Title: Nomination Request Form; Animal Disease Training.

OMB Control Number: 0579-0353.

Type of Request: Extension of approval of an information collection.

Abstract: Under the Animal Health Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 8301 et seq. ), the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture is authorized, among other things, to protect the health of U.S. livestock and poultry populations by preventing the introduction and interstate spread of serious diseases and pests of livestock and by eradicating such diseases from the United States when feasible. In connection with this mission, APHIS' Veterinary Services (VS) program provides vital animal disease training.

VS Professional People Training provides training on responses to animal disease events, sample collection procedures, and disease mitigation and eradication activities to private veterinarians and State, Tribal, military, international, industry, and university personnel. The courses are designed to prepare participants for activities dealing with a U.S. animal disease incident. Individuals who wish to attend animal disease-related training must submit a Nomination Request Form (VS Form 1-5) to VS to help the program coordinate courses and select participants. VS develops rosters with course participants' names and contact information to notify them of future training courses and to encourage contact among participants throughout their careers.

We are asking the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to approve our use of this information collection activity for an additional 3 years.

The purpose of this notice is to solicit comments from the public (as well as affected agencies) concerning our information collection. These comments will help us:

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

(2) Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

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

(4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, through use, as appropriate, of automated, electronic, mechanical, and other collection technologies; e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

Estimate of burden: The public burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 0.33 hours per response.

Respondents: State, Tribal, military, international, industry, and university personnel.

Estimated annual number of respondents: 350.

Estimated annual number of responses per respondent: 1.

Estimated annual number of responses: 350.

Estimated total annual burden on respondents: 116 hours. (Due to averaging, the total annual burden hours may not equal the product of the annual number of responses multiplied by the reporting burden per response.)

All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter of public record.

Comments are invited 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, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions that were used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

Title: Fourth Access, Participation, Eligibility, and Certification Study Series (APEC IV).

Form Number: Not applicable.

OMB Number: 0584-0530.

Expiration Date: Not Yet Determined.

Type of Request: Reinstatement, with change, of a previously approved collection for which approval has expired.

Abstract:

USDA's Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) depends upon the APEC study series to provide reliable, national estimates of errors and improper payments made to school districts in which the National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program are operated. This is the fourth study in the APEC series and it will provide the required information for school year (SY) 2023-2024.

Program errors fall into three broad categories: Certification (determining the eligibility of a student for a given level of reimbursement), aggregation (adding up all the meal counts by reimbursement category as they are transmitted through the claims process), and meal claiming (ensuring that meals claimed meet the meal pattern requirements). Certification and aggregation errors contribute to improper payments, while meal claiming error is an operational error that does not result in an improper payment. The majority of improper payments in the programs result from certification errors, while aggregation errors are relatively rare.

The Payment Integrity Information Act of 2019 (PIIA) requires that FNS identify and reduce improper payments in these programs, including both underpayments and overpayments. In order to comply with the law, programs must have a statistically valid rate of improper payment below 10 percent, and programs out of compliance with PIIA are subject to increased scrutiny and reporting requirements.

Beyond statutory improper payment reporting requirements, FNS recognizes the human and economic costs of program error. For example, certification error may result in children being certified at a lower or higher level than the one for which they qualify; aggregation error may cause school districts to receive a lower or higher reimbursement than they should have received; and meal claiming error may result in a participant receiving a less balanced and nutritious meal than they would have if the meal pattern was followed.

Although the APEC II and the forthcoming APEC III findings show substantial improvement in certain types of error since APEC I, there is an ongoing need to identify and correct sources of program error.

The specific study objectives of APEC IV are:

• Objective 1: Generate a national estimate of the annual amount of improper payments in the National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program based on SY 2023-2024 by replicating and refining the methodology used in prior APEC studies.

• Objective 2: Provide a robust examination of the relationship between error rates and student (household), school, and school food authority (SFA) characteristics.

• Objective 3: Conduct two sub-studies testing the effect that data collection methods have on responses.

○ Electronic Application Sub-study: Evaluate whether USDA's online application prototype with integrity features generates a more accurate and complete accounting of household size and income compared to other online application types and paper applications.

○ Mode Effect Sub-Study: Assess the effect of in-person versus telephone interviews on responses to the household survey.

Consistent with methodology used in the previous studies in the APEC series, we will collect data to address the study objectives using a multistage-clustered sample design, which will include:

• A nationally representative sample of SFAs in the contiguous 48 states and the District of Columbia;

• A stratified sample of schools within each SFA; and

• A random sample of students (households) within each sampled school that applied for free and reduced-price meals, were categorically eligible for free meals, or were directly certified for free meals.

APEC IV will collect data to measure certification, aggregation, and meal claiming errors via in-person visits to SFAs and schools and surveys of SFA directors and households. Data collection will include (a) abstraction from income eligibility applications and categorical eligibility records; (b) abstraction of meal count and claiming records from SFAs, schools, States, and FNS administrative data; (c) an online survey of SFA directors; (d) meal observations in schools; and (e) a telephone survey of households.

The analysis plan includes the following components: (a) Calculating error rates; (b) estimating improper payments; (c) comparisons to previous APEC estimates (APEC I, II, III); and (d) quantitative analyses to identify factors associated with errors. The calculation of estimates from APEC IV will include the incidence of error, the total dollar amount of error, and the dollar based error rate. The comparisons to prior APEC studies will include tests for significant changes over time. The quantitative analyses will examine the sources and causes of errors with a focus on identifying strategies for reducing errors.

Affected Public: Individuals/Households and State, Local, or Tribal Governments. Respondent groups identified include: (1) Child Nutrition State agencies, (2) SFAs, (3) schools, and (4) parents/guardians of sampled students that are either certified to receive a free or reduced price meal or who applied for but were denied benefits in SY 2023-24.

Estimated Number of Respondents: The estimated number of respondents is 13,068. This includes 5,210 responses and 7,858 non-responses. The number of unique respondents expected to provide data for this study are 4,112 households and 1,098 State and Local Governments (44 State Agencies, 295 SFAs, and 759 schools).

Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: All respondents will be asked to respond to each specific data collection activity only once. The overall average number of responses per respondent across the entire collection is 5.14.

Estimated Total Annual Responses: The estimated number of total annual responses is 67,317.

Estimated Time per Response: The estimated time of response varies from 1 minute to 4 hours depending on the respondent group, as shown in the burden table below. The estimated time per response is 11.49 minutes (0.191 hours).

Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 12,851.4 hours. This includes 12,419.6 hours for respondents and 431.7 hours for non-respondents. See the table below for estimated total annual burden for each type of respondent.

On January 25, 2021, President Biden signed the Executive Order on Ensuring the Future is Made in All of America by All of America's Workers (referred to as the Buy American Executive order hereafter) supporting the American economy by requiring terms and conditions of Federal financial assistance awards and Federal procurements to maximize the use of goods, products, and materials produced in, and services offered in, the United States. FNS is issuing this RFI in response to this Executive Order.

Section 104(d) of the William F. Goodling Child Nutrition Reauthorization Act of 1998 (Pub. L. 105-336) added a provision, Section 12(n) to the National School Lunch Act (NSLA) (42 U.S.C. 1760(n)), requiring school food authorities (SFAs) to purchase, to the maximum extent practicable, domestic commodities or products. This Buy American provision supports the mission of the Child Nutrition Programs, which is to serve children nutritious meals and support American agriculture. The existing regulatory provision stems directly from the statutory requirement.

The Buy American provision applies to SFAs located in the 48 contiguous United States and is one of the procurement standards these SFAs must comply with when purchasing commercial food and food products served in NSLP and SBP. Although Alaska, Hawaii, and the U.S. territories are exempt from the Buy American provision, SFAs in Hawaii are required to purchase food and food products produced in Hawaii in sufficient quantities, as determined by the SFA, to meet NSLP and SBP needs per 7 CFR 210.21(d)(3) and 7 CFR 220.16(d)(3). Likewise, SFAs in Puerto Rico are required to purchase food and food products produced in Puerto Rico in sufficient quantities, under 42 U.S.C. 1760(n)(4).

Section 12(n) of the NSLA defines “domestic commodity or product” as an agricultural commodity that is produced in the United States and a food product that is processed in the United States substantially using agricultural commodities produced in the United States. Report language accompanying the legislation noted that “substantially means over 51% from American products.” Accordingly, FNS has established in guidance that over 51% of the final processed product must consist of agricultural commodities that were grown domestically. Thus, for foods that are unprocessed, agricultural commodities must be domestic, and for foods that are processed, they must be processed domestically using domestic agricultural food components that are comprised of over 51% domestically grown items, as determined by the SFA. Any processed product used must contain over 51% of the product's food component from United States origin. This definition of domestic product serves both the needs of schools and American agriculture. Foods and food products from Guam, American Samoa, Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Northern Mariana Islands are considered domestic products under this provision as these products are from the territories of the United States.

FNS has provided through guidance limited exceptions to the Buy American provision which allow for the purchase of foods not meeting the “domestic” standard as described above ( i.e., “non-domestic”) in circumstances when use of domestic foods is truly not practicable. These exceptions, as determined by the SFA, are:

• The product is not produced or manufactured in the United States in sufficient and reasonably available quantities of a satisfactory quality; or

• Competitive bids reveal the costs of a United States product are significantly higher than the non-domestic product.

It should be noted that FNS has not defined a dollar amount or percentage triggering possible use of an exception. It is each individual SFA's responsibility to determine what dollar amount or percentage constitutes a significantly higher price thus permitting the use of the exception. If an SFA is using one of the above exceptions, there is no requirement at this time to request a waiver from the State agency or FNS in order to purchase a non-domestic product. SFAs must, however, keep documentation justifying their use of exception(s). State agencies must ensure SFA compliance with the Buy American provision when conducting oversight processes.

FNS has already received feedback that stakeholders face difficulties in implementing and monitoring the Buy American provision and guidance. Additionally, stakeholders have reached out for assistance with interpreting and following the Buy American provision and have also requested help with understanding the exceptions. Feedback provided in response to this Request for Information will help inform future rulemaking and guidance around the Buy American provision.

This notice contains a list of questions, the answers to which will assist FNS in identifying those regulations, and/or policies that may benefit from modification, streamlining, expansion, or repeal in light of the Buy American Executive order. FNS encourages public comment on these questions and seeks any other data commenters believe are relevant to FNS's review efforts. The type of feedback that is most useful to the agency includes feedback that identifies specific regulations and/or policies that could benefit from reform; feedback that refers to specific barriers to participation; feedback that offers actionable data; and feedback that specifies viable alternatives to existing approaches that meet statutory obligations. For example, feedback that simply states that a stakeholder feels strongly that FNS should change a regulation or policy but does not contain specific information on how the proposed change would impact the costs and benefits of the regulation, is much less useful to FNS. FNS is looking for new information and new data to support any proposed changes. Highlighted below are a few of those points, noting comments that are most useful to FNS. Commenters should consider these principles as they answer and respond to the questions in this notice.

• Commenters should identify, with specificity, the program regulation and/or policy at issue, providing the Code of Federal Regulation (CFR) citation where appropriate.

• Commenters should identify, with specificity, administrative burdens, program requirements, or unnecessary complexity that may impose unjustified barriers in general, or that may have adverse effects on equity for all, including individuals who belong to underserved communities that have been denied equitable treatment, such as Black, Latino, and Indigenous and Native American persons, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders and other persons of color; members of religious minorities; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) persons; persons with disabilities, including learning disabilities; persons who live in rural areas; and persons otherwise adversely affected by persistent poverty or inequality.

• Commenters should provide, in as much detail as possible, an explanation why a program regulation and/or policy should be modified, streamlined, expanded, or repealed, as well as specific suggestions of ways the agency can better achieve its statutory and regulatory objectives in light of the Buy American Executive order.

• Commenters should provide specific data that document the costs, burdens, and benefits of existing requirements to the extent they are available.

This Request for Information reflects the commitment of FNS to work with our stakeholders, including local operators, State administrators, industry and producers, to ensure that the Program-specific Buy American provision support the Administration's priorities, is practicable and that FNS provides adequate guidance.

The below non-exhaustive list of questions is meant to assist members of the public in the formulation of comments and is not intended to restrict the issues that commenters may address.

1. What changes, if any, to the Buy American provision and guidance would you recommend to FNS to support the Buy American executive order? Please describe in detail.

2. Please describe what works well for your organization when implementing and/or meeting the Buy American provision.

3. Please describe any challenges or impediments identified in meeting or monitoring the Buy American provision.

4. Do you have State-specific requirements to ensure SFAs comply with the Buy American provision ( e.g., recording every exception used, listing alternatives considered, etc.)? If so, please describe in detail.

5. Does your SFA use geographic preference when soliciting for unprocessed locally grown or locally raised agricultural products?

a. If not, what are the reason(s) your SFA does not use geographic preference to purchase locally grown or locally raised agricultural products?

6. Does your SFA use small, minority, and/or women's businesses, including Tribal businesses, and labor surplus firms to purchase or process foods from local producers such as farmers, ranchers, and other producers, or to process unprocessed, locally grown agricultural commodities into usable food products, needed to operate the NSLP and SBP? If yes, which of the above does your SFA use and how often? Please describe whether your SFA has experienced any additional benefits (other than obtaining affordable foods) by using local producers.

7. Please provide suggestions on how FNS can support stakeholders in meeting the Buy American provision or in connecting U.S. food producers to local schools.

8. FNS allows two limited exceptions to the Buy American provision: Costs of a United States product that are significantly higher than the non-domestic product, and insufficient domestic quality or quantity. List the foods and/or food products that most often require an exception.

9. If these currently available exceptions were more or less available, what impacts would this have?

10. Do you think FNS should establish additional detail in the regulations for the Buy American provision?

11. Do you think FNS should define what is considered a significantly higher cost? If so, how should FNS define “significant”? Please be as specific as possible.

12. What methodology do you use to determine a significantly higher cost to your SFA that will require the purchase of non-domestic foods or food products? Do you use a dollar value or percentage in your determination? If yes, list the dollar value or percentage you use.

13. Should FNS consider a defined list of Buy American “excepted” items for food or food products that have been determined as not produced in the United States in sufficient and reasonably available commercial quantities of a satisfactory quality? If so, what criteria would you use to include items on this list, and which items would currently be included?

Collection of Information Requirements: This document does not impose information collection requirements, that is, reporting, recordkeeping or third-party disclosure requirements. However, this document does contain a general solicitation of comments in the form of a request for information. In accordance with implementing regulations of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), specifically 5 CFR 1320.3(h)(4), this general solicitation is exempt from the PRA. Facts or opinions submitted in response to general solicitations of comments from the public, published in the Federal Register or other publications, regardless of the form or format thereof, provided that no person is required to supply specific information pertaining to the commenter other than that necessary for self-identification, as a condition of the agency's full consideration, are not generally considered information collections and therefore not subject to the PRA.

Comments are invited 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, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions that were used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

Title: WIC Nutrition Assessment and Tailoring Study: In-Person Data Collection.

Form Number: Not applicable.

OMB Number: 0584-0663.

Expiration Date: 04/30/2024.

Type of Request: Revision of a currently approved collection.

Abstract: The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) provides supplemental foods, nutrition education and breastfeeding support, and referrals to health care and other social services to safeguard the health of low-income women, infants, and children up to 5 years of age who are at nutritional risk. As part of the certification and recertification process, WIC staff perform a comprehensive nutrition risk assessment with each participant to screen for certain nutrition risks and collect other relevant dietary and health information. Based on the nutrition risk assessment, WIC staff can individualize the food package benefits, nutrition education, and referrals the participant receives to meet their unique nutritional needs. While guidelines for conducting a quality nutrition risk assessment are described in the Value Enhanced Nutrition Assessment (VENA) guidance, 1 there is flexibility in how WIC staff conduct the nutrition risk assessment, and specifics of the process may vary by WIC State Agency (SA) and by WIC Local Agency (LA). Through this study, FNS seeks to better understand the nutrition services process as it transpires at WIC clinics, and WIC staff and participants' satisfaction with the process. The findings from this study will be used to develop guidance for WIC staff to enhance service delivery to improve program satisfaction, retention, and participant health and nutrition outcomes.

The four study objectives are: (1) Provide in-depth descriptive information on how a large, diverse sample of local WIC agencies performs the WIC nutrition risk assessment; (2) Systematically describe how a national sample of diverse local WIC agencies uses the collection of nutrition risk assessment information to tailor program benefits, including food packages, nutrition education, breastfeeding promotion and support, and referrals to health and social services; (3) Investigate relationships between WIC nutrition risk services processes (to include the nutrition risk assessment and the associated tailoring of program benefits), and the clinic experience, participant and staff perceptions, and overall clinic flow and efficiency; and (4) Identify specific practices or features of nutrition risk service processes that facilitate the use of nutrition assessment information for providing tailored program benefits, and that are associated with participant and staff satisfaction.

Under the currently approved WIC NATS data collection [OMB Control Number 0584-0663], 30 clinic sites will be selected to participate in remote site visits—where the study team will observe remote nutrition assessment visits ( i.e., assessments done via telephone or video call) and then interview WIC participants and staff by telephone. Under this revision, 30 clinic sites will be recruited to participate in the same data collection activities—including direct observation of nutrition assessments and interviews with participants and staff—during in-person site visits. Information collected under this revision will be used to better understand how the nutrition risk assessment process is conducted in a typical, face-to-face setting. This information will also be compared to similar information collected during the remote site visits.

