Economic Research Service
Foreign-Trade Zones Board
Industry and Security Bureau
International Trade Administration
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
Children and Families Administration
Food and Drug Administration
Health Resources and Services Administration
National Institutes of Health
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Transportation Security Administration
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Ocean Energy Management Bureau
Labor Statistics Bureau
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Federal Aviation Administration
Federal Transit Administration
Maritime Administration
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
Internal Revenue Service
Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, and notice of recently enacted public laws.
To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents electronic mailing list, go to https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/USGPOOFR/subscriber/new, enter your e-mail address, then follow the instructions to join, leave, or manage your subscription.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Final rule; request for comments.
The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Austro Engine GmbH E4 and E4P model diesel piston engines. This AD was prompted by reports of failure of the high-pressure pump (HPP) driving gear and a subsequent determination that a batch of HPP driving gears may have been damaged during assembly. This AD requires, for engines with an affected cylinder head, inspection of the HPP driving gear and, depending on the results of the inspection, replacement of the HPP driving gear with a part eligible for installation. This AD also requires, for engines with an affected HPP driving gear, replacement of the HPP driving gear either before further flight or within a certain number of flight hours after the effective date of this AD. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
This AD is effective November 16, 2021.
The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this AD as of November 16, 2021.
The FAA must receive comments on this AD by December 16, 2021.
You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
•
For service information identified in this final rule, contact Austro Engine GmbH, Rudolf-Diesel-Strasse 11, 2700 Weiner Neustadt, Austria; phone: +43 2622 23000; website:
You may examine the AD docket at
Wego Wang, Aviation Safety Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: (781) 238-7134; fax: (781) 238-7199; email:
The European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Community, issued EASA AD 2021-0203R1, dated September 24, 2021 (referred to after this as “the MCAI”), for Austro Engine GmbH E4 and E4P model diesel piston engines, to address the unsafe condition on these products. The MCAI states:
Occurrences were reported of HPP driving gear failure. Subsequent investigation determined that a certain batch of HPP driving gears was produced with a worn out assembly tool P/N AE300T012-1. Those HPP driving gears may have been damaged during assembly. Concurrently, it was determined that, for engines equipped with a certain cylinder head, a stack up of tolerances exists between the cylinder head, cylinder head cover, camshaft gear and HPP gear. Both scenarios could result in premature HPP gear failure.
This condition, if not corrected, could lead to engine in-flight shut-down with consequent forced landing, possibly resulting in damage to the aeroplane and injury to occupants. To address this potential unsafe condition, Austro Engine published the inspection SB, as defined in this [EASA] AD, to provide instructions for HPP gear inspection on engines equipped with an affected cylinder head, as defined in this [EASA] AD. Austro Engine also published the replacement SB, as defined in this [EASA] AD, to provide instructions for replacement of affected HPP gears, as defined in this [EASA] AD. For the reason described above, EASA issued Emergency AD 2021-0203-E to require inspection and/or replacement of HPP gears.
You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket at
This product has been approved by EASA and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with the European Community, EASA has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI. The FAA is issuing this AD because the agency evaluated all the relevant information provided by EASA and has determined that the unsafe condition described previously is likely to exist or develop in other products of the same type design.
The FAA reviewed Austro Engine Mandatory Service Bulletin No. MSB-E4-035/1, Revision No. 1, dated September 30, 2021 (MSB-E4-035/1); and Austro Engine Mandatory Service Bulletin No. MSB-E4-034/3, Revision No. 3, dated September 30, 2021 (MSB-E4-034/3).
Austro Engine MSB-E4-035/1 specifies procedures for inspecting HPP driving gears installed on E4 and E4P
Austro Engine MSB-E4-034/3 identifies the applicable part number and serial numbers of affected HPP driving gears installed on Austro Engine GmbH E4 and E4P model diesel piston engines.
This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in
This AD requires, for engines with an affected cylinder head, inspection of the HPP driving gear and, depending on the results of the inspection, replacement of the HPP driving gear with a part eligible for installation. This AD also requires, for engines with an affected HPP driving gear, replacement of the HPP driving gear within a certain number of flight hours, depending on the airplane on which the affected engine is installed.
The MCAI requires replacement of the HPP driving gear using the Accomplishment/Instructions, paragraph 2.1., of Austro Engine MSB-E4-034/3 while this AD does not require use of MSB-E4-034/3 to replace the HPP driving gear.
Section 553(b)(3)(B) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 551
An unsafe condition exists that requires the immediate adoption of this AD without providing an opportunity for public comments prior to adoption. The FAA has found that the risk to the flying public justifies foregoing notice and comment prior to adoption of this rule. The FAA received a report of occurrences of failure of the HPP driving gear. The manufacturer subsequently determined that a certain batch of HPP driving gears was produced with a worn out assembly tool, and may have been damaged during assembly. The manufacturer also determined that, for engines equipped with a certain cylinder head, a stack up of tolerances exists between the cylinder head, cylinder head cover, camshaft gear and high pressure pump driving gear. Both conditions could result in failure of the HPP driving gear. Austro Engine subsequently issued service information providing instructions for inspection and replacement of certain HPP driving gears installed on E4 and E4P model diesel piston engines.
Failure of the HPP driving gear can result in in-flight engine shut-down, forced landing, and damage to the airplane. The FAA considers failure of the HPP driving gear to be an urgent safety issue that requires immediate action to avoid damage to the airplane. For engines with an affected cylinder head, if the HPP driving gear does not pass the inspection required by this AD, this AD requires replacement of the HPP driving gear before further flight. In addition, for engines with an affected HPP driving gear and with a certain number of hours accumulated on the HPP driving gear, this AD also requires replacement of the HPP driving gear before further flight. Accordingly, notice and opportunity for prior public comment are impracticable and contrary to the public interest pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B).
In addition, the FAA finds that good cause exists pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d) for making this amendment effective in less than 30 days, for the same reasons the FAA found good cause to forgo notice and comment.
The FAA invites you to send any written data, views, or arguments about this final rule. Send your comments to an address listed under
Except for Confidential Business Information (CBI) as described in the following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR 11.35, the FAA will post all comments received, without change, to
CBI is commercial or financial information that is both customarily and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public disclosure. If your comments responsive to this AD contain commercial or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to this AD, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted comments as CBI. Please mark each page of your submission containing CBI as “PROPIN.” The FAA will treat such marked submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and they will not be placed in the public docket of this AD. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Wego Wang, Aviation Safety Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803. Any commentary that the FAA receives which is not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for this rulemaking.
The requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) do not apply when an agency finds good cause pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553 to adopt a rule without prior notice and comment. Because FAA has determined that it has good cause to adopt this rule without prior notice and comment, RFA analysis is not required.
The FAA estimates that this AD affects 418 engines installed on airplanes of U.S. registry.
The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:
The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary replacements that would be required based on the results of the inspection. The agency has no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need this replacement:
The FAA has included all known costs in its cost estimate. According to the manufacturer, however, some of the costs of this AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected operators.
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements. Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.
This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866, and
(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective November 16, 2021.
None.
This AD applies to Austro Engine GmbH E4 and E4P model diesel piston engines equipped with either:
(1) A cylinder head having part number (P/N) E4A-12-500-000 (affected cylinder head), or
(2) A high-pressure pump (HPP) driving gear, having P/N E4A-30-000-201, with a serial number (S/N) listed in Chapter 1.4, Table 1 of Austro Engine Mandatory Service Bulletin No. MSB-E4-034/3, Revision No. 3, dated September 30, 2021 (MSB-E4-034/3) (affected HPP driving gear).
Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC) Code 8520, Reciprocating Engine Power Section.
This AD was prompted by reports of failure of the HPP driving gear and a subsequent investigation by the manufacturer, which determined that a certain batch of HPP driving gears may have been damaged during assembly. The investigation also determined that affected engines equipped with an affected cylinder head were also subject to premature failure of the HPP driving gear. The FAA is issuing this AD to prevent the failure of the HPP driving gear. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in in-flight engine shut-down, forced landing, and damage to the airplane.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
(1) For engines with an affected cylinder head, before further flight after the effective date of this AD, perform all actions in the Accomplishment/Instructions, paragraph 2.1., of Austro Engine Mandatory Service Bulletin No. MSB-E4-035/1, Revision No. 1, dated September 30, 2021 (MSB-E4-035/1).
(2) If, during the performance of the actions required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD, the HPP driving gear does not pass the inspection, as specified in paragraph 2.1. of Austro Engine MSB-E4-035/1, before further flight, replace the HPP driving gear with a part eligible for installation.
(3) For engines equipped with an affected HPP driving gear, within the compliance time specified in Table 1 to paragraph (g)(3) of this AD, as applicable, replace each affected HPP driving gear with a part eligible for installation.
(1) For the purpose of this AD, a part eligible for installation is an HPP driving gear that is not an affected HPP driving gear.
(2) For the purpose of this AD, engines in Engine Group 1 are Model E4 engines in configuration “-A” installed on single engine airplanes.
(3) For the purpose of this AD, engines in Engine Group 2 are Model E4 engines in configuration “-B” or “-C” and Model E4P engines installed on twin-engine airplanes.
A special flight permit may be issued in accordance with 14 CFR 21.197 and 21.199 to permit a single ferry flight to a location where the actions required by this AD can be accomplished on a twin-engine airplane that has one or two Model E4 engines in configuration “-B” or “-C”, or Model E4P engines, installed.
The requirements to fill out and send the execution report to Austro Engine, as well as the requirement to contact Austro Engine and provide pictures of the driving gear, as set forth in the Accomplishment/Instructions, paragraph 2.1., of MSB-E4-035/1, are not required by this AD.
(1) The Manager, ECO Branch, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending information directly to the manager of the ECO Branch, send it to the attention of the person identified in paragraph (l)(1) of this AD. You may email your request to:
(2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office.
(1) For more information about this AD, contact Wego Wang, Aviation Safety Engineer, ECO Branch, FAA, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: (781) 238-7134; fax: (781) 238-7199; email:
(2) Refer to European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) AD 2021-0203R1, dated September 24, 2021, for more information. You may examine the EASA AD in the AD docket at
(1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
(2) You must use this service information as applicable to do the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
(i) Austro Engine Mandatory Service Bulletin (MSB) No. MSB-E4-035/1, Revision No. 1, dated September 30, 2021.
(ii) Austro Engine MSB No. MSB-E4-034/3, Revision No. 3, dated September 30, 2021.
(3) For Austro Engine service information identified in this AD, you may contact Austro Engine GmbH, Rudolf-Diesel-Strasse 11, 2700 Weiner Neustadt, Austria; phone: +43 2622 23000; website:
(4) You may view this service information at the FAA, Airworthiness Products Section, Operational Safety Branch, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, MA 01803. For information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call (781) 238-7759.
(5) You may view this service information that is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, email:
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT).
Final rule.
The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited Model DHC-8-400, -401, and -402 airplanes. This AD was prompted by a report of cracking found on a main landing gear (MLG) drag strut assembly. This AD requires a records review to determine if an affected MLG drag strut assembly is installed, repetitive detailed inspections for cracking of affected strut assemblies, a one-time magnetic particle inspection for cracking, and on-condition actions if necessary. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
This AD is effective December 6, 2021.
You may examine the AD docket on the internet at
Aziz Ahmed, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Propulsion Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516-228-7329; fax 516-794-5531; email
Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is the aviation authority for Canada, has issued TCCA AD CF-2020-43, dated October 21, 2020 (referred to after this as the Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information, or “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for certain De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited Model DHC-8-400, -401, and -402 airplanes. You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at
The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 by adding an AD that would apply to certain De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited Model DHC-8-400, -401, and -402 airplanes. The NPRM published in the
The FAA gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this final rule. The FAA has considered the comment received. The Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA) indicated its support for the NPRM.
The FAA reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment received, and determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting this final rule as proposed, except for minor editorial changes. The FAA has determined that these minor changes:
• Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the NPRM for addressing the unsafe condition; and
• Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was already proposed in the NPRM.
The FAA estimates that this AD will affect 34 airplanes of U.S. registry. The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD:
The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary on-condition actions that would be required based on the results of any required actions. The FAA has no way of determining the number of aircraft that might need these on-condition actions:
The FAA has included all known costs in its cost estimate. According to the manufacturer, however, some or all of the costs of this AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected operators.
Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements. Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.
This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
(1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
(3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective December 6, 2021.
None.
This AD applies to De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited Model DHC-8-400, -401, and -402 airplanes, certificated in any category, serial numbers 4001, 4003, and subsequent.
Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 32, Landing Gear.
This AD was prompted by a report of cracking found on a main landing gear (MLG) drag strut assembly. The FAA is issuing this AD to address cracking of the MLG drag strut assembly and possible failure under compression loads during landing or ground operations, which could result in asymmetric MLG configuration and potential runway excursion.
Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified, unless already done.
Within 30 days after the effective date of this AD: Review the applicable airplane maintenance records to determine if any affected MLG drag strut assembly identified in figure 1 to the introductory text of paragraph (g) of this AD is installed. If any affected MLG drag strut assembly is installed, do the actions specified in paragraphs (g)(1) and (2) of this AD.
(1) Within 80 flight hours after accomplishing the records review required by paragraph (g) of this AD, do a detailed inspection for cracking of the affected MLG drag strut assembly, and do all applicable on-condition actions before further flight, in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO Branch, FAA. Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 80 flight hours until the magnetic particle inspection required by paragraph (g)(2) of this AD is done.
(2) Within 1,600 flight hours or 12 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, perform a magnetic particle inspection for cracks of the entire tubular section of the affected MLG drag strut assembly, and do all on-condition actions before further flight, in accordance with a method approved by the Manager, New York ACO Branch, FAA. Performing the magnetic particle inspection required by this paragraph terminates the repetitive detailed inspections required by paragraph (g)(1) of this AD.
As of the effective date of this AD, no person may install an affected MLG drag strut assembly identified in figure 1 to the introductory text of paragraph (g) of this AD on any airplane unless the inspections and applicable on-conditions specified in paragraphs (g)(1) and (2) of this AD are done before further flight.
The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1)
(2)
(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing Airworthiness Information (MCAI) TCCA AD CF-2020-43, dated October 21, 2020, for related information. This MCAI may be found in the AD docket on the internet at
(2) For more information about this AD, contact Aziz Ahmed, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe and Propulsion Section, FAA, New York ACO Branch, 1600 Stewart Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; telephone 516-228-7329; fax 516-794-5531; email
(3) For information about TCCA AD CF-2020-43, dated October 21, 2020, contact TCCA, Transport Canada National Aircraft Certification, 159 Cleopatra Drive, Nepean, Ontario K1A 0N5, Canada; telephone 888-663-3639; email
None.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Final rule; correction.
This action corrects the final rule published in the
Effective date 0901 UTC, January 27, 2022. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under Title 1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order JO 7400.11 and publication of conforming amendments.
Jeffrey Claypool, Federal Aviation Administration, Operations Support Group, Central Service Center, 10101 Hillwood Parkway, Fort Worth, TX, 76177; telephone (817) 222-5711.
The FAA published a final rule in the
Class D and Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 5000, 6002, and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order JO 7400.11F dated August 10, 2021, and effective September 15, 2021, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class D and Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be subsequently published in FAA Order JO 7400.11.
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Amendment Class D and Class E Airspace; Ardmore, OK, published in the
Department of State.
Final rule.
The Department of State is amending the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) to add and update entries for Ethiopia and Eritrea, respectively. These changes codify that it is the policy of the United States to deny licenses and other approvals for exports of defense articles and defense services to certain end-users in those countries as described herein.
The rule is effective on November 1, 2021.
