This meeting is available to the public through the WebEx link above. If joining only via phone, callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Individuals who are deaf, deafblind and hard of hearing may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 and providing the Service with the call-in number found through registering at the web link provided for this meeting.

Members of the public are entitled to make comments during the public comment portion of the agenda at the end of the meeting. Members of the public may also submit written comments; the comments must be received in the Regional Programs Unit within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be emailed to Ivy Davis at ero@usccr.gov. Persons who desire additional information may contact the Regional Programs Unit at (202) 539-8246. Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing as they become available at www.facadatabase.gov. Persons interested in the work of this advisory committee are advised to go to the Commission's website, www.usccr.gov, or to contact the Regional Programs Unit at the above phone number or email address.

Agenda: Tuesday, August 3, 2021, at 1:00 p.m. (ET).

The Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) is a multilateral arms control treaty that seeks to achieve an international ban on chemical weapons (CW). The CWC prohibits, the use, development, production, acquisition, stockpiling, retention, and direct or indirect transfer of chemical weapons. This collection implements the following export provision of the treaty in the Export Administration Regulations:

Schedule 1 notification and report: Under Part VI of the CWC Verification Annex, the United States is required to notify the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), the international organization created to implement the CWC, at least 30 days before any transfer (export/import) of Schedule 1 chemicals to another State Party. The United States is also required to submit annual reports to the OPCW on all transfers of Schedule 1 Chemicals.

Schedule 3 End-Use Certificates: Under Part VIII of the CWC Verification Annex, the United States is required to obtain End-Use Certificates for exports of Schedule 3 chemicals to States not Party to the CWC to ensure the exported chemicals are only used for the purposes not prohibited under the Convention.

Electronically or on paper.

OMB Control Number: 0694-0117.

Form Number(s): None.

Type of Review: Regular submission, extension of a current information collection.

Affected Public: Business or other for-profit organizations.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 72.

Estimated Time per Response: 30 minutes.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 36 hours.

Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: 0.

Respondent's Obligation: Mandatory.

Legal Authority: CWC Implementation Act (Pub. L. 105-277, Division I), Executive Order 13128, DOC's CWC Regulation (15 CFR 710, et seq. )

We are soliciting public comments to permit the Department/Bureau to: (a) Evaluate whether the proposed information collection is necessary for the proper functions of the Department, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the time and cost burden for this proposed collection, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) Evaluate ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) Minimize the reporting burden on those who are to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

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

Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq. ) direct the Secretary of Commerce to allow, upon request, the incidental, but not intentional, taking of small numbers of marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region if certain findings are made and either regulations are issued or, if the taking is limited to harassment, a notice of a proposed authorization is provided to the public for review.

An authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or stock(s), will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses (where relevant), and if the permissible methods of taking and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such takings are set forth. NMFS has defined “negligible impact” in 50 CFR 216.103 as an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival.

Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, the MMPA defines “harassment” as: Any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment); or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering (Level B harassment).

On January 19, 2021, we issued a final rule with regulations to govern the unintentional taking of marine mammals incidental to geophysical survey activities conducted by oil and gas industry operators, and those persons authorized to conduct activities on their behalf (collectively “industry operators”), in Federal waters of the U.S. Gulf of Mexico (GOM) over the course of 5 years (86 FR 5322; January 19, 2021). The rule was based on our findings that the total taking from the specified activities over the 5-year period will have a negligible impact on the affected species or stock(s) of marine mammals and will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of those species or stocks for subsistence uses. The rule became effective on April 19, 2021.

Our regulations at 50 CFR 217.180 et seq. allow for the issuance of LOAs to industry operators for the incidental take of marine mammals during geophysical survey activities and prescribe the permissible methods of taking and other means of effecting the least practicable adverse impact on marine mammal species or stocks and their habitat (often referred to as mitigation), as well as requirements pertaining to the monitoring and reporting of such taking. Under 50 CFR 217.186(e), issuance of an LOA shall be based on a determination that the level of taking will be consistent with the findings made for the total taking allowable under these regulations and a determination that the amount of take authorized under the LOA is of no more than small numbers.

Shell plans to conduct two separate geophysical surveys, and submitted an LOA request for each survey. The first survey is a 4D (time lapse) survey of Lease Block WR 508 and portions of the surrounding approximately 100 lease blocks in the Stones development area (Stones survey). The second survey would also be a 4D (time lapse) survey, and would cover Lease Block AC 857 and portions of the surrounding approximately 60 lease blocks in the Perdido development area (Perdido survey). See Section F of the respective LOA applications for maps of these areas.

For the Stones survey survey, Shell anticipates using an airgun array consisting of 32 elements, with a total volume of 5,110 cubic inches (in 3 ). For the Perdido survey, Shell anticipates using an airgun array with a total volume of 2,280 in 3 . Please see Shell's applications for additional detail.

Consistent with the preamble to the final rule, the survey effort proposed by Shell in its LOA requests was used to develop LOA-specific take estimates based on the acoustic exposure modeling results described in the preamble (86 FR 5322, 5398; January 19, 2021). In order to generate the appropriate take number for authorization, the following information was considered: (1) Survey type; (2) location (by modeling zone  1 ); (3) number of days; and (4) season. 2 The acoustic exposure modeling performed in support of the rule provides 24-hour exposure estimates for each species, specific to each modeled survey type in each zone and season.

Summary descriptions of the modeled survey geometries ( i.e., 2D, 3D NAZ, 3D WAZ, Coil) are available in the preamble to the proposed rule (83 FR 29212, 29220; June 22, 2018). 3D NAZ was selected as the best available proxy survey type. The Stones survey will use a single source vessel with line spacing of 100 m and a shot interval of approximately 10.5 seconds. Although the 2D survey was the only exposure modeling scenario to use a single source vessel, the line spacing and shot interval represented by the 3D NAZ scenario make it most representative. The Perdido survey will also use a single source vessel, with source line spacing of 87.5 m and a shot interval of approximately 6 seconds. 3D NAZ is the most representative survey geometry for the same reasons discussed for the Stones survey. Note that all available acoustic exposure modeling results assume use of a 72 element, 8,000 in 3 array. In this case, take numbers authorized through the LOAs are considered conservative ( i.e., they likely overestimate take) primarily due to differences in the airgun arrays planned for use by Shell (most notably the relatively small array planned for use in the Perdido survey), as compared to the array modeled for the rule.

The Stones survey will take place over 95 days, including 65 days of sound source operation. The Perdido survey will take place over 60 days, including 50 days of sound source operation. Both surveys will occur within Zone 7. For the Stones survey, the seasonal distribution of survey days is not known in advance. Therefore, the take estimates for each species are based on the winter season, which for all species produces the greater value. For the Perdido survey, it is assumed that, of the 50 survey days, 35 would occur during summer and 15 would occur during winter.

For some species, take estimates based solely on the modeling yielded results that are not realistically likely to occur when considered in light of other relevant information available during the rulemaking process regarding marine mammal occurrence in the GOM. Thus, although the modeling conducted for the rule is a natural starting point for estimating take, our rule acknowledged that other information could be considered (see, e.g., 86 FR 5322, 5442 (January 19, 2021), discussing the need to provide flexibility and make efficient use of previous public and agency review of other information and identifying that additional public review is not necessary unless the model or inputs used differ substantively from those that were previously reviewed by NMFS and the public). For this survey, NMFS has other relevant information reviewed during the rulemaking that indicates use of the acoustic exposure modeling to generate a take estimate for certain marine mammal species produces results inconsistent with what is known regarding their occurrence in the GOM. Accordingly, we have adjusted the calculated take estimates as described below.

Killer whales are the most rarely encountered species in the GOM, typically in deep waters of the central GOM (Roberts et al., 2015; Maze-Foley and Mullin, 2006). The approach used in the acoustic exposure modeling, in which seven modeling zones were defined over the U.S. GOM, necessarily averages fine-scale information about marine mammal distribution over the large area of each modeling zone. NMFS has determined that the approach results in unrealistic projections regarding the likelihood of encountering killer whales.

As discussed in the final rule, the density models produced by Roberts et al. (2016) provide the best available scientific information regarding predicted density patterns of cetaceans in the U.S. GOM. The predictions represent the output of models derived from multi-year observations and associated environmental parameters that incorporate corrections for detection bias. However, in the case of killer whales, the model is informed by few data, as indicated by the coefficient of variation associated with the abundance predicted by the model (0.41, the second-highest of any GOM species model; Roberts et al., 2016). The model's authors noted the expected non-uniform distribution of this rarely-encountered species (as discussed above) and expressed that, due to the limited data available to inform the model, it “should be viewed cautiously” (Roberts et al., 2015).

NOAA surveys in the GOM from 1992-2009 reported only 16 sightings of killer whales, with an additional three encounters during more recent survey effort from 2017-18 (Waring et al., 2013; www.boem.gov/gommapps ). Two other species were also observed on fewer than 20 occasions during the 1992-2009 NOAA surveys (Fraser's dolphin and false killer whale  3 ). However, observational data collected by protected species observers (PSOs) on industry geophysical survey vessels from 2002-2015 distinguish the killer whale in terms of rarity. During this period, killer whales were encountered on only 10 occasions, whereas the next most rarely encountered species (Fraser's dolphin) was recorded on 69 occasions (Barkaszi and Kelly, 2019). The false killer whale and pygmy killer whale were the next most rarely encountered species, with 110 records each. The killer whale was the species with the lowest detection frequency during each period over which PSO data were synthesized (2002-2008 and 2009-2015). This information qualitatively informed our rulemaking process, as discussed at 86 FR 5322, 5334 (January 19, 2021), and similarly informs our analysis here.

The rarity of encounter during seismic surveys is not likely to be the product of high bias on the probability of detection. Unlike certain cryptic species with high detection bias, such as Kogia spp. or beaked whales, or deep-diving species with high availability bias, such as beaked whales or sperm whales, killer whales are typically available for detection when present and are easily observed. Roberts et al. (2015) stated that availability is not a major factor affecting detectability of killer whales from shipboard surveys, as they are not a particularly long-diving species. Baird et al. (2005) reported that mean dive durations for 41 fish-eating killer whales for dives greater than or equal to 1 minute in duration was 2.3-2.4 minutes, and Hooker et al. (2012) reported that killer whales spent 78 percent of their time at depths between 0-10 m. Similarly, Kvadsheim et al. (2012) reported data from a study of four killer whales, noting that the whales performed 20 times as many dives 1-30 m in depth than to deeper waters, with an average depth during those most common dives of approximately 3 m.

In summary, killer whales are the most rarely encountered species in the GOM and typically occur only in particularly deep water. While this information is reflected through the density model informing the acoustic exposure modeling results, there is relatively high uncertainty associated with the model for this species, and the acoustic exposure modeling applies mean distribution data over areas where the species is in fact less likely to occur. NMFS' determination in reflection of the data discussed above, which informed the final rule, is that use of the generic acoustic exposure modeling results for killer whales will generally result in estimated take numbers that are inconsistent with the assumptions made in the rule regarding expected killer whale take (86 FR 5322, 5403; January 19, 2021).

In past authorizations, NMFS has often addressed situations involving the low likelihood of encountering a rare species such as killer whales in the GOM through authorization of take of a single group of average size ( i.e., representing a single potential encounter). See 83 FR 63268, December 7, 2018. See also 86 FR 29090, May 28, 2021; 85 FR 55645, September 9, 2020. For the reasons expressed above, NMFS determined that a single encounter of killer whales is more likely than the model-generated estimates and has authorized take associated with a single killer whale group encounter ( i.e., up to 7 animals) for each LOA.

Based on the results of our analysis, NMFS has determined that the level of taking expected for these surveys and authorized through the LOAs is consistent with the findings made for the total taking allowable under the regulations. See Tables 1 and 2 in this notice and Table 9 of the rule (86 FR 5322; January 19, 2021).

Under the GOM rule, NMFS may not authorize incidental take of marine mammals in an LOA if it will exceed “small numbers.” In short, when an acceptable estimate of the individual marine mammals taken is available, if the estimated number of individual animals taken is up to, but not greater than, one-third of the best available abundance estimate, NMFS will determine that the numbers of marine mammals taken of a species or stock are small. For more information please see NMFS' discussion of the MMPA's small numbers requirement provided in the final rule (86 FR 5322, 5438; January 19, 2021).

The take numbers for authorization are determined as described above. Subsequently, the total incidents of harassment for each species may be multiplied by scalar ratios to produce a derived product that better reflects the number of individuals likely to be taken within a survey (as compared to the total number of instances of take), accounting for the likelihood that some individual marine mammals may be taken on more than one day (see 86 FR 5322, 5404; January 19, 2021). The output of this scaling, where appropriate, is incorporated into an adjusted total take estimate that is the basis for NMFS' small numbers determinations, as depicted in Table 1 for Shell's Stones survey and in Table 2 for the Perdido survey.