This phase of data collection for in-person site visits reduces the burden to the information collection. While the Local Agencies participated in the remote data collection, the collection activities for the in-person site visits do not collect information from them. As a result, they have been removed from the collection. Although the data collection from the in-person site visits actually adds burden to the four currently approved elements of the collection: (1) Direct observation of nutrition assessments, (2) interviews with clinic site directors; (3) interviews with clinic staff, and (4) interviews with WIC participants, this increase is offset by the removal of the Local Agencies from this collection. Estimates of the number of respondents and hours associated with this data collection are given below. The content of the currently approved data collection instruments has not changed.

Affected Public: (1) State, Local, and Tribal Government; (2) Business or Other for Profit; (3), Not For Profit Organizations; and (4) Individuals/Households. Respondent groups identified include: (1) State, local, and tribal governments (WIC clinic sites); (2) Businesses/Non-Profits; (WIC clinic sites); and (3) Individuals (adults who participate in WIC or who have children that participate in WIC).

Estimated Number of Respondents: The total estimated number of respondents is 1,050 (540 respondents and 510 non-respondents). The total includes 30 clinics (21 government and 9 business), and 1,020 individuals.

Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: The estimated frequency of response across the entire collection is 4.63. The estimated frequency of response is 5.78 annually for respondents and 3.42 annually for non-respondents. For most of the items in the collection, respondents reply to them only once, with the exception of the informed consents for the observation and staff interviews, the identified risks data collection form, and the staff interview guide. The WIC Clinic respondents will provide consent six times and will complete the data collection form and the interview five times.

Estimated Total Annual Responses: The estimated total number of annual responses is 4,865 (3,120 respondents and 1,745 non-respondents).

Estimated Time per Response: The estimated average response time per response across all respondents in the collection is 0.10 hours (0.15 hours for responsive participants and 0.02 hours for nonresponsive participants). The estimated time of response varies from one minute (0.02 hours) to one hour depending on the respondent group and activity, as shown in table 1.

Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: The total public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated at 509.38 hours (annually). See table 1 for estimated total annual burden for each type of respondent.

On July 1, 2020, Commerce published in the Federal Register a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on PET film from India, for the period July 1, 2019, through June 30, 2020. 1 Subsequently, on September 3, 2020, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.222(c)(1)(i), Commerce published a notice of initiation of an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on PET film from India. 2

On March 30, 2021, in accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act) and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(2), Commerce extended the due date for the preliminary results by 60 days (from April 2, 2021 to July 1, 2021). 3 On June 17, 2021, we extended the deadline by an additional 28 days. 4 The current deadline is July 29, 2021.

For a full description of the methodology underlying our conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. A list of topics included in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is included as an appendix to this notice. The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at http://access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/index.html.

The products covered by this Order are all gauges of raw, pretreated, or primed polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet, and strip, whether extruded or coextruded. Excluded are metallized films and other finished films that have had at least one of their surfaces modified by the application of a performance-enhancing resinous or inorganic layer of more than 0.00001 inches thick. Imports of PET film are classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item number 3920.62.00.90. HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes. The written description of the scope of the Order is dispositive.

Commerce initiated a review of eight separate companies in this proceeding. 6 We are rescinding this administrative review with respect to six of these companies: (1) Ester Industries Ltd. (Ester); (2) Garware Polyester Ltd. (Garware); (3) MTZ Polyesters Ltd. (MTZ); (4) Polyplex Corporation (Polyplex); (5) Uflex Ltd. (Uflex); and (6) Vacmet India Ltd. (Vacmet), pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), because all review requests of these companies were timely withdrawn. Accordingly, the companies that remain subject to the instant review are Jindal Poly Films Ltd. (Jindal) and SRF Limited of India (SRF). 7

Commerce is conducting this review in accordance with section 751(a)(2) of the Act. Export price is calculated in accordance with section 772 of the Act. Normal value is calculated in accordance with section 773 of the Act.

As a result of this review, we preliminarily determine the following weighted-average dumping margins for the period July 1, 2019, through June 30, 2020.

We intend to disclose the calculations performed to parties in this proceeding within five days after public announcement of the preliminary results in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c), interested parties may submit case briefs not later than 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may be filed not later than seven days after the date for filing case briefs. 8 Parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) A statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities. 9

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing, must submit a written request to the Acting Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, filed electronically via ACCESS. An electronically filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by Commerce's electronic records system, ACCESS, by 5 p.m. Eastern Time within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. Requests should contain: (1) The party's name, address, and telephone number; (2) the number of participants; and (3) a list of issues to be discussed. Issues raised in the hearing will be limited to those raised in the respective case briefs. Commerce intends to issue the final results of this administrative review, including the results of its analysis of the issues raised in any written briefs, not later than 120 days after the date of publication of this notice, unless extended, pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act.

Upon completion of this administrative review, Commerce shall determine, and U.S. CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. If a respondent's weighted-average dumping margin is not zero or de minimis ( i.e., less than 0.5 percent) in the final results of this review, we will calculate importer-specific ad valorem assessment rates on the basis of the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for an importer's examined sales and the total entered value of those same sales, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). 10 Where an importer-specific ad valorem assessment rate is zero or de minimis in the final results of the review, we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties. 11

Commerce intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 35 days after the date of publication of the final results of this administrative review in the Federal Register . If a timely summons is filed at the U.S. Court of International Trade, the assessment instructions will direct CBP not to liquidate relevant entries until the time for parties to file a request for a statutory injunction has expired ( i.e., within 90 days of publication.)

The following deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of PET film from India entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of the final results of this administrative review, as provided for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for the company under review will be the rate established in the final results of this review (except, if the rate is zero or de minimis, no cash deposit will be required); (2) for previously reviewed or investigated companies not listed above, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recent period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the less-than-fair-value investigation, but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters is 5.71 percent. 12 These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

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

We are issuing and publishing these results in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4).

In accordance with section 705(d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), on June 9, 2021, Commerce published its affirmative final determination in the countervailing duty investigation of wind towers from Malaysia. 1 On July 26, 2021, the ITC notified Commerce of its affirmative final determination that an industry in the United States is materially injured within the meaning of section 705(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, by reason of subsidized imports of subject merchandise from Malaysia. 2

The products covered by this order are wind towers from Malaysia. For a complete description of the scope of the order, see the appendix to this notice.

As noted above, on July 26, 2021, in accordance with section 705(d) of the Act, the ITC notified Commerce of its final determination in this investigation, in which it found that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of subsidized imports of wind towers from Malaysia. 3 Therefore, in accordance with section 705(c)(2) of the Act, Commerce is issuing this countervailing duty order. Because the ITC determined that imports of wind towers from Malaysia are materially injuring a U.S. industry, unliquidated entries of such merchandise from Malaysia, entered or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, are subject to the assessment of countervailing duties.

In accordance with section 706(a) of the Act, Commerce will direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess, upon further instruction by Commerce, countervailing duties for all relevant entries of wind towers from Malaysia. With the exception of entries occurring after the expiration of the provisional measures period and before the publication of the ITC's final affirmative injury determination, as further described below, countervailing duties will be assessed on unliquidated entries of wind towers from Malaysia entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after March 25, 2021, the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination. 4

In accordance with section 706 of the Act, Commerce will instruct CBP to reinstitute the suspension of liquidation of wind towers from Malaysia, as described in the appendix to this notice, effective on the date of publication of the ITC's final affirmative injury determination in the Federal Register , and to assess, upon further instruction by Commerce, pursuant to section 706(a)(1) of the Act, countervailing duties for each entry of the subject merchandise in an amount based on the net countervailable subsidy rates below. On or after the date of publication of the ITC's final injury determination in the Federal Register , CBP must require, at the same time as importers would deposit estimated normal customs duties on this merchandise, a cash deposit equal to the rates listed in the table below. The all-others rate applies to all producers or exporters not specifically listed, as appropriate.

Section 703(d) of the Act states that instructions issued pursuant to an affirmative preliminary determination may not remain in effect for more than four months. In the underlying investigation, Commerce published the Preliminary Determination on March 25, 2021. Therefore, the four-month period beginning on the date of the publication of the Preliminary Determination ended on July 22, 2021.

In accordance with section 703(d) of the Act, we will instruct CBP to terminate the suspension of liquidation and to liquidate, without regard to countervailing duties, unliquidated entries of wind towers from Malaysia entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption after July 22, 2021, the final day on which the provisional measures were in effect, until and through the day preceding the date of publication of the ITC's final injury determination in the Federal Register . Suspension of liquidation will resume on the date of publication of the ITC's final determination in the Federal Register .

This notice constitutes the countervailing duty order with respect to wind towers from Malaysia pursuant to section 706(a) of the Act. Interested parties can find a list of countervailing duty orders currently in effect at http://enforcement.trade.gov/stats/iastats1.html.

This order is issued and published in accordance with section 706(a) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.211(b).

On May 21, 2018, Commerce published in the Federal Register the Order. 1 On April 8, 2019, Commerce revoked, in part, the Order with respect to grade 1078 and higher tire cord quality wire rod used in the production of tire cord wire. 2 On June 13, 2019, Commerce revoked, in part, the Order with respect to valve spring quality (VSQ) wire rod. 3

Commerce is conducting this administrative review in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(B) of Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). 4 On July 10, 2020, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i), we initiated this review covering POSCO, the sole producer and exporter for which a review was requested. 5

On July 21, 2020, Commerce tolled all preliminary and final results in administrative reviews by 60 days. 6 On March 11, 2021 and June 17, 2021, we extended the deadline for issuing the preliminary results until July 30, 2021. 7

For a detailed description of the events that followed the initiation of this review, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 8

The scope of the Order includes certain hot-rolled products of carbon steel and alloy steel, in coils, of approximately round cross section, less than 19.00 mm in actual solid cross-sectional diameter. Excluded from the scope are grade 1078 and higher tire cord quality wire rod to be used in the production of tire cord wire. Also, excluded from the scope are valve spring quality (VSQ) steel products which is defined as wire rod. For a complete description of the scope of the Order, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 9

Commerce is conducting this review in accordance with section 751(a) of the Act. Constructed export prices are calculated in accordance with section 772 of the Act. Normal value is calculated in accordance with section 773 of the Act. For a full description of the methodology underlying our conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. A list of topics discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is attached as an appendix to this notice.

The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at http://access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/.

We preliminarily determine the following weighted-average dumping margin for the period May 1, 2019, through April 30, 2020:

Upon issuance of the final results, Commerce shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review. 10 The final results of this review shall be the basis for the assessment of antidumping duties on entries of merchandise covered by this review and for future deposits of estimated duties, where applicable. 11 Commerce intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP no earlier than 35 days after the date of publication of the final results of this review in the Federal Register . If a timely summons is filed at the U.S. Court of International Trade, the assessment instructions will direct CBP not to liquidate relevant entries until the time for parties to file a request for a statutory injunction has expired ( i.e., within 90 days of publication).

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), where an examined respondent's weighted-average dumping margin is not zero or de minimis ( i.e., less than 0.5 percent), we will calculate an importer-specific ad valorem duty assessment rate based on the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for the U.S. sales for a given importer to the total entered value of those sales. Where either the respondent's weighted-average dumping margin is zero or de minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), or an importer-specific assessment rate is zero or de minimis, we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties.

For entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by POSCO for which it did not know that its merchandise was destined for the United States, we will instruct CBP to liquidate such unreviewed entries pursuant to the reseller policy, 12 i.e., the assessment rate for such entries will be equal to the all-others rate established in the investigation ( i.e., 41.10 percent), if there is no rate for the intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction.

On July 10, 2020, based on timely requests for review in accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i), we initiated an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain carbon and alloy steel cut-to-length plate (CTL plate) from Italy. 1 This review covers ten producers and/or exporters of the subject merchandise. Commerce selected two companies, NLMK Verona SpA (NVR) and Officine Tecnosider s.r.l. (OTS), for individual examination. The producers and/or exporters not selected for individual examination are listed in the “Preliminary Results of the Review” section of this notice.

On July 21, 2020, Commerce tolled preliminary and final results deadlines in administrative reviews by 60 days, thereby extending the deadline for these results until April 1, 2021. 2 On March 10, 2021, Commerce extended the preliminary results of this review by 120 days, until July 30, 2021. 3 For a complete description of the events that followed the initiation of this review, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 4

The products covered by the order are certain carbon and alloy steel hot-rolled or forged flat plate products not in coils, whether or not painted, varnished, or coated with plastics or other non-metallic substances from Italy. Products subject to the order are currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item numbers: 7208.40.3030, 7208.40.3060, 7208.51.0030, 7208.51.0045, 7208.51.0060, 7208.52.0000, 7211.13.0000, 7211.14.0030, 7211.14.0045, 7225.40.1110, 7225.40.1180, 7225.40.3005, 7225.40.3050, 7226.20.0000, and 7226.91.5000. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise subject to this scope is dispositive. 5

Commerce is conducting this review in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(B) and (2) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Export price and constructed export price are calculated in accordance with section 772 of the Act. NV is calculated in accordance with section 773 of the Act.

For a full description of the methodology underlying our conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at https://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. A list of the topics discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is attached as an appendix to this notice.

One company under review, Lyman Steel Company (Lyman), filed a statement reporting that it made no shipments of subject merchandise to the United States during the POR. 6 We were able to confirm Lyman's claim with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). 7 Consequently, we preliminarily determine that Lyman had no shipments during the POR. Consistent with our practice, we find that it is not appropriate to preliminarily rescind the review with respect to this company, and we will instead complete the review for this company and issue appropriate instructions to CBP based on the final results of this review. 8

We preliminarily determine that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist for the respondents for the period May 1, 2019, through April 30, 2020:

The Act and Commerce's regulations do not address the establishment of a weighted-average dumping margin to be applied to companies not selected for individual examination when Commerce limits its examination in an administrative review pursuant to section 777A(c)(2) of the Act. Generally, Commerce looks to section 735(c)(5) of the Act, which provides instructions for calculating the all-others rate in a less-than-fair-value investigation, for guidance when calculating the weighted-average dumping margin for companies which were not selected for individual examination in an administrative review. Under section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act, the all-others rate is normally an amount equal to the weighted average of the estimated weighted-average dumping margins established for exporters and producers individually investigated, excluding rates that are zero, de minimis ( i.e., less than 0.5 percent), or determined entirely on the basis of facts available.

Consistent with section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act, we determined the weighted-average dumping margin for each of the non-selected companies by using the weighted-average dumping margins calculated for NVR and OTS in this administrative review.

Commerce intends to disclose the calculations performed in connection with these preliminary results to interested parties within five days after the date of publication of this notice. 9 Interested parties may submit case briefs to Commerce no later than 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. 10 Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may be filed no later than seven days after the time limit for filing case briefs. 11 Parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) A statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities. 12 Case and rebuttal briefs should be filed using ACCESS. 13

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, filed electronically via ACCESS within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. 14 Hearing requests should contain: (1) The party's name, address, and telephone number; (2) the number of participants; and (3) a list of issues to be discussed. Issues raised in the hearing will be limited to issues raised in the briefs. If a request for a hearing is made, Commerce intends to hold the hearing at a date and time to be determined. 15 Parties should confirm the date, time, and location of the hearing two days before the scheduled date.

An electronically-filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by ACCESS by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on the established deadline. Note that Commerce has temporarily modified certain of its requirements for serving documents containing business proprietary information. 16

Commerce intends to issue the final results of this administrative review, including the results of its analysis of issues raised in any written briefs, not later than 120 days after the date of publication of this notice, unless otherwise extended. 17

Upon completion of the administrative review, Commerce shall determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. 18

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), where the respondent reported the entered value of their U.S. sales, we calculated importer-specific ad valorem duty assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for the examined sales to the total entered value of the sales for which entered value was reported. Where the respondent did not report entered value or reported amounts based on estimated sales data, we calculated the entered value in order to calculate the assessment rate. Where either the respondent's weighted-average dumping margin is zero or de minimis, within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), or an importer-specific rate is zero or de minimis, we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties.

For the companies that were not selected for individual review, we will assign an assessment rate based on the average of the cash deposit rates calculated for NVR and OTS, excluding any rates that are zero, de minimis, or determined entirely based on adverse facts available. The final results of this review shall be the basis for the assessment of antidumping duties on entries of merchandise covered by the final results of this review and for future deposits of estimated duties, where applicable.

Commerce's “automatic assessment” will apply to entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by companies included in the final results of this review for which the reviewed companies did not know that the merchandise they sold to the intermediary ( e.g., a reseller, trading company, or exporter) was destined for the United States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the all-others rate if there is no rate for the intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction. 19

Further, if we continue to find, in the final results, that Lyman had no shipments of subject merchandise during the POR, we will instruct CBP to liquidate any suspended entries that entered under their AD case number ( i.e., at that exporter's rate) or at the all-others rate, if there is no rate for the intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction.

Consistent with its recent notice, 20 Commerce intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP no earlier than 35 days after the date of publication of the final results of this review in the Federal Register . If a timely summons is filed at the U.S. Court of International Trade, the assessment instructions will direct CBP not to liquidate relevant entries until the time for parties to file a request for a statutory injunction has expired ( i.e., within 90 days of publication).