Ms. Engda Wubneh, Foreign Affairs Officer, Office of Defense Trade Controls Policy, U.S. Department of State, telephone (202) 663-1809; email
The United States has deepening concerns about the ongoing crisis in northern Ethiopia as well as other threats to the sovereignty, national unity, and territorial integrity of Ethiopia. People in northern Ethiopia continue to suffer human rights violations, abuses, and atrocities, and urgently needed humanitarian relief is being blocked by the Ethiopian and Eritrean militaries as well as other armed actors. On May 23, 2021, the Secretary of State announced restrictions with respect to Ethiopia and Eritrea, including certain restrictions related to security assistance. The Department is updating ITAR § 126.1, consistent with the Secretary's announcement, by adding Ethiopia in paragraph (n) and updating the existing entry for Eritrea in paragraph (h). The policy of denial applies to licenses or other approvals for exports of defense articles or defense services to or for the armed forces, police, intelligence, or other internal security forces of either Ethiopia or Eritrea. Further, the Department is amending ITAR § 126.1(d)(2) to clarify that the prohibitions and exceptions for each country are specified in each respective paragraph, and not in ITAR § 126.1(d)(2). Lastly, the Department is making an administrative change to paragraph (d)(1).
The Department of State is of the opinion that controlling the import and export of defense articles and services is a foreign affairs function of the United States Government and that rules implementing this function are exempt from sections 553 (rulemaking) and 554 (adjudications) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1) and 5 U.S.C. 554(a)(4). Since the Department is of the opinion that this rule is exempt from 5 U.S.C. 553, it is the view of the Department that the provisions of Section 553(d) do not apply to this rulemaking.
Since this rule is exempt from the notice-and-comment provisions of 5 U.S.C. 553(b), the rule does not require analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
This rulemaking does not involve a mandate that will result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any year and it will not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Therefore, no actions are deemed necessary under the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995.
The Department does not believe this rulemaking is a major rule within the definition of 5 U.S.C. 804.
This rulemaking will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in accordance with Executive Order 13132,
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributed impacts, and equity). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. Because the scope of this rule implements a governmental policy limiting defense trade with a country, and does not impose additional regulatory requirements or obligations, the Department believes costs associated with this rule will be minimal. This rule has been designated as a nonsignificant regulatory action by the Office and Information and Regulatory Affairs under Executive Order 12866.
The Department of State has reviewed this rulemaking in light of Executive Order 12988 to eliminate ambiguity, minimize litigation, establish clear legal standards, and reduce burden.
The Department of State has determined that this rulemaking will not have tribal implications, will not impose substantial direct compliance costs on Indian tribal governments, and will not preempt tribal law. Accordingly, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rulemaking.
This rulemaking does not impose or revise any information collections subject to 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35.
Arms and munitions, Exports.
For the reasons set forth above, title 22, chapter I, subchapter M, part 126 is amended as follows:
22 U.S.C. 2752, 2778, 2780, 2791, and 2797; 22 U.S.C. 2651a; 22 U.S.C. 287c; Sec. 1225, Pub. L. 108-375; Sec. 7089, Pub. L. 111-117; Pub. L. 111-266; Sections 7045 and 7046, Pub. L. 112-74; E.O. 13637, 78 FR 16129.
(d) * * *
(1) * * *
(2) For defense articles and defense services, a policy of denial applies as specified in the associated paragraphs in the following table:
(h)
(n)
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, Department of Defense (DoD).
Final rule.
As part of the continuing response to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), DoD has revised the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) to aid civilian employers in more quickly identifying key employees so the Department can better understand the capacity and capability available to support the response to the current pandemic and to avoid military-civilian manpower conflicts in future Declarations of National Emergency or in military mobilizations.
This final rule is effective on December 1, 2021.
CAPT Richard Howell, (703) 697-3837.
DoD's internal policy, DoD Directive 1200.07, “Screening the Ready Reserve” (available at
Title 10 U.S.C. 12302 authorizes the President to recall up to 1 million reservists for up to 2 years in times of national emergency. Title 10 U.S.C. 10149, “Ready Reserve: continuous screening” requires the Secretary to provide a system of continuous screening of units and members of the Ready Reserve to ensure:
(1) No significant attrition of those members or units during a mobilization.
(2) a proper balance of military skills.
(3) those with military skills for which there is an overriding requirement, members having critical civilian skills are not retained in numbers beyond the need for those skills.
(4) recognition will be given to participation in combat and national security and military requirements.
(5) members whose mobilization in an emergency would result in an extreme personal or community hardship are not retained in the Ready Reserve.
The Ready Reserve is the category of reservists most often called to active duty. It consists of three subcategories: Selected Reserve, Individual Ready Reserve (IRR), and Inactive National Guard.
The Selected Reserve are the first to be activated. Most reservists are in this category.
The IRR is made up mainly of those who have had training and served in an Active Component.
The Inactive National Guard are those who leave active drilling status in the Army National Guard before completing their enlistment and will be put in this category unless they specifically request a transfer to the IRR. Only the Army maintains an Inactive National Guard.
If a reservist is unable to meet the requirements to be recalled, the respective Military Service shall discharge, retire, or transfer the member to the Standby Reserve. The Standby Reserve are reservists who maintain their military affiliation but are not members of the Ready Reserve. This may include reservists who fill key Federal positions as well as members whose civilian employers designate their job as crucial to national security.
Title 10 U.S.C.12302 also states recall consideration will be given to:
(1) The length and nature of previous service, to assure such sharing of exposure to hazards as the national security and military requirements will reasonably allow;
(2) family responsibilities; and
(3) employment necessary to maintain the national health, safety, or interest.
For example, if a health care professional can do society more good as a civilian, that individual may be exempted from recall. If reservists have serious family responsibilities, they may be exempted. The law may also exempt veterans with some disabilities, medical conditions, or certain separation codes from any involuntary recall.
On March 27, 2020, Executive Order 13912,
DoD's revisions support military mobilization without diminishing the civilian national coronavirus response. The rule is meant to enhance civilian employer awareness of the need to provide early identification of critical civilian positions within their organizations and, in coordination with the Military Services, allow the Service member to be considered for service not as a Ready Reserve member who is factored into military mobilization planning.
This rule only discusses employee and employer actions before a mobilization. After a mobilization is ordered, no deferment, delay, or exemption from mobilization will be granted because of civilian employment. The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA), 1994, Public Law 103-353, as amended at 38 U.S.C. 4301-4335, affords reservists and employers various rights and responsibilities regarding reemployment of their civilian position. Employers must ensure key position determinations are not undertaken in a manner that would violate USERRA, its implementing regulations at 20 CFR part 1002, or other Federal statutes and regulations.
Civilian employers, usually through their onboarding programs, identify key employees to ensure the Military Services have an accurate assessment of Ready Reserve members. This assessment of employees who have a Ready Reserve affiliation is meant to preclude conflicts between a member's mobilization requirements and non-Federal civilian employment obligations during times of war or national emergency. Ready Reserve members with critical civilian skills should work with their employer before mobilization. The efforts of civilian employers and their employees pre-mobilization will help identify employees who are required for the ongoing civilian response to the pandemic. While Ready Reserve members are already required to be screened by their respective Military Service per 10 U.S.C. 10149 and to work with their employer to ensure those with critical civilian skills are identified, these updates to the CFR will ensure a more accurate accounting of capability and capacity of the specialties required for COVID-19 response.
This rule updates the naming of current offices within the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), provides current information on service points of contact, and removes previous language pertaining to Federal Government employers to more succinctly clarify employer responsibilities to petition the respective Military Service of Ready Reserve members that may have a conflict with their employment prior to a military mobilization. These changes highlight how a civilian employer, based on their capability and capacity during either normal or extenuating circumstances such as the ongoing COVID-19 response, petitions a Military Service on behalf of a Ready Reserve employee who occupies a key position within a company or occupies a position where military mobilization would create an extreme personal or community hardship. Employers are encouraged to assess the internal capabilities of their own positions and the organic capacity to sustain emergency manpower needs prior to a military mobilization which can produce an accurate listing of what they consider key positions to their organization.
On Monday, December 28, 2020 (85 FR 84237-84243), the DoD published an interim final rule titled “Screening the Ready Reserve” for a 60-day public comment period. No public comments were received and this rule is being finalized with no changes from the published in interim final rule.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distribute impacts, and equity). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. The final rule is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866 and has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.
DoD believes the economic impact to civilian employers is minimal, estimating a cumulative total of $11K across all employers nationwide. Employers are already required to identify employees who are Ready Reserve members. The cost to employers of screening is already imbedded in their HR processes. The estimated costs if an employer submits a petition to a Military Service is calculated below and will vary based on the automation of human resource processes and the number of employees of an organization who are Ready Reserve members with critical skills. Ready Reserve members are already required to be screened by their respective Military Service per 10 U.S.C. 10149 and to work with their employers to address any concerns. The benefit of screening to the employer is to ensure those with critical civilian skills are identified in order to prevent conflicts between the emergency manpower needs of civilian and military activities during a mobilization.
The following describes how the estimated sum total of $11K was derived using existing costs to project costs of a petition. Using data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Census, DoD Total Military Strength report, and the DoD Status of Forces survey, less than 0.3 percent of the U.S. population is in the Reserve, including the National Guard, with 51 percent employed by the public [Federal (36 percent), State (9 percent), or Local (6 percent)]. There were 1,020,156 Military Service members in the Ready Reserve as of March 2020 and over 782,000 of those members are estimated to have civilian employment. Approximately 0.3 percent of the 782,000, or 2,346 members, may be identified as key civilian employees and may require a petition. The 2019 median hourly wage for an HR professional or manager is $34.92 an hour. The cost to screen one employee as part of an onboarding process questionnaire or through an annual recertification process, which is estimated at less than 10 minutes or $5.82, is already imbedded in their HR processes and thus not included here. The cost to prepare a petition on one employee is estimated at 2 hours, or $69.84. Applying a more appropriate and realistic planning factor of 0.3 percent to reflect key positions in civilian organizations reflects a projected annual cost, collectively from all employers, of $11,095.
It should be noted, not every Ready Reserve member in a company would be considered in a “key position” and therefore, a petition would not be needed on every member. The estimated cost presented encompasses all 1,020,156 Ready Reserve members and a 0.3 percent planning factor.
Assumptions in cost calculation include: U.S. population: 329,648,880 (as of May 14, 2020, source:
Data from 2018 DoD Status of Forces Survey reflects the following breakdown of principal civilian employment before most recent activation: Federal Government 36 percent; State government 9 percent; Local government 6 percent; Private/public company 43 percent; Non-profit 3 percent; Self-employed 2 percent; and Family business/farm/unemployed 1 percent. The below table reflects the costs of the 48,882 HR employees who would be preparing petitions on the Ready Reserve members in their organization.
Cost to the DoD. These estimates (0.3 percent of 782,000 Ready Reserve members fill key positions) indicate the Military Services would adjudicate approximately 2,346 members, a number well within the normal processing by all Military Service Reserve centers and therefore would not add additional costs.
Civilian Employer processes and military screening actions ensure civilian employers and the Military Services have the appropriate balance of civilian and military skills required for both parties in case of a mobilization. The challenges faced today in communities as well as in the DoD require dynamic and timely employment of our service members while reducing the conflict of those members to meet both military and or civilian requirements. Ultimately, the response to military mobilization and civilian planning will be greatly enhanced when the essential projected response needs have been equitably calculated for a Ready Reserve member and employee. Military Service annual screening provides a vital Ready Reserve force composed of members who meet Military Service readiness standards of mental, moral, professional, and physical fitness and possess the military qualifications required in the various grades, ratings, and specialties of their Military Service; and are available immediately for active duty during a mobilization or as otherwise required by law. The tasking of a Ready Reserve member who is known to be critical to civilian response in a key position that was not previously adjudicated through the Military Service could create a delay in the civilian response and in turn create potential harm to the local community. The benefit of this rule fosters a partnership in the appropriate balance of civilian and military assessments to meet needed requirements for a response while not decrementing each other's capacity and capability.
The DoD certifies that this final rule is not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601) because it would not, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact creating a substantial cost to a number of small entities. There are a small percentage of defined critical employees in the civilian sector, regardless of the national emergency, that are required to support their civilian employer. As the response to the pandemic evolved, the need for certain specialties in the response evolved. In the case of COVID-19, the immediate need was for medical providers and the situation evolved requiring additional specialties for support. In other non-Federal employment areas, a critical employee may stay consistent, as in the example of a sole nuclear reactor chief within a plant who should not be in the Ready Reserve as he or she would be required to mobilize if called upon and not be able to perform the critical civilian skill. Therefore, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, as amended, does not require us to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis.
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1532) requires agencies to assess anticipated costs and benefits before issuing any rule whose mandates require spending in any 1 year of $167 million in 2019 dollars, updated annually for inflation. It is estimated this final rule will not substantially affect State, local, or tribal governments and private sector costs any more than the previous rule requirements.
It has been determined that 32 CFR part 44 does not impose reporting or recordkeeping requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
Executive Order 13132 establishes certain requirements that an agency must meet when it promulgates an interim final rule (and subsequent final rule) that imposes substantial direct requirement costs on State and local governments, preempts State law, or otherwise has federalism implications. It is estimated this final rule will not have a substantial effect on State and local governments, where 9 percent and 6 percent respectively employ Ready Reserve, including the National Guard, members.
Armed forces reserves.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Final rule.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving multiple state implementation plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. These revisions were submitted by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) to establish and require reasonably available control technology (RACT) for individual major sources of volatile organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen oxides (NO
This final rule is effective on December 1, 2021.
EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID Number EPA-R03-OAR-2020-0598. All documents in the docket are listed on the
Mr. Riley Burger, Permits Branch (3AD10), Air and Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. The telephone number is (215) 814-2217. Mr. Burger can also be reached via electronic mail at
On February 9, 2021, EPA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). 86 FR 8743. In the NPRM, EPA proposed approval of case-by-case RACT determinations or alternative NO
Under certain circumstances, states are required to submit SIP revisions to address RACT requirements for both major sources of NO
On May 16, 2016, PADEP submitted a SIP revision addressing RACT for both the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS in Pennsylvania. PADEP's May 16, 2016 SIP revision intended to address certain outstanding non-CTG VOC RACT, VOC CTG RACT, and major source VOC and NO
On May 9, 2019, EPA conditionally approved the RACT II rule based on the commitments PADEP made in its September 22, 2017 letter.
The SIP revisions in this action only establish 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS RACT requirements. Applicable RACT requirements under the CAA for sources located in Philadelphia for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS were previously satisfied. See 81 FR 69687 (October 7, 2016).
To satisfy a requirement from EPA's May 9, 2019 conditional approval, PADEP submitted to EPA SIP revisions addressing NO
In the case-by-case RACT determinations submitted by PADEP on behalf of AMS, an evaluation was completed to determine if previously SIP-approved, case-by-case RACT emissions limits or operational controls were more stringent than the new RACT II presumptive or case-by-case requirements. If more stringent, the previously approved RACT requirements will continue to apply to the applicable source and are included in the new RACT II permit. If the new case-by-case RACT II requirements are more stringent than the previously approved RACT requirements, then the RACT II requirements will supersede the prior RACT requirements.