This product is used by NMFS in making the necessary small numbers determinations, through comparison with the best available abundance estimates (see discussion at 86 FR 5322, 5391; January 19, 2021). For this comparison, NMFS' approach is to use the maximum theoretical population, determined through review of current stock abundance reports (SAR; www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments ) and model-predicted abundance information ( https://seamap.env.duke.edu/models/Duke/GOM/ ). For the latter, for taxa where a density surface model could be produced, we use the maximum mean seasonal ( i.e., three-month) abundance prediction for purposes of comparison as a precautionary smoothing of month-to-month fluctuations and in consideration of a corresponding lack of data in the literature regarding seasonal distribution of marine mammals in the GOM. Information supporting the small numbers determinations is provided in Tables 1 and 2.

Based on the analysis contained herein of Shell's proposed survey activity described in its LOA applications and the anticipated take of marine mammals, NMFS finds that small numbers of marine mammals will be taken relative to the affected species or stock sizes ( i.e., less than one-third of the best available abundance estimate) and therefore the taking is of no more than small numbers.

NMFS has determined that the level of taking for these LOA requests is consistent with the findings made for the total taking allowable under the incidental take regulations and that the amount of take authorized under the LOAs is of no more than small numbers. Accordingly, we have issued two LOAs to Shell authorizing the take of marine mammals incidental to its geophysical survey activity, as described above.

The Commission voted 3-1 to authorize issuance of this Complaint. Acting Chairman Adler, Commissioners Kaye and Feldman voted to authorize issuance of the Complaint. Commissioner Baiocco voted to not authorize issuance of the Complaint. The text of the Complaint appears below.

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

Title of Collection: Impact Evaluation of Teacher Residency Programs.

OMB Control Number: 1850-0960.

Type of Review: A revision of a currently approved information collection.

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

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 637.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 394.

Abstract: The U.S. Department of Education (ED)'s Institute of Education Sciences (IES) requests clearance for data collection activities to support a study of teacher residency programs. Teacher residency programs aim to better prepare new teachers by combining education coursework with extensive on-the-job training. Program participants complete a full-year apprenticeship, or “residency,” under the supervision of an experienced mentor teacher before they become teachers of record. The programs help meet the needs of their partner districts by preparing teachers to fill shortages in high-needs schools and subjects. They offer financial support for residents in exchange for a commitment to teach for at least three to five years in the district, in an effort to improve teacher retention. This financial support may also help expand the pool of teacher candidates by encouraging people to enter the profession who might be deterred by the cost of a traditional teacher preparation program. This second request covers additional data collection activities for the study to examine program outcomes. A prior request (1850-0960, approved 4/26/2021) covered the collection of classroom rosters from schools to support random assignment of students to participating teachers.

This document provides the receipt and status reports for the period from 06/01/2021 to 06/30/2021. The Agency is providing notice of receipt of PMNs, SNUNs and MCANs (including amended notices and test information); an exemption application under 40 CFR part 725 (Biotech exemption); TMEs, both pending and/or concluded; NOCs to manufacture a new chemical substance; and a periodic status report on new chemical substances that are currently under EPA review or have recently concluded review.

EPA is also providing information on its website about cases reviewed under the amended TSCA, including the section 5 PMN/SNUN/MCAN and exemption notices received, the date of receipt, the final EPA determination on the notice, and the effective date of EPA's determination for PMN/SNUN/MCAN notices on its website at: https://www.epa.gov/reviewing-new-chemicals-under-toxic-substances-control-act-tsca/status-pre-manufacture-notices. This information is updated on a weekly basis.

Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq., a chemical substance may be either an “existing” chemical substance or a “new” chemical substance. Any chemical substance that is not on EPA's TSCA Inventory of Chemical Substances (TSCA Inventory) is classified as a “new chemical substance,” while a chemical substance that is listed on the TSCA Inventory is classified as an “existing chemical substance.” (See TSCA section 3(11).) For more information about the TSCA Inventory please go to: https://www.epa.gov/tsca-inventory.

Any person who intends to manufacture (including import) a new chemical substance for a non-exempt commercial purpose, or to manufacture or process a chemical substance in a non-exempt manner for a use that EPA has determined is a significant new use, is required by TSCA section 5 to provide EPA with a PMN, MCAN or SNUN, as appropriate, before initiating the activity. EPA will review the notice, make a risk determination on the chemical substance or significant new use, and take appropriate action as described in TSCA section 5(a)(3).

TSCA section 5(h)(1) authorizes EPA to allow persons, upon application and under appropriate restrictions, to manufacture or process a new chemical substance, or a chemical substance subject to a significant new use rule (SNUR) issued under TSCA section 5(a)(2), for “test marketing” purposes, upon a showing that the manufacture, processing, distribution in commerce, use, and disposal of the chemical will not present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment. This is referred to as a test marketing exemption, or TME. For more information about the requirements applicable to a new chemical go to: http://www.epa.gov/oppt/newchems.

Under TSCA sections 5 and 8 and EPA regulations, EPA is required to publish in the Federal Register certain information, including notice of receipt of a PMN/SNUN/MCAN (including amended notices and test information); an exemption application under 40 CFR part 725 (biotech exemption); an application for a TME, both pending and concluded; NOCs to manufacture a new chemical substance; and a periodic status report on the new chemical substances that are currently under EPA review or have recently concluded review.

This action provides information that is directed to the public in general.

No.

1. Submitting confidential business information (CBI). Do not submit this information to EPA through regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.

2. Tips for preparing your comments. When preparing and submitting your comments, see the commenting tips at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/comments.html.

In the past, EPA has published individual notices reflecting the status of TSCA section 5 filings received, pending or concluded. In 1995, the Agency modified its approach and streamlined the information published in the Federal Register after providing notice of such changes to the public and an opportunity to comment (See the Federal Register of May 12, 1995, (60 FR 25798) (FRL-4942-7). Since the passage of the Lautenberg amendments to TSCA in 2016, public interest in information on the status of section 5 cases under EPA review and, in particular, the final determination of such cases, has increased. In an effort to be responsive to the regulated community, the users of this information, and the general public, to comply with the requirements of TSCA, to conserve EPA resources and to streamline the process and make it more timely, EPA is providing information on its website about cases reviewed under the amended TSCA, including the section 5 PMN/SNUN/MCAN and exemption notices received, the date of receipt, the final EPA determination on the notice, and the effective date of EPA's determination for PMN/SNUN/MCAN notices on its website at: https://www.epa.gov/reviewing-new-chemicals-under-toxic-substances-control-act-tsca/status-pre-manufacture-notices. This information is updated on a weekly basis.

For the PMN/SNUN/MCANs that have passed an initial screening by EPA during this period, Table I provides the following information (to the extent that such information is not subject to a CBI claim) on the notices screened by EPA during this period: The EPA case number assigned to the notice that indicates whether the submission is an initial submission, or an amendment, a notation of which version was received, the date the notice was received by EPA, the submitting manufacturer ( i.e., domestic producer or importer), the potential uses identified by the manufacturer in the notice, and the chemical substance identity.

As used in each of the tables in this unit, (S) indicates that the information in the table is the specific information provided by the submitter, and (G) indicates that this information in the table is generic information because the specific information provided by the submitter was claimed as CBI. Submissions which are initial submissions will not have a letter following the case number. Submissions which are amendments to previous submissions will have a case number followed by the letter “A” ( e.g., P-18-1234A). The version column designates submissions in sequence as “1”, “2”, “3”, etc. Note that in some cases, an initial submission is not numbered as version 1; this is because earlier version(s) were rejected as incomplete or invalid submissions. Note also that future versions of the following tables may adjust slightly as the Agency works to automate population of the data in the tables.

In Table II of this unit, EPA provides the following information (to the extent that such information is not claimed as CBI) on the NOCs that have passed an initial screening by EPA during this period: The EPA case number assigned to the NOC including whether the submission was an initial or amended submission, the date the NOC was received by EPA, the date of commencement provided by the submitter in the NOC, a notation of the type of amendment ( e.g., amendment to generic name, specific name, technical contact information, etc.) and chemical substance identity.

In Table III of this unit, EPA provides the following information (to the extent such information is not subject to a CBI claim) on the test information that has been received during this time period: The EPA case number assigned to the test information; the date the test information was received by EPA, the type of test information submitted, and chemical substance identity.

If you are interested in information that is not included in these tables, you may contact EPA's technical information contact or general information contact as described under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT to access additional non-CBI information that may be available.

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.

Supporting documents, which explain in detail the information that the EPA will be collecting, are available in the public docket for this ICR. The docket can be viewed online at www.regulations.gov, or in person, at the EPA Docket Center, WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The telephone number for the Docket Center is 202-566-1744. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit: http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

Abstract: The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Ferroalloys Production Area Sources (40 CFR part 63, subpart YYYYYY) apply to existing and new ferroalloy production facilities that are an area source of hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions. In general, all NESHAP standards require initial notifications, performance tests, and periodic reports by the owners/operators of the affected facilities. They are also required to maintain records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring system is inoperative. These notifications, reports, and records are essential in determining compliance, and are required of all affected facilities subject to NESHAP.

Form Numbers: None.

Respondents/affected entities: Owners and operators of area source ferroalloys production facilities.

Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 63, subpart YYYYYY).

Estimated number of respondents: 9 (total).

Frequency of response: Initially, annually, and semiannually.

Total estimated burden: 362 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

Total estimated cost: $42,500 (per year), which includes $0 in annualized capital/startup and/or operation & maintenance costs.

Changes in the Estimates: There is a small decrease in burden from the most recently approved ICR as currently identified in the OMB Inventory of Approved Burdens. This decrease is not due to any program changes. This ICR reflects a reduction in the number of respondents based on a review of facilities listed in the 2008 final rule docket that remain in operation. A review of these facilities revealed that one of the existing ten companies has shut down, while remaining facilities appear to continue to be in operation. The growth rate for this industry is very low or non-existent, so no new companies are expected to become subject to this NESHAP during the three-year period of this ICR. There are no changes in the capital/startup or operation and maintenance (O&M) costs.

OMB Control Number: 3060-0741.

Title: Accelerating Wireline Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure Investment, GN Docket No. 17-84.

Form Number(s): N/A.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities.

Number of Respondents and Responses: 4,750 respondents; 471,920 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: 0.5-4.5 hours.

Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirements; recordkeeping and third-party disclosure requirements.

Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. Statutory authority for this information collection is contained in 47 U.S.C. 222 and 251.

Total Annual Burden: 473,440 hours.

Total Annual Cost: No cost.

Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No impact(s).

Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: The Commission is not requesting that the respondents submit confidential information to the FCC. Respondents may, however, request confidential treatment for information they believe to be confidential under 47 CFR 0.459 of the Commission's rules.

Needs and Uses: Section 251 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 251, is designed to accelerate private sector development and deployment of telecommunications technologies and services by spurring competition. Section 222(e) is also designed to spur competition by prescribing requirements for the sharing of subscriber list information. These information collection requirements are designed to help implement certain provisions of sections 222(e) and 251, and to eliminate operational barriers to competition in the telecommunications services market. Specifically, these information collection requirements will be used to implement (1) local exchange carriers' (“LECs”) obligations to provide their competitors with dialing parity and non-discriminatory access to certain services and functionalities; (2) incumbent local exchange carriers' (“ILECs”) duty to make network information disclosures; and (3) numbering administration. In November 2017, the Commission adopted new rules concerning certain information collection requirements implemented under section 251(c)(5) of the Act, pertaining to network change disclosures. Most of the changes to those rules applied specifically to a certain subset of network change disclosures, namely notices of planned copper retirements. In addition, the changes removed a rule that prohibits incumbent LECs from engaging in useful advanced coordination with entities affected by network changes. In June 2018, the Commission revised its network change disclosure rules to (1) revise the types of network changes that trigger an incumbent LEC's public notice obligation, and (2) extend the force majeure provisions applicable to copper retirements to all types of network changes. The changes were aimed at removing unnecessary regulatory barriers to the deployment of high-speed broadband networks.

OMB Control Number: 3060-0806.

Title: Universal Service-Schools and Libraries Universal Service Program, FCC Forms 470 and 471.

Form Number: FCC Forms 470 and 471.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Respondents: State, local or tribal government institutions, and other not-for-profit institutions.

Number of Respondents and Responses: 43,000 respondents; 67,100 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: 3.5 hours for FCC Form 470 (3 hours for response; 0.5 hours for recordkeeping; 4.5 hours for FCC Form 471 (4 hours for response; 0.5 hours for recordkeeping).

Frequency of Response: On occasion and annual reporting requirements, and recordkeeping requirement.

Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. Statutory authority for this information collection is contained in sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 201-205, 214, 254, and 403 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151-154, 201-205, 218-220, 254, 303(r), 403 and 405.

Total Annual Burden: 273,950 hours.

Total Annual Cost: No Cost.

Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No impact(s).

Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: There is no assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents concerning this information collection. However, respondents may request materials or information submitted to the Commission or to the Administrator be withheld from public inspection under 47 CFR 0.459 of the FCC's rules.

Needs and Uses: The Commission seeks approval to extend the existing collection 3060-0806 (FCC Forms 470 and 471). Collection of the information on FCC Forms 470 and 471 is necessary so that the Commission and USAC have sufficient information to determine if entities are eligible for funding pursuant to the schools and libraries support mechanism, to determine if entities are complying with the Commission's rules, and to prevent waste, fraud, and abuse. In addition, the information is necessary for the Commission to evaluate the extent to which the E-rate program is meeting the statutory objectives specified in section 254(h) of the 1996 Act, and the Commission's performance goals established in the E-rate Modernization Order and Second E-rate Modernization Order.

The meeting will be held on August 19, 2021 at 3:00 p.m. EDT and may be viewed live, by the public, at http://www.fcc.gov/live. Any questions that arise during the meeting should be sent to PrecisionAgTF@fcc.gov and will be answered at a later date. Members of the public may submit comments to the Task Force in the FCC's Electronic Comment Filing System, ECFS, at www.fcc.gov/ecfs. Comments to the Task Force should be filed in GN Docket No. 19-329.

Open captioning will be provided for this event. Other reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities are available upon request. Requests for such accommodations should be submitted via email to fcc504@fcc.gov or by calling the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice). Such requests should include a detailed description of the accommodation needed. In addition, please include a way the FCC can contact you if it needs more information. Please allow at least five days' advance notice; last-minute requests will be accepted but may not be possible to fill.

Proposed Agenda: At this meeting, the Task Force will hear updates from the Working Group leadership and discuss progress towards recommendations. This agenda may be modified at the discretion of the Task Force Chair and the Designated Federal Officer.

OMB Control Number: 3060-0174.

Title: Sections 73.1212, 76.1615, and 76.1715, Sponsorship Identification.

Form Number: N/A.

Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities; Individuals or households.

Number of Respondents and Responses: 22,900 respondents; 1,886,524 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: .0011 to .2011 hours.

Frequency of Response: Recordkeeping requirement, Third party disclosure requirement, On occasion reporting requirement.

Total Annual Burden: 258,567 Hours.

Total Annual Cost: $448,923.

Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. The statutory authority for this collection is contained in sections 4(i), 317 and 507 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.

Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: The FCC is preparing a system of records, FCC/MB-2, “Broadcast Station Public Inspection Files,” to cover the personally identifiable information (PII) that may be included in the broadcast station public inspection files. Respondents may request materials or information submitted to the Commission be withheld from public inspection under 47 CFR 0.459 of the Commission's rules.

Privacy Impact Assessment: There are two systems of records relevant to this collection: FCC/MB-2, “Broadcast Station Public Inspection Files,” and FCC/IB-1, “International Bureau Filing System (IBFS).” The Commission has published a system of records notice (SORN) for FCC/MB-2 and will modify it as necessary to include any personally identifiable information (PII) that will be added to the Online Public Inspection Files system as part of this collection. The Commission is also preparing a SORN for FCC/IBFS-1 to cover any PII that will be added to IBFS as part of this collection. The Commission is preparing Privacy Impact Assessments for both systems.

Needs and Uses: The information collection requirements that are approved under this collection are as follows:

47 CFR 73.1212 requires a broadcast station to identify at the time of broadcast the sponsor of any matter for which consideration is provided. For advertising commercial products or services, generally the mention of the name of the product or service constitutes sponsorship identification. In the case of television political advertisements concerning candidates for public office, the sponsor shall be identified with letters equal to or greater than four (4) percent of the vertical height of the television screen that airs for no less than four (4) seconds. In addition, when an entity rather than an individual sponsors the broadcast of matter that is of a political or controversial nature, licensee is required to retain a list of the executive officers, or board of directors, or executive committee, etc., of the organization paying for such matter. Sponsorship announcements are waived with respect to the broadcast of “want ads” sponsored by an individual but the licensee shall maintain a list showing the name, address and telephone number of each such advertiser. These lists shall be made available for public inspection.

47 CFR 73.1212(e) states that, when an entity rather than an individual sponsors the broadcast of matter that is of a political or controversial nature, the licensee is required to retain a list of the executive officers, or board of directors, or executive committee, etc., of the organization paying for such matter in its public file. Pursuant to the changes contained in 47 CFR 73.1212(e) and 47 CFR 73.3526(e)(19), this list, which could contain personally identifiable information, would be located in a public inspection file to be located on the Commission's website instead of being maintained in the public file at the station. Burden estimates for this change are included in OMB Control Number 3060-0214.

47 CFR 76.1615 states that, when a cable operator engaged in origination cablecasting presents any matter for which money, service or other valuable consideration is provided to such cable television system operator, the cable television system operator, at the time of the telecast, shall identify the sponsor. Under this rule section, when advertising commercial products or services, an announcement stating the sponsor's corporate or trade name, or the name of the sponsor's product is sufficient when it is clear that the mention of the name of the product constitutes a sponsorship identification. In the case of television political advertisements concerning candidates for public office, the sponsor shall be identified with letters equal to or greater than four (4) percent of the vertical height of the television screen that airs for no less than four (4) seconds.

47 CFR 76.1715 state that, with respect to sponsorship announcements that are waived when the broadcast/origination cablecast of “want ads” sponsored by an individual, the licensee/operator shall maintain a list showing the name, address and telephone number of each such advertiser. These lists shall be made available for public inspection.

This information collection is being revised to reflect the burden associated with the foreign sponsorship identification disclosure requirements adopted in the Sponsorship Identification Requirements for Foreign Government-Provided Programming (86 FR 32221, June 17, 2021, FCC 21-42, rel. Apr. 22, 2021). The collection requires broadcast television and radio stations, as well as 325(c) permit holders, to make a specific disclosure at the time of broadcast if material aired pursuant to the lease of time on the station has been sponsored, paid for, or furnished by a foreign governmental entity that indicates the specific entity and country involved. Licensees of each broadcast station and 325(c) permit holders also are required to exercise reasonable diligence to ascertain whether the foreign sponsorship disclosure requirements apply at the time of the lease agreement and at any renewal thereof.

This information collection requirements will provide the Commission and the public with increased transparency and will ensure that audiences of broadcast stations are aware when a foreign government, or its representatives, are seeking to persuade the American public. The information collection requirements will also enable interested parties to monitor the extent of such efforts to persuade the American public.

OMB Control Number: 3060-0214.

Title: Sections 73.3526 and 73.3527, Local Public Inspection Files; Sections 73.1212, 76.1701 and 73.1943, Political Files.

Form Number: N/A.

Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities; Not for profit institutions; State, Local or Tribal government; Individuals or households.

Number of Respondents and Responses: 23,984 respondents; 62,839 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: 1-52 hours.

Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement, Recordkeeping requirement, Third party disclosure requirement.

Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. The statutory authority that covers this information collection is contained in Sections 151, 152, 154(i), 303, 307 and 308 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.

Total Annual Burden: 2,047,805 Hours.

Total Annual Cost: No cost.

Privacy Impact Assessment: There are two systems of records relevant to this collection: FCC/MB-2, “Broadcast Station Public Inspection Files,” and FCC/IB-1, “International Bureau Filing System (IBFS).” The Commission has published a system of records notice (SORN) for FCC/MB-2 and will modify it as necessary to include any personally identifiable information (PII) that will be added to the Online Public Inspection Files system as part of this collection. The Commission is also preparing a SORN for FCC/IBFS-1 to cover any PII that will be added to IBFS as part of this collection. The Commission is preparing Privacy Impact Assessments for both systems.

Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: Most of the documents comprising the public file consist of materials that are not of a confidential nature. Respondents complying with the information collection requirements may request that the information they submit be withheld from disclosure. If confidentiality is requested, such requests will be processed in accordance with the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 0.459.

Needs and Uses: The information collection requirements included under this OMB Control Number 3060-0214, requires broadcast stations to maintain for public inspection a file containing the material set forth in 47 CFR 73.3526 and 73.3527.

This collection is being revised to reflect the burden associated with the foreign sponsorship identification disclosure requirements adopted in the Sponsorship Identification Requirements for Foreign Government-Provided Programming (86 FR 32221, June 17, 2021, FCC 21-42, rel. Apr. 22, 2021). The collection requires broadcast television and radio stations to place copies of foreign sponsorship identification disclosures required by 47 CFR 73.1212(j) and the name of the program to which the disclosures were appended in its online public inspection file on a quarterly basis in a standalone folder marked as “Foreign Government-Provided Programming Disclosures.” The collection requires 325(c) permit holders to place copies of foreign sponsorship identification disclosures required by 47 CFR 73.1212(j) and the name of the program to which the disclosures were appended in its International Bureau Filing System record on a quarterly basis. The filing must state the date and time the program aired. In the case of repeat airings of the program, those additional dates and times should also be included. Where an aural announcement was made, its contents must be reduced to writing and placed in the online public inspection file in the same manner.

This information collection requirement will provide the Commission and the public with increased transparency and will ensure that audiences of broadcast stations are aware when a foreign government, or its representatives, are seeking to persuade the American public. The information collection requirements will also enable interested parties to monitor the extent of such efforts to persuade the American public.

Sec. 4314(c)(1) through (5) of title 5, U.S.C., requires each agency to establish, in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Office of Personnel Management, one or more performance review boards. The board shall review and evaluate the initial appraisal of a senior executive's performance by the supervisor, along with any recommendations to the appointing authority relative to the performance of the senior executive.

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552b(e)(1).

This notice sets out a summary of the use and burden associated with the following information collections. More detailed information can be found in each collection's supporting statement and associated materials (see ADDRESSES ).

Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. The term “collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA requires federal agencies to publish a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension or reinstatement of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, CMS is publishing this notice.

1. Type of Information Collection Request: Revision of a currently approved collection; Title of Information Collection: Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit Program; Use: Plan sponsor and State information is used by CMS to approve contract applications, monitor compliance with contract requirements, make proper payment to plans, and ensure that correct information is disclosed to potential and current enrollees. Form Number: CMS-10141 (OMB control number: 0938-0964); Frequency: Once; Affected Public: Private sector (Business or other for-profit and Not-for-profit institutions); Number of Respondents: 11,771,497; Total Annual Responses: 675,231,213; Total Annual Hours: 9,312,314. (For policy questions regarding this collection contact Maureen Connors at 410-786-4132.)

2. Type of Information Collection Request: Revision of a previously approved collection; Title of Information Collection: Conditions of Coverage for Portable X-ray Suppliers and Supporting Regulations; Use: The requirements contained in this information collection request are classified as conditions of participation or conditions for coverage. Portable X-rays are basic radiology studies (predominately chest and extremity X-rays) performed on patients in skilled nursing facilities, residents of long-term care facilities and homebound patients. The CoPs are based on criteria described in the law, and are designed to ensure that each portable X-ray supplier has properly trained staff and provides the appropriate type and level of care for patients. The information collection requirements described below are necessary to certify portable X-ray suppliers wishing to participate in the Medicare program. There are currently 506 portable X-ray suppliers participating in the Medicare program.

On September 30, 2019 (84 FR 51732), CMS updated the personnel requirements for portable X-ray technicians at 42 CFR 486.104(a), to focus on the qualifications of the individual performing services removing school accreditation requirements and simplifying the structure of the requirements. Additionally, CMS also revised the requirements for referral of service at 42 CFR 486.106(a) for portable X-ray requirements for orders. This change removed the requirement that physician or non-physician practitioner's orders for portable X-ray services must be written and signed and replacing the specific requirements related to the content of each portable X-ray order with a cross-reference to the requirements at 42 CFR 410.32, which also apply to portable X-ray services. Form Number: CMS-R-43 (OMB Control number: 0938-0338); Frequency: Yearly; Affected Public: Business or other for-profit and Not-for-profit institutions; Number of Respondents: 506; Total Annual Responses: 1,012; Total Annual Hours: 324. (For policy questions regarding this collection contact James Cowher at 410-786-1948.)

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. The term “collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires federal agencies to publish a 30-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension or reinstatement of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, CMS is publishing this notice that summarizes the following proposed collection(s) of information for public comment:

1. Type of Information Collection Request: New collection (Request for a new OMB control number); Title of Information Collection: The International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, Procedure Coding System (ICD-10-PCS); Use: The HIPAA Act of 1996 required CMS to adopt standards for coding systems that are used for reporting health care transactions. The Transactions and Code Sets final rule (65 FR 50312) published in the Federal Register on August 17, 2000 adopted the International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) Volumes 1 and 2 for diagnosis codes and ICD-9-CM Volume 3 for inpatient hospital services procedures as standard code sets for use by covered entities (health plans, health care clearinghouses, and those health care providers who transmit any health information in electronic form in connection with a transaction for which the Secretary has adopted a standard).