The following deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the final results of this administrative review, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for the exporters listed above will be equal to the weighted- average dumping margin established in the final results of this review, except if the rate is less than 0.50 percent and, therefore, de minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), in which case the cash deposit rate will be zero; (2) for companies not participating in this review, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific cash deposit rate published for the most recently completed segment; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review or the original less-than-fair- value (LTFV) investigation, but the producer is, then the cash deposit rate will be the cash deposit rate established for the most recently completed segment for the producer of the merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other producers or exporters will continue to be 6.08 percent, the all-others rate established in the LTFV investigation. 21 These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

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

We are issuing and publishing these preliminary results in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

On May 2, 2019, Commerce published the antidumping duty order on welded pipe from Canada. 1 On July 10, 2020, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(c)(i), Commerce initiated an administrative review of the Order, covering 41 producers or exporters of the subject merchandise. 2 On August 5, 2020, we selected Evraz Inc. NA  3 as the sole mandatory respondent for this administrative review. 4 On July 22, 2020, Commerce tolled all deadlines in administrative reviews by 60 days. 5 Pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), Commerce determined that it was not practicable to complete the preliminary results of this review within 245 days and extended the deadline for the preliminary results of this review by 120 days, until July 30, 2021. 6

For a detailed description of the events that followed the initiation of this review, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 7 The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the internet at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/.

The product covered by this Order is welded pipe from Canada. For a full description of the scope, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

One producer and/or exporter under review, Canam (St Gedeon) (Canam), properly filed a certification reporting that it made no shipments of subject merchandise during the POR. 8 We received no information from CBP that contradicted Canam's no-shipment claim. 9 Therefore, we preliminarily determine that this company did not have shipments of subject merchandise during the POR. Consistent with Commerce's practice, 10 Commerce finds that it is not appropriate to rescind the review with respect to this company, but rather, to complete the review and issue appropriate instructions to CBP based on the final results of this review.

Commerce is conducting this review in accordance with section 751(a) of the Act. Export price is calculated in accordance with section 772 of the Act. Normal value is calculated in accordance with section 773 of the Act. For a full description of the methodology underlying these preliminary results, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. A list of topics included in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is included as an appendix to this notice.

We preliminarily determine that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist for the period of August 27, 2018, through April 30, 2020:

For the weighted-average dumping margin for non-selected respondents in an administrative review, generally, Commerce looks to section 735(c)(5) of the Act, which provides instructions for calculating the all-others rate in an investigation. Under section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act, the all-others rate is normally an amount equal to the weighted average of the estimated weighted-average dumping margins established for exporters and producers individually investigated, excluding any zero or de minimis margins, and any margins determined entirely on facts available. We preliminarily calculated a weighted-average dumping margin for Evraz that was not zero, de minimis, or based on facts available. Accordingly, we have preliminarily applied the weighted-average dumping margin calculated for Evraz as the weighted-average dumping margin for the non-individually examined companies.

We intend to disclose the calculations performed for these preliminary results to parties within five days after public announcement of the preliminary results. 12

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c), interested parties may submit case briefs no later than 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. 13 Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may be filed not later than seven days after the date for filing case briefs. 14 Parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) A statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities. 15 Executive summaries should be limited to five pages total, including footnotes. Case and rebuttal briefs should be filed using ACCESS  16 and must be served on interested parties. 17 Note that Commerce has temporarily modified certain of its requirements for serving documents containing business proprietary information, until further notice. 18

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, filed electronically via ACCESS. An electronically-filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by ACCESS by 5 p.m. Eastern Standard Time within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. Requests should contain: (1) The party's name, address, and telephone number; (2) the number of participants; and (3) a list of issues to be discussed. Issues raised in the hearing will be limited to those raised in the respective case and rebuttal briefs. If a request for a hearing is made, Commerce intends to hold the hearing at a date and time to be determined.

Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), Commerce will determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of subject merchandise in accordance with the final results of this review. Commerce intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 35 days after the date of publication of the final results of this administrative review in the Federal Register . If a timely summons is filed at the U.S. Court of International Trade, the assessment instructions will direct CBP not to liquidate relevant entries until the time for parties to file a request for a statutory injunction has expired ( i.e., within 90 days of publication).

If Evraz's weighted-average dumping margin is above de minimis ( i.e., 0.50 percent), upon completion of the final results, Commerce will calculate importer-specific assessment rates on the basis of the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for the importer's examined sales to the total entered value of sales. Where we do not have entered values for all U.S. sales to a particular importer, we will calculate a per-unit assessment rate by aggregating the antidumping duties due for all U.S. sales to that importer and dividing this amount by the total quantity sold to that importer. 19 To determine whether the duty assessment rates are de minimis, in accordance with the requirement set forth in 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), we calculate importer-specific ad valorem ratios based on the estimated entered value. Where Evraz's weighted-average dumping margin is zero or de minimis, or an importer-specific ad valorem rate is zero or de minimis, we will instruct CBP to liquidate appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties. 20 For the companies which were not selected for individual examination, we intend to direct CBP to assess antidumping duties at a rate equal to the weighted-average dumping margin determined for Evraz in the final results.

For entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by Evraz for which it did not know its merchandise was destined for the United States, we will instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at the all-others rate if there is no rate for the intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction. 21

The final results of this review shall be the basis for the assessment of antidumping duties on entries of merchandise covered by the final results of this review and for future cash deposits of estimated duties, where applicable. 22

The following cash deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the final results of this administrative review, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for the companies listed above will be that established in the final results of this review, except if the rate is less than 0.50 percent and, therefore, de minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), in which case the cash deposit rates will be zero; (2) for previously reviewed or investigated companies not covered in this review, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recently-completed segment of this proceeding in which the company was reviewed; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review or in the LTFV investigation, but the manufacturer is, then the cash deposit rate will be the company-specific rate established for the most recently-completed segment of this proceeding for the manufacturer of subject merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other producers or exporters will continue to be 12.32 percent, the all-others rate established in the LTFV investigation. 23 These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

Unless otherwise extended, Commerce intends to issue the final results of this administrative review, including the results of its analysis of issues raised by the parties in the written comments, within 120 days of publication of these preliminary results in the Federal Register , pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(1).

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

These preliminary results are issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4).

The Whiting Committee and Advisory Panel will receive Fishing Year 2020 Annual Monitoring Report from the Whiting Plan Development Team. They will identify and discuss management priority recommendations to be considered at the September 2021 Council meeting. Other business will be discussed, if necessary.

Although non-emergency issues not contained on the agenda may come before this Council for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Council action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency. The public also should be aware that the meeting will be recorded. Consistent with 16 U.S.C. 1852, a copy of the recording is available upon request.

This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director, at (978) 465-0492, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

The purpose of the meeting is for the Advisory Panel to create a Fishery Performance Report including advisor input on related specifications and management measures.

The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Shelley Kimbel-Spedden at the Council Office, (302) 526-5251, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. ) and the NMSA (16 U.S.C. 1434), NOAA prepared a DEIS for a proposed national marine sanctuary in New York's eastern Lake Ontario and the Thousand Islands region of the St. Lawrence River. NOAA announced the availability of the DEIS in a notice issued on July 7, 2021 (86 FR 35757). In that notice, NOAA announced there would be four public meetings, two of which were planned to be virtual meetings, and two of which NOAA planned to hold in person. When the notice was issued, NOAA included a caveat to the in-person meetings stating “A virtual meeting platform may substitute if public safety concerns remain to prevent the spread of COVID-19.”

NOAA has determined that the two meetings previously scheduled for August 18, 2021 and August 19, 2021 will now be conducted virtually. Interested parties should register to attend a virtual meeting via the information provided in the DATES section of this notice or at https://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/lake-ontario/.

NTIS, an agency of the U.S. Department of Commerce, is seeking proposals from potential JVPs that can work with NTIS to assist Federal agencies to leverage innovative ways to collect, connect, access, secure, analyze, disseminate and enable effective and efficient use of data to address unique and complex national data priorities.

Federal agencies are currently addressing national issues in such areas as fraud detection, improper payments, public services, health and safety, cybersecurity, technology transfer, supply chain optimization, and internal requirements to operate more effectively and efficiently. Addressing these mission-critical data issues requires new capabilities in machine learning, artificial intelligence, predictive analytics and other advanced data science expertise. See OMB M-19-18  1 and Executive Order 13859. 2 Federal agencies that need the data services of NTIS and its JVPs require holistic solutions that may require the application of multiple data and technological capabilities in new and innovative ways in order to support the agencies' strategic plans and mission-critical priorities. Many of the challenges facing Federal agencies are at the intersection of data science and information technology (IT) modernization. Solutions often require related capabilities in emerging technologies, innovation, change management, and agile delivery methods. Mission areas that NTIS supports include, but are not limited to, fraud detection, public services, health and safety, technology transfer, and national security.

Activities conducted by NTIS and its JVPs in support of other Federal agencies may include: (1) Designing, testing, analyzing, or demonstrating the application of Federal data and data services, either alone or in combination with non-Federal data; (2) based on Federal data or the use of Federal data in some combination with open Federal data and non-Federal data, facilitating the creation of suites of products, platforms, and services that assist Federal agencies in meeting the needs of businesses, innovators, government agencies, and others; and (3) otherwise enhancing data discovery and usability, data interoperability and standards, data analytics and forecasting, or data infrastructure and security. Projects that can be accomplished by a Federal agency via a commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) procurement or acquisition action will not be conducted by NTIS with its JVPs.

Organizations that enter into joint venture partnership agreements with NTIS, pursuant to this notice, will have opportunities to engage in early discussions about projects with NTIS and the sponsoring Federal agencies and may subsequently compete for the opportunity to work with NTIS to provide data services on specific projects under a merit-based selection process established by NTIS.

Under a separate notice that will be published in the Federal Register (“assistive technologies JVPs notice”), NTIS will accept proposals from interested private-sector organizations to become a JVP eligible to work with NTIS on projects involving assistive technologies. JVPs selected under the instant notice will not be eligible to compete for assistive technology project opportunities with NTIS unless they also apply and are selected under the assistive technologies JVPs notice. Organizations that enter into JVP agreements with NTIS pursuant to the assistive technologies notice will not be eligible to compete for data innovation opportunities with NTIS unless they also apply and are selected under the instant notice. Organizations selected under the instant notice will be eligible to work with NTIS on projects involving the types of data innovation described in this notice.

The Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) has delegated to NTIS authority to operate as a permanent clearinghouse of scientific, technical, and engineering information and to collect and disseminate such information. 15 U.S.C. 1152. The National Technical Information Act of 1988, codified at 15 U.S.C. 3704b, additionally accorded the Secretary, acting through NTIS, the authority to enter into joint ventures, and declared the clearinghouse to be a permanent Federal function that could not be privatized without Congressional approval. The National Technical Information Act of 1988 was amended by section 506(c) of the American Technology Preeminence Act of 1991 (Pub. L. 102-245), which directed NTIS to focus on developing new electronic methods and media for information dissemination.

As the nature and scope of information and data dissemination have changed, NTIS has continued to focus on innovations to address these changes. New capabilities are available in application program interfaces (APIs) as conduits for data dissemination that have significantly improved data use, interoperability, and accessibility. Artificial intelligence, machine learning, and predictive analytics are transforming how data are analyzed and managed to support national priorities in fraud detection, emergency preparedness, cybersecurity, citizen services, and in promoting health and public safety.

Using its joint venture authority, NTIS has established a unique joint venture partnership program that has resulted in a number of innovative data service projects across the Federal government that allow other Federal agencies to address national priorities more efficiently and effectively.

Specifically, through NTIS' joint venture partnership program, NTIS will (1) accelerate private-sector use of Federal government data, either alone or in combination with non-Federal data, for the development and use of new and improved data products and services, and (2) accelerate the Federal government's use of data to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of Federal programs and thus improve mission outcomes.

The NTIS joint venture partnership program enables NTIS to structure joint venture partnership agreements with the private sector and interagency agreements with Federal agencies that offer the best combination of speed, agile applications development, and performance for delivering integrated innovative data services and solutions. NTIS manages joint venture projects in a highly flexible, interactive, and collaborative manner with its customer Federal agencies and JVPs throughout the project lifecycle.

Joint ventures are not procurements or acquisitions and do not result in contracts under the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR). Joint ventures involve the investment of resources by NTIS and its JVPs, with a formal agreement for the sharing of revenues associated with the venture. The joint venture partnerships provide data services that allow customer Federal agencies to accelerate the time it takes to achieve mission outcomes. The joint venture partnerships accomplish this by using innovative and creative methods of collecting, connecting, accessing, securing, analyzing, disseminating and enabling effective and efficient use of Federal data and non-Federal data.

Proposals must address at least one of the following two technical requirements by demonstrating the proposer's capabilities to deliver data-driven innovations. The proposer must explicitly state in the proposal which area(s) are addressed.

1. Innovations in the use of data and data services to leverage data as a strategic asset to improve business processes and mission outcome. The proposal must include a description of how the proposer would contribute innovations in the use of data and data services. The scope of this area includes data science and engineering innovations and the ability to integrate and deliver complete data-driven solutions associated with (a) making it easier to use data through data cleansing and improved interoperability; (b) searching, discovering, combining, analyzing, disseminating, and using Federal government data, either alone or in combination with non-Federal data, in new ways; and (c) implementing innovative and secure data infrastructures to advance artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning for enabling cybersecurity, and creating cloud based analytic data platforms that deliver capabilities for data analytics through highly scalable infrastructure.

2. Analysis, interpretation, and understanding of data, as well as meaningful application of the analysis and interpretation, to automate business processes, predict future events and prescribe potential solutions. The proposal must describe how the proposer would use AI, machine learning, and robotics to improve the analysis, interpretation, understanding, and application of either static or real time data to achieve innovations in business processes automation, supply chains, and overall mission outcome.

NTIS will enter into joint venture partnership agreements in accordance with all relevant provisions of applicable Federal law. Any proposal that has the appearance of circumventing the FAR or other agency acquisition requirements will be determined to be non-responsive to this notice during the initial phase of the selection process and will not be considered further. Proposers must acknowledge and address the following terms in their proposals:

• Data received from a Federal agency and from non-Federal organizations as part of a project performed by NTIS with a JVP may only be accessed and utilized for project purposes consistent with all applicable statutory and regulatory provisions and all relevant agreements.

• Federal agencies and private-sector organizations that provide data as part of a project performed by NTIS with a JVP will retain ownership of the data rights. Federal agencies and private-sector organizations may be requested to provide licenses to use the data for the purposes of a project.

• At a minimum, systems, programs, and applications included in the proposal must comply with the documented security assessment and authorization (A&A) policies issued by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), standards and guidance issued by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), and the Federal Information Security Modernization Act of 2014 (FISMA) (44 U.S.C. 3551 et seq. ), before the systems, programs, and applications are offered to Federal agencies under a joint venture partnership.

• JVPs who are selected and enter into joint venture partnership agreements pursuant to this notice will be eligible to submit proposals for specific project opportunities. Eligible JVPs interested in such opportunities will be required to submit a proposal in response to an opportunity announcement for specific projects within a short time period, typically two to three weeks.

• Proposers must have the ability to accept electronic fund transfers.

• NTIS will not guarantee that any revenue will be generated for the JVP merely by entering into a joint venture partnership agreement with NTIS.

• Proposers must have the ability to fund their portion of any projects commenced pursuant to a joint venture partnership agreement for a period of time, which may differ for individual projects, due to Federal accrual accounting practices. NTIS does not allow (and has never offered) financial incentives for entering into joint venture partnership agreements. NTIS will not provide advance payments to JVPs.

NTIS seeks to enter into joint venture partnership(s) with one or more partners to assist Federal agencies in furthering their missions in innovative and creative ways by enabling government agencies and the public with improved access to, or analysis, collection, or use of Federal data and data services, either alone or in combination with non-Federal data. NTIS and its JVPs provide data services for speedy execution of innovative projects, typically involving one or more of the following attributes: (a) First or early use of emerging technology; (b) complexity of solution architecture, interoperability, and/or security; (c) agile applications development and systems operations, which require adaptive scoping; or (d) custom solutions to meet unique requirements without COTS solutions.

Proposers are encouraged to include proposed teams of private-sector organizations, which may include small and medium-size enterprises and start-ups that bring unique and innovative capabilities for delivering data science capabilities. Proposals should describe any proposed teaming arrangements and solution integration capabilities, including the relationships among the parties, how the team would function, and how the team may be augmented to fill missing capabilities. Although teaming arrangements are encouraged, the JVP itself will be expected to provide at least 50 percent of the labor on each project for which it is selected. NTIS will evaluate each proposal and may solicit oral presentations from some or all proposers. Where appropriate, NTIS, in its discretion, may reach out to selected JVPs for teaming arrangements on future projects that involve emerging and/or cutting-edge capabilities that fall within NTIS' mission.

The proposal is a word-processed document of no more than fifteen (15) single-spaced pages responsive to the evaluation criteria set forth below. Any pages submitted beyond the 15-page limit will not be considered. Each proposal page layout should be 8.5 inches by 11 inches with 1-inch margins. The font for the proposal should be Times New Roman 12 point or similar font in readable size (no less than 10 point). All submissions must be made in electronic format and submitted in accordance with the ADDRESSES section above. All proposals are subject to the False Claims Amendments Act of 1986, 31 U.S.C. 3729 and 18 U.S.C. 287, as well as the False Statements Accountability Act of 1996, 18 U.S.C 1001. In accordance with Federal appropriations law, an authorized representative of the selected proposer(s) may be required to provide certain certifications regarding Federal felony and Federal criminal tax convictions, unpaid Federal tax assessments, and delinquent Federal tax returns.