In AMS' RACT determinations involving NO
Here, EPA is approving SIP revisions pertaining to case-by-case RACT requirements and alternative NO
The case-by-case RACT determinations submitted by PADEP, on behalf of AMS, consist of an evaluation of all reasonably available controls at the time of evaluation for each affected emissions unit, resulting in an AMS determination of what specific emissions limit or control measures satisfy RACT for that particular unit. The adoption of new, additional, or revised emissions limits or control measures to existing SIP-approved RACT I requirements were specified as requirements in new or revised federally enforceable permits (hereafter RACT II permits) issued by AMS to the source. Similarly, AMS' determinations of alternative NO
PADEP's SIP revisions incorporate AMS' determinations of source-specific RACT II controls for individual emission units at major sources of NO
AMS, in its RACT II determinations, considered the prior source-specific RACT requirements and, where more stringent, retained those prior RACT requirements as part of its new RACT determinations. In the NPRM, EPA proposed to find that all the proposed revisions to previously SIP-approved RACT requirements would result in equivalent or additional reductions of NO
Other specific requirements of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS case-by-case RACT determinations and alternative NO
EPA received comments from three commenters on the February 9, 2021 NPRM. 86 FR 8743. A summary of the comments and EPA's response are discussed in this section. A copy of the comments can be found in the docket for this rule action.
As required by Pennsylvania's RACT II regulations, AMS then conducted, for sources seeking a CbC determination, an analysis examining what air pollution controls were available for those individual sources to determine the lowest emissions limit that a particular source is capable of meeting by the application of control technology that is reasonably available considering technologically and economic feasibility.
Through its source-specific RACT II determinations, AMS has established NO
CAA section 110(l) prohibits EPA from approving a SIP revision if the revision would “interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress . . . or any other applicable requirement of this chapter.” 42 U.S.C. 7410(l). While EPA interprets section 110(l) as applying to all NAAQS that are in effect, including those for which a relevant SIP submission may not have been made, the level of rigor needed for any CAA section 110(l) demonstration will vary depending on the nature and circumstances of the revision. For example, an in-depth section 110(l) analysis is more appropriate where there is a reasonable expectation that an existing SIP standard is being weakened or that there will be a net emissions increase because of approval of the SIP revision under consideration. However, here, the Pennsylvania CbC RACT II SIP revisions are either retaining an existing standard or establishing a more stringent one. For these reasons, EPA did not include a detailed section 110(l) analysis at the proposal stage. Since the commenter raised the issue, EPA is responding in this final action by explaining why its approval is consistent with section 110(l).
In circumstances where an existing SIP standard is being weakened or a net emissions increase is expected, there are two generally recognized paths for satisfying CAA section 110(l). First, a state may demonstrate through an air quality modeling analysis that the revision will not interfere with the attainment of the NAAQS, reasonable further progress, or any other applicable requirement. This is the approach the commenter claims is required for the Pennsylvania CbC RACT II SIP revisions. Second, a state may substitute equivalent or greater emissions reductions to compensate for any change to a plan to ensure actual emissions to the air are not increased and thus preserve status quo air quality. A showing that the substitute measures
Both the
In a more analogous case to the situation presented here, EPA's interpretation of section 110(l) was upheld in
With this rule action, EPA is only approving revisions that add specific NO
The facilities in this rule identified as objectionable in the comment break down into the categories listed below. As explained in the proposed rulemaking document, EPA views each facility as a separable SIP revision, and that should it receive comment on one facility but not others, EPA may take separate, final action on the remaining facilities.
For the CbC NO
Through retention of the existing emissions limits and the approval of the alternative NO
As described above, EPA determined that AMS adequately justified its RACT II CbC NO
This modeling data analysis from Colorado does not trigger a need for EPA, Pennsylvania, or AMS to conduct modeling on the impact of NO
The commenter also raises concern with the use, in the economic feasibility analysis, of outdated interest rates that are not reflective of current economic conditions and the consumer price index (CPI) to adjust air pollution control costs to current dollar values.
Ultimately, the commenter acknowledges that if the RACT evaluations were redone in a manner to address the identified concerns, the control technologies determined to be RACT would not change.
As to the commenter's remarks about fuel switching, it appears that they may apply to the Exelon Generating Company—Richmond Station where a fuel switch to natural gas was determined to be technically infeasible for Combustion Turbine #91 and #92. In this instance, Exelon identified the large-scale costs and related regulatory requirements as technical impediments to installing a natural gas line to the facility, and AMS agreed with this analysis and determined that it was not technically feasible. Whether or not AMS' conclusion on the technical feasibility analysis was sufficient does not change the final conclusion on the overall feasibility of the potential use of fuel switching for the sources at this facility. EPA agrees with the commenter that determining fuel switching as a technically feasible control would not change the determination that this control is ultimately infeasible as RACT for the sources at hand and is finalizing AMS' proposed RACT requirements.
EPA also agrees with the commenter that choosing suitable interest rates and cost escalation factors is a requirement of RACT determinations. Per 25 Pa. Code 129.92(b)(4), the cost effectiveness evaluation must be consistent with the
The commenter did not specify which economic feasibility determinations in this rule contain questionable interest rates or cost escalations but recognizes that updates to such factors in the economic analysis would not necessarily change the final RACT determinations. These factors are among many other values used in a complex, multi-factor cost analysis. EPA agrees it is not clear that revised interest rate or cost escalations in the economic analysis would change the final conclusions of the determinations contained in this rule. Without a more specific allegation from the commenter about the sources in question, the commenter's allegations are too general and speculative in nature to prevent EPA from approving AMS' RACT II CbC determinations for sources at the nine subject facilities.
More generally, the commenter asserts that EPA should establish term limits for RACT plan approvals and ensure that facilities re-evaluate RACT plans to incorporate any future advancements in technology as is required by New Jersey RACT rules.
EPA guidance does highlight the need for emission controls that are reasonably consistent with protecting a short-term NAAQS such as ozone. However, in those cases where an emissions limit for a RACT control can be quantified, EPA guidance states that averaging periods for such limits should be as short as practicable and in no case longer than 30 days. See the January 20, 1984 EPA guidance memorandum titled “Averaging Times for Compliance with VOC Emissions Limits—SIP Revision Policy.”
In the instance of Grays Ferry Cogeneration Partnership and Vicinity Energy, the facilities are using an averaging plan to limit NO
EPA disagrees with the commenter that Grays Ferry Cogeneration Partnership and Vicinity Energy should evaluate the technical and economic feasibility of certain alternative control options. The evaluation of alternative controls is only a requirement for sources opting for case-by-case RACT evaluation under 25 Pa. Code 129.99. Sources at the subject facilities are complying with RACT through the NO
EPA also disagrees with the commenter's recommendation to disapprove the NO
Finally, EPA declines to establish term limits for RACT plan approvals to ensure the periodic re-evaluation of technologies as required by New Jersey's RACT rules. The Clean Air Act and the requirements to implement RACT are designed to protect public health and the environment. However, the only factors EPA is legally required to consider for approving RACT are those in the statute, EPA's regulations, and the SIP-approved Pennsylvania implementing regulations. Term limits for RACT plan approvals for periodic re-evaluation of technologies is not a statutory or regulatory requirement for approval of these RACT determinations. Even without such term limits, RACT is periodically reevaluated in non-attainment areas after the promulgation of a new ozone NAAQS.
EPA is approving the case-by-case RACT determinations and/or alternative NO
In this document, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of source-specific RACT determinations and NO
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
• Is not a “significant regulatory action” subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
• Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501
• Is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
• Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
• Does not have federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
• Is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the State, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by January 3, 2022. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action approving Pennsylvania's NO
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
42 U.S.C. 7401
The revisions and additions read as follows:
(d) * * *
(1) * * *
(f) Approval of source-specific RACT requirements for the 2008 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard for the facilities listed in this paragraph are incorporated as specified. (Rulemaking Docket No. EPA-OAR-2020-0598).
(1) AdvanSix Resins & Chemicals LLC—Frankford Plant—Incorporating by reference RACT Plan Approval No. IP16-000276, revised and effective March 5, 2020, which supersedes the prior RACT Plan Approval effective February 9, 2016. See also the
(2) Exelon Generation Company—Richmond Generating Station—Incorporating by reference RACT Plan Approval No. IP16-000246, effective April 20, 2020 which supersedes the prior RACT Plan Approval, effective February 9, 2016. See also the
(3) Grays Ferry Cogeneration Partnership—Incorporating by reference RACT Plan Approval No. IP-16-000250, effective March 4, 2020, which supersedes RACT Plan Approval, effective January 9, 2015. See also the
(4) Vicinity Energy Philadelphia—Schuylkill Station—Incorporating by reference RACT Plan Approval No. IP16-000249, effective March 4, 2020, which supersedes RACT Plan Approval, effective February 9, 2016. See also the
(5) Kinder Morgan Liquids Terminals, LLC—Philadelphia Terminal—Incorporating by reference RACT Plan Approval No. IP16-000233, effective April 20, 2020, which supersedes RACT Plan Approval, effective February 9, 2016. See also the
(6) Naval Surface Warfare Center—Philadelphia Division—Incorporating by reference RACT Plan Approval No. IP16-000235, effective March 20, 2020, which supersedes the prior RACT Plan Approval, effective February 9, 2016. See also the
(7) Newman and Company, Inc.—Incorporating by reference RACT Plan Approval No. IP16-000223, effective March 31, 2020, which supersedes RACT Plan Approval, effective January 9, 2015. See also the
(8) Philadelphia Energy Solutions Refining and Marketing LLC.—Incorporating by reference RACT Plan Approval No. IP-16-00269, effective April 24, 2020, which supersedes the RACT Plan Approval effective February 9, 2016. See also the
(9) Philadelphia Shipyard Inc.—Incorporating by reference RACT Plan Approval No. IP16-000300, effective April 8, 2020.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Final rule.
This regulation establishes and removes tolerances for residues of fluensulfone in or on multiple crops that are identified later in this document. The Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4) requested these tolerance actions under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
This regulation is effective November 1, 2021. Objections and requests for hearings must be received
The docket for this action, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0601, is available at
Due to the public health emergency, the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC) and Reading Room is closed to visitors with limited exceptions. The staff continues to provide customer service via email, phone, and webform. For the latest status information on EPA/DC services, docket access, visit
Marietta Echeverria, Acting Director, Registration Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; main telephone number: (703) 305-7090; email address:
You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer. The following list of North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them. Potentially affected entities may include:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code 112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government Publishing Office's e-CFR site at
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a(g), any person may file an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0601 in the subject line on the first page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must be in writing and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before January 3, 2022. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0601, by one of the following methods:
•
•
•
Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along with more information about dockets generally, is available at
In the
Based upon review of the data supporting the petition, EPA is establishing one tolerance at a different level than petitioned for. A discussion of this revision to the petitioned-for tolerance can be found in section IV.C. In addition, IR-4 initially petitioned for tolerances for multiple sugar beet commodities but withdrew their request for these tolerances and the new use on sugar beet on April 8, 2021. EPA is therefore not establishing tolerances for the sugar beet commodities.
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is “safe.” Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA
Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors specified therein, EPA has reviewed the available scientific data and other relevant information in support of this action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a determination on aggregate exposure for fluensulfone including exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action. EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with fluensulfone follows.
In an effort to streamline its publications in the
EPA has previously published a number of tolerance rulemakings for fluensulfone, in which EPA concluded, based on the available information, that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm would result from aggregate exposure to fluensulfone and established tolerances for residues of that chemical. EPA is incorporating previously published sections from those rulemakings that remain unchanged as described further in this rulemaking.
Acute dietary risks are below the Agency's level of concern of 100% of the aPAD; they are 21% of the aPAD for infants (<1 year old), the group with the highest estimated exposure. Chronic dietary risks are below the Agency's level of concern of 100% of the cPAD; they are 4.8% of the cPAD for infants (<1 year old), the group with the highest estimated exposure. EPA concluded that the combined food, water, and residential exposures result in aggregate MOEs above the level of concern of 100 for all relevant exposure scenarios and are not of concern. As the chronic dietary endpoint and dose are protective of potential cancer effects, fluensulfone is not expected to pose a dietary or aggregate cancer risk of concern.
Therefore, based on the risk assessments and information described above, EPA concludes there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the general population, or to infants and children, from aggregate exposure to fluensulfone residues. More detailed information on this action can be found in the document entitled, “Fluensulfone. Petition for Crop Group Conversions to
For a discussion of the available analytical enforcement method, see Unit IV.A. of the May 24, 2019 rulemaking.
In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S. tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. EPA considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA section 408(b)(4). EPA may establish a tolerance that is different from a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain the reasons for departing from the Codex level.
The tolerance for crop subgroup 4-16B (20 ppm) is harmonized with the Codex MRLs for mizuna and mustard greens; all other Codex MRLs for crops within crop subgroup 4-16B are lower than 20 ppm. The tolerance for kohlrabi (1.5 ppm) is harmonized with the Codex MRL for kohlrabi. The tolerance for crop subgroup 4-16A (4 ppm) is harmonized with the Codex MRL for spinach; all other Codex MRLs for commodities within crop subgroup 4-16A are lower than 4 ppm. The tolerance for crop
The petitioner proposed a tolerance value of 4 ppm for leaf petiole vegetable subgroup 22B based on the existing tolerance for vegetables, leafy, except
In this rule, EPA is establishing tolerances for fluensulfone residues in or on the leaf petiole vegetable subgroup 22B at 2 ppm, which is lower than the existing tolerance in or on vegetables, leafy, except
In accordance with the World Trade Organization's (WTO) Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) Agreement, EPA intends to notify the WTO of the changes to these tolerances in order to satisfy its obligations under the Agreement. In addition, the SPS Agreement requires that Members provide a “reasonable interval” between the publication of a regulation subject to the Agreement and its entry into force to allow time for producers in exporting Member countries to adapt to the new requirement. Accordingly, EPA is establishing an expiration date for the existing tolerance for residues of fluensulfone in or on vegetables, leafy, except
Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of fluensulfone in or on
Additionally, the following existing tolerances are unnecessary due to the establishment of the above tolerances:
This action establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d) in response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from review under Executive Order 12866, entitled “Regulatory Planning and Review” (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), or to Executive Order 13045, entitled “Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks” (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). This action does not contain any information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501
Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerances in this final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601
This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food handlers, and food retailers, not States or Tribes, nor does this action alter the relationships or distribution of power and responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or Tribal Governments, on the relationship between the National Government and the States or Tribal Governments, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes. Thus, the Agency has determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled “Federalism” (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled “Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments” (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501
This action does not involve any technical standards that would require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).
Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Agricultural commodities, Pesticides, and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Therefore, for the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA is amending 40 CFR chapter 1 as follows:
21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.
The additions read as follows:
(a) * * *
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Final rule; correcting amendment.
This document corrects an inadvertent drafting error in final regulations published in the
Effective on November 1, 2021, and applicable beginning September 7, 2021.
Heather Cronin, Sustainable Fisheries, NMFS Pacific Islands Regional Office, 808-725-5179.
On August 5, 2021, NMFS published a final rule that required the use of electronic logbooks in the Hawaii pelagic longline fisheries and on Class C and D vessels in the American Samoa pelagic longline fishery (86 FR 42744). In that final rule, NMFS inadvertently removed an unrelated regulation at 50 CFR 665.14(b)(2)(ii). That section requires permit holders in the MHI non-commercial bottomfish fishery to submit logbook reports within 72 hours of the end of the fishing trip. That reporting requirement was established in Amendment 14 to the Fishery Management Plan for the Bottomfish and Seamount Groundfish Fisheries of the Western Pacific Region (replaced in part by the Fishery Ecosystem Plan for the Hawaiian Archipelago). The requirement has been in place since 2008 and should not have been removed (see 73 FR 18450, April 4, 2008; 73 FR 41296, July 18, 2008; and 75 FR 2198, January 10, 2010). This correcting amendment reinstates the requirement.