The ICD-10-PCS code set has been maintained, enhanced and expanded as a direct result of recommendations for updates ( e.g., adding new codes, deleting codes, and editing descriptive material related to existing codes) received from interested stakeholders from both the public and private sectors. Thus, information collected in the application is significant to code set maintenance. The ICD-10-PCS code set maintenance is an ongoing process, as changes are implemented and updated; therefore, the process requires continual collection of information from applicants on a bi-annual basis. As new technology evolves and new complex medical procedures are developed, requests are submitted to CMS requesting modifications to the ICD-10-PCS code set. Requests have been received prior to HIPAA implementation and must continue to be collected to facilitate quality decision-making.

The Committee provides two meetings each year as a public forum to discuss proposed changes to ICD-10. Suggestions to CMS for ICD-10-PCS procedure code modifications come from both the public and private sectors. ICD-10-PCS modification requests can be proposals for new or revised procedure codes or requests for technical coding updates including but not limited to, enhancements to existing procedure code concepts, such as adding a new body part value or a new approach value. Requestors are asked to include a description of the procedure code or change being requested, and rationale for why the procedure code or change is needed. Supporting references and literature may also be submitted. Interested parties submit these ICD-10-PCS modification requests three months prior to a scheduled Spring or Fall C&M meeting via email to the following email address: ICDProcedureCodeRequest@cms.hhs.gov. Form Number: CMS-10744 (OMB control number: 0938-New); Frequency: Yearly; Affected Public: Business or other for-profits and Not-for-profit institutions and Private Sector; Number of Respondents: 80; Total Annual Responses: 80; Total Annual Hours: 800 (For policy questions regarding this collection contact Marilu Hue at 410-786-4510.)

2. Type of Information Collection Request: Revision of a currently approved collection; Title of Information Collection: Transitional Pass through payments related to Drugs, Biologicals, and Radiopharmaceuticals to determine eligibility under the Outpatient Prospective Payment System; Use: Section 201(b) of the BBRA 1999 amended section 1833(t) of the Act by adding new section 1833(t)(6). This provision requires the Secretary to make additional payments to hospitals for a period of 2 to 3 years for certain drugs, radiopharmaceuticals, biological agents, medical devices and brachytherapy devices. Section 1833(t)(6)(A)(iv) establishes the criteria for determining the application of this provision to new items. Section 1833(t)(6)(C)(i) provides that the additional payment for drugs and biologicals be the amount by which the amount determined under section 1842(o) of the Act exceeds the portion of the otherwise applicable hospital outpatient department fee schedule amount that the Secretary determines to be associated with the drug or biological.

Interested parties such as hospitals, pharmaceutical companies, and physicians will apply for transitional pass-through payment for drugs, biologicals, and radiopharmaceuticals used with services covered under the hospital OPPS. After we receive all requested information, we will evaluate the information to determine if the criteria for making a transitional pass- through payment are met and if an interim healthcare common procedure coding system (HCPCS) code for a new drug, biological, or radiopharmaceutical is necessary. We will advise the applicant of our decision, and update the hospital OPPS during its next scheduled quarterly update to reflect any newly approved drug, biological, or radiopharmaceutical. We list below the information that we will require from all applicants. Form Number: CMS-10008 (OMB control number: 0938-0802); Frequency: Yearly; Affected Public: Private Sector; Number of Respondents: 30; Total Annual Responses: 30; Total Annual Hours: 480 (For policy questions regarding this collection contact Raymond A. Bulls at 410-786-7267.)

3. Type of Information Collection Request: Extension of a currently approved Information Collection; Title of Information Collection: Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) Survey for Merit-based Incentive Payment Systems (MIPS); Use: CMS is submitting updates to one information collection request associated with the CAHPS for MIPS survey. The CAHPS for MIPS survey is used in the Quality Payment Program (QPP) to collect data on fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries' experiences of care with eligible clinicians participating in MIPS and is designed to gather only the necessary data that CMS needs for assessing physician quality performance, and related public reporting on physician performance, and should complement other data collection efforts. The survey consists of the core Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) CAHPS Clinician & Group Survey, version 3.0, plus additional survey questions to meet CMS's information and program needs. The survey information is used for quality reporting, the Care Compare website, and annual statistical experience reports describing MIPS data for all MIPS eligible clinicians.

This 2021 information collection request addresses changes to the CAHPS for MIPS Survey associated with the CY 2021 Physician Fee Schedule (PFS) final rule. In order to address the increased use of telehealth care due to the Public Health Emergency (PHE) for COVID-19, an additional question is added to the CAHPS for MIPS survey to integrate one telehealth item to assess the patient-reported usage of telehealth services. In addition, the cover page of the CAHPS for MIPS Survey is revised to include a reference to care in telehealth settings. The CAHPS for MIPS survey results in burden to three different types of entities: Groups and virtual groups, vendors, and beneficiaries associated with administering the survey. Virtual groups are subject to the same requirements as groups; therefore, we will refer only to groups as an inclusive term for both unless otherwise noted. The estimated time to administer the 2021 CAHPS for MIPS survey has increased from 12.9 minutes to 13.1 minutes; however, there was an overall decrease in burden as the number of respondents decreased. Form Number: CMS-10450 (OMB control number: 0938-1222); Frequency: Yearly; Affected Public: Business or other for-profits and Not-for-profit institutions and Individuals and Households; Number of Respondents: 30,249; Total Annual Responses: 30,249; Total Annual Hours: 6,902 (For policy questions regarding this collection contact Alesia Hovatter at 410-786-6861.)

Description: In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, the NSECE COVID-19 Follow-up will deepen our understanding of the state of ECE supply and the ECE workforce following the initial period of crisis, including changes in supply or departures from and re-entries to the workforce. The NSECE COVID-19 Follow-up will collect information from center-based ECE providers to children birth through age 5 years, not yet in kindergarten, home-based ECE providers that serve children under age 13, as well as the ECE workforce providing these services. The collection consists of three coordinated nationally representative surveys:

1. A two-wave survey of individuals who provided paid care for children under the age of 13 in a residential setting as of 2019 and participated in the 2019 NSECE (Home-based Provider Interview),

2. a two-wave survey of providers of care to children ages 0 through 5 years of age (not yet in kindergarten) in a non-residential setting (Center-based Provider Interview) as of 2019 and that participated in the 2019 NSECE, and

3. a two-wave survey conducted with individuals employed in center-based child care programs working directly with children in classrooms (Center-based Classroom Staff [Workforce] Interview) as of 2019 and who participated in the 2019 NSECE.

Respondents: Home-based providers as of 2019 serving children under 13 years (listed and unlisted paid)—regardless of their status serving children in 2020-2022, center-based child care providers as of 2019 serving children ages 0 through 5 years of age (not yet in kindergarten)—regardless of their status serving children in 2020-2022, and classroom-assigned instructional staff members working with children ages 0 through 5 years of age (not yet in kindergarten) in center-based child care providers as of 2019, regardless of their employment status in 2020-2022.

Annual Burden Estimates: This request is for an extension through spring 2022.

Estimated Total Burden Hours: 3,774.

Comments: The Department specifically requests comments on (a) whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted within 60 days of this publication.

Authority: Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) Act of 1990 as amended by the CCDBG Act of 2014 (Pub. L. 113-186).

Description: Section 107(b)(1)(B)(ii) of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000, as amended at 22 U.S.C. 7105(b)(1)(B)(ii), authorizes the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to make a grant for a national communication system—the NHTH—to assist victims of severe forms of trafficking in persons in seeking help, receiving referrals, and reporting potential trafficking cases.

HHS made an award in the form of a Cooperative Agreement to a single, competitively selected grantee to maintain and support operation of the NHTH throughout the United States and U.S. territories. The NHTH is a toll-free hotline that operates 24 hours a day, every day of the year.

The Cooperative Agreement delineates the roles and responsibilities for the administration of the grant program, which include:

1. Operating the NHTH with experienced and trained anti-trafficking advocates;

2. Operating the NHTH website and responding to online signals;

3. Promoting NHTH services to increase the identification and protection of victims of severe forms of human trafficking;

4. Providing timely information and service referrals to human trafficking victims using a trauma-informed, person-centered, culturally responsive, and linguistically appropriate approach;

5. Notifying law enforcement agencies of potential cases of human trafficking as well as instances when a trafficking victim is in imminent danger; and

6. Documenting emerging trafficking schemes to assist in the detection and investigation of trafficking cases.

The NHTH grantee collects information about signalers (individuals who contact the hotline) and from signalers regarding potential victims of a severe form of trafficking in persons and human trafficking cases. Given the unique relationship the NHTH has to the public, OTIP is seeking clearance to collect information about and from these signalers that will be summarized and reported to OTIP by the NHTH grantee in the aggregate. The NHTH Performance Indicators information collection will provide data for OTIP to assess the extent to which the grantee meets required program activities to:

• Ensure potential victims of trafficking remain able to access assistance by constantly monitoring and mitigating factors impacting NHTH operations;

• Assist the grantee to assess and improve their project over the course of the project period;

• Disseminate insights related to human trafficking cases and trends to inform anti-trafficking strategies and policies; and

• Provide information to Congress, other federal agencies, stakeholders, the public, and other countries on the aggregate outputs and outcomes of the NHTH operations.

Respondents: Potential victims, representatives of governmental entities, law enforcement, first responders, members of the community, representatives of nongovernmental entities providing social, legal, or protective services to individuals in the United States who may have been subjected to severe forms of trafficking in persons utilize the NHTH as signalers.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 84,543.

Comments: The Department specifically requests comments on (a) whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted within 60 days of this publication.

Authority: 22 U.S.C. 7105.

Description: Baby FACES 2018 and 2022 build upon a prior study (Baby FACES 2009; OMB 0970-0354) that longitudinally followed two cohorts of children through their experience in the program. While the 2009 study provided a great deal of information about program participation over time and about services received by children and families, it did not allow for national level estimates of service quality or inferences about children who enter the program after 15 months of age. To fill these knowledge gaps and to answer additional questions about how programs function, the design for the information collection in 2022 will refresh the nationally representative cross-sectional sample of programs, centers, home visitors, teachers, classrooms, children, and families that was used in Baby FACES 2018. Freshening the sample will allow new programs that came into being since 2018 a chance to enter the study. This design allows for nationally representative estimates at all levels at a point in time and includes the entire age span of enrolled children.

The goal of this work is to obtain updated information on EHS programs and understand better how program processes support relationships ( e.g., between home visitors and parents, between parents and children, and between teachers and children) that are hypothesized to lead to improved child and family outcomes.

Respondents: EHS program directors, child care center directors, teachers and home visitors, and parents of enrolled children.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 1,824.

Comments: The Department specifically requests comments on (a) whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted within 60 days of this publication.

Authority: Sec. 645A and 649 of the Improving Head Start for School Readiness Act of 2007.

The current fee structure ($2.00/continuous query enrollment, $2.00/one-time query, and $4.00/self-query) was announced in the Federal Register on July 20, 2016 (81 FR 47173), and became effective on October 1, 2016. One-time queries, continuous query enrollments, and self-queries are submitted and query responses are received through the NPDB's secure website. Fees are paid via electronic funds transfer, debit card, or credit card.

The NPDB is authorized by the Health Care Quality Improvement Act of 1986 (the Act), Title IV of Public Law 99-660, as amended (42 U.S.C. 11101 et seq. ). Further, two additional statutes expanded the scope of the NPDB—Section 1921 of the Social Security Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1396r-2) and Section 1128E of the Social Security Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1320a-7e). Information collected under the Section 1128E authority was consolidated within the NPDB pursuant to Section 6403 of the Affordable Care Act, Public Law 111-148; this consolidation became effective on May 6, 2013.

42 U.S.C. 11137(b)(4), 42 U.S.C. 1396r-2(e), and 42 U.S.C. 1320a-7e(d) authorize the establishment of fees for the costs of processing requests for disclosure of such information. Final regulations at 45 CFR part 60 set forth the criteria and procedures for information to be reported to and disclosed by the NPDB. In determining any changes in the amount of user fees, the Department uses the criteria set forth in section 60.19(b) of the regulations. Section 60.19(b) states:

“The amount of each fee will be determined based on the following criteria:

(1) Direct and indirect personnel costs, including salaries and fringe benefits such as medical insurance and retirement,

(2) Physical overhead, consulting, and other indirect costs (including materials and supplies, utilities, insurance, travel, and rent and depreciation on land, buildings, and equipment),

(3) Agency management and supervisory costs,

(4) Costs of enforcement, research, and establishment of regulations and guidance,

(5) Use of electronic data processing equipment to collect and maintain information—the actual cost of the service, including computer search time, runs and printouts, and

(6) Any other direct or indirect costs related to the provision of services.”