The proposal must address each of the evaluation criteria set forth in the following section and should include all of the information set forth in this section in a manner sufficient to allow each section to be reviewed against the evaluation criteria set forth below. Each section of the proposal should include a brief title or description of its content.

(1) The proposal to become a JVP must include a capability statement that describes the nature and scope of the organization's expertise to perform data services to address mission-critical Federal data requirements. The proposal must include: (a) A description of technical capabilities in each area of data innovation that the proposer and, where applicable, its team, will address; (b) examples of up to three major projects where the proposer and, where applicable, its team, have demonstrated data innovations using the technical capabilities; if the proposer and, where applicable, its team, have not conducted projects in which they have demonstrated data innovations using the technical capabilities, the proposer should include instead a description of how it would go about doing so; (c) a description of the professional accomplishments, skills, certifications, and training of the personnel proposed to provide the technical capabilities and perform the work proposed in the proposal, including each individual whose innovative technical capabilities are critical to the development or execution of joint venture projects in a substantive and measurable way; and (d) a description of the resources, such as staff, partnerships, integration and project management capabilities, contracts, or technologies, that the proposer would use to achieve these innovations. This information will be considered against evaluation criteria 1 through 3 below.

(2) The proposal may include any other information that the proposer thinks will assist reviewers in their evaluation of the proposal against the evaluation criteria described below.

To the extent permitted by law, including the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552, NTIS will not disclose confidential or proprietary information provided and clearly marked in any proposal submitted in response to this notice without providing the organization that submitted such information the opportunity to object to the potential release of the information. If NTIS receives a request for disclosure of confidential or proprietary information, it will promptly notify the submitting organization in writing and give it an opportunity to demonstrate that NTIS should withhold the information in accordance with Department of Commerce FOIA regulations (15 CFR part 4).

The evaluation criteria for the proposals are as follows:

(1) Rationality (0-35 points).

The extent to which the logic and soundness of the proposer's approach to enable data innovations that will address Federal data priorities by (a) advancing the use of data as a strategic asset to achieve mission outcome and support evidence-based policies; (b) transforming and optimizing supply chains through the use of data science capabilities; (c) promoting data governance and standardization; and (d) creating new capabilities for data discovery, data set search, and interoperability to connect and derive new insights for predictive analytics and prescriptive actions.

(2) Technical Merit of Contribution (0-30 points).

The technical effectiveness and innovation of the proposed capabilities and past work or plans for providing such capabilities described in the proposal and the extent to which they would contribute to the fields of data science, AI, engineering, or best practices relevant to the services to be provided by NTIS and its JVPs as described in the General Scope section of this announcement.

(3) Organizational Qualifications and Resource Availability (0-35 points).

The likelihood that the professional accomplishments, data services and solution integration delivery experience, skills, certifications, and training of the personnel proposed to provide the technical capabilities and perform the work proposed in the proposal, including all individuals whose innovative technical capabilities are critical to the development or execution of joint venture projects in a substantive and measurable way as identified in the proposal, will contribute to the successful execution of projects; and the extent to which the proposer has access to the necessary equipment, tools, facilities, technologies, and overall support and resources to accomplish proposed objectives and work jointly with NTIS to accomplish project goals.

All proposals received before the end date set forth in the DATES section of this notice will be reviewed to determine whether they are submitted by a private-sector organization (eligible), contain all required technical, business and administrative information (complete), and are responsive to this notice. Proposals determined to be ineligible, incomplete, and/or non-responsive based on the initial screening will be eliminated from further review. However, NTIS, in its sole discretion, may continue the review process for a proposal that is missing non-substantive information that can easily be rectified or cured.

All proposals that are determined to be eligible, complete, and responsive will proceed for full reviews in accordance with the review and selection process set forth below.

At least three (3) objective individuals, knowledgeable about the particular technical areas described in the proposal, will review the merits of each proposal based on the evaluation criteria. The reviewers may discuss the proposals with each other, but scores will be determined on an individual basis, not as a consensus. NTIS may solicit oral presentations from some or all proposers.

The Selecting Official, who is the NTIS Deputy Director or designee, will make final proposal selections, taking into consideration the results of the reviewers' evaluations, relevance to the scope and objectives described in this notice, the distribution of proposals across technical areas, and the distribution of proposers among a diverse set of qualified organizations. A diverse set of qualified organizations would include large, medium, and small organizations that may be for-profit or non-profit and that have both unique and discrete data science capabilities and specialized expertise and experience in integrating such capabilities for holistic, complete solutions.

Unsuccessful proposers will be notified in writing. Proposers whose proposals are selected will be notified and will be provided with a standard NTIS joint venture partnership agreement for execution. Each joint venture partnership agreement entered into between a selected proposer and NTIS will incorporate the selected proposer's proposal by reference. NTIS will not be responsible for any costs incurred by any proposer prior to execution of a joint venture partnership agreement.

The membership of the United States Patent and Trademark Office Performance Review Board is as follows:

Alternates:

The Clean Air Act (CAA) affords EPA a 45-day period to review and, as appropriate, the authority to object to operating permits proposed by state permitting authorities under title V of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7661-7661f. Section 505(b)(2) of the CAA and 40 CFR 70.8(d) authorize any person to petition the EPA Administrator to object to a title V operating permit within 60 days after the expiration of EPA's 45-day review period if EPA has not objected on its own initiative. Petitions must be based only on objections to the permit that were raised with reasonable specificity during the public comment period provided by the state, unless the petitioner demonstrates that it was impracticable to raise these issues during the comment period or the grounds for the issues arose after this period.

Petitioner submitted a petition requesting that EPA object to the CAA title V operating permit no. 4-07-0001-04 issued by JCDH to the ABC Coke Plant. Petitioner requested that the Administrator object to the permit for the following reasons: The permit omitted applicable requirements, including requirements related to total annual benzene; the permit failed to include adequate monitoring to ensure compliance with applicable requirements; and the permit application was inadequate or incomplete.

On June 30, 2021, the Administrator issued an Order denying the Petition. The Order explains EPA's basis for denying the Petition. Pursuant to sections 307(b) and 505(b)(2) of the CAA, a petition for judicial review of those parts of the Order that deny issues in the Petition may be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit within 60 days from the date this notice is published in the Federal Register .

Throughout this document wherever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, it is intended to refer to the EPA.

The CAA affords the EPA a 45-day period to review and object to a title V operating permit proposed by a state permitting authority under title V of the CAA if the EPA determines the permit does not comply with the Act. Section 505(b)(2) of the CAA authorizes any person to petition the EPA Administrator to object to a title V operating permit within 60 days after the expiration of the EPA's 45-day review period if the EPA has not objected on its own initiative. Petitions must be based only on objections to the permit that were raised with reasonable specificity during the public comment period provided by the state, unless the petitioner demonstrates that it was impracticable to raise these issues during the comment period or unless the grounds for the issue arose after this period.

The EPA received the Petition from Earthjustice on behalf of Cully Air Action Team, Portland Clean Air, Oregon Environmental Council, and Verde, dated February 4, 2020, requesting that the EPA object to the issuance of title V operating permit no. 26-1876-TV-01 for the Owens-Brockway Glass Container Inc.'s Portland, Oregon facility.

The Petition claims that: (A) The final permit lacks conditions sufficient to assure compliance with the applicable particulate matter emission limit in the New Source Performance Standard for Glass Manufacturing (40 CFR part 60, subpart CC); (B) the final permit lacks sufficient monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting to assure compliance with the applicable particulate matter emission limit in Oregon's Clean Air Act state implementation plan; (C) the final permit lacks conditions sufficient to assure compliance with the requirement to take “reasonable precautions” to control fugitive dust; (D) the final permit fails to assure compliance with the applicable chromium emission limit under 40 CFR part 63, subpart SSSSSS; (E) the final permit fails to assure compliance with the facility's general duty to prevent accidental releases under Clean Air Act section 112(r)(1); (F) that the final permit fails to assure compliance with the Plant Site Emissions Limits (PSELs) for lead (Pb) and sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ); and (G) the final permit unlawfully omits an enforceable compliance schedule to bring Owens-Brockway into compliance with applicable opacity and particulate matter limits.

On May 10, 2021, the EPA Administrator issued an Order granting claims A, B, and G and denying the remaining claims in the Petition. The Order explains the basis for the EPA's decision.

Sections 307(b) and 505(b)(2) of the CAA provide that the Order is subject to judicial review for those portions of the Order that deny issues raised in a petition. Any petition for review shall be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit no later than October 4, 2021.

Pursuant to the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945, as amended (12 U.S.C. 635, et seq. ), the Export-Import Bank of the United States (EXIM), facilitates the finance of the export of U.S. goods and services by providing insurance or guarantees to U.S. exporters or lenders financing U.S. exports. By neutralizing the effect of export credit insurance or guarantees offered by foreign governments and by absorbing credit risks that the private sector will not accept, EXIM enables U.S. exporters to compete fairly in foreign markets on the basis of price and product. In the event that a borrower defaults on a transaction insured or guaranteed by EXIM, the insured or guaranteed exporter or lender may seek payment from EXIM by the submission of a claim.

Title and Form Number: EIB 10-05 Notice of Claim and Proof of Loss, Medium Term Guarantee.

OMB Number: 3048-0034.

Type of Review: Regular.

Need and Use: This collection of information is necessary, pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 635(a)(1), to determine if such claim complies with the terms and conditions of the relevant guarantee.

Affected Public: This form affects entities involved in the export of U.S. goods and services.

Annual Number of Respondents: 65.

Estimated Time per Respondent: 1 1/2 hours.

Annual Burden Hours: 97.5 hours.

Frequency of Reporting of Use: As needed to request a claim payment.

Government Expenses:

Reviewing time per year: 65 hours.

Average Wages per Hour: $42.50.

Average Cost per Year: $2,762 (time * wages).

Benefits and Overhead: 20%.

Total Government Cost: $3,315.

This collection of information is necessary, pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 635(a)(1), to determine eligibility of the export sales for insurance coverage. The Report of Premiums Payable for Financial Institutions Only is used to determine the eligibility of the shipment(s) and to calculate the premium due to Ex-Im Bank for its support of the shipment(s) under its insurance program. Export-Import Bank customers will be able to submit this form on paper or electronically.

By neutralizing the effect of export credit support offered by foreign governments and by absorbing credit risks that the private sector will not accept, EXIM enables U.S. exporters to compete fairly in foreign markets on the basis of price and product. Under the Working Capital Guarantee Program, EXIM provides repayment guarantees to lenders on secured, short-term working capital loans made to qualified exporters. The guarantee may be approved for a single loan or a revolving line of credit. In the event that a buyer defaults on a transaction insured by EXIM the insured exporter or lender may seek payment by the submission of a claim.

Title and Form Number: EIB 10-03 Notice of Claim and Proof of Loss, Export Credit Insurance Policies.

OMB Number: 3048-0033.

Type of Review: Regular.

Need and Use: This collection of information is necessary, pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 635(a)(1), to determine if such claim complies with the terms and conditions of the relevant insurance policy.

Affected Public: This form affects entities involved in the export of U.S. goods and services.

Annual Number of Respondents: 300.

Estimated Time per Respondent: 60 minutes.

Annual Burden Hours: 300 hours.

Frequency of Reporting or Use: As needed to request claim payment.

Government Expenses:

Reviewing Time per Year: 300 hours.

Average Wages per Hour: $42.50.

Average Cost per Year: $12,750.

Benefits and Overhead: 20%.

Total Government Cost: $15,300.

This collection of information is necessary, pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 635(a)(1), to determine eligibility of the export sales for insurance coverage. The Report of Premiums Payable for Financial Institutions Only is used to determine the eligibility of the shipment(s) and to calculate the premium due to Ex-Im Bank for its support of the shipment(s) under its insurance program. Export-Import Bank customers will be able to submit this form on paper or electronically.

This form will enable EXIM to identify the specific details of the proposed co-financing transaction between a U.S. exporter, EXIM, and a foreign export credit agency; the information collected includes vital facts such as the amount of U.S.-made content in the export, the amount of financing requested from EXIM, and the proposed financing amount from the foreign export credit agency. These details are necessary for approving this unique transaction structure and coordinating our support with that of the foreign export credit agency to ultimately complete the transaction and support U.S. exports—and U.S. jobs.

Titles and Form Number: EIB11-04, Co-Financing with Foreign Export Credit Agency.

OMB Number: 3048-0037.

Type of Review: Regular.

Need and Use: The information collected will provide information needed to determine compliance and creditworthiness for transaction requests submitted to the Export Import Bank under its insurance, guarantee, and direct loan programs.

Affected Public: This form affects entities involved in the export of U.S. goods and services.

Annual Number of Respondents: 60.

Estimated Time per Respondent: 15 minutes.

Annual Burden Hours: 15 hours.

Frequency of Reporting or Use: As needed.

Government Expenses:

Reviewing Time per Year: 15 hours.

Average Wages per Hour: $42.50.

Average Cost per Year: $637.50 (time * wages).

Benefits and Overhead: 20%.

Total Government Cost: $765.

The Commission may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid OMB control number.

As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the FCC invited the general public and other Federal Agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection. Comments are requested concerning: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimates; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4), the FCC seeks specific comment on how it might “further reduce the information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.”

OMB Control No.: 3060-0999.

Title: Hearing Aid Compatibility Status Report and Section 20.19, Hearing Aid-Compatible Mobile Handsets (Hearing Aid Compatibility Act).

Form Numbers: FCC Form 655 and FCC Form 855.

Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities.

Number of Respondents: 934 respondents; 934 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: 13.9710921 hours per response (average).

Frequency of Response: On occasion and annual reporting requirements, recordkeeping requirements, 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. 151, 154(i), 157, 160, 201, 202, 214, 301, 303, 308, 309(j), 310 and 610 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.

Total Annual Burden: 13,049 hours.

Total Annual Cost: No cost.

Privacy Impact Assessment: No impact(s).

Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: Information requested in the reports and certifications may include confidential information. However, covered entities are allowed to request that such materials submitted to the Commission be withheld from public inspection.

Needs and Uses: The Commission will submit the revised information collection to OMB to obtain a full three-year clearance. The changes being made to the information collect concern the Commission's wireless hearing aid compatibility rules as they relate to the obligations of wireless handset manufacturers and wireless service providers to: (1) Label and disclose certain information related to handset packaging; (2) post certain information on their publicly accessible websites; and (3) file annual status reports and certifications. No changes are being made to the information collection as related to standards development and the approved number of estimated respondents and responses.

The revisions to the information collection are necessitated by a Report and Order in WT Docket No. 20-3, FCC 21-28, adopted on February 16, 2021. In this Report and Order, the Commission adopted a new technical standard for determining hearing aid compatibility between hearing aids and wireless handsets and made other corresponding and implementation changes. In addition, the Commission revised the information that handset manufacturers and service providers must include on hearing aid-compatible wireless handset package labels and in the related package inserts or user manuals. The Commission revised the labeling rule in order to streamline the rule and remove outdated requirements. The new rule requires that the package label provide the volume control capabilities of a hearing aid-compatible handset that meets volume control requirements, and it maintains the requirement that a hearing aid-compatible handset's package label state that the handset is hearing aid-compatible. The new rule still requires hearing aid-compatible handsets to list the handset's hearing aid-compatible rating, but moves the location in which it is required to be listed from the package label to the package insert or user manual. The other requirements for package inserts and user manuals have not changed, but the requirements have been reorganized to make them easier to follow. The Commission's labeling revisions continue to allow consumers to access the information that they need to understand the hearing aid compatibility of handsets they are considering for purchase. At the same time, the labeling revisions give handset manufacturers and service providers flexibility in designing package labels and conveying supplemental information.

The Report and Order also revised website posting requirements for handset manufacturers and service providers. The revised rule requires handset manufacturers and service providers to post to their publicly accessible websites the technical standard used to determine hearing aid compatibility in addition to the information that handset manufacturers and service providers are presently required to post. Since handset manufacturers and service providers are already required to include the technical standard used to determine hearing aid compatibility in package inserts or user manuals for hearing aid-compatible handsets, this change will not substantially impact the existing paperwork burden estimates that OMB has already approved for this information collection. Further, the website posting requirement has been revised to eliminate the requirement that service providers post to their publicly accessible websites the different levels of functionality of the hearing aid-compatible handsets that they offer to the public. This change offsets any burden added by the requirement that service providers post the technical standard used to determine hearing aid compatibility.

Finally, the Report and Order addressed the status reporting and certification requirements for handset manufacturers and service providers. The Report and Order revised the dates that service providers must file their FCC Form 855 certifications and handset manufacturers must file their FCC Form 655 status reports. The forms were due January 15 and July 15 each year, respectfully, and now are due by January 31 and July 31. These changes were made to accommodate Federal holidays at the start of January and July and to make sure the forms contain information for the full preceding 12-month periods. The Commission uses these forms as the principal way to ensure compliance with its wireless hearing aid compatibility requirements. The Commission is also revising the forms to reflect the Commission's current hearing aid compatibility de minimis provisions and to reflect the Commission's new mailing address.