Administrative practice and procedure, Bottomfish, Fisheries, Fishing, Hawaii, Pacific Islands, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, NMFS amends 50 CFR part 665 as follows:
16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) If fishing was authorized under a permit pursuant to § 665.203(a)(2), the vessel operator or vessel owner must submit the original logbook form for each day of the fishing trip to the Regional Administrator within 72 hours of the end of each fishing trip.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
This action proposes to amend United States Area Navigation (RNAV) route T-354, and establish RNAV route T-421 in the eastern United States. The proposed changes to the routes would expand the availability of RNAV routing in support of transitioning the National Airspace System (NAS) from ground-based to satellite-based navigation. Additionally, a portion of the RNAV routes would provide en route structure where VHF Omnidirectional Range (VOR) Federal airway segments would be removed due to VORs scheduled for decommissioning under the FAA's VOR Minimum Operational Network (MON) program.
Comments must be received on or before December 16, 2021.
Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590; telephone: (800) 647-5527, or (202) 366-9826. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2021-0914; Airspace Docket No. 21-ASO-10 at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments through the internet at
FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at
Paul Gallant, Rules and Regulations Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-8783.
The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it would expand the availability of RNAV in the eastern United States and improve the efficient flow of air traffic within the NAS by lessening the dependency on ground-based navigation.
Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No. FAA-2021-0914; Airspace Docket No. 21-ASO-10) and be submitted in triplicate to the Docket Management Facility (see
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: “Comments to FAA Docket No. FAA-2021-0914; Airspace Docket No. 21-ASO-10.” The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
All communications received on or before the specified comment closing date will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule. The proposal contained in this action may be changed in light of comments received. All comments submitted will be available for examination in the public docket both before and after the comment closing date. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the docket.
An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the internet at
You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office (see
This document proposes to amend FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace
The FAA is proposing an amendment to 14 CFR part 71 to amend RNAV route T-354, and establish T-421.
United States RNAV T-routes are published in paragraph 6011 of FAA Order JO 7400.11F, dated August 10, 2021, and effective September 15, 2021, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The RNAV routes listed in this document would be subsequently published in FAA Order JO 7400.11.
FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15.
The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore: (1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, “Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures” prior to any FAA final regulatory action.
Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
This action proposes to amend United States Area Navigation (RNAV) route T-251 in the central United States due to the decommissioning of the Malden, MO, (MAW) VHF Omnidirectional Range Tactical Air Navigation (VORTAC), in support of the VHF Omnidirectional Range (VOR) Minimum Operational Network (MON) program for improved efficiency of the National Airspace System (NAS) while reducing the dependency on ground based navigational systems.
Comments must be received on or before December 16, 2021.
Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590; telephone: 1 (800) 647-5527 or (202) 366-9826. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2021-0918; Airspace Docket No. 21-ACE-11 at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments through the internet at
FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at
Paul Gallant, Rules and Regulations Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-8783.
The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it would expand the availability of RNAV routes in the NAS, increase airspace capacity, and reduce complexity in high air traffic volume areas.
Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No. FAA-2021-0918; Airspace Docket No. 21-ACE-11 and be submitted in triplicate to the Docket Management Facility (see
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: “Comments to FAA Docket No. FAA-2021-0918; Airspace Docket No. 21-ACE-11.” The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
All communications received on or before the specified comment closing date will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule. The proposal contained in this action may be changed in light of comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the docket.
An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the internet at
You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any comments received and any final disposition in person in the Dockets Office (see
This document amends FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 10, 2021 and effective September 15, 2021. FAA Order JO 7400.11F is publicly available as listed in the
The FAA is proposing an amendment to 14 CFR part 71 to amend RNAV route T-251 by extending the route further south in the central United States.
United States Area Navigation routes are published in paragraph 6011 of FAA Order JO 7400.11F, dated August 10, 2021, and effective September 15, 2021, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The RNAV route listed in this document would be subsequently published in FAA Order JO 7400.11.
FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15.
The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore: (1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, “Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures” prior to any FAA final regulatory action.
Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
This action proposes to establish three United States Area Navigation (RNAV) routes, designated T-370, T-398, and T-419, in the south and central United States. These routes would supplement certain VHF Omnidirectional Range (VOR) Federal airways in support of the VOR Minimum Operational Network (MON) program, and would expand the availability of RNAV routing in the National Airspace System (NAS).
Comments must be received on or before December 16, 2021.
Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590; telephone: 1 (800) 647-5527 or (202) 366-9826. You must identify FAA Docket No. FAA-2021-0920; Airspace Docket No. 21-ASW-7 at the beginning of your comments. You may also submit comments through the internet at
FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and subsequent amendments can be viewed online at
Paul Gallant, Rules and Regulations Group, Office of Policy, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-8783.
The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of the airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it would expand the availability of RNAV routes in the NAS, increase airspace capacity, and reduce complexity in high air traffic volume areas.
Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic, environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
Communications should identify both docket numbers (FAA Docket No. FAA-2021-0920; Airspace Docket No. 21-ASW-7 and be submitted in triplicate to the Docket Management Facility (see
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments on this action must submit with those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: “Comments to FAA Docket No. FAA-2021-0920; Airspace Docket No. 21-ASW-7.” The postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
All communications received on or before the specified comment closing date will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule. The proposal contained in this action may be changed in light of comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the docket.
An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the internet at
This document amends FAA Order JO 7400.11F, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 10, 2021 and effective September 15, 2021. FAA Order JO 7400.11F is publicly available as listed in the
The FAA is proposing an amendment to 14 CFR part 71 to establish new RNAV routes T-370, T-398, and T-419 in the southern and central United States. These routes would overlay certain VOR Federal airways that are based on navigation aids (NAVAIDs) that are planned for decommissioning under the FAA's VOR MON program.
The full route legal descriptions of T-370, T-398, and T-419 are listed in “The Proposed Amendment” section, below.
These changes would provide RNAV routing to supplement VOR Federal airways that will be impacted by the VOR MON program, and support the
United States Area Navigation routes are published in paragraph 6011 of FAA Order JO 7400.11F, dated August 10, 2021, and effective September 15, 2021, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The RNAV routes listed in this document would be subsequently published in FAA Order JO 7400.11.
FAA Order JO 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is published yearly and effective on September 15.
The FAA has determined that this proposed regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. It, therefore: (1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under Department of Transportation (DOT) Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified that this proposed rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
This proposal will be subject to an environmental analysis in accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, “Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures” prior to any FAA final regulatory action.
Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:
49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.
Federal Communications Commission.
Proposed rule.
In this document, the Commission seeks to gather updated information and propose how best to fulfill Congress' goal of protecting Public Safety Answering Points (PSAPs) from disruptive robocalls in a manner that avoids the potential security risks of making registered PSAP numbers available to those claiming to be autodialer operators. Specifically, the Commission proposes that voice service providers be required to block autodialed calls made to PSAP telephone numbers on the PSAP Do-Not-Call registry. The Commission takes this action to satisfy its statutory obligations under the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 (Tax Relief Act).
Comments are due on or before December 1, 2021, and reply comments are due on or before December 16, 2021.
You may submit comments, identified by CG Docket No. 12-129 and PS Docket No. 21-343, by any of the following methods:
•
•
Filings can be sent by commercial overnight courier or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission.
• Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9050 Junction Drive, Annapolis Junction, MD 20701.
• U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail must be addressed to 45 L Street NE, Washington, DC 20554.
• Effective March 19, 2020, and until further notice, the Commission no longer accepts any hand or messenger delivered filings. This is a temporary measure taken to help protect the health and safety of individuals, and to mitigate the transmission of COVID-19. See
Richard D. Smith of the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (717) 338-2797 or
This is a summary of the Commission's Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (
This matter shall be treated as a “permit-but-disclose” proceeding in accordance with the Commission's
The
1. In this
2. The Commission seeks comment on the extent to which autodialed calls continue to be a problem for PSAPs. Has the number of such unwanted calls changed in any significant way since 2012? For example, have technological changes resulted in more unwanted autodialed calls being made to PSAPs or have any new technological or regulatory solutions, such as blocking technologies, arisen that allow PSAPs to better protect themselves from unwanted calls? Does the extent of this problem vary depending on whether the autodialed calls are voice calls or texts? Are there situations in which entities that intended to disrupt PSAP operations used autodialers or similar technologies in denial-of-service attacks to disrupt the provision of emergency services? How do those incidents shed light on the risk and potential harms that might result from the misuse of registered PSAP numbers? Have such incidents increased since 2012, as technology has changed? Are there new or evolving robocall threats to PSAPs
3. To what extent does the recent Supreme Court decision addressing the Telephone Consumer Protection Act's (TCPA's) definition of “automatic telephone dialing system” impact the efficacy of the PSAP Do-Not-Call registry?
4. In light of potential security concerns involved with granting access to the registered PSAP numbers to a broad range of autodialer operators as the means to facilitate compliance with the PSAP Do-Not-Call registry as contemplated in 2012, the Commission proposes that voice service providers block autodialed calls made to registered PSAP telephone numbers on the PSAP Do-Not-Call registry. As the means to identify the calls to be blocked, the Commission's rules already require autodialer operators seeking access to the registry to provide certain information including “all outbound telephone numbers used to place autodialed calls, including both actual originating numbers and numbers that are displayed on caller identification services.”
5. The Commission proposes to give voice service providers access to the PSAP telephone numbers and outbound autodialer telephone numbers registered on the PSAP Do-Not-Call registry. The Commission further proposes to require voice service providers to block any calls that originate from a registered autodialer number when made to a registered PSAP telephone number. Under this approach, access to the registered PSAP telephone numbers is restricted to more easily verified voice service providers that can ensure compliance by blocking calls made to the PSAP telephone numbers rather than entrusting compliance to an unknown number of robocallers whose identity and intentions in seeking access to the database may be difficult to confirm. Specifically, the Commission seeks comment on whether such an approach would alleviate the security risks associated with allowing access to a centralized database of PSAP numbers to all autodialer users who register. Does granting voice service providers access to registered PSAP telephone numbers create any new security issues? If so, how should the Commission minimize those concerns? How can the Commission ensure the security of the PSAP Do-Not-Call registry database from malicious actors?
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14. The Commission seeks comment on its assessment of the seriousness of the security risks associated with housing registered PSAP telephone numbers in a centralized database and granting access to those numbers to callers purporting to need them to comply with the rules as contemplated in 2012. The Commission is particularly interested in comments from PSAPs, law enforcement agencies, and national security agencies on these risks. To what extent, if any, would granting access to a list of PSAP numbers enhance the ability of bad actors to initiate a denial-of-service attack on a PSAP? Are there other comprehensive sources of PSAP telephone numbers already available, such that incremental risks added by the registry would be minimal? Even if some individual PSAP numbers are obtainable from alternative sources, to what extent would access to a single centralized database of such numbers increase the security risks of misuse of such numbers? On balance, do these security concerns outweigh the potential protections a registry affords from unwanted autodialed calls? How might the Commission best address the security concerns posed by a centralized database of PSAP telephone numbers that would allow the Commission to move forward with the creation of a PSAP Do-Not-Call registry, as contemplated in 2012, in a manner that does not jeopardize PSAPs and emergency callers that rely on PSAPs?
15. To what extent do the significant potential monetary penalties for PSAP Do-Not-Call violations and for unauthorized dissemination or distribution of the registered PSAP numbers impact the Commission's analysis of the risks of potential abuse? To what extent is the effectiveness of such monetary penalties undermined when dealing with individuals or entities who seek to intentionally disrupt the provision of emergency services and make efforts to conceal their identity, or who are foreign actors against whom it may be difficult or impossible to enforce such penalties? Does the implementation of STIR/SHAKEN caller ID authentication technology, or the efforts of the registered traceback consortium to trace calls back to their source, make it less likely that callers initiate denial-of-service attacks on PSAPs by making it easier to determine the source of a call?
16.
17.
18. Consistent with section 6507(b)(1), the Commission's rules “permit,” but do not require, PSAPs to register “any PSAP telephone numbers associated with the provision of emergency services or communications with other public safety agencies.”
19.
20. How long might it take to identify, develop, and implement any such alternative solution to a PSAP Do-Not-Call registry? What would it cost to create such a solution? Who would maintain the list of telephone numbers housed in such a technological solution, and how often would the technology be updated or would callers be required to install updates? Are there risks that legitimate emergency calls might be blocked if such a system were implemented? Are there other viable alternative technological options that the Commission should consider that satisfy the specific statutory requirements and objectives of section 6507? Alternatively, should the Commission consider certain options—even if they do not satisfy section 6507 in and of themselves—that the Commission could adopt in addition to measures that do satisfy section 6507?
21. Security solutions exist today that can block calls to PSAPs that are determined to be fraudulent. These solutions become more effective when used in combination with STIR/SHAKEN. Is call blocking at the PSAP a more effective solution? Can PSAPs deploy the same blocking solutions that are used for consumers, or are more specialized solutions required? If blocking is to be based, at least in part, on information produced by STIR/SHAKEN, what information should the terminating provider disseminate to the PSAP to make this determination? If more specialized solutions are required, how do these tools differ from consumer blocking tools? Would the need for PSAPs to deploy this solution place additional technical complexity and/or additional financial burden on PSAPs, and if so, how could this be mitigated? Which type of solutions can be deployed on a wide scale?
22. Apart from provider blocking, do PSAPs themselves have an ability to effectively block unwanted calls? If not, how long would it take and how much would it cost to implement such a blocking solution? Would requiring every autodialed call to identify itself as an automated call using the caller ID information allow PSAPs to block these calls more effectively? Are there any “best practices” that PSAPs might implement to protect themselves from robocalls? For example, the Hospital Robocall Protection Group has issued a report outlining best practices that hospitals can use to protect hospitals against robocalls. Should the Commission consider outlining similar best practices for PSAPs? If so, what is the best method for doing so? For instance, should the Commission seek input from an existing or new advisory committee?
23.
24. Would this approach require Congress to revisit the statutory language associated with the Tax Relief Act and the TCPA to permit the Commission to implement this solution? This might include authorizing the inclusion of PSAP telephone numbers on a registry currently reserved for “residential telephone subscribers,” and
25.
26. The Commission seeks comment on these and any other potential solutions that allow the Commission to protect registered PSAP numbers from unauthorized dissemination in a timely and cost-effective manner, while fulfilling Congress' goal of stopping unwanted calls to PSAPs, including the costs and benefits of each approach.
27. Cybersecurity events continue to affect the ability of PSAPs to respond to 911 calls, locate 911 callers, and dispatch assistance. How can the Commission aid in securing PSAPs against these types of attacks? As 911 services evolve, the ability to reach PSAPs by text, video, and data transmissions create additional vulnerabilities that may be exploited. As states and local jurisdictions have deployed text-to-911 capabilities, have PSAPs experienced attacks using text messaging as an attack vector? Have PSAPs transitioning to Next Generation 911 (NG911) systems experienced an increase in such incidents? If so, are those risks specific to NG911's technical implementation? Can the proposed Do-Not-Call registry for PSAPs mitigate risks associated with NG911 services? Can solutions used to prevent cyberattacks through the PSAP's administrative broadband connections also prevent attacks through NG911? What is needed to ensure NG911 communications with PSAPs are legitimate traffic?
28. In 2020, the Communications Security, Reliability, and Interoperability Council (CSRIC) submitted a report to the Commission regarding security risks and best practices for mitigation in 911 systems.