The Department will continue to review the user fees periodically as required by Office of Management and Budget Circular Number A-25 and will revise fees as necessary. Any future changes in user fees and their effective dates will be announced in the Federal Register .

The National Clinical Care Commission Act (Pub. L. 115-80) requires the HHS Secretary to establish the National Clinical Care Commission. The Commission consists of representatives of specific federal agencies and non-federal individuals who represent diverse disciplines and views. The Commission will evaluate and make recommendations to the HHS Secretary and Congress regarding improvements to the coordination and leveraging of federal programs related to diabetes and its complications.

During the meeting, the Commission will vote to approve the final report to be submitted to Congress. The final meeting agenda will be available prior to the meeting at https://health.gov/our-work/health-care-quality/national-clinical-care-commission/meetings .

Public Participation at Meeting: The Commission invites public comment on issues related to the Commission's charge. There will be an opportunity for limited oral comments (each no more than 3 minutes in length) at this virtual meeting. Virtual attendees who plan to provide oral comments at the Commission meeting during a designated time must register prior to the meeting at https://kauffmaninc.adobeconnect.com/nccc12_2021/event/event_info.html.

Written comments are welcome throughout the entire development process of the Commission's work and may be emailed to OHQ@hhs.gov. Written comments should not exceed three pages in length.

Individuals who need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should indicate the special accommodation when registering online or by notifying Jennifer Gillissen at jennifer.gillissen@kauffmaninc.com by August 30, 2021.

Authority: The National Clinical Care Commission is required under the National Clinical Care Commission Act (Pub. L. 115-80). The Commission is governed by provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), Public Law 92-463, as amended (5 U.S.C., App.) which sets forth standards for the formation and use of federal advisory committees.

The document published on July 15, 2021, at 86 FR 37339, contained incorrect meeting date in the DATES and ADDRESSES sections. The correct date for the meeting is July 30, 2021. The notice incorrectly noted the meeting would be July 30, 2020.

In the Federal Register of July 15, 2021, in FR Doc. 2021-14757, beginning on page 37339, the following corrections are made:

1. On page 37339, in the second column, in the DATES section, remove the text, “July 30, 2020” and insert, in its place, the text “July 30, 2021”.

2. On page 37339 in the second column, in the ADDRESSES section, remove the text, “July 30, 2020” and insert, in its place, the text “July 30, 2021”.

This notice informs the public that HUD is seeking approval from OMB for the information collection described in Section A.

Title of Information Collection: Application for displacement/relocation/temporary relocation assistance for persons.

OMB Approval Number: 2506-0016.

Type of Request: Extension of currently approved collection.

Form Numbers: HUD-40030, HUD-40054, HUD-40055, HUD-40056, HUD-40057, HUD-40058, HUD-40061, and HUD-40072.

Description of the need for the information and proposed use: Application for displacement/relocation assistance for persons (families, individuals, businesses, nonprofit organizations and farms) displaced by, or temporarily relocated for, certain HUD programs. No changes are being made for Forms HUD-40030, HUD-40054, 40055, HUD-40056, HUD-40057, HUD-40058, HUD-40061, and HUD-40072.

Respondents: Individuals, households, businesses, farms, non- profits, state, local and tribal governments.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 37,800.

Estimated Number of Responses: 61,800.

Frequency of Response: 3.

Average Hours per Response: .8.

Total Estimated Burdens: 56,000 (no change).

This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected parties concerning the collection of information described in Section A on the following:

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

(2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information;

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

(4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

HUD encourages interested parties to submit comment in response to these questions.

Section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35.

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development, James A. Jemison II, having reviewed and approved this document, is delegating the authority to electronically sign this document to submitter, Aaron Santa Anna, who is the Federal Register Liaison for HUD, for purposes of publication in the Federal Register .

Section 8071 of the SUPPORT for Patients and Communities Act (Pub. L. 115-271, approved Oct. 24, 2018) (“SUPPORT Act”) authorizes the appropriation of funds, as may be necessary, for each fiscal year of 2019 to 2023 for assistance to states to provide stable, temporary housing to individuals in recovery from a substance use disorder. The SUPPORT Act requires amounts appropriated or amounts otherwise made available to grantees for RHP be treated as though such funds are CDBG funds under title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5302) (“HCD Act”) and authorizes the Secretary of HUD to waive or specify alternative requirements to any provision of title I of the HCD Act necessary to facilitate or expedite the use of RHP funds, except for requirements related to fair housing, nondiscrimination, labor standards, the environment, and requirements that activities benefit persons of low- and moderate-income.

The SUPPORT Act authorized HUD to establish a funding formula based on specific factors listed in section 8071 of the SUPPORT Act and to allocate funds appropriated or otherwise made available for RHP according to the established funding formula. HUD published the funding formula in the Federal Register on April 17, 2019 (84 FR 16027) (the “Formula Notice”). In accordance with the SUPPORT Act, HUD distributes amounts appropriated for RHP according to the Formula Notice unless the appropriation act directs HUD to do otherwise. Following an appropriation of funds, HUD determines the RHP grantees and publishes their allocation amounts online at https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/comm_planning/budget in accordance with the Formula Notice and requirements of the appropriation. Congress appropriated $25,000,000 for RHP in fiscal year (FY) 2020 and $25,000,000 for RHP in FY 2021. HUD allocated the RHP funds to 25 grantees in FY 20 and 27 grantees in FY 21.

HUD published the “Notice of FY2020 Allocations, Waivers, and Alternative Requirements for the Pilot Recovery Housing Program” (85 FR 75361) (the “Program Notice”) on its website on November 4, 2020, and in the Federal Register on November 25, 2020. The Program Notice imposed the rules, waivers, and alternative requirements and provided specific program deadlines that apply for fiscal year 2020 (FY 20). The Program Notice describes requirements on the use of RHP funds and the applicable waivers and alternative requirements to title I of the HCD Act and 24 CFR part 570 necessary to expedite or facilitate the use of RHP funds. This Updated Program Notice imposes the Program Notice's rules, waivers and alternative requirements, as amended by this Updated Program Notice, on the use of all existing and future RHP allocations and revises the FY 20 RHP Action Plan submission deadline. Grantees must comply with the applicable requirements at 2 CFR part 200, as amended. Amendments to 2 CFR part 200 may renumber some subparts and regulations. Where RHP notices (with applicability dates preceding the amendments' effective dates) refer to specific regulations of 2 CFR part 200 that are renumbered or revised by amendments to 2 CFR part 200, the requirements that apply to the grant are the requirements in 2 CFR part 200, as amended, notwithstanding the renumbered regulatory reference.

This Updated Program Notice is based on the applicable waivers and alternative requirements to the CDBG program requirements included in the November 25, 2020, Program Notice. The Secretary has determined that those statutory and regulatory waivers and alternative requirements will apply to this Updated Program Notice because they are necessary to expedite or facilitate the use of RHP funds. The waivers and alternative requirements are only applicable to the use of RHP funds and do not apply to CDBG funds used in conjunction with RHP funds or other sources of CDBG funds ( i.e., from other grants or guaranteed loan funds) used for RHP-eligible activities.

All RHP allocations are subject to the requirements in the Program Notice, as amended by this Updated Program Notice and any subsequent notices (collectively, the “RHP notices”). The applicable rules, statutory and regulatory waivers, and alternative requirements described in the RHP notices apply to fiscal year allocations as of the applicability date of each RHP notice. Grantees may use funds from different FY allocations for the same RHP-eligible activity, however, grantees should be aware that each allocation has a distinct period of performance and distinct limitations on administrative and technical assistance costs.

Section I.B. of the Program Notice requires RHP Grantees to submit a RHP Action Plan for FY 20 allocations, including the Form SF-424, application for federal funds, by August 16, 2021. This Updated Program Notice amends section I.B. and extends the submission deadline for RHP Action Plans for FY 20 allocations to December 31, 2021. Grantees with FY 21 allocations must submit a RHP Action Plan or amendment for FY 21 funds by August 16, 2022, according to the requirements in the Program Notice, as amended by section II.B. of this Updated Program Notice.

Grantees will have a single, combined RHP Action Plan for the use of RHP funds, including any and all allocations from existing and future appropriations authorized under the SUPPORT Act. For future allocations, grantees must submit a RHP Action Plan or amendment, including a Form SF-424, application for federal funds, for the allocated funds by August 16 of the fiscal year following the fiscal year in which the funds were authorized. For example, a grantee with an allocation in fiscal year 2022 must submit a RHP Action Plan or RHP Action Plan amendment, as well as any required submissions, by August 16, 2023.

A grantee's RHP Action Plan must meet the specific requirements in the Program Notice, as amended by this Updated Program Notice. If a grantee receiving an allocation fails to submit a RHP Action Plan for its allocation by the deadline(s) provided in this Updated Program Notice or submits a RHP Action Plan for less than the total allocation amount, HUD may simultaneously notify the grantee of the reduction in its allocation amount and reallocate those funds in accordance with the SUPPORT Act's requirements.

The following sections describe the RHP Action Plan requirements and process that RHP grantees must complete to access RHP grant funds. These requirements and processes amend those provided in section II.H. of the Program Notice. Grantees that receive a RHP allocation must submit a RHP Action Plan according to the requirements in the Program Notice, as amended by this Updated Program Notice and described below.

A grantee will have a single RHP Action Plan that describes the use(s) of RHP funds for all of its allocations. While each fiscal year allocation will be a separate grant with separate grant numbers and agreements, this combined administrative approach of a single RHP Action Plan is intended to expedite and facilitate the use of RHP funds by grantees while reducing administrative burden. ( Note: RHP Action Plan submissions or substantial amendments for less than the amount of the allocation amount may result in allocation amount reductions. For example, a grantee's submission for its FY 20 allocation must have activity budgets that amount to its FY 20 funds.)

i. Initial RHP Action Plan Submission: A grantee must submit an initial RHP Action Plan pursuant to the requirements in section II.H. of the Program Notice, not later than August 16 of the fiscal year following the fiscal year in which the funds were allocated. (Note: RHP Action Plans for FY 20 allocations have an extended deadline of December 31, 2021, as provided by section II.A. of this Updated Program Notice.) For example, a grantee must submit a RHP Action Plan for its FY 21 allocation not later than August 16, 2022. All requirements of section II.H. of the Program Notice related to Action Plan requirements, as amended by this Updated Program Notice, apply to all initial RHP Action Plans, and RHP Action Plans must be submitted to HUD via the Disaster Recovery Grants Reporting (DRGR) system. As a reminder, the citizen participation plan (CPP) may be amended in accordance with 24 CFR 91.105(a)(3) and 91.115(a)(3) concurrently to address RHP funds, and to allow no less than 15 calendar days of public comment and encourage participation by organizations interested in residential recovery programs for individuals with substance use disorders.

A grantee may submit an initial RHP Action Plan for multiple allocations. A grantee that submits an initial RHP Action Plan for multiple allocations must submit its RHP Action Plan no later than the deadline for the earliest fiscal year allocation. For example, the deadline for an initial RHP Action Plan that includes both FY 20 and FY 21 allocations is December 31, 2021 (the submission deadline for FY 20 allocations). If submitting a RHP action plan for multiple allocations, the grantee must set up project and activity budgets in the DRGR system for the total of the allocations and submit the RHP Action Plan via the DRGR system in accordance with the requirements in the Program Notice, as amended by this Updated Program Notice.

ii. Substantial Amendment Process for Additional Allocation(s): A grantee with a HUD-approved Action Plan for any RHP allocation(s) must submit a substantial amendment to its RHP Action Plan to incorporate any subsequent allocation(s). For example, a grantee that has a HUD-approved RHP Action Plan for its FY 20 allocation must submit a substantial amendment to incorporate its FY 21 allocation or any future allocations. The grantee must submit the substantial amendment via the DRGR system by the deadline in section II.A. of this Updated Program Notice. In the DRGR system, grantees must ensure any subsequent allocation(s) are fully budgeted in the amendment to the RHP Action Plan prior to submission to HUD. The process for the substantial amendment to the RHP Action Plan for a subsequent allocation is as follows:

1. The grantee amends its RHP Action Plan to incorporate each substantial amendment. The substantial amendment shall include the HUD-approved RHP Action Plan and the modifications made to it by the substantial amendment. A grantee's substantial amendment(s) to its RHP Action Plan must comply with the requirements in II.H. of the Program Notice, as amended by this Updated Program Notice, and include, at a minimum, the use of the total amount of RHP funds, including prior and new allocations, in the substantial amendment. The grantee may modify existing activities or add new activities to the HUD-approved RHP Action Plan) in a substantial amendment.