The changes the Commission is making will not affect the number of respondents or responses, burden hours, or costs presently approved by OMB for this information collection. The Commission requests that OMB approve the proposed revisions to the currently approved information collection in order to implement the changes the Commission adopted in the Report and Order. These changes benefit handset manufacturers and service providers by reducing regulatory burden while continuing to ensure that the Commission can fulfill its statutory obligation to monitor compliance with its hearing aid compatibility rules and make more complete and accessible information available to consumers. All other paperwork burden requirements previously approved by OMB for this information collection remain unchanged.

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

This collection of information implements section 518(e) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 360h(e)) and part 810 (21 CFR part 810), mandatory medical device recall authority provisions. Section 518(e) of the FD&C Act provides FDA with the authority to issue an order requiring an appropriate person, including manufacturers, importers, distributors, and retailers of a device, if FDA finds that there is reasonable probability that the device intended for human use would cause serious, adverse health consequences or death, to: (1) Immediately cease distribution of such device and (2) immediately notify health professionals and device-user facilities of the order and to instruct such professionals and facilities to cease use of such device.

FDA will then provide the person named in the cease distribution and notification order with the opportunity for an informal hearing on whether the order should be amended to require a mandatory recall of the device. If, after providing the opportunity for an informal hearing, FDA determines that such an order is necessary, the Agency may amend the order to require a mandatory recall.

FDA issued part 810 to implement the provisions of section 518 of the FD&C Act. The information collected under the mandatory recall authority provisions will be used by FDA to implement mandatory recalls.

In the Federal Register of April 5, 2021 (86 FR 17610), FDA published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed collection of information. No comments were received.

FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as follows:

Information Collection Request Title: Health Center Program: COVID-19 Data Collection Tools, OMB No. 0906-0062—Revision.

Abstract: This information collection request was previously approved by OMB on June 11, 2020, as an emergency clearance (OMB No.: 0906-0062). HRSA is currently undertaking the standard Paperwork Reduction Act process for normal OMB approval.

During the COVID-19 public health emergency, HRSA-supported health centers and Federally Qualified Health Center Look-Alikes (look-alikes) have played a key role in providing testing and care for those affected by the virus. HRSA has awarded billions of dollars in new funding to support health center awardees and look-alikes in the detection, prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of COVID-19. This funding has enabled health centers to maintain or increase their staffing levels, conduct training, provide COVID-19 treatment, and administer millions of tests for both existing and new patients. In addition, HRSA, in collaboration with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, launched the Health Center COVID-19 Vaccine program as part of an Administration initiative focused on health equity. This occurred in February 2021 to directly allocate COVID-19 vaccines to HRSA-supported health centers.

This ICR to support the implementation of COVID-19 relief funding and response activities includes forms previously submitted in the emergency information collection request clearance: (1) Health Center COVID-19 Data Collection Survey Tool, (2) Addendum to COVID-19 Data Collection Survey Tool, and (3) the Health Center COVID-19 Vaccine Program Readiness Assessment Tool. This revised information collection request also includes two newly added forms: (1) Primary Care Association (PCA) COVID-19 Data Collection Survey Tool  1 and (2) the Health Center COVID-19 Vaccine Program Conditions of Participation Agreement.

A 60-day notice published in the Federal Register on April 23, 2021, vol. 86, No. 77; pp. 21756-57. There were no public comments.

Need and Proposed Use of the Information: HRSA uses the data collected to optimize COVID-19 testing and vaccination; track health center capacity and the impact of COVID-19 on operations, patients, and staff; and better understand training and technical assistance, funding, and other health center resource needs. The data allow HRSA to assess health center capacity prior to program enrollment, supporting successful vaccine allocation strategies, while providing HRSA with information on the effectiveness of vaccine distribution through this program. In addition, the data inform HRSA in resource allocation and technical assistance to health centers.

The readiness assessment supports HRSA's analysis of health center ability to successfully participate in the Health Center COVID-19 Vaccine Program. These data are critical to determine health center capacity to implement the vaccination program as well as comply with program requirements. These data are used to assess program readiness including:

The health center weekly survey and addendum support HRSA's ability to monitor progress towards the development and delivery of COVID-19 prevention, preparedness, and/or response activities; and ensure appropriate vaccine administration as well as better understand training and technical assistance, funding, and other health center resource needs.

The Conditions of Participation Agreement governs all COVID-19 vaccination activities at all health center sites that receive COVID-19 vaccine through the HRSA Health Center COVID-19 Vaccine Program. Health Centers that sign the agreement agree to adhere to each of the stated requirements.

The PCA weekly survey increases information sharing between health centers, PCAs, and HRSA in order to better support COVID-19 emergency response efforts inclusive of testing and vaccination activities. Data collected from the survey tool is used to track and monitor issues/challenges to program implementation and assess the need for the delivery/dissemination of targeted training and technical assistance.

Likely Respondents: HRSA-supported health centers, look-alikes, and PCAs.

Burden Statement: Burden in this context means the time expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose or provide the information requested. This includes the time needed to review instructions; to develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; to train personnel and to be able to respond to a collection of information; to search data sources; to complete and review the collection of information; and to transmit or otherwise disclose the information. The total annual burden hours estimated for this ICR are summarized in the table below.

HRSA specifically requests comments on (1) the necessity and utility of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of the agency's functions, (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden, (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected, and (4) the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to minimize the information collection burden.

The ACHDNC provides advice and recommendations to the Secretary of HHS on policy, program development, and other matters of significance concerning certain activities described in section 1111 of the PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 300b-10), as further described below. The ACHDNC is also governed by the provisions of the FACA, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), which sets forth standards for the formation and use of advisory committees. The ACHDNC advises the Secretary of HHS about aspects of newborn and childhood screening and technical information for the development of policies and priorities that will enhance the ability of the state and local health agencies to provide for newborn and child screening, counseling and health care services for newborns and children having, or at risk for, heritable disorders. The ACHDNC will review and report regularly on newborn and childhood screening practices, recommend improvements in the national newborn and childhood screening programs, and fulfill responsibilities described in section 1111 of the PHS Act. In addition, the ACHDNC's recommendations regarding inclusion of additional conditions for screening, following adoption by the Secretary, are considered evidence-informed preventive health services provided for in the comprehensive guidelines supported by HRSA through the Recommended Uniform Screening Panel (RUSP) pursuant to section 2713 of the PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 300gg-13). Under this provision, non-grandfathered group health plans and health insurance issuers offering group or individual health insurance are required to provide insurance coverage without cost-sharing (a co-payment, co-insurance, or deductible) for preventive services for plan years ( i.e., policy years) beginning on or after the date that is one year from the Secretary's adoption of the condition for screening.

The filing date of the ACHDNC charter remains November 10, 2020. A copy of the ACHDNC charter is available on the ACHDNC website at https://www.hrsa.gov/advisory-committees/heritable-disorders/index.html. A copy of the charter also can be obtained by accessing the FACA database that is maintained by the Committee Management Secretariat under the General Services Administration. The website address for the FACA database is http://www.facadatabase.gov/.

When submitting comments or requesting information, please include the information request collection title for reference.

Information Collection Request Title: National Health Service Corps Scholar/Students to Service Travel Worksheet, OMB No. 0915-0278—Extension.

Abstract: Clinicians participating in the HRSA National Health Service Corps (NHSC) Scholarship Program (SP) and the Students to Service (S2S) Loan Repayment Program (LRP) use the online Travel Request Worksheet to request and receive travel funds from the federal government to visit eligible NHSC sites to which they may be assigned in accordance with the Public Health Service Act, section 331(c)(1).

The travel approval process is initiated when an NHSC scholar or S2S participant notifies the NHSC of an impending interview at one or more NHSC-approved practice sites. The Travel Request Worksheet is also used to initiate the relocation process after a NHSC scholar or S2S participant has successfully been matched to an approved practice site in accordance with the Public Health Service Act, section 331(c)(3). Upon receipt of a completed Travel Request Worksheet, the NHSC will review and approve or disapprove the request and promptly notify the scholar or S2S participant and the NHSC logistics contractor regarding travel arrangements and authorization of the funding for the site visit or relocation.

Need and Proposed Use of the Information: This information will facilitate NHSC scholar and S2S participants' receipt of federal travel funds that are used to visit high-need NHSC-approved practice sites. The Travel Request Worksheet is also used to initiate the relocation process after a NHSC scholar or S2S participant has successfully been matched to an approved practice site.

Likely Respondents: Clinicians participating in the NHSC SP and the S2S LRP.

Burden Statement: Burden in this context means the time expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose, or provide the information requested. This includes the time needed to review instructions; to develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; to train personnel and to be able to respond to a collection of information; to search data sources; to complete and review the collection of information; and to transmit or otherwise disclose the information. The total annual burden hours estimated for this ICR are summarized in the table below.

HRSA specifically requests comments on (1) the necessity and utility of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of the agency's functions; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to minimize the information collection burden.

The Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act) authorizes the Secretary of Health and Human Services (the Secretary) to issue a Declaration to provide liability immunity to certain individuals and entities (Covered Persons) against any claim of loss caused by, arising out of, relating to, or resulting from the manufacture, distribution, administration, or use of medical countermeasures (Covered Countermeasures), except for claims involving “willful misconduct” as defined in the PREP Act. Under the PREP Act, a Declaration may be amended as circumstances warrant.

The PREP Act was enacted on December 30, 2005, as Public Law 109-148, Division C, § 2. It amended the Public Health Service (PHS) Act, adding section 319F-3, which addresses liability immunity, and section 319F-4, which creates a compensation program. These sections are codified at 42 U.S.C. 247d-6d and 42 U.S.C. 247d-6e, respectively. Section 319F-3 of the PHS Act has been amended by the Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Reauthorization Act (PAHPRA), Public Law 113-5, enacted on March 13, 2013, and the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, Public Law 116-136, enacted on March 27, 2020, to expand Covered Countermeasures under the PREP Act.

On January 31, 2020, the former Secretary, Alex M. Azar II, declared a public health emergency pursuant to section 319 of the PHS Act, 42 U.S.C. 247d, effective January 27, 2020, for the entire United States to aid in the response of the nation's health care community to the COVID-19 outbreak. Pursuant to section 319 of the PHS Act, the Secretary renewed that declaration effective on April 26, 2020, July 25, 2020, October 23, 2020, January 21, 2021, April 21, 2021 and July 20, 2021.

On March 10, 2020, former Secretary Azar issued a Declaration under the PREP Act for medical countermeasures against COVID-19 (85 FR 15198, Mar. 17, 2020) (the Declaration). On April 10, the former Secretary amended the Declaration under the PREP Act to extend liability immunity to covered countermeasures authorized under the CARES Act (85 FR 21012, Apr. 15, 2020). On June 4, the former Secretary amended the Declaration to clarify that covered countermeasures under the Declaration include qualified countermeasures that limit the harm COVID-19 might otherwise cause. (85 FR 35100, June 8, 2020). On August 19, the former Secretary amended the declaration to add additional categories of Qualified Persons and amend the category of disease, health condition, or threat for which he recommended the administration or use of the Covered Countermeasures. (85 FR 52136, August 24, 2020). On December 3, 2020, the former Secretary amended the declaration to incorporate Advisory Opinions of the General Counsel interpreting the PREP Act and the Secretary's Declaration and authorizations issued by the Department's Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health as an Authority Having Jurisdiction to respond; added an additional category of qualified persons under Section V of the Declaration; made explicit that the Declaration covers all qualified pandemic and epidemic products as defined under the PREP Act; added a third method of distribution to provide liability protections for, among other things, private distribution channels; made explicit that there can be situations where not administering a covered countermeasure to a particular individual can fall within the PREP Act and the Declaration's liability protections; made explicit that there are substantive federal legal and policy issues and interests in having a unified whole-of-nation response to the COVID-19 pandemic among federal, state, local, and private-sector entities; revised the effective time period of the Declaration; and republished the declaration in full. (85 FR 79190, December 9, 2020). On February 2, 2021, the Acting Secretary Norris Cochran amended the Declaration to add additional categories of Qualified Persons authorized to prescribe, dispense, and administer COVID-19 vaccines that are covered countermeasures under the Declaration (86 FR 7872, February 2, 2021). On February 16, 2021, the Acting Secretary amended the Declaration to add additional categories of Qualified Persons authorized to prescribe, dispense, and administer COVID-19 vaccines that are covered countermeasures under the Declaration (86 FR 9516, February 16, 2021) and on February 22, 2021, the Department filed a notice of correction to the February 2 and February 16 notices correcting effective dates stated in the Declaration, and correcting the description of qualified persons added by the February 16, 2021 amendment. (86 FR 10588, February 22, 2021). On March 11, 2021, the Acting Secretary amended the Declaration to add additional Qualified Persons authorized to prescribe, dispense, and administer covered countermeasures under the Declaration. (86 FR 14462 March 16, 2021).

Secretary Xavier Becerra now amends section V of the Declaration to revise subsections (d) and (f) to clarify that qualified pharmacy technicians are Qualified Persons covered by the Declaration, and to expand the scope of authority for qualified pharmacy technicians to administer seasonal influenza vaccines to adults within the state where they are authorized to practice and for interns to administer seasonal influenza vaccines to adults consistent with other terms and conditions of the Declaration.

Accordingly, subsection V(d) authorizes:

(d) A State-licensed pharmacist who orders and administers, and pharmacy interns and qualified pharmacy technicians who administer (if the pharmacy intern or technician acts under the supervision of such pharmacist and the pharmacy intern or technician is licensed or registered by his or her State board of pharmacy), 1 (1) vaccines that the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends to persons ages three through 18 according to ACIP's standard immunization schedule or (2) seasonal influenza vaccine administered by qualified pharmacy technicians and interns that the ACIP recommends to persons aged 19 and older according to ACIP's standard immunization schedule; or (3) FDA authorized or FDA licensed COVID -19 vaccines to persons ages three or older. Such State-licensed pharmacists and the State-licensed or registered interns or technicians under their supervision are qualified persons only if the following requirements are met:

i. The vaccine must be authorized, approved, or licensed by the FDA;

ii. In the case of a COVID-19 vaccine, the vaccination must be ordered and administered according to ACIP's COVID-19 vaccine recommendation(s);

iii. In the case of a childhood vaccine, the vaccination must be ordered and administered according to ACIP's standard immunization schedule;

iv. In the case of seasonal influenza vaccine administered by qualified pharmacy technicians and interns, the vaccination must be ordered and administered according to ACIP's standard immunization schedule;

v. In the case of pharmacy technicians, the supervising pharmacist must be readily and immediately available to the immunizing qualified pharmacy technician;

vi. The licensed pharmacist must have completed the immunization training that the licensing State requires for pharmacists to order and administer vaccines. If the State does not specify training requirements for the licensed pharmacist to order and administer vaccines, the licensed pharmacist must complete a vaccination training program of at least 20 hours that is approved by the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE) to order and administer vaccines. Such a training program must include hands on injection technique, clinical evaluation of indications and contraindications of vaccines, and the recognition and treatment of emergency reactions to vaccines;

vii. The licensed or registered pharmacy intern and qualified pharmacy technician must complete a practical training program that is approved by the ACPE. This training program must include hands-on injection technique, clinical evaluation of indications and contraindications of vaccines, and the recognition and treatment of emergency reactions to vaccines;

viii. The licensed pharmacist, licensed or registered pharmacy intern and qualified pharmacy technician must have a current certificate in basic cardiopulmonary resuscitation;  2

ix. The licensed pharmacist must complete a minimum of two hours of ACPE-approved, immunization-related continuing pharmacy education during each State licensing period;

x. The licensed pharmacist must comply with recordkeeping and reporting requirements of the jurisdiction in which he or she administers vaccines, including informing the patient's primary-care provider when available, submitting the required immunization information to the State or local immunization information system (vaccine registry), complying with requirements with respect to reporting adverse events, and complying with requirements whereby the person administering a vaccine must review the vaccine registry or other vaccination records prior to administering a vaccine;

xi. The licensed pharmacist must inform his or her childhood-vaccination patients and the adult caregiver accompanying the child of the importance of a well-child visit with a pediatrician or other licensed primary care provider and refer patients as appropriate; and

xii. The licensed pharmacist, the licensed or registered pharmacy intern and the qualified pharmacy technician must comply with any applicable requirements (or conditions of use) as set forth in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) COVID-19 vaccination provider agreement and any other federal requirements that apply to the administration of COVID-19 vaccine(s).

Further, the initial phrase of subsection V(f) is revised to state authorize “Any healthcare professional or other individual who holds an active license or certification permitting the person to prescribe, dispense, or administer vaccines under the law of any State as of the effective date of this amendment, or a pharmacist or pharmacy intern as authorized under the section V(d) of this Declaration. . . .”