29. Should the Commission consider caller ID authentication methods such as STIR/SHAKEN as a means to enhance the security of PSAP operations or promote greater trust for calls to PSAPs and those associated with 911? Providers using STIR/SHAKEN assign calls an “attestation level” that signifies what they know about the calling party and its right to use the number shown in the caller ID. Does STIR/SHAKEN sufficiently mitigate the robocall threat to PSAPs by allowing service providers to screen illegitimate 911 calls, including 911 calls to PSAPs from callers seeking to disguise their phone number or location information, more effectively? Can PSAPs use existing analytics, such as caller ID authentication, to help evaluate the trustworthiness of a call and caller? Do such analytics help PSAPs combat robocalling attacks better than a centralized database of PSAP numbers? If not, could additional STIR/SHAKEN standards, such as a unique attestation level, help distinguish between legitimate 911 calls and illegitimate calls from bad actors? Should the Commission encourage standards bodies to define such standards to be deployed by providers? Should such an attestation framework distinguish 911 calls originated by non-service initialized devices, which bypass the typical authorization conducted by originating providers, from service-initialized 911 calls? Can STIR/SHAKEN standards account for this issue and ensure that PSAPs using caller ID authentication do not negatively impact legitimate calls? Are there other technology developments or regulatory changes that would be required to facilitate the use of caller ID authentication technologies to support PSAP operations?
30.
31. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA), the Commission has prepared the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) of the possible significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities by the policies and rules proposed in the
32. Section 6507 of the Tax Relief Act required the Commission to “initiate a proceeding to create a specialized Do-Not-Call registry” for PSAPs to protect them from unwanted or illegal robocalls and to issue associated regulations after providing the public with notice and an opportunity to comment. To fulfill this mandate, in 2012 the Commission adopted rules to establish a Do-Not-Call registry for telephone numbers used by PSAPs and to prohibit the use of “automatic dialing equipment” to contact those registered numbers for non-emergency purposes.
33. The proposed rules are authorized under sections 4(i), 4(j), and 227 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 154(j), 227, and section 6507 of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, Public Law 112-96, 47 U.S.C. 1473, 47 U.S.C. 6507.
34. The
35. In addition, the Commission's rules already require autodialer operators seeking access to the PSAP Do-Not-Call registry to provide certain information, including all outbound telephone numbers used to place autodialed calls. The
36. The
37. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant alternatives that it has considered in reaching its proposed approach, which may include the following four alternatives (among others): (1) The establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into account the resources available to small entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance or reporting requirements under the rule for small entities; (3) the use of performance, rather than design, standards; and (4) an exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small entities.
38. The
39. In addition, the
40. Further, the
41. The Commission expects to consider the economic impact of these proposals on small entities, as identified in comments filed in response to the
42. None.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Proposed rule; request for comments.
NMFS proposes to implement an annual catch limit (ACL) of 492,000 lb (223,167 kg) for Deep 7 bottomfish in the main Hawaiian Islands (MHI) for each of the fishing years 2021-22, 2022-23, and 2023-24. As an in-season accountability measure (AM), if NMFS projects that the fishery will reach the ACL in any given fishing year, we would close the commercial and non-commercial fisheries in Federal waters
NMFS must receive comments by November 16, 2021.
You may submit comments on the proposed rule, identified by NOAA-NMFS-2021-0077, by either of the following methods:
•
•
NMFS prepared an environmental assessment and draft supplemental environmental assessment that describe the potential impacts on the human environment that could result from the proposed action. The assessments, a regulatory impact review, and other supporting documents are available at
Brett Schumacher, NMFS PIRO Sustainable Fisheries, 808-725-5185.
NMFS and the Western Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) manage the Deep 7 bottomfish fishery in Federal waters around Hawaii under the Fishery Ecosystem Plan for the Hawaiian Archipelago (FEP), as authorized by the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act). The Deep 7 bottomfish are onaga (
The Council recommended that NMFS implement the proposed ACLs and AMs for MHI Deep 7 bottomfish in fishing years 2021-22, 2022-23, and 2023-24. Each fishing year begins on September 1 and ends on August 31 of the following year. The Council recommended the proposed ACL of 492,000 lb (223,167 kg) based on an updated 2021 bottomfish stock assessment, and in consideration of the risk of overfishing, past fishery performance, and the acceptable biological catch recommendation from its Scientific and Statistical Committee, with opportunity for input from the public.
The 2021 stock assessment estimated the overfishing limit for the MHI Deep 7 bottomfish stock complex to be 568,000 lb (257,640 kg), assuming three years of identical catch in fishing years 2021-22, 2022-23, and 2023-24. This new overfishing limit is 2,000 lb (907 kg) more than the overfishing limit for three years of fishing estimated in the previous stock assessment. The proposed ACL is the same as the ACL that NMFS specified the previous three years (84 FR 29394, June 24, 2019). The ACL is associated with up to a 40 percent probability of overfishing for each proposed fishing year, which is more conservative than the 50 percent risk threshold allowed under NMFS guidelines for National Standard 1 of the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
NMFS monitors Deep 7 bottomfish catches based on data provided by commercial fishermen to the State of Hawaii and non-commercial fishermen to NMFS. As an in-season AM, if NMFS projects that the fishery will reach the ACL, we would close the commercial and non-commercial fisheries for MHI Deep 7 bottomfish in Federal waters for the remainder of the fishing year. As an additional post-season AM, in the event that NMFS determines that the final MHI Deep 7 bottomfish catch exceeds the ACL in any given year, NMFS would reduce the ACL for the subsequent fishing year by the amount of the overage with a subsequent rulemaking.
The fishery has not caught the proposed limit in any year since 1989, and NMFS does not anticipate that the fishery will attain the limit in any fishing year in this proposed rule. NMFS does not expect this proposed rule to result in a change in fishing operations, or other changes to the conduct of the fishery that would result in significant environmental impacts.
NMFS will consider public comments on this proposed rule and will announce the final rule in the
Pursuant to section 304(b)(1)(A) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the NMFS Assistant Administrator for Fisheries has determined that this proposed rule is consistent with the FEP, other provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, and other applicable laws, subject to further consideration after public comment.
The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration that the attached proposed rule, issued under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
NMFS proposes to implement an ACL of 492,000 lb (223,167 kg) for MHI Deep 7 bottomfish, as recommended by the Council, for each fishing year 2021-22, 2022-23, and 2023-24. Each fishing year begins on September 1 and ends on August 31 of the following year. NMFS monitors MHI Deep 7 bottomfish catches based on data provided by commercial fishermen to the State of Hawaii and non-commercial fishermen to NMFS. The AMs for fishing years 2021-22, 2022-23, and 2023-24 would remain the same as the AMs that are currently in place. That is, if NMFS projects that the fishery will reach this limit in any fishing year, NMFS would close the commercial and non-commercial fisheries for MHI Deep 7
This proposed rule would affect commercial and non-commercial fishermen who catch MHI Deep 7 bottomfish. In general, the relative importance of MHI bottomfish to commercial participants as a percentage of overall fishing or household income is unknown, as the total suite of fishing and other income generating activities by individual operations across the year has not been examined. For Regulatory Flexibility Act purposes only, NMFS has established a small business size standard for businesses, including their affiliates, whose primary industry is commercial fishing (see 50 CFR 200.2). A business primarily engaged in commercial fishing (NAICS code 11411) is classified as a small business if it is independently owned and operated, is not dominant in its field of operation (including its affiliates), and has combined annual receipts not in excess of $11 million for all its affiliated operations worldwide. Based on available information, NMFS has determined that all affected entities—vessels in the commercial and non-commercial fisheries for MHI Deep 7 bottomfishare small entities under the NMFS standard, as they are engaged in the business of fish harvesting, independently owned or operated, not dominant in their field of operation, and have annual gross receipts not in excess of $11 million. Therefore, there would be no disproportionate economic impacts between large and small entities. Furthermore, there would be no disproportionate economic impacts among the universe of vessels based on gear, home port, or vessel length.
During the 2019-20 fishing year, 334 fishermen reported catching 161,437 lb (73,227 kg) of MHI Deep 7 bottomfish, which is consistent with catch and participation in recent years. Catch in this fishery has generally been decreasing over time. During each of fishing years 2014-15, 2015-16, and 2016-2017, an average of 374 fisherman have reported catching almost 274,000 lb (124,284 kg) of MHI Deep 7 bottomfish, whereas catch over the past three full fishing years averaged 192,805 lb/year (87,455 kg/year) by an average of 331 participants annually. Price per pound for Deep 7 bottomfish averaged $7.23 ($15.93/kg) in 2020 with 91 percent of catch sold. Assuming that the fishery attains the ACL of 492,000 lb (223,167 kg) in an individual fishing year, and using the 2020 average price of $7.23/lb ($15.93/kg), NMFS expects the potential annual fleet-wide revenue during each of the 2021-22, 2022-23 and 2023-24 fishing years to be $3,557,160 (or approximately $3,237,016 under the assumption that 91 percent of catch is sold). If the MHI Deep 7 bottomfish catch reached the ACL during a fishing year, with the entire catch sold by the 334 participants fishing in 2019-20, the potential revenue would average $10,650 from the sale of 1,473 lb (668 kg) of Deep 7 bottomfish per fisherman. If the fishery reaches the ACL, and 91 percent of all MHI Deep 7 bottomfish catch was sold, then each of these 334 commercial fishermen would sell an average of 1,340 lb (608 kg) of Deep 7 bottomfish valued at about $9,692, which is well below the $11 million threshold.
Even though this proposed rule would apply to a substantial number of vessels,
This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866.
This proposed rule contains no information collection requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
Accountability measures, Annual catch limits, Bottomfish, Fishing, Hawaii, Pacific Islands.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, NMFS proposes to amend 50 CFR part 665 as follows:
16 U.S.C. 1801
(a) In accordance with § 665.4, the ACLs for MHI bottomfish fisheries for each fishing year are as follows:
(e) If landings of Deep 7 bottomfish exceed the specified ACL in a fishing year, the Regional Administrator will reduce the ACL for the subsequent year by the amount of the overage in a separate rulemaking.
The Department of Agriculture will submit the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 on or after the date of publication of this notice. Comments are requested regarding: (1) 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) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on 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.
Comments regarding these information collections are best assured of having their full effect if received by December 1, 2021. Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be submitted within 30 days of the publication of this notice on the following website
An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
The retail and wholesale quantity and value of sales are collected for fresh cut flowers, potted flowering plants, foliage plants, annual bedding/garden plants, herbaceous perennials, cut cultivated florist greens, propagative floriculture material, and unfinished plants. Additional detail on area in production, operation value of sales, and agricultural workers is included. Content changes are minimal year to year, with the goal of avoiding significant changes to the survey length and respondent burden associated with each questionnaire. The only program change currently being considered involves expanding the survey to allow publishing a U.S. total, in addition to state-level totals for 28 States (Alaska, Alabama, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin). These statistics are used by the U.S. Department of Agriculture to help administer programs and by growers and marketers in making production and marketing decisions.
General authority for these data collection activities is granted under U.S. Code Title 7, Section 2204. This statute specifies that “The Secretary of Agriculture shall procure and preserve all information concerning agriculture which can be obtained by the collection of statistics . . . and shall distribute them among agriculturists”.
Economic Research Service, USDA.
Notice of information collection; request for comments.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) intention to request approval for a Field Test for a new information collection for a Second National Household Food Acquisition and Purchase Survey (FoodAPS-2) also called the National Food Study among American households.
Written comments must be received by January 3, 2022 to be assured of consideration.
All comments should be submitted electronically to
For specific questions related to this information collection, contact Jeffrey Gonzalez, 202-694-5341,
The Department of Agriculture's Economic Research Service, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13), provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps the Economic Research Service (ERS) assess the impact of its information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand the ERS's information collection requirements and provide the required data in the desired format. ERS is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection requirement (ICR) that is described below. Comments are invited on: (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) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.
FoodAPS-2 data are necessary to understand Americans' food and nutrition choices, the drivers of these choices, and how the government can improve administration of public programs at reasonable cost to better the health and well-being of the American population. The data will reveal precise and detailed information on: (1) Food purchased for preparation at home and away from home; (2) food people get for free; (3) food that each member of the household gets; (4) the nutrient content of food items people get; (5) the cost of these foods and how people pay for them (
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) collected similar data in 2012-2013 with the first National Household Food Acquisition and Purchase Survey (FoodAPS-1, OMB Control Number 0536-0068). (See the results at
The main objective of the Field Test is to test the final design and procedures for the Full Survey data collection. Specifically, the Field Test will evaluate the following: A mail screener to reduce in-person screening; enhancements to the data collection instruments that assess drivers of food acquisition behavior; a new native smartphone application; an alternative web-based Food Log using a barcode scanner, for households who are unable to use the smartphone app; a telephone mode option for households who are unable to use either the smartphone app or the web-based method; and monetary incentives to encourage Food Log reporting throughout the 7-day period.
All sampled households will receive a $5 incentive to complete a mail screener questionnaire. All households completing an in-person screening interview to determine eligibility for the study will receive $5. All recruited households will receive $40 upon completion of the Initial Interview and Food Log training. $2 will be provided to each household member age 16 and over who completes the Income Worksheet (available online and via the app) and another $2 per person age 11 and over for completing the Profile Questionnaire (available online and via the app). An additional $16 incentive will be provided to the primary respondent after completion of a Debriefing Interview at the end of the reporting period.
In addition, an incentives experiment is embedded in the Field Test. The incentives experiment varies the amount of a promised monetary incentive that each eligible household member who reports both their food purchases and the food they get for free (including affirmation of no food) can accumulate per day ($5 per day per eligible member vs. $5 for days 1-3 and $10 for days 4-7). The final incentive scheme for the Full Survey will be determined by the results of Field Test.
Responses will be combined for statistical purposes and reported only in aggregate or statistical form. Because this is a field test for the full-scale FoodAPS-2 data collection, there are no plans to make the collected data available to the public. The data will be analyzed and used to finalize design and data collection protocol for the Full Survey.
BMW Manufacturing Company, LLC (BMW MC) submitted a notification of proposed production activity to the FTZ Board (the Board) for its facility in Spartanburg, South Carolina within Subzone 38A. The notification conforming to the requirements of the Board's regulations (15 CFR 400.22) was received on October 22, 2021.
Pursuant to 15 CFR 400.14(b), FTZ production activity would be limited to the specific foreign-status components described in the submitted notification (summarized below) and subsequently authorized by the Board. The benefits that may stem from conducting production activity under FTZ procedures are explained in the background section of the Board's website—accessible via
The proposed foreign-status components include 48-volt lithium-ion batteries and non-rubber brake lines (duty rate ranges from duty-free to 2.7%). The request indicates that the materials are subject to duties under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 (Section 301), depending on the country of origin. The applicable Section 301 decisions require subject merchandise to be admitted to FTZs in privileged foreign status (19 CFR 146.41).
Public comment is invited from interested parties. Submissions shall be addressed to the Board's Executive Secretary and sent to:
A copy of the notification will be available for public inspection in the “Online FTZ Information System” section of the Board's website.
For further information, contact Christopher Wedderburn at
The Materials and Equipment Technical Advisory Committee will meet on November 18, 2021, 10:00 a.m., Eastern Standard Time, via teleconference. The Committee advises the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Export Administration with respect to technical questions that affect the level of export controls applicable to materials and related technology.
1. Opening Remarks and Introduction by BIS Senior Management.
2. Report from working groups.
3. Report by regime representatives.
4. Discussion of matters determined to be exempt from the provisions relating to public meetings found in 5 U.S.C. app. 2 §§ 10(a)(1) and 10(a)(3).
The open session will be accessible via teleconference on a first come, first serve basis. To join the conference, submit inquiries to Ms. Yvette Springer at
To the extent time permits, members of the public may present oral statements to the Committee. Written statements may be submitted at any time before or after the meeting. However, to facilitate distribution of public presentation materials to Committee members, the materials should be forwarded prior to the meeting to Ms. Springer via email.
The Assistant Secretary for Administration, with the concurrence of the delegate of the General Counsel, formally determined on October 26, 2021, pursuant to Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. app. 2 § 10(d)), that the portion of the meeting dealing with pre-decisional changes to the Commerce Control List and the U.S. export control policies shall be exempt from the provisions relating to public meetings found in 5 U.S.C. app. 2 § § 10(a)(1) and 10(a)(3). The remaining portions of the meeting will be open to the public.