2. The grantee publishes each substantial amendment to its RHP Action Plan in accordance with the grantee's adopted CPP. The grantee shall provide opportunity for public comment and public hearings, if any, on the substantial amendment and consider and summarize public comments received, in accordance with the requirements described in steps 2 and 3 in section II.H. of the Program Notice.

3. The grantee submits its RHP Action Plan to HUD. A complete action plan submission includes items i through xii in section II.H. of the Program Notice.

4. HUD will review the substantial amendment to the RHP Action Plan in accordance with 24 CFR 91.500 and this Updated Program Notice and the Program Notice.

5. Once HUD accepts the substantial amendment to the RHP Action Plan for the subsequent allocation(s), HUD and the grantee will enter into a grant agreement for each new allocation described in the substantial amendment. HUD transmits the RHP grant agreement to the grantee, and the grantee signs and returns the grant agreement for HUD's signature.

6. HUD will establish the grantee's line(s) of credit to reflect the amount of new RHP funds.

7. The grantee may draw down funds from each grant's line of credit, consistent with the applicable draw down requirements, after the Responsible Entity completes applicable environmental review(s) pursuant to 24 CFR part 58 and, as applicable, receives from HUD or the State the Authority to Use Grant Funds (AUGF) form.

RHP funds for FY 21 and any subsequent allocations are subject to the same requirements as those for FY 20 allocations provided in the Program Notice, as amended by this Updated Program Notice. Each grant is subject to its RHP expenditure deadline in accordance with the applicable executed grant agreement. Pursuant to the grant agreement, a grantee must expend RHP funds for each RHP grant before the end of the grant's period of performance. All RHP funds must be expended before the end of the period of performance on September 1 of the seventh Federal fiscal year from the fiscal year of the appropriation, which is 29 days before the RHP appropriation account is cancelled in accordance with 31 U.S.C. 1552(a), 24 CFR 570.200(k), and 24 CFR 570.480(h). For example, if Congress appropriates funds under Section 8071 of the SUPPORT Act for fiscal year 2022, all FY 22 funds must be expended before the end of the period of performance on September 1, 2029. Grant funds are not available for obligation and expenditure after the period of performance.

HUD, via the DRGR system, will block remaining RHP funds after the grant expenditure deadline to prevent grantees from drawing down funds past the grant's period of performance. The grantee will be able to continue drawing down funds from its line(s) of credit for grants still within their period of performance until the expenditure deadline for each such grant has been reached.

Additionally, section 8071(c)(1) of the SUPPORT Act requires grantees to “expend at least 30 percent of such funds within one year of the date funds become available to the grantee for obligation.” The date of HUD's execution of the grant agreement is used for this purpose. Pursuant to 24 CFR 570.496(b) (states) and 570.910(b)(5) (District of Columbia), any amount of funds that exceeds 70% of a grant allocation not expended by such date is subject to cancellation.

Pursuant to section II.P. of the Program Notice, HUD will close out RHP grants in accordance with the 24 CFR 570.489(o), which imposes the closeout requirements of 2 CFR part 200. HUD notes that those closeout requirements are now located at 2 CFR 200.344.

The information collection requirements in this Updated Program Notice have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520) and assigned OMB Control Number 2506-0165. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act, HUD may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection displays a currently valid OMB control number.

The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance numbers for RHP grants under the SUPPORT Act are 14.218 (Community Development Block Grants/Entitlement Grants), 14.225 (Community Development Block Grants/Special Purpose Grants/Insular Areas, and 14.228 (Community Development Block Grants/State's Program and Non-Entitlement Grants in Hawaii) (formerly CDBG Grant/Small Cities Program).

A Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) with respect to the environment has been made in accordance with HUD regulations at 24 CFR part 50, which implement section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)). The FONSI is available for inspection at HUD's Funding Opportunities web page.

This notice informs the public that HUD is seeking approval from OMB for the information collection described in Section A.

Title of Information Collection: Data Collection and Reporting for HUD's Continuum of Care Program—Annual Performance Report and System Performance Report.

OMB Approval Number: 2506-0145.

Type of Request: Reinstatement.

Form Number: N/A.

Description of the need for the information and proposed use: This request is for clearance of data collection and reporting to enable the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Office of Community Planning and Development (CPD) to continue to manage and assess the effectiveness of its homeless assistance projects on an annual basis. Per 24 CFR 578.103(e), HUD requires recipients and subrecipients that receive funding through the CoC Program (authorized by the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act, as amended by the Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing (HEARTH) Act) to prepare and submit annual project-level reports on performance and spending.

This request will also enable the HUD CPD Office to initiate a process to assess the effectiveness of local coordinated systems of homeless assistance. The McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act, as amended, now requires communities to measure their performance as a coordinated system, in addition to analyzing performance by specific projects or project types. Section 427 of the Act established a set of selection criteria for HUD to use in awarding CoC Program funding. These selection criteria require CoCs to report to HUD their system-level performance. The intent of these selection criteria are to encourage CoCs, in coordination with Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) Program recipients and all other homeless assistance stakeholders in the community, to regularly measure their progress in meeting the needs of people experiencing homelessness in their community and to report this progress to HUD. This request is for HUD to collect system-level performance measure data from CoCs on an annual basis, as described in Appendix B of this document.

The project APR and system-level performance measures both rely on a primary data source in each CoC—a local Homeless Management Information System (HMIS). An HMIS is an electronic data collection system that stores person-level information about homeless persons who access a community's homeless service system. Over the past decade, HUD has supported the development of local HMIS by funding their development and implementation, by providing technical assistance, and by developing national data standards that enable the collection of standardized information on the characteristics, service patterns and service needs of homeless persons within a jurisdiction and across jurisdictions. These standards are described in HUD's HMIS Data Standards.

This notice requests public comment on the Department's revision of a currently approved collection of information regarding a customer survey that solicits inquirers' feedback on the applicability and utility of EBSA's Participant Assistance Program. A summary of the ICR and the current burden estimates follows:

Agency: Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA), Department of Labor.

Title: EBSA Participant Assistance Program Customer Survey.

OMB Number: 1210-0161.

Respondents: (Annual) 11,200.

Number of Annual Responses: 11,200.

Total Annual Burden Hours: 1,867 hours.

Total Annual Costs: $0.

Description: The demographic questions in the EBSA Participant Assistance Program Customer Survey are being updated in response to Executive Order 13985—Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government. 1 The new demographic survey information will be used to provide additional training to EBSA benefits advisors in order to better serve the underserved populations that the Department assists.

The Participant Assistance Program Customer Survey collects customer satisfaction data for a sample of private citizens who call into the participant assistance program to ask about their private sector employer provided benefits such as pensions, retirement savings, and health benefits. Three types of callers are queried: (1) Those who need benefit claim assistance; (2) those who have a valid benefit claim; and (3) those who have an invalid benefit claim. The results of the survey are analyzed to provide actionable data that could be used to improve program performance. Examples of improved performance that may result from that study include, but are not limited to:

The study will include survey data from regional offices in Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Cincinnati, Dallas, Kansas City, Los Angeles, New York, Philadelphia and San Francisco and District offices in Miami, Seattle and Washington.

The Department is particularly interested in comments that:

• Evaluate whether the collections of information are necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the collections of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

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

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

• Evaluate the effectiveness of the additional demographic questions.

Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the ICR for OMB approval of the information collection; they will also become a matter of public record.

The standard for shackles and hooks (29 CFR 1915.113(b)(1)) requires that all hooks for which no applicable manufacturer's recommendations are available be tested and that the employer retain a certification record. The standard on portable air receivers (29 CFR 1915.172(d)) requires that portable, unfired pressure vessels be examined quarterly and subjected to a yearly hydrostatic pressure test and that a certification record be maintained. For additional substantive information about this ICR, see the related notice published in the Federal Register on April 27, 2021 (86 FR 22279).

This information collection is subject to the PRA. A Federal agency generally cannot conduct or sponsor a collection of information, and the public is generally not required to respond to an information collection, unless the OMB approves it and displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. In addition, notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person shall generally be subject to penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information that does not display a valid OMB Control Number. See 5 CFR 1320.5(a) and 1320.6.

DOL seeks PRA authorization for this information collection for three (3) years. OMB authorization for an ICR cannot be for more than three (3) years without renewal. The DOL notes that information collection requirements submitted to the OMB for existing ICRs receive a month-to-month extension while they undergo review.

Agency: DOL-OSHA.

Title of Collection: Shipyard Employment Standards.

OMB Control Number: 1218-0220.

Affected Public: Private Sector: Businesses or other for-profits.

Total Estimated Number of Respondents: 4,726.

Total Estimated Number of Responses: 27,342.

Total Estimated Annual Time Burden: 10,379 hours.

Total Estimated Annual Other Costs Burden: $0.

Section 103(h) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (Mine Act), 30 U.S.C. 813(h), authorizes MSHA to collect information necessary to carry out its duty in protecting the safety and health of miners. Further, section 101(a) of the Mine Act, 30 U.S.C. 811, authorizes the Secretary of Labor (Secretary) to develop, promulgate, and revise as may be appropriate, improved mandatory health or safety standards for the protection of life and prevention of injuries in coal or other mines. In addition, section 303 of the Mine Act requires that all underground coal mines be ventilated by mechanical ventilation equipment installed and operated in a manner approved by an authorized representative of the Secretary and that such equipment be examined daily and a record be kept of such examination.

Underground coal mines usually present harsh and hostile working environments. The ventilation system is the most vital life support system in underground mining and a properly operating ventilation system is essential for maintaining a safe and healthful working environment. Lack of adequate ventilation in underground mines has resulted in fatalities from asphyxiation and explosions.

An underground mine is a maze of tunnels that must be adequately ventilated with fresh air to provide a safe environment for miners. Methane is liberated from the strata, and noxious gases and dusts from blasting and other mining activities may be present. The explosive and noxious gases and dusts must be diluted, rendered harmless, and carried to the surface by the ventilating currents. Sufficient air must be provided to maintain the level of respirable dust at or below specific exposure limits and air quality must be maintained in accordance with MSHA standards. Mechanical ventilation equipment of sufficient capacity must operate at all times while miners are in the mine. Ground conditions are subject to frequent changes; thus, sufficient tests and examinations are necessary to ensure the integrity of the ventilation system and to detect any changes that may require adjustments in the system. Records of tests and examinations are necessary to ensure that the ventilation system is being maintained and that changes which could adversely affect the integrity of the system or the safety of the miners are not occurring. These examination, reporting, and recordkeeping requirements of sections 75.310, 75.312, 75.342, 75.351, 75.360 through 75.364, 75.370, 75.371, and 75.382 also incorporate examinations of other critical aspects of the underground work environment such as roof conditions and electrical equipment which have historically caused numerous fatalities when not properly maintained and operated.

Section 75.362, On-shift Examinations, was revised at subsection 75.362(a)(2) and (g)(2)-(4) by MSHA's rule titled “Lowering Miners' Exposure to Respirable Coal Mine Dust, Including Continuous Personal Dust Monitors,” published May 1, 2014. This rule also revised subsection 75.371(f) and (j).

Subsection 75.362(a)(2) requires that a person designated by the operator conduct an examination and record the results and the corrective actions taken to ensure compliance with the respirable dust control parameters specified in the approved mine ventilation plan.

Under subsection 75.362(g)(2)(i), the certified person directing the on-shift examination must certify by initials, date, and time, on a board maintained at the section load out or similar location showing that the examination was made prior to resuming production. No increased burden is estimated for section 75.362(g)(2)(i) in this Information Collection Request (ICR) because MSHA does not expect the burden to be different from the burden in existing section 75.362(g)(2)).

Under section 75.362(g)(2)(ii), the certified person directing the on-shift examination must verify, by initials, date, and time, the record of the results of the examination required under section 75.362(a)(2) to ensure compliance with the respirable dust control parameters specified in the mine ventilation plan. Further, section 75.362(g)(3) requires a mine foreman or equivalent mine official to countersign each examination record required under section 75.362(a)(2) after it is verified by the certified person under section 75.362(g)(2)(ii), and no later than the end of the mine foreman's or equivalent mine official's next regularly scheduled working shift. Section 75.362(g)(2)(ii) and (g)(3) are additional burdens that are accounted for in this ICR and 75.362(g)(2)(ii)(4) requires that records be retained at a surface location at the mine for at least 1 year and must be made available for inspection by authorized representatives of the Secretary and the representative of miners.