Under the PREP Act and the Declaration, a “qualified person” is a “covered person.” Subject to certain limitations, a covered person is immune from suit and liability under Federal and State law with respect to all claims for loss caused by, arising out of, relating to, or resulting from the administration or use of a covered countermeasure if a declaration under the PREP Act has been issued with respect to such countermeasure. “Qualified person” includes (A) a licensed health professional or other individual who is authorized to prescribe, administer, or dispense such countermeasures under the law of the State in which the countermeasure was prescribed, administered, or dispensed; or (B) “a person within a category of persons so identified in a declaration by the Secretary” under subsection (b) of the PREP Act. 42 U.S.C. 247d-6d(i)(8)

By this amendment to the Declaration, the Secretary clarifies and expands the authorization for a category of persons who are qualified persons under section 247d-6d(i)(8)(B). First, the amendment clarifies that qualified pharmacy technicians are authorized to administer Childhood vaccinations and COVID-19 vaccinations that are Covered Countermeasures under section VI of this Declaration. The Department has authorized qualified pharmacy technicians to administer these vaccines under section V(a) of the Declaration through Guidance issued by the Assistant Secretary for Health. 3 This amendment adds qualified pharmacy technicians to section V(d) of the Declaration, to clarify that these healthcare professionals are authorized subject to the conditions stated in that subsection. In addition, the amendment expands the authorization for qualified pharmacy technicians and interns to administer seasonal influenza vaccines under the supervision of a pharmacist to persons aged 19 and older consistent with ACIP recommendations. The Secretary anticipates that there will be a need for the adult population to receive both COVID-19 and seasonal influenza vaccines throughout the 2021-2022 influenza season. Health risks may increase for individuals who contract seasonal influenza concurrently with COVID-19, thus expanding the scope of authorized vaccinators for seasonal influenza lessens the harm otherwise caused by COVID-19.

While influenza incidence was lower than anticipated last fall and winter, the same cannot be assumed for the 2021-2022 flu season, as states have largely lifted the community mitigation measures previously in place at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. Seasonal influenza has the potential to inflict significant burden and strain on the U.S. healthcare system in its own right; and in conjunction with the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, a spike in influenza cases could overwhelm healthcare providers. Like the vaccination against COVID-19, the vaccination against influenza requires many people to be vaccinated within a short period of time, potentially creating a surge on the system. Concern also remains regarding the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants and their potential to cause disease both among vaccinated and unvaccinated populations. It is yet to be determined if COVID-19 vaccine boosters will be recommended; however, if boosters become necessary, allowing pharmacy interns and technicians to administer both COVID-19 vaccines and influenza vaccines would allow states maximum flexibility in limiting potential impacts of both illnesses. ACIP also recently voted unanimously in favor of COVID-19 and influenza vaccine co-administration. 4 5 Like COVID-19 vaccines, influenza vaccines are administered as intramuscular (IM) injections, and would require minimal, if any, additional training to administer, and would not place any undue training burden on providers.

As qualified persons, these qualified pharmacy technicians and interns will be afforded liability protections in accordance with the PREP Act and the terms of this amended Declaration. Second, to the extent that any State law that would otherwise prohibit these healthcare professionals who are a “qualified person” from prescribing, dispensing, or administering COVID-19 vaccines or other Covered Countermeasures, such law is preempted. On May 19, 2020, the Office of the General Counsel issued an advisory opinion concluding that, because licensed pharmacists are “qualified persons” under this declaration, the PREP Act preempts state law that would otherwise prohibit such pharmacists from ordering and administering authorized COVID-19 diagnostic tests. 6 The opinion relied in part on the fact that the Congressional delegation of authority to the Secretary under the PREP Act to specify a class of persons, beyond those who are authorized to administer a covered countermeasure under State law, as “qualified persons” would be rendered a nullity in the absence of such preemption. This opinion is incorporated by reference into this declaration. Based on the reasoning set forth in the May 19, 2020 advisory opinion, any State law that would otherwise prohibit a member of any of the classes of “qualified persons” specified in this declaration from administering a covered countermeasure is likewise preempted. In accordance with section 319F-3(i)(8)(A) of the Public Health Service Act, a State remains free to expand the universe of individuals authorized to administer covered countermeasures within its jurisdiction under State law.

The plain language of the PREP Act makes clear that there is preemption of state law as described above. Furthermore, preemption of State law is justified to respond to the nation-wide public health emergency caused by COVID-19 as it will enable States to quickly expand the vaccination workforce with additional qualified healthcare professionals where State or local requirements might otherwise inhibit or delay allowing these healthcare professionals to participate in the COVID-19 countermeasure program.

Amended Declaration for Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act Coverage for medical countermeasures against COVID-19.

Section V of the March 10, 2020 Declaration under the PREP Act for medical countermeasures against COVID-19, as amended April 10, 2020, June 4, 2020, August 19, 2020, as amended and republished on December 3, 2020, and as amended on February 2, 2021, and as amended March 11, 2021, is further amended pursuant to section 319F-3(b)(4) of the PHS Act as described below. All other sections of the Declaration remain in effect as republished at 85 FR 79190 (December 9, 2020).

1. Covered Persons, section V, delete in full and replace with:

2. Effective Time Period, section XII, delete in full and replace with:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 247d-6d.

CBP invites the general public and other federal agencies to comment on the proposed and/or continuing information collections pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ). This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.8. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points: (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, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) suggestions to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) suggestions to 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. The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the request for approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.

Title: Declaration for Free Entry of Returned American Products (CBP Form 3311).

OMB Number: 1651-0011.

Form Number: CBP Form 3311.

Current Actions: Extension.

Type of Review: Extension (without change).

Affected Public: Businesses.

Abstract: CBP Form 3311, Declaration for Free Entry of Returned American Products, which is authorized by, among others, 19 CFR 10.1, 10.66, 10.67, 12.41, 123.4, and 143.23, is used to collect information from the importer or authorized agent in order to claim duty-free treatment for articles entered under certain provisions of Subchapter I of Chapter 98 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS, https://hts.usitc.gov/current ). The form serves as a declaration that the articles are: (1) The growth, production, and manufacture of the United States; (2) are returned to the United States without having been advanced in value or improved in condition while abroad; (3) the goods were not previously entered under a temporary importation under bond provision; and (4) drawback was never claimed and/or paid.

This collection of information applies to members of the importing public and trade community who seek to claim duty-free treatment based on compliance with the aforementioned requirements. These members of the public and trade community are familiar with import procedures and with CBP regulations. Obligation to respond to this information collection is required to obtain benefits.

Type of Information Collection: CBP Form 3311, Declaration for Free Entry of Returned American Products.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 12,000.

Estimated Number of Annual Responses per Respondent: 35.

Estimated Number of Total Annual Responses: 420,000.

Estimated Time per Response: 0.10 hours.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 42,000.

• TPS is a temporary immigration status granted to eligible nationals of a country designated for TPS under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) or to eligible persons without nationality who last habitually resided in the designated country.

• During the TPS designation period, TPS beneficiaries are eligible to remain in the United States, may not be removed, are employment authorized, and may obtain Employment Authorization Documents (EADs), so long as they continue to meet the requirements of TPS.

• TPS beneficiaries may also apply for travel authorization as a matter of discretion.

• To qualify for TPS, beneficiaries must meet the eligibility standards at INA section 244(c)(1)-(2), 8 U.S.C. 1254a(c)(1)-(2).

• When the Secretary of Homeland Security (Secretary) terminates a country's TPS designation, beneficiaries return to one of the following:

○ The same immigration status or category that they maintained before TPS, if any (unless that status or category has since expired or been terminated); or

○ Any other lawfully obtained immigration status or category they received while registered for TPS, as long as it is still valid on the date TPS terminates.

Through this Federal Register notice, DHS is extending the initial registration periods from 180 days to 18 months for initial applicants (that is, individuals who do not currently have TPS) under the TPS designations for Venezuela, Syria, and Burma, as specified in this notice. The initial registration periods will now run for the entire 18-month period of the TPS designations for Venezuela and Burma, and for the entire 18-month period of TPS redesignation for Syria. This will allow individuals to submit an initial application for TPS and an application for employment authorization documentation (if desired), during the relevant country's TPS designation or redesignation.

DHS is extending the registration period for a number of reasons. In general, individuals must be given an initial registration period of no less than 180 days to register for TPS, but the Secretary has discretion to provide for a longer registration period. See 8 U.S.C. 1254a(c)(1)(A)(iv). Historically, the length of the initial registration period has varied. Compare 66 FR 14214 (March 9, 2001) (18 months initial registration period for applicants under TPS designation for El Salvador) with 80 FR 36346 (June 24, 2015) (180-day initial registration period for applicants under TPS designation for Nepal). In recent years, this period has most typically been limited to the statutory minimum of 180 days, although later extensions of the initial registration period have also been announced for some countries. See, e.g., 81 FR 4051 (Jan. 25, 2016) (setting 180-day initial registration period during extension and redesignation of South Sudan for TPS); 78 FR 1866 (Jan. 9, 2013) (setting 180-day initial registration period during extension and redesignation of Sudan for TPS); 75 FR 39957 (July 13, 2010) (extending previously announced initial 180-day registration period for Haiti TPS applicants to allow more time for individuals to apply). After reevaluating the initial 180-day registration periods announced for TPS under the new designations for Venezuela and Burma and the redesignation of Syria, DHS has determined that it will provide the full 18 months of these designations for applicants to file their initial Form I-821 and Form I-765 to obtain an EAD, if desired. Limiting the initial registration period to 180 days may place a burden on applicants who are unable to timely file but would otherwise be eligible for a grant of TPS. In addition, permitting registration throughout the entirety of the designation period could reduce the operational burden on USCIS, as incoming applications may be spread out over a longer period of time. This extended registration period is in keeping with the humanitarian purpose of TPS and will better advance the goal of ensuring “the Federal Government eliminates . . . barriers that prevent immigrants from accessing government services available to them.” See Executive Order 14012, Restoring Faith in Our Legal Immigration Systems and Strengthening Integration and Inclusion Efforts for New Americans, 86 FR 8277 (Feb. 5, 2021).

In addition, through this Federal Register notice, DHS is making corrections to the Federal Register notice regarding Venezuela's TPS designation that was published on March 9, 2021, at 86 FR 13574. USCIS is correcting the second paragraph of the section titled “Required Application Forms and Application Fees To Register for TPS” to correct the end date of the EAD validity period noted in that section from “September 7, 2021” to “September 9, 2022.” USCIS is also correcting the section titled “Refiling a TPS Registration Application After Receiving a Denial of a Fee Waiver Request” in order to remove erroneous references to a “good cause” exception to late filings for initial TPS applicants under the Venezuela designation. 3

In FR Doc. 2021-04951, beginning on page 13574, in the Federal Register of March 9, 2021, make the following corrections:

1. On page 13578, the sentence indicating “Although not required to do so, if you want to obtain an EAD valid through September 7, 2021, you must file an Application for Employment Authorization (Form I-765) and pay the Form I-765 fee (or submit a Request for a Fee Waiver (Form I-912))” is corrected to read as follows: “Although not required to do so, if you want to obtain an EAD valid through September 9, 2022, you must file an Application for Employment Authorization (Form I-765) and pay the Form I-765 fee or request a fee waiver”.

2. On page 13578, the heading “Refiling a TPS Registration Application After Receiving a Denial of a Fee Waiver Request” is corrected to read as follows: “Refiling a TPS Registration Application after Receiving Notice that USCIS Did Not Grant the Fee Waiver Request”.

3. On page 13578, the first paragraph under the heading that currently reads “Refiling a TPS Registration Application After Receiving a Denial of a Fee Waiver Request” is struck and replaced with the following correction:

“You should file as soon as possible so USCIS can process your application and issue an EAD promptly, if you requested one. If USCIS does not grant your fee waiver request related to your initial TPS application, you must refile your Form I-821 for TPS, along with the required fees, by September 9, 2022 to continue seeking initial TPS. If USCIS does not grant your fee waiver request, you may also refile your Form I-765, with fee, either with your Form I-821 or at a later time as long as it is within the period that Venezuela is designated for TPS. For more information on late initial registration, visit the USCIS TPS web page at uscis.gov/tps .”

The Committee was created pursuant to Paragraph V.A.4 of the Memorandum of Agreement and Consent Decree entered into by the United States of America and the State of Alaska on August 27, 1991, and approved by the United States District Court for the District of Alaska in settlement of United States of America v. State of Alaska, Civil Action No. A91-081 CV. The Committee advises the Trustee Council on matters relating to decisions on injury assessment, restoration activities, or other use of natural resource damage recoveries obtained by the government. The Trustee Council consists of representatives of the U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, and Alaska Department of Law.

The Committee consists of 10 members to reflect balanced representation from each of the following principal interests: Aquaculture/mariculture, commercial tourism, conservation/environmental, recreation, subsistence use, commercial fishing, native landownership, sport hunting/fishing, science/technology, and public-at-large.

We are soliciting nominations for seven positions that represent aquaculture/mariculture, commercial fishing, commercial tourism, recreation, Native landownership, subsistence, and public-at-large interests. The Committee members will be selected and appointed by the Secretary of the Interior to serve a two-year term.

Nominations for membership may be submitted by any source. Nominations should include a résumé providing an adequate description of the nominee's qualifications, including information that would enable the Department of the Interior to make an informed decision regarding meeting the membership requirements of the Committee and permit the Department of the Interior to contact a potential member.

Authority: 5 U.S.C. appendix 2.

The EVOS PAC was created pursuant to Paragraph V.A.4 of the Memorandum of Agreement and Consent Decree entered into by the United States of America and the State of Alaska on August 27, 1991, and approved by the United States District Court for the District of Alaska in settlement of United States of America v. State of Alaska, Civil Action No. A91-081 CV.

The EVOS PAC meeting agenda will include the FY22 Work Plan. An opportunity for public comments will be provided. The final agenda and materials for the meeting will be posted on the EVOS Trustee Council website at www.evostc.state.ak.us. All EVOS PAC meetings are open to the public.

Interested persons may choose to make oral comments at the meeting during the designated time. Depending on the number of people wishing to comment and the time available, the amount of time for oral comments may be limited. Interested parties should contact the Designated Federal Officer (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT ) for advance placement on the public speaker list for this meeting.

Interested members of the public may submit relevant information or questions for the Committee to consider during the public meeting. Written statements must be received by September 22, 2021, so that the information may be made available to the Committee for their consideration prior to this meeting. Written statements must be supplied to the Designated Federal Officer via email at philip_johnson@ios.doi.gov.

Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comments, please be aware that your entire comment, including your personal identifying information, may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

Authority: 5 U.S.C. appendix 2.

The area comprising the Coastal Plain includes approximately 1.6 million acres within the approximately 19.3 million-acre Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. In September 2019 and in connection with Public Law 115-97, Dec. 22, 2017, the BLM completed the Coastal Plain Oil and Gas Leasing Final EIS. The BLM then issued a Record of Decision (ROD) for the Coastal Plain Oil and Gas Leasing Program on August 8, 2020 (85 FR 51754). The ROD approved a program to implement Section 20001 of Public Law 115-97, which directed the BLM to manage the oil and gas leasing program on the Coastal Plain in a manner similar to lease sales under the Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act of 1976 (including regulations).

On June 1, 2021, the Secretary of the Interior issued Secretary's Order 3401, Section 4 of which directed “a temporary halt on all Department activities related to the [Leasing] Program in the Arctic Refuge” pending “a new, comprehensive analysis of the potential environmental impacts of the Program” to “address . . . identified legal deficiencies.”

The purpose of this public scoping process is to determine the scope of issues to be addressed and to identify the significant issues, including any legal deficiencies in the Final EIS, related to an oil and gas leasing program within the Coastal Plain. Information received during this process will influence the development of the Supplemental EIS and guide the scope of the environmental analysis. The BLM will work collaboratively with interested parties to identify the management decisions best suited to local, regional, and national needs and concerns.

The purpose and need of the Supplemental EIS is bound by statute and remains the same as for the September 2019 Final EIS, i.e., to implement Section 20001 of Public Law 115-97. Potential new alternatives to be considered in the Supplemental EIS include, but are not limited to, those that would: Designate certain areas of the Coastal Plain as open or closed to leasing; permit less than 2,000 acres of surface development throughout the Coastal Plain; prohibit surface infrastructure in sensitive areas; and otherwise avoid or mitigate impacts from oil and gas activities.

The Supplemental EIS will evaluate impacts to various surface resources including, but not limited to, caribou, polar bears, birds, vegetation, and surface waters including wetlands, as well as to other uses of the Coastal Plain, including subsistence uses. The Supplemental EIS will also consider impacts from greenhouse gas emissions from any Leasing Program.

After the scoping comment period is closed, the BLM will review and consider the scoping comments received and will develop a Draft Supplemental EIS, which BLM estimates will be completed approximately 6 to 8 months after the scoping period ends. At that time the Draft Supplemental EIS will be made available for public comment for at least 45 days. After the close of the Draft Supplemental EIS comment period, BLM will develop a Final Supplemental EIS incorporating comments received on the Draft, which BLM estimates will be completed approximately 6 months after the Draft Supplemental EIS comment period ends. A record of decision selecting a program alternative from the Final Supplemental EIS would be issued no sooner than 30 days after notice of the availability of the Final Supplemental EIS is published in the Federal Register .

Authority: 40 CFR 1501.9(d), 40 CFR 1501.7 (2019).

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ) and 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1), all information collections require approval under the PRA. We may not conduct or sponsor and you are not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

As part of our continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burdens, we invite the public and other Federal agencies to comment on new, proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand our information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format.

We are especially interested in public comment addressing the following:

(1) Whether or not the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether or not the information will have practical utility;

(2) The accuracy of our estimate of the burden for this collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

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

(4) How might the agency 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 response.