For more information, contact Yvette Springer via email.
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
In accordance with the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the Department of Commerce (Commerce) is automatically initiating the five-year reviews (Sunset Reviews) of the antidumping and countervailing duty (AD/CVD) order(s) and suspended investigation(s) listed below. The International Trade Commission (the ITC) is publishing concurrently with this notice its notice of
Applicable November 1, 2021.
Commerce official identified in the
Commerce's procedures for the conduct of Sunset Reviews are set forth in its
In accordance with section 751(c) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(c), we are initiating the Sunset Reviews of the following antidumping and countervailing duty order(s) and suspended investigation(s):
As a courtesy, we are making information related to sunset proceedings, including copies of the pertinent statute and Commerce's regulations, Commerce's schedule for Sunset Reviews, a listing of past revocations and continuations, and current service lists, available to the public on Commerce's website at the following address:
In accordance with section 782(b) of the Act, any party submitting factual information in an AD/CVD proceeding must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information. Parties must use the certification formats provided in 19 CFR 351.303(g). Commerce intends to reject factual submissions if the submitting party does not comply with applicable revised certification requirements.
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.103(d), Commerce will maintain and make available a public service list for these proceedings. Parties wishing to participate in any of these five-year reviews must file letters of appearance as discussed at 19 CFR 351.103(d). To facilitate the timely preparation of the public service list, it is requested that those seeking recognition as interested parties to a proceeding submit an entry of appearance within 10 days of the publication of the Notice of Initiation. Because deadlines in Sunset Reviews can be very short, we urge interested parties who want access to proprietary information under administrative protective order (APO) to file an APO application immediately following publication in the
Domestic interested parties, as defined in section 771(9)(C), (D), (E), (F), and (G) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.102(b), wishing to participate in a Sunset Review must respond not later than 15 days after the date of publication in the
If we receive an order-specific notice of intent to participate from a domestic interested party, Commerce's regulations provide that
This notice of initiation is being published in accordance with section 751(c) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(c).
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
Every five years, pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the Department of Commerce (Commerce) and the International Trade Commission automatically initiate and conduct reviews to determine whether revocation of a countervailing or antidumping duty order or termination of an investigation suspended under section 704 or 734 of the Act would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping or a countervailable subsidy (as the case may be) and of material injury.
Pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act, the following Sunset Reviews are scheduled for initiation in December 2021 and will appear in that month's
Commerce's procedures for the conduct of Sunset Review are set forth in 19 CFR 351.218. The
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.103(c), Commerce will maintain and make available a service list for these proceedings. To facilitate the timely preparation of the service list(s), it is requested that those seeking recognition as interested parties to a proceeding contact Commerce in writing within 10 days of the publication of the Notice of Initiation.
Please note that if Commerce receives a Notice of Intent to Participate from a member of the domestic industry within 15 days of the date of initiation, the review will continue.
Thereafter, any interested party wishing to participate in the Sunset Review must provide substantive comments in response to the notice of initiation no later than 30 days after the date of initiation. Note that Commerce has modified certain of its requirements for serving documents containing business proprietary information, until further notice.
This notice is not required by statute but is published as a service to the international trading community.
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
On October 22, 2021, the Court of International Trade (CIT) issued its final judgment in
Applicable November 1, 2021.
Jinny Ahn, AD/CVD Operations, Office VIII, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC, 20230; telephone: (202) 482-0339.
On December 17, 2019, Commerce published its
The mandatory respondents, as well as Beijing Pacific, GHC, Ningxia Mineral, and Shanxi Sincere (collectively, the respondents), appealed Commerce's
In its remand redetermination, issued in July 2021, Commerce: (1) Reconsidered and further explained its determination to use Malaysia as the primary surrogate country; (2) reconsidered its choice of HS code for the bituminous coal SV used in the production of activated carbon; and (3) reconsidered and further explained its allocation of certain line items in valuing financial ratios using the 2017 financial statements from the Romanian company, Romcarbon SA (Romcarbon).
In its decision in
Because there is now a final court decision, Commerce amends the
Because the mandatory respondents, Beijing Pacific, Ningxia Mineral, and Shanxi Sincere have superseding cash deposit rates (
At this time, Commerce remains enjoined by CIT order from liquidating entries that were exported by Carbon Activated, Datong Juqiang, Beijing Pacific, GHC, Ningxia Mineral, and Shanxi Sincere, and were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption during the period April 1, 2017, through March 31, 2018. These entries will remain enjoined pursuant to the terms of the injunction during the pendency of any appeals process.
In the event the CIT's ruling is not appealed, or, if appealed, upheld by a
This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 516A(c) and (e) and 777(i)(1) of the Act.
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
Applicable October 26, 2021.
Dmitry Vladimirov at (202) 482-0665 and Christopher Williams at (202) 482-5166 (Argentina); James Hepburn at (202) 482-1882 and Preston Cox at (202) 482-5041 (Mexico); George McMahon at (202) 482-1167 and Marc Castillo at (202) 482-0519 (the Russian Federation (Russia)); AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230.
On October 6, 2021, the Department of Commerce (Commerce) received antidumping duty (AD) petitions concerning imports of oil country tubular goods (OCTG) from Argentina, Mexico, and Russia filed in proper form on behalf of Borusan Mannesmann Pipe U.S., Inc., PTC Liberty Tubulars LLC, U.S. Steel Tubular Products, Inc., the United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union, AFL-CIO, CLC (the USW), and Welded Tube USA, Inc. (the petitioners), domestic producers of OCTG and a certified union that represents workers engaged in the production of OCTG.
On October 7, 8, 14, and 19, 2021, Commerce requested supplemental information pertaining to certain aspects of the Petitions in separate supplemental questionnaires.
In accordance with section 732(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the petitioners allege that imports of OCTG from Argentina, Mexico, and Russia are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV) within the meaning of section 731 of the Act, and that imports of such products are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, the OCTG industry in the United States. Consistent with section 732(b)(1) of the Act, the Petitions are accompanied by information reasonably available to the petitioners supporting their allegations.
Commerce finds that the petitioners filed the Petitions on behalf of the domestic industry, because the petitioners are interested parties, as defined in sections 771(9)(C) and 771(9)(D) of the Act. Commerce also finds that the petitioners demonstrated sufficient industry support for the initiation of the requested LTFV investigations.
Because the Petitions were filed on October 6, 2021, the period of investigation (POI) for these LTFV investigations is October 1, 2020, through September 30, 2021, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1).
The products covered by these investigations are OCTG from Argentina, Mexico, and Russia. For a full description of the scope of these investigations,
On October 13, 2021, Commerce spoke with counsel to the petitioners regarding the proposed scope, to ensure that the scope language in the Petitions is an accurate reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is seeking relief.
As discussed in the
Commerce requests that any factual information that parties consider relevant to the scope of these investigations be submitted during this period. However, if a party subsequently finds that additional factual information pertaining to the scope of these investigations may be relevant, the party may contact Commerce and request permission to submit the additional information. All such submissions must be filed on the records of each of the concurrent AD and CVD investigations.
All submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS), unless an exception applies.
Commerce is providing interested parties an opportunity to comment on the appropriate physical characteristics of OCTG to be reported in response to Commerce's AD questionnaires. This information will be used to identify the key physical characteristics of the subject merchandise in order to report the relevant costs of production accurately, as well as to develop appropriate product-comparison criteria.
Interested parties may provide any information or comments that they feel are relevant to the development of an accurate list of physical characteristics. Specifically, they may provide comments as to which characteristics are appropriate to use as: (1) General product characteristics; and (2) product comparison criteria. We note that it is not always appropriate to use all product characteristics as product comparison criteria. We base product comparison criteria on meaningful commercial differences among products. In other words, although there may be some physical product characteristics utilized by manufacturers to describe OCTG, it may be that only a select few product characteristics take into account commercially meaningful physical characteristics. In addition, interested parties may comment on the order in which the physical characteristics should be used in matching products. Generally, Commerce attempts to list the most important physical characteristics first and the least important characteristics last.
In order to consider the suggestions of interested parties in developing and issuing the AD questionnaires, all product characteristics comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on November 15, 2021, which is 20 calendar days from the signature date of this notice. Any rebuttal comments must be filed by 5:00 p.m. ET on November 26, 2021, which is the first business day after 10 calendar days from the initial comment deadline.
Section 732(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on behalf of the domestic industry. Section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) At least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and (ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 732(c)(4)(D) of the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of the total production of the domestic like product, Commerce shall: (i) Poll the industry or rely on other information in order to determine if there is support for the petition, as required by subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine industry support using a statistically valid sampling method to poll the “industry.”
Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the “industry” as the producers as a whole of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute directs Commerce to look to producers and workers who produce the domestic like product. The International Trade Commission (ITC), which is responsible for determining whether “the domestic industry” has been injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like product in order to define the industry. While both Commerce and the ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic like product,
Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as “a product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation under this title.” Thus, the reference point from which the domestic like product analysis begins is “the article subject to an investigation” (
With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioners do not offer a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope of the investigations.
In determining whether the petitioners have standing under section 732(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data contained in the Petitions with reference to the domestic like product as defined in the “Scope of the Investigations,” in the appendix to this notice. To establish industry support, the petitioners provided the 2020 production of OCTG for the U.S. producers that support the Petitions.
On October 8, 15, and 20, 2021, we received comments on industry support from Tenaris Bay City, Inc., IPSCO Tubulars Inc., Maverick Tube Corporation, and Tenaris Global Services (U.S.A.) Corporation (collectively, Tenaris USA), U.S. producers of OCTG.
Based on the information provided in the Petitions, the First General Issues Supplement, Petitioners' Letter, the Second General Issues Supplement, Petitioners' Letter II, and other information readily available to Commerce, we determine that the domestic producers and workers have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 732(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petitions account for at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product.
The petitioners allege that the U.S. industry producing the domestic like product is being materially injured, or is threatened with material injury, by reason of the imports of the subject merchandise sold at LTFV. In addition, the petitioners allege that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.
The petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition is illustrated by a significant and increasing volume of subject imports; reduced market share; underselling and price suppression; lost sales and revenues; declines in production, U.S. shipments, and capacity utilization; decline in employment; and adverse impact on the domestic industry's financial performance.
The following is a description of the allegations of sales at LTFV upon which Commerce based its decision to initiate these LTFV investigations of imports of OCTG from Argentina, Mexico, and Russia. The sources of data for the deductions and adjustments relating to U.S. price and normal value (NV) are discussed in greater detail in the country-specific AD Initiation Checklists.
For Argentina, Mexico, and Russia, the petitioners established export prices (EPs) on the average unit value (AUVs) of publicly available import data. For Argentina and Mexico, the petitioners conservatively made no adjustments to the AUVs for foreign inland freight and foreign brokerage and handling expenses incurred in subject foreign countries for purposes of calculating net EPs. For Russia, the petitioners deducted expenses associated with inland freight and brokerage and handling costs incurred in Russia to calculate an ex-factory, or net, EP.
For Argentina, Mexico, and Russia, the petitioners stated they were unable to obtain home-market or third-country prices for OCTG to use as a basis for NV. Therefore, for Argentina, Mexico, and Russia, the petitioners calculated NV based on constructed value (CV).
Pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, the petitioners calculated CV as the sum of the cost of manufacturing, selling, general, and administrative expenses, financial expenses, and profit.
Based on the data provided by the petitioners, there is reason to believe that imports of OCTG from Argentina, Mexico, and Russia are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at LTFV. Based on comparisons of EP to CV in accordance with section 773 of the Act, the estimated dumping margins for OCTG concerning each of the countries covered by this initiation are as follows: (1) Argentina—168.49 percent; (2) Mexico—59.75 percent; and (3) Russia—136.96 percent.
Based upon the examination of the Petitions and supplemental responses, we find that they meet the requirements of section 732 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating these LTFV investigations to determine whether imports of OCTG from Argentina, Mexico, and Russia are being, or are likely to be, sold in the United States at LTFV. In accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(b)(1), unless postponed, we will make our preliminary determinations no later than 140 days after the date of this initiation.
In the Petitions, the petitioners identified 18 companies in Argentina, 78 companies in Mexico, and 14 companies in Russia, as producers and/or exporters of OCTG.
Following standard practice in LTFV investigations involving market economy countries, in the event that Commerce determines that the number of exporters or producers in any individual case is large such that Commerce cannot individually examine each company based upon its resources, where appropriate, Commerce intends to select mandatory respondents in that case based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports under the appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States subheadings listed in the “Scope of the Investigations,” in the appendix.
On October 19, 2021, Commerce released CBP data on imports of OCTG from Argentina, Mexico, and Russia under administrative protective order (APO) to all parties with access to information protected by APO and indicated that interested parties wishing to comment on the CBP data must do so within three business days after the publication date of the notice of initiation of these investigations.
Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(b). Instructions for filing such applications may be found on Commerce's website at
Comments on CBP data and respondent selection must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An electronically filed document must be received successfully in its entirety via ACCESS by 5:00 p.m. ET on the specified deadline.
In accordance with section 732(b)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.202(f), copies of the public version of the AD Petitions have been provided to the governments of Argentina, Mexico, and Russia via ACCESS. To the extent practicable, we will attempt to provide a copy of the public version of the AD Petitions to each exporter named in the AD Petitions, as provided under 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).
We will notify the ITC of our initiation, as required by section 732(d) of the Act.
The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date on which the AD Petitions were filed, whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of OCTG from Argentina, Mexico, and/or Russia are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, a U.S. industry.
Factual information is defined in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) as: (i) Evidence submitted in response to questionnaires; (ii) evidence submitted in support of allegations; (iii) publicly available information to value factors under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure the adequacy of remuneration under 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence placed on the record by Commerce; and (v) evidence other than factual information described in (i)-(iv). Section 351.301(b) of Commerce's regulations requires any party, when submitting factual information, to specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information is being submitted
Section 773(e) of the Act addresses the concept of particular market situation (PMS) for purposes of CV, stating that “if a particular market situation exists such that the cost of materials and fabrication or other processing of any kind does not accurately reflect the cost of production in the ordinary course of trade, the administering authority may use another calculation methodology under this subtitle or any other calculation methodology.” When an interested party submits a PMS allegation pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, Commerce will respond to such a submission consistent with 19 CFR 351.301(c)(2)(v). If Commerce finds that a PMS exists under section 773(e) of the Act, then it will modify its dumping calculations appropriately.
Neither section 773(e) of the Act, nor 19 CFR 351.301(c)(2)(v), set a deadline for the submission of PMS allegations and supporting factual information. However, in order to administer section 773(e) of the Act, Commerce must receive PMS allegations and supporting factual information with enough time to consider the submission. Thus, should an interested party wish to submit a PMS allegation and supporting new factual information pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, it must do so no later than 20 days after submission of a respondent's initial section D questionnaire response.
Parties may request an extension of time limits before the expiration of a time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301, or as otherwise specified by Commerce. In general, an extension request will be considered untimely if it is filed after the expiration of the time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301. For submissions that are due from multiple parties simultaneously, an extension request will be considered untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. ET on the due date. Under certain circumstances, we may elect to specify a different time limit by which extension requests will be considered untimely for submissions which are due from multiple parties simultaneously. In such a case, we will inform parties in a letter or memorandum of the deadline (including a specified time) by which extension requests must be filed to be considered timely. An extension request must be made in a separate, stand-alone submission; under limited circumstances we will grant untimely-filed requests for the extension of time limits. Parties should review Commerce's regulations concerning factual information prior to submitting factual information in these investigations.
Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.
Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Parties wishing to participate in these investigations should ensure that they meet the requirements of 19 CFR 351.103(d) (
This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 732(c)(2) and 777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.203(c).