Paragraph (a)(2) in section 75.370, Mine ventilation plan; submission and approval, contains the burden for underground coal mine operators to submit mine ventilation plan revisions for District Manager approval. Each mine ventilation plan must include information that is specified by section 75.371, Mine ventilation plan; contents.

Section 75.371(f) adds the following information that a mine operator must include in the mine ventilation plan: The minimum quantity of air that will be delivered to the working section for each mechanized mining unit (MMU), and the identification by make and model, of each different dust suppression system used on equipment on each working section, including: (1) The number, types, location, orientation, operating pressure, and flow rate of operating water sprays; (2) the maximum distance that ventilation control devices will be installed from each working face when mining or installing roof bolts in entries and crosscuts; (3) procedures for maintaining the roof bolter dust collection system in approved condition; and (4) recommended best work practices for equipment operators to minimize dust exposure.

Section 75.371(j) adds a requirement that for machine mounted dust collectors, the ventilation plan must include the type and size of dust collector screens used and a description of the procedures to be followed to properly maintain dust collectors used on the equipment.

Section 75.370(a)(2) requires all underground coal mine operators to submit revisions for mine ventilation plans to MSHA. The burden to submit the additional information required by section 75.371(f) and (j) as proposed revisions to the plan is accounted for in this package under section 75.370(a)(2). In addition, section 75.370(a)(3)(i) requires underground coal mine operators to notify the miners' representative at least 5 days prior to submission of mine ventilation plan revisions and, if requested, provide a copy of the revisions to the miners' representative at the time of notification. Section 75.370(a)(3)(iii) and (f)(3) require the operator to post a copy of the plan revisions, and section 75.370(f)(1) requires that the operator provide a copy of the revisions to the miners' representative, if requested. MSHA assumes that a copy of the revisions will be requested. The burdens for notification, providing requested copies, and posting associated with mine ventilation plan revisions resulting from section 75.371(f) and (j) are accounted for in this package under section 75.370(a)(3)(i), (f)(1), (a)(3)(iii), and (f)(3), respectively.

MSHA is soliciting comments concerning the proposed information collection related to Ventilation Plans, Tests, and Examinations in Underground Coal Mines. MSHA is particularly interested in comments that:

• Evaluate whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information has practical utility;

• Evaluate the accuracy of MSHA's estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

• Suggest methods to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

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

Background documents related to this information collection request are available at https://regulations.gov and at DOL-MSHA located at 201 12th Street South, Suite 4E401, Arlington, VA 22202-5452. Questions about the information collection requirements may be directed to the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this notice.

This information collection request concerns provisions for Ventilation Plans, Tests, and Examinations in Underground Coal Mines. MSHA has updated the data with respect to the number of respondents, responses, burden hours, and burden costs supporting this information collection request from the previous information collection request.

Type of Review: Extension, without change, of a currently approved collection.

Agency: Mine Safety and Health Administration.

OMB Number: 1219-0088.

Affected Public: Business or other for-profit.

Number of Respondents: 153.

Frequency: On occasion.

Number of Responses: 10,926.

Annual Burden Hours: 115,874 hours.

Annual Respondent or Recordkeeper Cost: $26,004.

Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized in the request for Office of Management and Budget approval of the proposed information collection request; they will become a matter of public record and will be available at https://www.reginfo.gov.

Section 103(h) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (Mine Act), 30 U.S.C. 813(h), authorizes MSHA to collect information necessary to carry out its duty in protecting the safety and health of miners. Further, section 101(a) of the Mine Act, 30 U.S.C. 811, authorizes the Secretary of Labor (Secretary) to develop, promulgate, and revise as may be appropriate, improved mandatory health or safety standards for the protection of life and prevention of injuries in coal or other mines.

The information collection addressed by this notice is intended to protect miners by ensuring that up-to-date, accurate mine maps contain the information needed to clarify the best alternatives for action during an emergency operation. Coal mine operators routinely use maps to create safe and effective development plans.

Mine maps are schematic depictions of critical mine infrastructure, such as water, power, transportation, ventilation, and communication systems. Using accurate, up-to-date maps during a disaster, mine emergency personnel can locate refuges for miners and identify sites of explosion potential. Emergency personnel use the maps to know where stationary equipment was placed, where ground was secured, and where they can best begin a rescue operation. During a disaster, maps can be crucial to the safety of the emergency personnel who must enter a mine to begin a search for survivors.

Mine maps may describe the current status of an operating mine or provide crucial information about a closed mine that is being reopened.

Title 30 CFR 75.1200 requires each underground coal mine operator to have an accurate and up-to-date map of such mine drawn to scale and stored in a fireproof repository in an area on the surface of the mine chosen by the mine operator to minimize the danger of destruction by fire or other hazards. Sections 75.1200-1, 75.1201, 75.1202, 75.1202-1, and 75.1203 specify the information which must be shown on the map. The maps must be certified by a registered engineer or surveyor and be kept up-to-date by temporary notations and revised and supplemented to include the temporary notations at intervals of not more than 6 months. Maps must be made available for inspection by a representative of the Secretary, State coal mine inspectors, miners and their representatives, operators of adjacent coal mines, and persons owning, leasing, or residing on surface areas of such mines or areas adjacent to such mines. Mine maps are essential to the planning and safe operation of the mine. In addition, these maps provide a graphic presentation of the locations of working sections and the locations of fixed surface and underground mine facilities and equipment, escapeway routes, coal haulage and man and materials haulage entries and other information essential to mine rescue or mine firefighting activities in the event of mine fires, explosions or inundations of gas or water. The information is essential to the safe operation of adjacent mines and mines approaching the worked out areas of active or abandoned mines. Section 75.372 requires underground mine operators to submit three copies of an up-to-date mine map to the District Manager at intervals not exceeding 12 months during the operating life of the mine.

Title 30 CFR 75.1204 and 75.1204-1 require that whenever an underground coal mine operator permanently closes or abandons a coal mine, or temporarily closes a coal mine for a period of more than 90 days, the operator must file with MSHA a copy of the mine map revised and supplemented to the date of closure. Maps are retained in a repository and are made available to mine operators of adjacent properties. The maps are necessary to provide an accurate record of underground areas that have been mined to help prevent active mine operators from mining into abandoned areas that may contain water or harmful gases.

Title 30 CFR 77.1200, 77.1201, and 77.1202 require surface coal mine operators to maintain an accurate and up-to-date map of the mine and specifies the information to be shown on the map, the acceptable range of map scales, that the map be certified by a registered engineer or surveyor, and that the map be available for inspection by the Secretary or his authorized representative. These maps are essential for the safe operation of the mine and provide essential information to operators of adjacent surface and underground mines. Properly prepared and effectively utilized surface mine maps can prevent outbursts of water impounded in underground mine workings and/or inundations of underground mines by surface impounded water or water and/or gases impounded in surface auger mining worked-out areas.

Title 30 CFR 75.373 and 75.1721 require that after a mine is abandoned or declared inactive and before it is reopened, mine operations must not begin until MSHA has been notified and has completed an inspection. Section 75.1721 specifies that once the mine operator notifies the MSHA District Manager of the intent to reopen a mine all preliminary plans must be submitted in writing and approved prior to development of the coalbed.

MSHA is soliciting comments concerning the proposed information collection related to Mine Mapping and Records of Opening, Closing, and Reopening of Mines. MSHA is particularly interested in comments that:

• Evaluate whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information has practical utility;

• Evaluate the accuracy of MSHA's estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

• Suggest methods to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

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

Background documents related to this information collection request are available at https://regulations.gov and at DOL-MSHA located at 201 12th Street South, Suite 4E401, Arlington, VA 22202-5452. Questions about the information collection requirements may be directed to the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION section of this notice.

This information collection request concerns provisions for Mine Mapping and Records of Opening, Closing, and Reopening of Mines. MSHA has updated the data with respect to the number of respondents, responses, burden hours, and burden costs supporting this information collection request from the previous information collection request.

Type of Review: Extension, without change, of a currently approved collection.

Agency: Mine Safety and Health Administration.

OMB Number: 1219-0073.

Affected Public: Business or other for-profit.

Number of Respondents: 580.

Frequency: On occasion.

Number of Responses: 1,190.

Annual Burden Hours: 6,274 hours.

Annual Respondent or Recordkeeper Cost: $3,204,898.

Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized in the request for Office of Management and Budget approval of the proposed information collection request; they will become a matter of public record and will be available at https://www.reginfo.gov.

The NRC is issuing a new guide in the NRC's “Regulatory Guide” series. This series was developed to describe and make available to the public information regarding methods that are acceptable to the NRC staff for implementing specific parts of the agency's regulations, techniques that the NRC staff uses in evaluating specific issues or postulated events, and data that the NRC staff needs in its review of applications for permits and licenses.

Revision 0 of RG 3.76 was issued with a temporary identification of Draft Regulatory Guide, DG-3055. It describes an approach that is acceptable to the staff of the NRC by endorsing, with clarifications, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) guidance in NEI 14-03, Revision 2, “Format, Content and Implementation Guidance for Dry Cask Storage Operations-Based Aging Management,” issued December 2016.

The NRC published a notice of the availability of DG-3055 (ADAMS Accession No. ML20282A298), in the Federal Register on December 11, 2020 (85 FR 80193), for a 45-day public comment period. The public comment period closed on January 25, 2021. The staff received one public comment submission on DG-3055.

This RG is a new RG 3.76 that describes an approach that is acceptable to the staff of the NRC by endorsing, with clarifications, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) guidance in NEI 14-03, Revision 2, “Format, Content and Implementation Guidance for Dry Cask Storage Operations-Based Aging Management,” issued December 2016.

This new RG provides guidance to industry for complying with and implementing the requirements for spent fuel storage renewals in Part 72 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), “Licensing Requirements for the Independent Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level Radioactive Waste, and Reactor-Related Greater Than Class C Waste.” This guidance addresses renewal of ISFSI specific licenses and CoCs for spent fuel storage cask designs in 10 CFR 72.42, “Duration of license; renewal,” and 10 CFR 72.240, “Conditions for spent fuel storage cask renewal,” respectively.

The guidance specifically addresses the format and content of spent fuel storage renewal applications and the implementation of aging management programs (AMPs). The guidance uses an operations-focused approach to aging management, in which operating experience is shared through an industry database and continually assessed to adjust AMPs, as needed and within regulatory limits, to ensure the effectiveness of aging management activities during the period of extended operation and the continued safe storage of spent fuel.

This RG is a rule as defined in the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801-808). However, the Office of Management and Budget has not found it to be a major rule as defined in the Congressional Review Act.

This regulatory guide, RG 3.76, endorses, with clarifications, NEI 14-03, which provides guidance on the format and content of spent fuel storage renewal applications and implementation of aging management programs under 10 CFR part 72. As explained in RG 3.76, licensees are not required to comply with the positions set forth in this regulatory guide. Therefore, RG 3.76 does not constitute backfitting as defined in 10 CFR 72.62, “Backfitting,” and as described in NRC Management Directive (MD) 8.4, “Management of Backfitting, Forward Fitting, Issue Finality, and Information Requests”; or constitute forward fitting as that term is defined and described in MD 8.4. If, in the future, the NRC were to impose a position in RG 3.76 in a manner that would constitute backfitting or forward fitting, then the NRC would address the backfitting provision in 10 CFR 72.62 or the forward fitting provision of MD 8.4, respectively.

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 an Applicant using the “Company” name box, at http://www.sec.gov/search/search.htm or by calling (202) 551-8090.

1. Applicants request an order to permit the Adviser, 1 subject to the approval of the board of trustees of the Trust (collectively, the “Board”), 2 including a majority of the trustees who are not “interested persons” of the Trust or the Adviser, as defined in section 2(a)(19) of the Act (the “Independent Trustees”), without obtaining shareholder approval, to: (i) Select investment subadvisers (“Subadvisers”) for all or a portion of the assets of one or more of the Funds pursuant to an investment subadvisory agreement with each Subadviser (each a “Subadvisory Agreement”); and (ii) materially amend Subadvisory Agreements with the Subadvisers.