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 can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

Abstract: Reclamation is responsible for approximately 6.5 million acres of land which directly support Reclamation's Federal water projects in the 17 Western States. Under Title 43 CFR part 429, individuals or entities wanting to use Reclamation's lands, facilities, or waterbodies must apply using Form 7-2540. Examples of such uses are:

We review applications to determine whether granting individual use authorizations are compatible with Reclamation's present or future uses of the lands, facilities, or waterbodies. When we find a proposed use compatible, we advise the applicant of the estimated administrative costs and estimated application processing time. In addition to the administrative costs, we require the applicant to pay a use fee based on a valuation or by competitive bidding. If the application is for construction of a bridge, building, or other significant construction project, Reclamation may require that all plans and specifications be signed and sealed by a licensed professional engineer.

Title of Collection: Bureau of Reclamation Use Authorization Application.

OMB Control Number: 1006-0003.

Form Number: Form 7-2540.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Respondents/Affected Public: Individuals, corporations, companies, and State and local entities who want to use Reclamation lands, facilities, or waterbodies.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Respondents: 225.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 225.

Estimated Completion Time per Response: 2 hours.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 450 hours.

Respondent's Obligation: Required to obtain or retain a benefit.

Frequency of Collection: Each time a use authorization is requested.

Total Estimated Annual Nonhour Burden Cost: $78,750.

An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

The authority for this action is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq ).

The Commission has received a complaint and a submission pursuant to § 210.8(b) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure filed on behalf of Causam Enterprises, Inc. on July 28, 2021. The complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337) in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain smart thermostats, load control switches and components thereof. The complainant names as respondents: Alarm.com Holdings, Inc. of Tysons, VA; Alarm.com Inc. of Tysons, VA; Ecobee, Inc. of Canada; EnergyHub, Inc. of Brooklyn, NY; Itron, Inc. Liberty Lake, WA; Itron Distributed Energy Management, Inc. of Liberty Lake, WA; Resideo Smart Homes Technology (Tianjin) of China; Resideo Technologies, Inc. of Austin, TX; and Xylem Inc. of Rye Brook, NY. The complainant requests that the Commission issue a limited exclusion order, cease and desist orders, and impose a bond upon respondents alleged infringing articles during the 60-day Presidential review period pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1337(j).

Proposed respondents, other interested parties, and members of the public are invited to file comments on any public interest issues raised by the complaint or § 210.8(b) filing. Comments should address whether issuance of the relief specifically requested by the complainant in this investigation would affect the public health and welfare in the United States, competitive conditions in the United States economy, the production of like or directly competitive articles in the United States, or United States consumers.

In particular, the Commission is interested in comments that:

(i) Explain how the articles potentially subject to the requested remedial orders are used in the United States;

(ii) identify any public health, safety, or welfare concerns in the United States relating to the requested remedial orders;

(iii) identify like or directly competitive articles that complainant, its licensees, or third parties make in the United States which could replace the subject articles if they were to be excluded;

(iv) indicate whether complainant, complainant's licensees, and/or third party suppliers have the capacity to replace the volume of articles potentially subject to the requested exclusion order and/or a cease and desist order within a commercially reasonable time; and

(v) explain how the requested remedial orders would impact United States consumers.

Written submissions on the public interest must be filed no later than by close of business, eight calendar days after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register . There will be further opportunities for comment on the public interest after the issuance of any final initial determination in this investigation. Any written submissions on other issues must also be filed by no later than the close of business, eight calendar days after publication of this notice in the Federal Register . Complainant may file replies to any written submissions no later than three calendar days after the date on which any initial submissions were due. No other submissions will be accepted, unless requested by the Commission. Any submissions and replies filed in response to this Notice are limited to five (5) pages in length, inclusive of attachments.

Persons filing written submissions must file the original document electronically on or before the deadlines stated above. Submissions should refer to the docket number (“Docket No. 3560”) in a prominent place on the cover page and/or the first page. ( See Handbook for Electronic Filing Procedures, Electronic Filing Procedures  1 ). Please note the Secretary's Office will accept only electronic filings during this time. Filings must be made through the Commission's Electronic Document Information System (EDIS, https://edis.usitc.gov ). No in-person paper-based filings or paper copies of any electronic filings will be accepted until further notice. Persons with questions regarding filing should contact the Secretary at EDIS3Help@usitc.gov.

Any person desiring to submit a document to the Commission in confidence must request confidential treatment. All such requests should be directed to the Secretary to the Commission and must include a full statement of the reasons why the Commission should grant such treatment. See 19 CFR 201.6. Documents for which confidential treatment by the Commission is properly sought will be treated accordingly. All information, including confidential business information and documents for which confidential treatment is properly sought, submitted to the Commission for purposes of this Investigation may be disclosed to and used: (i) By the Commission, its employees and Offices, and contract personnel (a) for developing or maintaining the records of this or a related proceeding, or (b) in internal investigations, audits, reviews, and evaluations relating to the programs, personnel, and operations of the Commission including under 5 U.S.C. Appendix 3; or (ii) by U.S. government employees and contract personnel, 2 solely for cybersecurity purposes. All nonconfidential written submissions will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Secretary and on EDIS. 3

This action is taken under the authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and of §§ 201.10 and 210.8(c) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 201.10, 210.8(c)).

The Commission has received a complaint and a submission pursuant to § 210.8(b) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure filed on behalf of Zebra Technologies Corporation on July 29, 2021. The complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337) in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain radio frequency transmission devices and components thereof. The complainant names as respondents: OnAsset Intelligence, Inc. of Irving, TX. The complainant requests that the Commission issue a limited exclusion order, cease and desist orders, and impose a bond upon respondents alleged infringing articles during the 60-day Presidential review period pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1337(j).

Proposed respondents, other interested parties, and members of the public are invited to file comments on any public interest issues raised by the complaint or § 210.8(b) filing. Comments should address whether issuance of the relief specifically requested by the complainant in this investigation would affect the public health and welfare in the United States, competitive conditions in the United States economy, the production of like or directly competitive articles in the United States, or United States consumers.

In particular, the Commission is interested in comments that:

(i) Explain how the articles potentially subject to the requested remedial orders are used in the United States;

(ii) identify any public health, safety, or welfare concerns in the United States relating to the requested remedial orders;

(iii) identify like or directly competitive articles that complainant, its licensees, or third parties make in the United States which could replace the subject articles if they were to be excluded;

(iv) indicate whether complainant, complainant's licensees, and/or third party suppliers have the capacity to replace the volume of articles potentially subject to the requested exclusion order and/or a cease and desist order within a commercially reasonable time; and

(v) explain how the requested remedial orders would impact United States consumers.

Written submissions on the public interest must be filed no later than by close of business, eight calendar days after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register . There will be further opportunities for comment on the public interest after the issuance of any final initial determination in this investigation. Any written submissions on other issues must also be filed by no later than the close of business, eight calendar days after publication of this notice in the Federal Register . Complainant may file replies to any written submissions no later than three calendar days after the date on which any initial submissions were due. No other submissions will be accepted, unless requested by the Commission. Any submissions and replies filed in response to this Notice are limited to five (5) pages in length, inclusive of attachments.

Persons filing written submissions must file the original document electronically on or before the deadlines stated above. Submissions should refer to the docket number (“Docket No. 3561”) in a prominent place on the cover page and/or the first page. ( See Handbook for Electronic Filing Procedures, Electronic Filing Procedures. 1 ) Please note the Secretary's Office will accept only electronic filings during this time. Filings must be made through the Commission's Electronic Document Information System (EDIS, https://edis.usitc.gov. ) No in-person paper-based filings or paper copies of any electronic filings will be accepted until further notice. Persons with questions regarding filing should contact the Secretary at EDIS3Help@usitc.gov.

Any person desiring to submit a document to the Commission in confidence must request confidential treatment. All such requests should be directed to the Secretary to the Commission and must include a full statement of the reasons why the Commission should grant such treatment. See 19 CFR 201.6. Documents for which confidential treatment by the Commission is properly sought will be treated accordingly. All information, including confidential business information and documents for which confidential treatment is properly sought, submitted to the Commission for purposes of this Investigation may be disclosed to and used: (i) By the Commission, its employees and Offices, and contract personnel (a) for developing or maintaining the records of this or a related proceeding, or (b) in internal investigations, audits, reviews, and evaluations relating to the programs, personnel, and operations of the Commission including under 5 U.S.C. appendix 3; or (ii) by U.S. government employees and contract personnel, 2 solely for cybersecurity purposes. All nonconfidential written submissions will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Secretary and on EDIS. 3

This action is taken under the authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and of §§ 201.10 and 210.8(c) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 201.10, 210.8(c)).

Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

(1) Type of Information Collection: Revision of a currently approved collection.

(2) The Title of the Form/Collection: Explosives Employee Possessor Questionnaire.

(3) The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection: Form number: ATF Form 5400.28.

Component: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice.

(4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract:

Primary: Individuals or households.

Other: Business or other for-profit.

Abstract: The Explosives Employee Possessor Questionnaire—ATF Form 5400.28 will be used to determine if an individual is qualified to serve as an employee possessor, who can ship, transport, receive, and/or possess materials for an explosives business or operation.

(5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: An estimated 10,000 respondents will use the form, and it will take each respondent 20 minutes to complete their responses.

(6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The estimated annual public burden associated with this collection is 3,334 hours, which is equal to 10,000 (# of respondents) * .3333 (20 minutes).

If additional information is required contact: Melody Braswell, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE, Mail Stop 3E.405A, Washington, DC 20530.

The standard requires employers to monitor employee exposure to methylene chloride (MC), to provide medical consultation and examinations, to train employees about the hazards of MC in their working areas, and to establish and maintain records of employee exposure to MC. These records will be used by employers, employees, physicians and the Government to ensure that employees are not being harmed by exposure to MC. For additional substantive information about this ICR, see the related notice published in the Federal Register on April 29, 2021 (86 FR 22715).

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: Methylene Chloride Standard.

OMB Control Number: 1218-0179.

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

Total Estimated Number of Respondents: 84,595.

Total Estimated Number of Responses: 236,458.

Total Estimated Annual Time Burden: 61,813 hours.

Total Estimated Annual Other Costs Burden: $21,048,881.30.

Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D).

The provisions of the standard require that the employer make a periodic inspection of alloy steel chain slings at least once a year and to make and maintain a record of the inspection. It also requires the employer to ensure that each new, repaired or reconditioned alloy steel chain sling is proof tested and a certification record maintained. In addition, the standard requires the employer to maintain a record of the proof test on wire rope slings. For additional substantive information about this ICR, see the related notice published in the Federal Register on April 27, 2021 (86 FR 22278).

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: Slings Standard.

OMB Control Number: 1218-0223.

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

Total Estimated Number of Respondents: 381,502.

Total Estimated Number of Responses: 381,582.

Total Estimated Annual Time Burden: 31,398 hours.

Total Estimated Annual Other Costs Burden: $0.

Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D).

NASA intends to grant an exclusive, co-exclusive, or partially exclusive patent license in the United States to practice the inventions described and claimed in U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 16/104,824 entitled “Cryogenic Flux Capacitor for Solid-State Storage and On-Demand Supply of Fluid Commodities,” filed on August 17, 2018, to GenH2 Corporation, having its principal place of business in Titusville, Florida. The fields of use may be limited. NASA has not yet made a final determination to grant the requested license and may deny the requested license even if no objections are submitted within the comment period.

This notice of intent to grant an exclusive, co-exclusive or partially exclusive patent license is issued in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 209(e) and 37 CFR 404.7(a)(1)(i). The patent rights in these inventions have been assigned to the United States of America as represented by the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The prospective license will comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7.

Information about other NASA inventions available for licensing can be found online at http://technology.nasa.gov.

Title of Collection: CISE REU Past Participant Survey—2021 Impact of REU Participation on Career Pathways.

OMB Approval Number: 3145-NEW.

Type of Request: Intent to establish an information collection.

Abstract: Every year the National Science Foundation (NSF) funds hundreds of Research Experience for Undergraduates (REU) activities through its REU program. The Directorate of Computer and Information Science and Engineering (CISE) is seeking to evaluate the effectiveness of the CISE REU program.

REUs provide undergraduate students at U.S. higher education institutions to work with a faculty on a research project. They can take the form of REU Sites or REU Supplements. REU Sites are based on independent proposals to initiate and conduct projects that engage a number of students in research, and REU Supplements are included as a component of proposals for new or renewal NSF grants or cooperative agreements or may be requested for ongoing NSF-funded research projects.

By offering this opportunity to undergraduate students the REU program seeks to expand student participation in all kinds of research—both disciplinary and interdisciplinary—encompassing efforts by individual investigators, groups, centers, national facilities, and others. It draws on the integration of research and education to attract a diverse pool of talented students into careers in science and engineering, including teaching and education research related to science and engineering, and to help ensure that these students receive the best education possible.

The data collection intends to assess the impact of REU participation on career pathways and will be done through an online survey. The researchers will collect data from past participants including the students and the mentors with a separate survey customized for each group. The specific evaluation objectives are:

1. Identify the career trajectory of the REU participants since their participation in the REU program including degrees they received, institutions they attended, and their current status ( e.g., employed, graduate students).

2. Document the structure of the REU experience that the respondents participated in. These may include the type of REU ( e.g., Site, Supplement), location of REU, and timing of REU.

3. Describe the REU mentors' perceptions of the REU program on the student participants and the mentors' career development.

4. Examine the skills the participants gained and experiences they had during their REU participation. These may include technical skills, information on graduate school application process, and research training.

5. Analyze the relationships between REU participation and career pathways specifically focusing on whether these experiences are associated with the participants' interest in and ultimate selection of research careers in computing.

Ultimately, the findings from the analysis of this data collection will be used to improve the impact of CISE REU Program in order to better reach its goals of providing meaningful research opportunities to undergraduate students and, in doing so, attracting a broad range of students to computing/STEM careers.

Use of information: The information collected through this survey will be used to evaluate the NSF CISE REU Program.

Expected Respondents: The survey will be sent to students and mentors who participated in the NSF CISE REU Program through an REU Site or a Supplement. Further, in order to obtain data from an appropriate comparison group, the researchers will also include participants of other REUs and similar activities. The CISE REU Program participant list will be obtained from NSF and comparison group participants will be culled from a list of individuals previously surveyed by the researchers. The estimated number of individuals who will be receiving this survey is 25,000. Based on an approximate response rate of 30%, there will be an estimated 7,500 respondents when the data collection is completed.

Average time per respondent: The online survey is designed to be completed in 20 minutes or less.

Frequency: Each respondent will be asked to complete this survey once during late summer/early fall 2021.

Estimated burden on public: Based on 7,500 estimated responses and 20 minutes per respondent, the estimate for this data collection is 2,500 burden hours.

Comments: Comments are invited 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) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; 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.

The NRC is considering renewal of Facility Operating License No. R-125, which authorizes the licensee to operate the UMLRR, located on the campus of UML in Lowell, Middlesex County, Massachusetts, at a maximum steady-state thermal power of 1.0 MW. The renewed license would authorize continued operation of UMLRR for an additional 20 years from the date of issuance of the renewed license. UML submitted its renewal application by letter dated October 20, 2015. UML subsequently supplemented its renewal application as described under “Identification of the Proposed Action” in Section II of this notice. Therefore, as required by section 51.21 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), “Criteria for and identification of licensing and regulatory actions requiring environmental assessments,” the NRC prepared this EA. Based on the results of the EA, the NRC did not identify any significant impacts from the proposed action ( i.e., license renewal) and is, therefore, issuing a FONSI in accordance with 10 CFR 51.32, “Finding of no significant impact.”

The UMLRR is a heterogeneous open pool non-power reactor that has been in operation since January 1975 for teaching and research purposes. The reactor is licensed to operate at a thermal power of 1.0 MW, and is located on the North Campus of UML, which includes classrooms, offices, and other facilities in an area just north of the Middlesex River.

The UMLRR is housed in a steel-reinforced concrete building. The reactor itself is situated in an open pool, which serves as part of the primary coolant loop as well as moderator, coolant, and shielding. The reactor will be fueled with uranium-silicide and uranium-aluminide low-enriched uranium fuel elements. Waste heat is dissipated via forced-convection cooling at full power, although the reactor can also be cooled via natural convection at lower power levels. A double loop coolant system transfers waste heat from the reactor to the atmosphere via the primary coolant system, heat exchanger, a secondary cooling system, and a cooling tower. Makeup water is provided through municipal water supply (city of Lowell). An Area Radiation Monitoring System continuously monitors gamma and beta radiation levels at locations in the UMLRR facility. A Stack Radiation Monitoring System continuously monitors air exiting the facility through the ventilation system exhaust stack for airborne radioactivity (gaseous and particulate). Airborne discharges are limited by the UMLRR's technical specifications to ensure that exposure to the general public will not exceed the limits of 10 CFR part 20, “Standards for Protection against Radiation.”

A detailed description of the reactor can be found in the UMLRR safety analysis report (SAR) submitted by the UML with its renewal application.