The merchandise covered by the investigations is certain oil country tubular goods (OCTG), which are hollow steel products of circular cross-section, including oil well casing and tubing, of iron (other than case iron) or steel (both carbon and alloy), whether seamless or welded, regardless of end finish (
Subject merchandise includes material matching the above description that has been finished, packaged, or otherwise processed in a third country, including by performing any heat treatment, cutting, upsetting, threading, coupling, or any other finishing, packaging, or processing that would not otherwise remove the merchandise from the scope of the investigations if performed in the country of manufacture of the OCTG.
Excluded from the scope of the investigations are: casing or tubing containing 10.5 percent or more by weight of chromium; drill pipe; unattached couplings; and unattached thread protectors.
The merchandise subject to these investigations is currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item numbers: 7304.29.1010, 7304.29.1020, 7304.29.1030, 7304.29.1040, 7304.29.1050, 7304.29.1060, 7304.29.1080, 7304.29.2010, 7304.29.2020, 7304.29.2030, 7304.29.2040, 7304.29.2050,
The merchandise subject to the investigations may also enter under the following HTSUS item numbers: 7304.39.0024, 7304.39.0028, 7304.39.0032, 7304.39.0036, 7304.39.0040, 7304.39.0044, 7304.39.0048, 7304.39.0052, 7304.39.0056, 7304.39.0062, 7304.39.0068, 7304.39.0072, 7304.39.0076, 7304.39.0080, 7304.59.6000, 7304.59.8015, 7304.59.8020, 7304.59.8025, 7304.59.8030, 7304.59.8035, 7304.59.8040, 7304.59.8045, 7304.59.8050, 7304.59.8055, 7304.59.8060, 7304.59.8065, 7304.59.8070, 7304.59.8080, 7305.31.4000, 7305.31.6090, 7306.30.5055, 7306.30.5090, 7306.50.5050, and 7306.50.5070.
The HTSUS subheadings and specifications above are provided for convenience and customs purposes only. The written description of the scope of the investigations is dispositive.
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
Applicable October 26, 2021.
Paul Litwin (the Republic of Korea) or Allison Hollander (the Russian Federation), AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-6002 or (202) 482-2805, respectively.
On October 6, 2021, the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) received countervailing duty (CVD) petitions concerning imports of oil country tubular goods (OCTG) from the Republic of Korea (Korea) and the Russian Federation (Russia), filed in proper form on behalf of Borusan Mannesmann Pipe U.S., Inc.; PTC Liberty Tubulars LLC; U.S. Steel Tubular Products, Inc.; the United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union, AFL-CIO, CLC; and Welded Tube USA, Inc. (the petitioners), domestic producers of OCTG and a certified union that represents workers engaged in the production of OCTG.
On October 8, 12, and 19, 2021, Commerce requested supplemental information pertaining to certain aspects of the Petitions.
In accordance with section 702(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the petitioners allege that the Government of Korea (GOK) and the Government of Russia (GOR) are providing countervailable subsidies, within the meaning of sections 701 and 771(5) of the Act, to producers of OCTG in Korea and Russia, and that such imports are materially injuring, or threatening material injury to, the domestic industry producing OCTG in the United States. Consistent with section 702(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.202(b), for those alleged programs on which we are initiating CVD investigations, the Petitions were accompanied by information reasonably available to the petitioners supporting their allegations.
Commerce finds that the petitioners filed the Petitions on behalf of the domestic industry because the petitioners are interested parties, as defined in sections 771(9)(C) and (D) of the Act. Commerce also finds that the petitioners demonstrated sufficient industry support with respect to the initiation of the requested CVD investigations.
Because the Petitions were filed on October 6, 2021, the period of investigation (POI) for these CVD investigations is January 1, 2020, through December 31, 2020.
The merchandise covered by these investigations are oil country tubular goods from Korea and Russia. For a full description of the scope of these investigations,
On October 13, 2021, Commerce spoke with counsel to the petitioners regarding the proposed scope to ensure that the scope language in the Petitions is an accurate reflection of the products for which the domestic industry is seeking relief.
As discussed in the
Commerce requests that any factual information the parties consider relevant to the scope of the investigations be submitted during this time period. However, if a party subsequently finds that additional factual information pertaining to the scope of the investigations may be relevant, the party may contact Commerce and request permission to submit the additional information. All such comments must be filed on the records of each of the concurrent AD and CVD investigations.
All submissions to Commerce must be filed electronically using Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS), unless an exception applies.
Pursuant to sections 702(b)(4)(A)(i) and (ii) of the Act, Commerce notified the GOK and the GOR of the receipt of the Petitions and provided an opportunity for consultations with respect to the Petitions.
Section 702(b)(1) of the Act requires that a petition be filed on behalf of the domestic industry. Section 702(c)(4)(A) of the Act provides that a petition meets this requirement if the domestic producers or workers who support the petition account for: (i) At least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product; and (ii) more than 50 percent of the production of the domestic like product produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for, or opposition to, the petition. Moreover, section 702(c)(4)(D) of the Act provides that, if the petition does not establish support of domestic producers or workers accounting for more than 50 percent of the total production of the domestic like product, Commerce shall: (i) Poll the industry or rely on other information in order to determine if there is support for the petition, as required by subparagraph (A); or (ii) determine industry support using a statistically valid sampling method to poll the “industry.”
Section 771(4)(A) of the Act defines the “industry” as the producers as a whole of a domestic like product. Thus, to determine whether a petition has the requisite industry support, the statute directs Commerce to look to producers and workers who produce the domestic like product. The International Trade Commission (ITC), which is responsible for determining whether “the domestic industry” has been injured, must also determine what constitutes a domestic like product in order to define the industry. While both Commerce and the ITC must apply the same statutory definition regarding the domestic like product,
Section 771(10) of the Act defines the domestic like product as “a product which is like, or in the absence of like, most similar in characteristics and uses with, the article subject to an investigation under this title.” Thus, the reference point from which the domestic like product analysis begins is “the article subject to an investigation” (
With regard to the domestic like product, the petitioners do not offer a definition of the domestic like product distinct from the scope of the investigations.
In determining whether the petitioners have standing under section 702(c)(4)(A) of the Act, we considered the industry support data contained in the Petitions with reference to the domestic like product as defined in the “Scope of the Investigations,” in the appendix to this notice. To establish industry support, the petitioners provided the 2020 production of OCTG for the U.S. producers that support the Petitions.
On October 8, 15, and 20, 2021, we received comments on industry support from Tenaris Bay City, Inc.; IPSCO Tubulars Inc.; Maverick Tube Corporation; and Tenaris Global Services (U.S.A.) Corporation (collectively, Tenaris USA), U.S. producers of OCTG.
Based on the information provided in the Petitions, the First General Issues Supplement, Petitioners' Letter, the Second General Issues Supplement, Petitioners' Letter II, and other information readily available to Commerce, we determine that the domestic producers and workers have met the statutory criteria for industry support under section 702(c)(4)(A)(i) of the Act because the domestic producers (or workers) who support the Petitions account for at least 25 percent of the total production of the domestic like product.
Because Korea and Russia are “Subsidies Agreement Countries” within the meaning of section 701(b) of the Act, section 701(a)(2) of the Act applies to these investigations. Accordingly, the ITC must determine whether imports of the subject merchandise from Korea and/or Russia materially injure, or threaten material injury to, a U.S. industry.
The petitioners allege that imports of the subject merchandise are benefitting from countervailable subsidies and that such imports threaten to cause material injury to the U.S. industry producing the domestic like product. In addition, the petitioners allege that subject imports exceed the negligibility threshold provided for under section 771(24)(A) of the Act.
The petitioners contend that the industry's injured condition is illustrated by a significant and increasing volume of subject imports; reduced market share; underselling and price suppression; lost sales and revenues; declines in production, U.S. shipments, and capacity utilization; decline in employment; and adverse impact on the domestic industry's financial performance.
Based upon our examination of the Petitions on OCTG from Korea and Russia, including supplemental information provided by the petitioners, we find that the Petitions meet the requirements of section 702 of the Act. Therefore, we are initiating CVD investigations to determine whether imports of OCTG from Korea and Russia benefit from countervailable subsidies conferred by the GOK and the GOR, respectively. In accordance with section 703(b)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR
Based on our review of the Petition on Korean OCTG, we find that there is sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 46 alleged programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate on each program,
Based on our review of the Petition on Russian OCTG, we find that there is sufficient information to initiate a CVD investigation on 12 alleged programs. For a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate on each program,
The petitioners named 287 companies in Korea and 14 companies in Russia as producers/exporters of OCTG.
In the event that Commerce determines that the number of companies in Korea or Russia is large and it cannot individually examine each company based upon Commerce's resources, where appropriate, Commerce intends to select respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports of OCTG from Korea and Russia during the POI under the appropriate Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States subheadings listed in the “Scope of the Investigations,” in the appendix.
On October 19, 2021, Commerce released CBP data for U.S. imports of OCTG from Korea and Russia under administrative protective order (APO) to all parties with access to information protected by APO and indicated that interested parties wishing to comment regarding the CBP data and respondent selection must do so within three business days of the publication date of the notice of initiation of these CVD investigations.
Comments on CBP data and respondent selection must be filed electronically using ACCESS. An electronically filed document must be received successfully, in its entirety, by ACCESS no later than 5:00 p.m. ET on the specified deadline.
In accordance with section 702(b)(4)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.202(f), a copy of the public version of the Petitions has been provided to the GOK and GOR via ACCESS. To the extent practicable, Commerce will attempt to provide a copy of the public version of the Petitions to each exporter named in the Petitions, as provided under 19 CFR 351.203(c)(2).
Commerce will notify the ITC of our initiation, as required by section 702(d) of the Act.
The ITC will preliminarily determine, within 45 days after the date on which the Petitions were filed, whether there is a reasonable indication that imports of OCTG from Korea and Russia are materially injuring or threatening material injury to a U.S. industry.
Factual information is defined in 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) as: (i) Evidence submitted in response to questionnaires; (ii) evidence submitted in support of allegations; (iii) publicly available information to value factors under 19 CFR 351.408(c) or to measure the adequacy of remuneration under 19 CFR 351.511(a)(2); (iv) evidence placed on the record by Commerce; and (v) evidence other than factual information described in (i)-(iv). Any party, when submitting factual information, must specify under which subsection of 19 CFR 351.102(b)(21) the information is being submitted and, if the information is submitted to rebut, clarify, or correct factual information already on the record, provide an explanation identifying the information already on the record that the factual information seeks to rebut, clarify, or correct.
Parties may request an extension of time limits before the expiration of a time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301 or as otherwise specified by the Secretary. In general, an extension request will be considered untimely if it is filed after the expiration of the time limit established under 19 CFR 351.301. For submissions that are due from multiple parties simultaneously, an extension request will be considered untimely if it is filed after 10:00 a.m. ET on the due date. Under certain circumstances, Commerce may elect to specify a different time limit by which extension requests will be considered untimely for submissions which are due from multiple parties simultaneously. In such a case, Commerce will inform parties in a letter or memorandum of the deadline (including a specified time) by which extension requests must be filed to be considered timely. An extension request must be made in a separate, standalone submission; under limited circumstances Commerce will grant untimely-filed requests for the extension of time limits. Parties should review Commerce's regulations concerning the extension of time limits prior to submitting extension requests in these investigations.
Any party submitting factual information in an AD or CVD proceeding must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.
Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. Instructions for filing such applications may be found on the Commerce website at
This notice is issued and published pursuant to sections 702 and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.203(c).
The merchandise covered by the investigations is certain oil country tubular goods (OCTG), which are hollow steel products of circular cross-section, including oil well casing and tubing, of iron (other than case iron) or steel (both carbon and alloy), whether seamless or welded, regardless of end finish (
Subject merchandise includes material matching the above description that has been finished, packaged, or otherwise processed in a third country, including by performing any heat treatment, cutting, upsetting, threading, coupling, or any other finishing, packaging, or processing that would not otherwise remove the merchandise from the scope of the investigations if performed in the country of manufacture of the OCTG.
Excluded from the scope of the investigations are: Casing or tubing containing 10.5 percent or more by weight of chromium; drill pipe; unattached couplings; and unattached thread protectors.
The merchandise subject to these investigations is currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item numbers: 7304.29.1010, 7304.29.1020, 7304.29.1030, 7304.29.1040, 7304.29.1050, 7304.29.1060, 7304.29.1080, 7304.29.2010, 7304.29.2020, 7304.29.2030, 7304.29.2040, 7304.29.2050, 7304.29.2060, 7304.29.2080, 7304.29.3110, 7304.29.3120, 7304.29.3130, 7304.29.3140, 7304.29.3150, 7304.29.3160, 7304.29.3180, 7304.29.4110, 7304.29.4120, 7304.29.4130, 7304.29.4140, 7304.29.4150, 7304.29.4160, 7304.29.4180, 7304.29.5015, 7304.29.5030, 7304.29.5045, 7304.29.5060, 7304.29.5075, 7304.29.6115, 7304.29.6130, 7304.29.6145, 7304.29.6160, 7304.29.6175, 7305.20.2000, 7305.20.4000, 7305.20.6000, 7305.20.8000, 7306.29.1030, 7306.29.1090, 7306.29.2000, 7306.29.3100, 7306.29.4100, 7306.29.6010, 7306.29.6050, 7306.29.8110, and 7306.29.8150.
The merchandise subject to the investigations may also enter under the following HTSUS item numbers: 7304.39.0024, 7304.39.0028, 7304.39.0032, 7304.39.0036, 7304.39.0040, 7304.39.0044, 7304.39.0048, 7304.39.0052, 7304.39.0056, 7304.39.0062, 7304.39.0068, 7304.39.0072, 7304.39.0076, 7304.39.0080, 7304.59.6000, 7304.59.8015, 7304.59.8020, 7304.59.8025, 7304.59.8030, 7304.59.8035, 7304.59.8040, 7304.59.8045, 7304.59.8050, 7304.59.8055, 7304.59.8060, 7304.59.8065, 7304.59.8070, 7304.59.8080, 7305.31.4000, 7305.31.6090, 7306.30.5055, 7306.30.5090, 7306.50.5050, and 7306.50.5070.
The HTSUS subheadings above are provided for convenience and customs purposes only. The written description of the scope of the investigations is dispositive.
International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce.
Notice of an open meeting of a Federal Advisory Committee.
This notice sets forth the schedule and proposed topics for a meeting of the Environmental Technologies Trade Advisory Committee (ETTAC).
The meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, November 16, 2021 from 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST). The deadline for members of the public to register to participate, including requests to make comments during the meeting and for auxiliary aids, or to submit written comments for dissemination prior to the meeting, is 5:00 p.m. EST on Tuesday, November 9, 2021.
The meeting will be held virtually via Webex. Requests to register to participate (including to speak or for auxiliary aids) and any written comments should be submitted via email to Ms. Victoria Yue, Office of Energy & Environmental Industries, International Trade Administration, at
Ms. Victoria Yue, Office of Energy & Environmental Industries, International Trade Administration (Phone: 202-482-3492; email:
The meeting will take place on Tuesday, November 16, 2021 from 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. EST. The general meeting is open to the public, and time will be permitted for public comment from 4:30 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. EST. Members of the public seeking to attend the meeting are required to register in advance. Those interested in attending must provide notification by Tuesday, November 9, 2021, at 5:00 p.m. EST, via the contact information provided above. This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to OEEI at
Written comments concerning ETTAC affairs are welcome any time before or after the meeting. To be considered during the meeting, written comments must be received by Tuesday, November 9, 2021, at 5:00 p.m. EST to ensure transmission to the members before the meeting. Minutes will be available within 30 days of this meeting.