2. Applicants also request an order exempting the Subadvised Funds (as defined below) from the Disclosure Requirements, which require each Fund to disclose fees paid to a Subadviser. Applicants seek relief to permit each Subadvised Fund to disclose (as a dollar amount and a percentage of the Fund's net assets): (i) The aggregate fees paid to the Adviser and any Wholly-Owned Subadvisers; and (ii) the aggregate fees paid to Affiliated and Non-Affiliated Subadvisers (“Aggregate Fee Disclosure”). 3 Applicants seek an exemption to permit a Subadvised Fund to include only the Aggregate Fee Disclosure. 4

3. Applicants request that the relief apply to Applicants, as well as to any other existing or future registered open-end management investment company or series thereof that intends to rely on the requested order in the future and that: (i) Is advised by the Adviser; (ii) uses the multi-manager structure described in the application; and (iii) complies with the terms and conditions of the application (each, a “Subadvised Fund”). 5

4. The Adviser serves or will serve as the investment adviser to each Subadvised Fund pursuant to an investment advisory agreement with the Fund (each an “Investment Advisory Agreement”). Each Investment Advisory Agreement has been or will be approved by the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, and by the shareholders of the relevant Subadvised Fund in the manner required by sections 15(a) and 15(c) of the Act. The terms of these Investment Advisory Agreements comply or will comply with section 15(a) of the Act. Applicants are not seeking an exemption from the Act with respect to the Investment Advisory Agreements. Pursuant to the terms of each Investment Advisory Agreement, the Adviser, subject to the oversight of the Board, will provide continuous investment management for each Subadvised Fund. For its services to each Subadvised Fund, the Adviser receives or will receive an investment advisory fee from that Fund as specified in the applicable Investment Advisory Agreement.

5. Consistent with the terms of each Investment Advisory Agreement, the Adviser may, subject to the approval of the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, and the shareholders of the applicable Subadvised Fund (if required by applicable law), delegate portfolio management responsibilities of all or a portion of the assets of a Subadvised Fund to a Subadviser. The Adviser will retain overall responsibility for the management and investment of the assets of each Subadvised Fund. This responsibility includes recommending the removal or replacement of Subadvisers, allocating the portion of that Subadvised Fund's assets to any given Subadviser and reallocating those assets as necessary from time to time. 6 The Subadvisers will be “investment advisers” to the Subadvised Funds within the meaning of Section 2(a)(20) of the Act and will provide investment management services to the Funds subject to, without limitation, the requirements of Sections 15(c) and 36(b) of the Act. 7 The Subadvisers, subject to the oversight of the Adviser and the Board, will determine the securities and other investments to be purchased, sold or entered into by a Subadvised Fund's portfolio or a portion thereof, and will place orders with brokers or dealers that they select. 8

6. The Subadvisory Agreements will be approved by the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, in accordance with sections 15(a) and 15(c) of the Act. In addition, the terms of each Subadvisory Agreement will comply fully with the requirements of section 15(a) of the Act. The Adviser may compensate the Subadvisers or the Subadvised Funds may compensate the Subadvisers directly.

7. Subadvised Funds will inform shareholders of the hiring of a new Subadviser pursuant to the following procedures (“Modified Notice and Access Procedures”): (a) Within 90 days after a new Subadviser is hired for any Subadvised Fund, that Fund will send its shareholders either a Multi-manager Notice or a Multi-manager Notice and Multi-manager Information Statement;  9 and (b) the Subadvised Fund will make the Multi-manager Information Statement available on the website identified in the Multi-manager Notice no later than when the Multi-manager Notice (or Multi-manager Notice and Multi-manager Information Statement) is first sent to shareholders, and will maintain it on that website for at least 90 days. 10

8. Section 15(a) of the Act states, in part, that it is unlawful for any person to act as an investment adviser to a registered investment company “except pursuant to a written contract, which contract, whether with such registered company or with an investment adviser of such registered company, has been approved by the vote of a majority of the outstanding voting securities of such registered company.”

9. Form N-1A is the registration statement used by open-end investment companies. Item 19(a)(3) of Form N-1A requires a registered investment company to disclose in its statement of additional information the method of computing the “advisory fee payable” by the investment company with respect to each investment adviser, including the total dollar amounts that the investment company “paid to the adviser (aggregated with amounts paid to affiliated advisers, if any), and any advisers who are not affiliated persons of the adviser, under the investment advisory contract for the last three fiscal years.”

10. Rule 20a-1 under the Act requires proxies solicited with respect to a registered investment company to comply with Schedule 14A under the 1934 Act. Items 22(c)(1)(ii), 22(c)(1)(iii), 22(c)(8) and 22(c)(9) of Schedule 14A, taken together, require a proxy statement for a shareholder meeting at which the advisory contract will be voted upon to include the “rate of compensation of the investment adviser,” the “aggregate amount of the investment adviser's fee,” a description of the “terms of the contract to be acted upon,” and, if a change in the advisory fee is proposed, the existing and proposed fees and the difference between the two fees.

11. Regulation S-X sets forth the requirements for financial statements required to be included as part of a registered investment company's registration statement and shareholder reports filed with the Commission. Sections 6-07(2)(a), (b), and (c) of Regulation S-X require a registered investment company to include in its financial statements information about investment advisory fees.

12. Section 6(c) of the Act provides that the Commission may exempt any person, security, or transaction or any class or classes of persons, securities, or transactions from any provisions of the Act, or any rule thereunder, if such exemption is necessary or appropriate in the public interest and consistent with the protection of investors and the purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of the Act. Applicants state that the requested relief meets this standard for the reasons discussed below.

13. Applicants assert that, from the perspective of the shareholder, the role of the Subadvisers is substantially equivalent to the limited role of the individual portfolio managers employed by an investment adviser to a traditional investment company. Applicants also assert that the shareholders expect the Adviser, subject to review and approval of the Board, to select a Subadviser who is in the best position to achieve the Subadvised Fund's investment objective. Applicants believe that permitting the Adviser to perform the duties for which the shareholders of the Subadvised Fund are paying the Adviser—the selection, oversight and evaluation of the Subadviser—without incurring unnecessary delays or expenses of convening special meetings of shareholders is appropriate and in the interest of the Fund's shareholders, and will allow such Fund to operate more efficiently. Applicants state that each Investment Advisory Agreement will continue to be fully subject to section 15(a) of the Act and approved by the relevant Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, in the manner required by section 15(a) and 15(c) of the Act.

14. Applicants submit that the requested relief meets the standards for relief under section 6(c) of the Act. Applicants state that the operation of the Subadvised Fund in the manner described in the Application must be approved by shareholders of that Fund before it may rely on the requested relief. Applicants also state that the proposed conditions to the requested relief are designed to address any potential conflicts of interest or economic incentives, and provide that shareholders are informed when new Subadvisers are hired.

15. Applicants contend that, in the circumstances described in the application, a proxy solicitation to approve the appointment of new Subadvisers provides no more meaningful information to shareholders than the proposed Multi-manager Information Statement. Applicants state that, accordingly, they believe the requested relief is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, and consistent with the protection of investors and the purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of the Act.

16. With respect to the relief permitting Aggregate Fee Disclosure, Applicants assert that disclosure of the individual fees paid to the Subadvisers does not serve any meaningful purpose. Applicants contend that the primary reasons for requiring disclosure of individual fees paid to Subadvisers are to inform shareholders of expenses to be charged by a particular Subadvised Fund and to enable shareholders to compare the fees to those of other comparable investment companies. Applicants believe that the requested relief satisfies these objectives because the Subadvised Fund's overall advisory fee will be fully disclosed and, therefore, shareholders will know what the Subadvised Fund's fees and expenses are and will be able to compare the advisory fees a Subadvised Fund is charged to those of other investment companies. In addition, Applicants assert that the requested relief would benefit shareholders of the Subadvised Fund because it would improve the Adviser's ability to negotiate the fees paid to Subadvisers. In particular, Applicants state that if the Adviser is not required to disclose the Subadvisers' fees to the public, the Adviser may be able to negotiate rates that are below a Subadviser's “posted” amounts. Applicants assert that the relief will also encourage Subadvisers to negotiate lower subadvisory fees with the Adviser if the lower fees are not required to be made public.

17. The Commission has granted the requested relief with respect to Wholly-Owned and Non-Affiliated Subadvisers through numerous exemptive orders. The Commission also has extended the requested relief to Affiliated Subadvisers. 11 Applicants state that although the Adviser's judgment in recommending a Subadviser can be affected by certain conflicts, they do not warrant denying the extension of the requested relief to Affiliated Subadvisers. Specifically, the Adviser faces those conflicts in allocating fund assets between itself and a Subadviser, and across Subadvisers, as it has an interest in considering the benefit it will receive, directly or indirectly, from the fee the Subadvised Fund pays for the management of those assets. Applicants also state that to the extent the Adviser has a conflict of interest with respect to the selection of an Affiliated Subadviser, the proposed conditions are protective of shareholder interests by ensuring the Board's independence and providing the Board with the appropriate resources and information to monitor and address conflicts.

18. With respect to the relief permitting Aggregate Fee Disclosure, Applicants assert that it is appropriate to disclose only aggregate fees paid to Affiliated Subadvisers for the same reasons that similar relief has been granted previously with respect to Wholly-Owned and Non-Affiliated Subadvisers.

Applicants agree that any order granting the requested relief will be subject to the following conditions:

1. Before a Subadvised Fund may rely on the order requested in the Application, the operation of the Subadvised Fund in the manner described in the Application will be, or has been, approved by a majority of the Subadvised Fund's outstanding voting securities as defined in the Act, or, in the case of a Subadvised Fund whose public shareholders purchase shares on the basis of a prospectus containing the disclosure contemplated by condition 2 below, by the initial shareholder before such Subadvised Fund's shares are offered to the public.

2. The prospectus for each Subadvised Fund will disclose the existence, substance and effect of any order granted pursuant to the Application. In addition, each Subadvised Fund will hold itself out to the public as employing the multi-manager structure described in the Application. The prospectus will prominently disclose that the Adviser has the ultimate responsibility, subject to oversight by the Board, to oversee the Subadvisers and recommend their hiring, termination, and replacement.

3. The Adviser will provide general management services to each Subadvised Fund, including overall supervisory responsibility for the general management and investment of the Subadvised Fund's assets, and subject to review and oversight of the Board, will (i) set the Subadvised Fund's overall investment strategies, (ii) evaluate, select, and recommend Subadvisers for all or a portion of the Subadvised Fund's assets, (iii) allocate and, when appropriate, reallocate the Subadvised Fund's assets among Subadvisers, (iv) monitor and evaluate the Subadvisers' performance, and (v) implement procedures reasonably designed to ensure that Subadvisers comply with the Subadvised Fund's investment objective, policies and restrictions.

4. Subadvised Funds will inform shareholders of the hiring of a new Subadviser within 90 days after the hiring of the new Subadviser pursuant to the Modified Notice and Access Procedures.

5. At all times, at least a majority of the Board will be Independent Trustees, and the selection and nomination of new or additional Independent Trustees will be placed within the discretion of the then-existing Independent Trustees.

6. Independent Legal Counsel, as defined in Rule 0-1(a)(6) under the Act, will be engaged to represent the Independent Trustees. The selection of such counsel will be within the discretion of the then-existing Independent Trustees.

7. Whenever a Subadviser is hired or terminated, the Adviser will provide the Board with information showing the expected impact on the profitability of the Adviser.

8. The Board must evaluate any material conflicts that may be present in a subadvisory arrangement. Specifically, whenever a subadviser change is proposed for a Subadvised Fund (“Subadviser Change”) or the Board considers an existing Subadvisory Agreement as part of its annual review process (“Subadviser Review”):

(a) The Adviser will provide the Board, to the extent not already being provided pursuant to section 15(c) of the Act, with all relevant information concerning:

(i) Any material interest in the proposed new Subadviser, in the case of a Subadviser Change, or the Subadviser in the case of a Subadviser Review, held directly or indirectly by the Adviser or a parent or sister company of the Adviser, and any material impact the proposed Subadvisory Agreement may have on that interest;

(ii) any arrangement or understanding in which the Adviser or any parent or sister company of the Adviser is a participant that (A) may have had a material effect on the proposed Subadviser Change or Subadviser Review, or (B) may be materially affected by the proposed Subadviser Change or Subadviser Review;

(iii) any material interest in a Subadviser held directly or indirectly by an officer or Trustee of the Subadvised Fund, or an officer or board member of the Adviser (other than through a pooled investment vehicle not controlled by such person); and

(iv) any other information that may be relevant to the Board in evaluating any potential material conflicts of interest in the proposed Subadviser Change or Subadviser Review.

(b) the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, will make a separate finding, reflected in the Board minutes, that the Subadviser Change or continuation after Subadviser Review is in the best interests of the Subadvised Fund and its shareholders and, based on the information provided to the Board, does not involve a conflict of interest from which the Adviser, a Subadviser, any officer or Trustee of the Subadvised Fund, or any officer or board member of the Adviser derives an inappropriate advantage.

9. Each Subadvised Fund will disclose in its registration statement the Aggregate Fee Disclosure.

10. In the event that the Commission adopts a rule under the Act providing substantially similar relief to that in the order requested in the Application, the requested order will expire on the effective date of that rule.

11. Any new Subadvisory Agreement or any amendment to an existing Investment Advisory Agreement or Subadvisory Agreement that directly or indirectly results in an increase in the aggregate advisory fee rate payable by the Subadvised Fund will be submitted to the Subadvised Fund's shareholders for approval.