The proposed action would renew Facility Operating License No. R-125 for a period of 20 years from the date of issuance of the renewed license. The proposed action is in accordance with UML's application dated October 20, 2015, as supplemented by letters dated March 16, 2016, November 30, 2016, March 31, 2017, July 11, 2017, August 7, 2017, September 13, 2017, January 6, 2018, February 1, 2018, March 5, 2019, April 10, 2019, October 18, 2019, October 24, 2019, December 19, 2019, December 20, 2019, February 24, 2020, September 30, 2020, January 30, 2021, February 16, 2021, April 5, 2021, and April 20, 2021 (collectively referred to as “the renewal application”). In accordance with 10 CFR 2.109, “Effect of timely renewal application,” the existing license remains in effect until the NRC takes final action on the renewal application. As described in the renewal application, UML has also requested NRC review and approval of certain facility changes, and associated changes to the license, in conjunction with the renewal of the license. These include the use of uranium-aluminide fuel elements in addition to the similar uranium-silicide elements currently in use, instrumentation and control upgrades, and re-designation of the reactor containment building as a confinement building.

The proposed action is needed to allow the continued operation of the UMLRR, which is used for teaching and research to support the mission of UML, for a period of 20 years from the date of issuance of the renewed license.

UML has requested approval of certain facility and license changes in conjunction with license renewal, as previously discussed. However, the proposed action will not require any major physical changes to the facility, or any changes that would significantly affect the operation of the facility, and the operational impacts would be similar to those that have occurred during the current license term. As discussed further, the proposed action will not have a significant environmental impact.

Gaseous radioactive effluents resulting from the routine operation of the UMLRR are Argon-41 (Ar-41) and Nitrogen-16 (N-16). These nuclides are released to the environment from the reactor building via an exhaust stack on the roof that combines the ventilation exhausts from both the reactor building interior and all attached systems. The UMLRR stack discharge length is 100 feet (30.5 meters) and has an airflow rate of 15,000 cubic feet (7.1 cubic meters) per minute. Because the half-life of N-16 is approximately 7 seconds, the release from the reactor stack is insignificant because most of the N-16 produced in the reactor coolant would decay before reaching the stack. Ar-41 is by far the most significant radionuclide released as a gaseous effluent during normal reactor operations. The maximum release of Ar-41 would occur from continuous operation at full power. UML measured the Ar-41 concentration to be 2.28 × 10 − 6 microcuries per milliliter exiting the exhaust stack under full power operations. The annual release of Ar-41 under these conditions would be 495 curies (Ci) per year. From this information, UML calculated the maximum annual dose to a member of the public using the ARCON96 computer code to be 14.5 millirem (mrem). This meets the 100 mrem per year (mrem/yr) dose equivalent to the maximally exposed individual in 10 CFR 20.1301, “Dose limits for individual members of the public.” UML's annual reports for the 5 years of operation from 2015 through 2019 show that the maximum actual recorded release of Ar-41 was 6.27 Ci in 2015, which the report stated would result in a conservative estimated dose of 0.2 mrem/yr to a member of the public, which is well below the 100 mrem/yr limit specified in 10 CFR 20.1301. This radiation dose of 0.2 mrem/yr also demonstrates compliance with the as low as is reasonably achievable (ALARA) air emissions dose constraint of 10 mrem specified in 10 CFR 20.1101, “Radiation protection programs,” paragraph (d).

Liquid radioactive wastes produced as part of the normal operation of the UMLRR are stored in the liquid radioactive waste storage room. From there they are released to the environment via the city of Lowell sanitary sewer system in accordance with 10 CFR 20.2003, “Disposal by release into sanitary sewerage.” The water is treated at the Lowell wastewater treatment facility, after which it is discharged to the Merrimack River. The annual reports for the 5 years of operation from 2015 through 2019 show that UML properly disposed of liquid radioactive waste by release into the sanitary sewer system. Based on information presented in the annual reports, radionuclide releases were within the allowable limits specified in 10 CFR part 20, Appendix B, “Annual Limits on Intake (ALIs) and Derived Air Concentrations (DACs) of Radionuclides for Occupational Exposure; Effluent Concentrations; Concentrations for Release to Sewerage,” for liquid effluents.

Low-level solid radioactive waste generated from reactor operations at the UMLRR are primarily demineralizer resins, paper, disposable clothing, gloves, and other miscellaneous contaminated items. These wastes are held to allow for decay and then released for disposal as regular solid wastes if they do not exceed background activity. Otherwise, the wastes are sent to a low-level radioactive waste broker for proper disposal of the wastes containing long-lived radionuclides. The last low-level radioactive waste shipment offsite discussed in the UML annual reports was in May 2017; the shipment consisted of 106 cubic feet (3 cubic meters) of contaminated materials from the reactor as well as other UML campus labs. Once transferred, the low-level waste broker ships and disposes of the waste in accordance with all applicable regulations for radioactive materials. To comply with the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, UML has entered into a contract with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) that provides that DOE retains title to the fuel utilized at UMLRR and that DOE is obligated to take the fuel from the site for final disposition.

As described in Chapter 11 of the UMLRR SAR, and verified through NRC staff review of the UML annual reports for the 5 years of operation from 2015 through 2019, personnel exposures are well within the limits set by 10 CFR 20.1201, “Occupational dose limits for adults,” and are ALARA in accordance with 10 CFR 20.1101(b). UML tracks exposures of personnel monitored with dosimeters, and the annual reports for the 5 years of operation from 2015 through 2019 show that the personnel doses were usually less than 10 percent of the occupational limit of 50 milliSieverts (5,000 mrem) per year. Area thermo-luminescent dosimeter monitors mounted in the control room and the reactor bay provide an additional monthly measurement of total radiation exposures at those locations. No changes in reactor operation that would lead to an increase in occupational dose are expected or proposed as a result of the proposed action.

The radiation monitoring systems associated with reactor operations at UMLRR are provided and maintained as a means of ensuring compliance with radiation limits established under 10 CFR part 20. The UMLRR radiation monitoring systems consist of area monitors, continuous air monitors, portable radiation survey instruments, personnel monitors, and stack particulate and gas monitors. The stack particulate and gas monitoring systems measure the beta-gamma activity emitted by radioactive particulates and the activity of gaseous radioactive nuclides, respectively, that are exhausted through the UMLRR exhaust stack. Perimeter monitoring at UMLRR consists of dosimeters that detect X-ray and gamma radiation.

UML conducts an environmental monitoring program to record and track the radiological impact of UMLRR operation on the surrounding unrestricted area. The environment outside the reactor building is monitored by passive optically stimulated luminescence dosimeters, which are changed out quarterly. These dosimeters are located at strategic locations in and around the Pinanski building, which is attached to the reactor building. The UML Radiation Safety Office analyzes the results to ensure that the reported doses are below 10 CFR part 20 limits, and to monitor for trends that would indicate unusual or elevated exposures. UML states that it has determined that the numbers and placement of environmental dosimeters is sufficient based upon historical data accumulated and analyzed from other dosimetry locations that were part of a previous comprehensive background study of areas around the UML campus. The renewal application provided total annual environmental monitoring dose results from 2009 through 2013 for dosimeters located in the first and third floor airlocks, and 2 locations within the Pinanski building. For each year and location, the measured doses were below 10 mrem and well below the limits to the public as required by 10 CFR part 20. Year-to-year trends in exposures are consistent between monitoring locations. Also, no correlation exists between total annual reactor operation and annual exposures measured at the monitoring locations.

Based on its review of monitoring data in the renewal application, the NRC staff concludes that operation of the UMLRR does not have any significant radiological impact on the surrounding environment. No changes in reactor operation that would affect normal off-site radiation levels are expected or proposed as a result of the proposed action. Therefore, the proposed action would not have a significant radiological impact.

Accident scenarios are discussed in Chapter 13 of the UMLRR SAR. The accidents analyzed in Chapter 13 range from anticipated events to a postulated fission product release with radiological consequences that exceed those of any accident considered to be credible. This limiting accident is referred to as the maximum hypothetical accident (MHA). UML considers the uncontrolled release of the volatile gaseous fission products to be the MHA for UMLRR. This accident would involve the removal of the cladding from one side of one fuel plate while the fuel is in the reactor pool. From there, the release would continue to the reactor confinement building and into the environment. UML uses this scenario to calculate the maximum concentration of fission products that might be present in the reactor room air following the MHA. From its calculations, UML concluded that individual worker exposures from the MHA would not exceed 10 CFR part 20 dose limits and that all effluent releases to the environment resulting from the MHA would also meet 10 CFR part 20 dose limits.

Separate from this EA, the NRC staff is reviewing UML's MHA analyses of the potential radiological consequences that may result from the proposed license renewal. The results of the NRC staff's safety review will be documented in a safety evaluation report that will be made publicly available. If the NRC concludes that the radiological consequences of the MHA are within 10 CFR part 20 dose limits, then the MHA and the proposed action would not have a significant impact with respect to the radiological consequences of the MHA.

Because, in the renewal application, UML has not proposed any physical changes to the reactor facility design, or changes to facility operating conditions, that would significantly affect facility operation, there would be no changes in the types or quantities of routine effluents that may be released off site. UML has systems in place for controlling the release of radiological effluents and implements a radiation protection program to monitor personnel exposures and releases of radioactive effluents. Accordingly, there would be no increase in routine occupational or public radiation exposure as a result of the proposed action. As previously discussed, a separate safety evaluation is being conducted by the NRC staff to determine the probability and consequences of accidents that could result from the proposed action. If the safety evaluation finds that the probability and consequences of accidents are within NRC regulatory requirements, then the proposed action would have no significant environmental impact with respect to accidents.

License renewal would not significantly change reactor operations. As previously discussed, information in the renewal application and data reported to the NRC by UML for the last 5 years of reactor operations were evaluated to determine the radiological impact of reactor operations. The NRC staff found that releases of radioactive material and personnel exposures were all well within applicable regulatory limits. Based on this evaluation, the proposed action would have no significant radiological impacts.

The proposed action does not involve any significant change in the operation of the reactor, change in the emissions or heat load dissipated to the environment, or involve construction or other land disturbance activities. The proposed action would not result in any land use changes or increases in noise or air emissions and would not have a significant impact on air quality, noise, or visual resources. Water is supplied through the city water utility and UML proposes no increase in water use or effluent discharge. Thus, the proposed action would not incrementally affect surface water or groundwater resources. There is no potential for the proposed action to affect aquatic or terrestrial resources, or any other environmental resource conditions. Therefore, the proposed action would have no significant non-radiological impacts.

In addition to the National Environmental Policy Act, which requires Federal agencies to consider the environmental impacts of proposed actions, the NRC has responsibilities that are derived from other environmental laws and policy directives, which include the Endangered Species Act (ESA), Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA), Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA), National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), and Executive Order 12898, “Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations” (59 FR 7629). The following presents a summary of impacts associated with resources protected by these laws and related requirements.

The ESA was enacted to prevent further decline of endangered and threatened species and restore those species and their critical habitat. Section 7 of the ESA requires Federal agencies to consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) or National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) regarding actions that may affect listed species or designated critical habitats.

The NRC staff conducted a search of federally listed species and critical habitats that have the potential to occur in the vicinity of the UMLRR using the FWS's Environmental Conservation Online System. Three federally listed species occur in Middlesex County, Massachusetts: The red knot ( Calidris canutus rufa ), small whorled pogonia ( Isotria medeoloides ), and northern long-eared bat ( Myotis septentrionalis ). However, none of these species are likely to occur near the UMLRR because it is located on the UML campus. The campus does not provide suitable habitat for federally listed species because it has been developed and in use for research and educational purposes for many decades. Additionally, operation of the UMLRR has no direct nexus to the natural environment that would otherwise affect federally listed species. Accordingly, the proposed action would have no effect on federally listed species or critical habitats. Federal agencies are not required to consult with the FWS if they determine that an action will not affect listed species or critical habitats. Thus, the ESA does not require consultation for the proposed UMLRR license renewal, and the NRC considers its obligations under ESA Section 7 to be fulfilled for the proposed action.

The CZMA, in part, encourages States to preserve, protect, develop, and restore coastal resources. Applicants for Federal licenses to conduct an activity that affects any land or water use or natural resource of the coastal zone of a State must provide a certification stating that the proposed activity complies with the State's approved coastal zone management program and that the applicant will conduct activities consistent with that program.

Middlesex County, Massachusetts, does not contain any coastal zones. Because the UMLRR is not located within or near any managed coastal zones, the proposed action would not affect any coastal zones and CZMA consistency certification does not apply. Therefore, UML does not need to provide a certification under the CZMA.

The FWCA requires Federal agencies that license water resource development projects to consult with the FWS (or NMFS, when applicable) and the State wildlife resource agencies regarding the potential impacts of the project on fish and wildlife resources.

The proposed action does not involve any water resource development projects, including any modifications relating to impounding a body of water, damming, diverting a stream or river, deepening a channel, irrigation, or altering a body of water for navigation or drainage. Therefore, no coordination with other agencies pursuant to the FWCA is required for the proposed action.

The NHPA requires Federal agencies to consider the effects of their undertakings on historic properties. As stated in the Act, historic properties are any prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in, or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The NRHP lists several historic properties in Middlesex County within 0.6 miles (1 kilometer) of the UMLRR. Operation of the UMLRR has not likely had any impact on any of these properties. The nearest historic property, which is located about 0.3 miles (0.5 kilometers) from the UMLRR, is the St. Joseph's Convent and School (National Register Listing No. 02000789). The location of this historic property is completely surrounded by development, and the view towards the UMLRR is obstructed by commercial and industrial properties. Based on this information, the proposed action would have no adverse effect on historic properties in the vicinity of the UMLRR. By letter dated November 26, 2018, the NRC staff contacted the Massachusetts State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and discussed the proposed action. On January 2, 2019, the SHPO indicated concurrence with the NRC staff's determination that the proposed action would have no adverse effect on historic properties.

Executive Order 12898 directs Federal agencies to identify and address the disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of their actions on minority and low-income populations to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law.

The environmental justice impact analysis evaluates the potential for disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority and low-income populations that could result from the proposed action. Such effects may include human health, biological, cultural, economic, or social impacts. Minority and low-income populations are subsets of the general public residing around the UMLRR, and all are exposed to the same health and environmental effects generated from activities at the UMLRR.

Minority Populations in the Vicinity of the UMLRR —According to the U.S. Census Bureau's 2010 Census, approximately 31 percent of the total population (approximately 505,000 individuals) residing within a 10-mile (16-kilometer) radius of the UMLRR identified themselves as minorities. The largest minority populations were Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin of any race (approximately 90,000 or 18 percent) followed by Asian (approximately 43,000 or 8.5 percent). According to the 2010 Census, 23.5 percent of the Middlesex County population identified themselves as minorities, with persons of Asian and Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin of any race comprising the largest minority populations (9.3 percent and 6.5 percent, respectively). According to the U.S. Census Bureau's 2019 American Community Survey 1-year Estimates, the minority population of Middlesex County, as a percent of the total population, had increased to about 30 percent.

Low-Income Populations in the Vicinity of the UMLRR —According to the U.S. Census Bureau's 2015-2019 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, approximately 54,000 persons and 10,000 families (approximately 10 and 7 percent, respectively) residing within a 10-mile (16-kilometer) radius of the UMLRR were identified as living below the Federal poverty threshold. The 2019 Federal poverty threshold was $26,172 for a family of four.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau's 2019 American Community Survey Census 1-Year Estimates, the median household income for Massachusetts was $85,843 while approximately 6 percent of families and 9 percent of the State population were found to be living below the Federal poverty threshold. Middlesex County had a higher median household income average ($107,056) and a lower percentage of families (4 percent) and persons (7 percent) living below the poverty level.

Impact Analysis —Potential impacts to minority and low-income populations would mostly consist of radiological effects; however, radiation doses from continued operations associated with the license renewal are expected to continue at current levels and would be well below regulatory limits.

Based on this information and the analysis of human health and environmental impacts presented in this EA, the proposed license renewal action would not have disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority and low-income populations residing near the UMLRR.

As an alternative to license renewal, the NRC considered denying the proposed action ( i.e., the “no-action” alternative). If the NRC denied the renewal application, reactor operations would cease, and decommissioning would be required sooner than if a renewed license were issued. The NRC notes that, even with a renewed license, UMLRR will eventually be decommissioned, at which time the environmental effects of decommissioning would occur. Decommissioning would be conducted in accordance with an NRC-approved decommissioning plan, which would require a separate environmental review under 10 CFR 51.21. Cessation of reactor operations would reduce or eliminate radioactive effluents. However, as previously discussed in this EA, radioactive effluents from reactor operations constitute a small fraction of the applicable regulatory limits. Therefore, the environmental impacts of license renewal and the denial of the renewal application would be similar. In addition, denying the renewal application would eliminate the benefits of teaching, research, and services provided by the UMLRR.

There are no unresolved conflicts concerning alternative uses of available resources under the proposed action. Further, the proposed action does not involve the use of any different resources or significant quantities of resources beyond those previously considered in the renewal of Facility Operating License No. R-125 for the UMLRR in November 1985, which previously renewed the UMLRR license for a period of 30 years.

As discussed previously, the NRC staff consulted with the Massachusetts SHPO regarding the proposed action. Additionally, in accordance with NRC policy, the NRC staff consulted with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Liaison Officer on March 17 and March 26, 2021, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action, and explained the environmental reviews and forwarded a draft of this EA. On April 20, 2021, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts official indicated, by electronic mail, that they had no comments regarding the proposed action.