Topics to be considered: During the November 16 meeting, which will be the third meeting of the current charter term, the Committee will review draft recommendations and conduct subcommittee breakouts under the themes of Trade Policy and Export Competitiveness, Climate Change Mitigation and Resilience Technologies, and Waste Management and Circular Economy. An agenda will be made available one week prior to the meeting upon request to Victoria Yue.
Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce.
Brenda E. Brown, Office of AD/CVD Operations, Customs Liaison Unit, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202) 482-4735.
Each year during the anniversary month of the publication of an antidumping or countervailing duty order, finding, or suspended investigation, an interested party, as defined in section 771(9) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), may request, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213, that the Department of Commerce (Commerce) conduct an administrative review of that antidumping or countervailing duty order, finding, or suspended investigation.
All deadlines for the submission of comments or actions by Commerce discussed below refer to the number of calendar days from the applicable starting date.
In the event Commerce limits the number of respondents for individual examination for administrative reviews initiated pursuant to requests made for the orders identified below, Commerce intends to select respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data for U.S. imports during the period of review. We intend to release the CBP data under Administrative Protective Order (APO) to all parties having an APO within five days of publication of the initiation notice and to make our decision regarding respondent selection within 35 days of publication of the initiation
In the event Commerce decides it is necessary to limit individual examination of respondents and conduct respondent selection under section 777A(c)(2) of the Act:
In general, Commerce finds that determinations concerning whether particular companies should be “collapsed” (
Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), a party that requests a review may withdraw that request within 90 days of the date of publication of the notice of initiation of the requested review. The regulation provides that Commerce may extend this time if it is reasonable to do so. Determinations by Commerce to extend the 90-day deadline will be made on a case-by-case basis.
Section 504 of the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015 amended the Act by adding the concept of particular market situation (PMS) for purposes of constructed value under section 773(e) of the Act.
Neither section 773(e) of the Act nor 19 CFR 351.301(c)(2)(v) set a deadline for the submission of PMS allegations and supporting factual information. However, in order to administer section 773(e) of the Act, Commerce must receive PMS allegations and supporting factual information with enough time to consider the submission. Thus, should an interested party wish to submit a PMS allegation and supporting new factual information pursuant to section 773(e) of the Act, it must do so no later than 20 days after submission of initial Section D responses.
In accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b), an interested party as defined by section 771(9) of the Act may request in writing that the Secretary conduct an administrative review. For both antidumping and countervailing duty reviews, the interested party must specify the individual producers or exporters covered by an antidumping finding or an antidumping or countervailing duty order or suspension agreement for which it is requesting a review. In addition, a domestic interested party or an interested party described in section 771(9)(B) of the Act must state why it desires the Secretary to review those particular producers or exporters. If the interested party intends for the Secretary to review sales of merchandise by an exporter (or a producer if that producer also exports merchandise from other suppliers) which was produced in more than one country of origin and each country of origin is subject to a separate order, then the interested party must state specifically, on an order-by-order basis, which exporter(s) the request is intended to cover.
Note that, for any party Commerce was unable to locate in prior segments, Commerce will not accept a request for an administrative review of that party absent new information as to the party's location. Moreover, if the interested party who files a request for review is unable to locate the producer or exporter for which it requested the review, the interested party must provide an explanation of the attempts it made to locate the producer or
As explained in
Commerce no longer considers the non-market economy (NME) entity as an exporter conditionally subject to an antidumping duty administrative reviews.
All requests must be filed electronically in Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS) on Enforcement and Compliance's ACCESS website at
Commerce will publish in the
For the first administrative review of any order, there will be no assessment of antidumping or countervailing duties on entries of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption during the relevant provisional-measures “gap” period of the order, if such a gap period is applicable to the period of review.
This notice is not required by statute but is published as a service to the international trading community.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notice; public meeting.
The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council's Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass Advisory Panel will hold a public webinar meeting, jointly with the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission's Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass Advisory Panel.
The meeting will be held on Thursday, November 18, 2021, from 2 p.m. until 5 p.m.
The meeting will be held via webinar. Connection information will be posted prior to the meeting to the MAFMC's online calendar at
Christopher M. Moore, Ph.D., Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, telephone: (302) 526-5255.
The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council's Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass Advisory Panel will meet via webinar jointly with the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission's Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass Advisory Panel. The purpose of this meeting is to discuss 2022 federal waters recreational management measures (
The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aid should be directed to Shelley Spedden, (302) 526-5251, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notice of public meetings.
The Western Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) will hold meetings of its Fishing Industry Advisory Committee (FIAC), Non-Commercial Fisheries Advisory Committee (NCFAC), Social Science Planning Committee (SSPC), American Samoa Archipelago Fishery Ecosystem Plan (FEP) Advisory Panel (AP), the Pelagic Standing Committee of the Council, Mariana Archipelago FEP-Guam AP, Mariana Archipelago FEP-Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) AP, and Hawaii Archipelago FEP AP to discuss and make recommendations on fishery management issues in the Western Pacific Region.
The meetings will be held Tuesday, November 16, 2021 through Friday, November 19, 2021. For specific dates, times and agendas, see
Each of the meetings will be held by web conference via Webex. Instructions for connecting to the web conference and providing oral public comments will be posted on the Council website at
Kitty M. Simonds, Executive Director, Western Pacific Fishery Management Council; telephone: (808) 522-8220.
The FIAC will meet on Tuesday, November 16, 2021, from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m.; the NCFAC will meet on Tuesday, November 16, 2021, from 3 p.m. to 5 p.m.; the American Samoa Archipelago FEP AP will meet on Tuesday, November 16, 2021, from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m.; the Pelagic Standing Committee will meet on Wednesday, November 17, 2021, from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m.; the Mariana Archipelago FEP-CNMI AP will meet on Thursday, November 18, 2021, from 1:30 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.; the Mariana Archipelago FEP-Guam AP will meet on Thursday, November 18, 2021, from 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.; the SSPC will meet on Thursday, November 18, 2021, from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m.; and the Hawaii Archipelago FEP AP will meet on Friday, November 19, 2021, from 1:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. All times listed are Local Island times except for the FIAC, NCFAC, Pelagic Standing Committee, and SSPC are Hawaii Standard Time.
Public comment periods will be provided in the agendas. The order in which agenda items are addressed may change. The meetings will run as late as necessary to complete scheduled business.
These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Kitty M. Simonds, (808) 522-8220 (voice) or (808) 522-8226 (fax), at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notice of SEDAR 78 South Atlantic Spanish Mackerel Data/Assessment Webinar 1.
The SEDAR 78 assessment of the South Atlantic stock of Spanish mackerel will consist of a series of assessment webinars. A SEDAR 78 Data/Assessment Webinar 1 is scheduled for November 17, 2021. See
The SEDAR 78 South Atlantic Spanish Mackerel Data/Assessment Webinar 1 has been scheduled for November 17, 2021, from 9 a.m. until 12 p.m. Eastern. The established times may be adjusted as necessary to accommodate the timely completion of discussion relevant to the assessment process. Such adjustments may result in the meeting being extended from or completed prior to the time established by this notice.
The meeting will be held via webinar. The webinar is open to members of the public. Registration for the webinar is available by contacting the SEDAR coordinator via email at
Kathleen Howington, SEDAR Coordinator, 4055 Faber Place Drive, Suite 201, North Charleston, SC 29405; phone: (843) 571-4371; email:
The Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic, and Caribbean Fishery Management Councils, in conjunction with NOAA Fisheries and the Atlantic and Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commissions, have implemented the Southeast Data, Assessment and Review (SEDAR) process, a multi-step method for determining the status of fish stocks in the Southeast Region. SEDAR is a three-step process including: (1) Data Workshop; (2) Assessment Process utilizing webinars; and (3) Review
The items of discussion at the SEDAR 78 South Atlantic Spanish Mackerel Data/assessment Webinar 1 are as follows:
Identify and discuss data issues, begin discussion on base model configuration and discuss proposed changes to model, sensitivity runs, and projections.
Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically identified in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the intent to take final action to address the emergency.
This meeting is accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for auxiliary aids should be directed to the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council office (see
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notice of SEDAR 80 Life History Topical Working Group Webinar I for U.S. Caribbean queen triggerfish.
The SEDAR 80 stock assessment of U.S. Caribbean queen triggerfish will consist of a series of data webinars. See
The SEDAR 80 Life History Topical Working Group Webinar I will be held from 10 a.m. to 12 p.m. Eastern, November 19, 2021. The established times may be adjusted as necessary to accommodate the timely completion of discussion relevant to the assessment process. Such adjustments may result in the meeting being extended from or completed prior to the time established by this notice.
Julie A. Neer, SEDAR Coordinator; (843) 571-4366; email:
The Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic, and Caribbean Fishery Management Councils, in conjunction with NOAA Fisheries and the Atlantic and Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commissions have implemented the Southeast Data, Assessment and Review (SEDAR) process, a multi-step method for determining the status of fish stocks in the Southeast Region. SEDAR is a multi-step process including: (1) Data Workshop; (2) Assessment Process utilizing webinars; and (3) Review Workshop. The product of the Data Workshop is a data report that compiles and evaluates potential datasets and recommends which datasets are appropriate for assessment analyses. The product of the Assessment Process is a stock assessment report that describes the fisheries, evaluates the status of the stock, estimates biological benchmarks, projects future population conditions, and recommends research and monitoring needs. The assessment is independently peer reviewed at the Review Workshop. The product of the Review Workshop is a Summary documenting panel opinions regarding the strengths and weaknesses of the stock assessment and input data. Participants for SEDAR Workshops are appointed by the Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic, and Caribbean Fishery Management Councils and NOAA Fisheries Southeast Regional Office, HMS Management Division, and Southeast Fisheries Science Center. Participants include data collectors and database managers; stock assessment scientists, biologists, and researchers; constituency representatives including fishermen, environmentalists, and NGO's; International experts; and staff of Councils, Commissions, and state and federal agencies.
The items of discussion in the webinar are as follows:
Participants will discuss and make recommendations regrading what life history data may be included in the assessment of U.S. Caribbean Queen Triggerfish.
Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically identified in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the intent to take final action to address the emergency.
The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to the Council office (see
The times and sequence specified in this agenda are subject to change.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notice of a public meeting.
The Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (Council) will hold a one-day in-person and virtual (hybrid) meeting of its Standing, Reef Fish, Ecosystem and Socioeconomic Scientific and Statistical Committees (SSC).
The meeting will take place Thursday, November 18, 2021, from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., EST.
The in-person meeting will take place at the Gulf Council office. If you are unable to travel, you may attend via webinar. Registration information will be available on the Council's website by visiting
Mr. Ryan Rindone, Lead Fishery Biologist, Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council;
The meeting will begin with Introductions and Adoption of Agenda, Approval of Verbatim Minutes and Meeting Summary from the September 27-30, 2021 hybrid meeting, and review of the Scope of Work.
The Committees will review and evaluate the SEDAR 70 projections for Gulf of Mexico
The Committees will then review and evaluate the projections for SEDAR 72: Gulf of Mexico Gag, including presentations on the data and projections, Something's Fishy for Gag, and hold an SSC discussion for considering management recommendations.
The Committees will review SEDAR 68: Gulf of Mexico Scamp Research Track Assessment. The Committees will receive presentations on the data, assessment development, and peer-review. Council staff will present on Something's Fishy for Gulf Scamp. Next, the Committees will review and discuss the Terms of Reference (TOR) for SEDAR 68: Gulf of Mexico Scamp Operational Assessment, background and hold an SSC discussion.
Lastly, the Committees will receive public comment before addressing any items under Other Business.
The meeting will be also be broadcast via webinar. You may register for the webinar by visiting
The Agenda is subject to change, and the latest version along with other meeting materials will be posted on
Although other non-emergency issues not on the agenda may come before the Scientific and Statistical Committees for discussion, in accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Actions of the Scientific and Statistical Committee will be restricted to those issues specifically identified in the agenda and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under Section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take-action to address the emergency.
The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aid should be directed to Kathy Pereira, (813) 348-1630, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notice of a public meeting.
The South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council) will convene a meeting of the Outreach and Communications Advisory Panel via webinar to address upcoming outreach and communications topics.
The Outreach and Communications Advisory Panel (AP) meeting will be held via webinar November 18, 2021, from 1 p.m. until 5 p.m. and November 19, 2021, from 8:30 a.m. until 12 p.m.
Cameron Rhodes, Outreach Program Manager, South Atlantic Fishery Management Council; phone: (843) 725-7577 or toll free: (866) SAFMC-10; fax: (843) 769-4520; email:
The Outreach and Communications AP will meet to discuss the following agenda items: Social media policies; preliminary review of the new SAFMC website; outreach and communication needs relative to red snapper management issues; and building relationships with tackle shops. AP members will receive updates on the status of a Sea Grant fellowship, the Council's Citizen Science Program, and a draft Outreach and Communications Strategy for the Council's Habitat Blueprint. AP members will provide individual updates on outreach and communication efforts as appropriate.
The meeting is are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for auxiliary aids should be directed to the Council office (see
The times and sequence specified in this agenda are subject to change.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notice; public meeting.
The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council's (MAFMC's) Northeast Trawl Advisory Panel (NTAP) Working Group will hold a public meeting.
The meeting will be held on Friday, November 19, 2021, from 9 a.m. to 11 a.m. For agenda details, see
The meeting will be held via webinar. Details on the proposed agenda, webinar listen-in access, and briefing materials will be posted at the MAFMC's website:
Christopher M. Moore, Ph.D., Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, telephone: (302) 526-5255.
The purpose of this meeting is for the NTAP Working Group to review the goals and objectives of NTAP 2021 and 2022 research and discuss approaches for restrictor experiment research. The restrictor experiment research will include a discussion of target species, site selection, and the paired tow approach. Then, the NTAP working group will develop talking points for a full NTAP update and discuss other business.
The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Shelley Spedden at the Mid-Atlantic Council Office, (302) 526-5251, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
Notice; public meeting.
The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council will hold a webinar question-and-answer session for stakeholders regarding electronic vessel trip reporting (eVTR) after the recent implementation of required commercial electronic reporting.
The question-and-answer session will be held via webinar on Thursday, November 18, 2021, beginning at 5 p.m. For details, see
This meeting will be held via webinar and connection and agenda information will be posted at the MAFMC's website:
Christopher M. Moore, Ph.D., Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, telephone: (302) 526-5255.
This is a Council-hosted eVTR question and answer session open to the public and targeted towards commercial operators. Beginning on November 10, 2021, all commercial vessels with federal permits for species managed by the Mid-Atlantic or New England Council will be required to submit vessel trip reports (VTRs) electronically as eVTRs within 48 hours of the end of a trip (unless required sooner as with some sector allocations). This action does not change any other existing requirements associated with VTRs. These changes were recommended by the MAFMC and NEFMC in order to increase the timeliness and availability of data submitted through VTRs, reduce the reporting burden on commercial vessel operators, and increase the accuracy and quality of data. This meeting follows multiple Council held training workshops and will act as an opportunity for follow up questions regarding using an approved eVTR software application.
This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Shelley Spedden at the Mid-Atlantic Council Office (302) 526-5251 at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.
Office of Postsecondary Education, Department of Education.
Notice.
The Department of Education (Department) is issuing a notice inviting applications for fiscal year (FY) 2022 for the Centers for International Business Education (CIBE) program, Assistance Listing Number 84.220A. This notice relates to the approved information collection under OMB control number 1840-0616.
For the addresses for obtaining and submitting an application, please refer to our Common Instructions for Applicants to Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the
Timothy Duvall, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 2B225, Washington, DC 20202. Telephone: (202) 453-7521. Email:
If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) or a text telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.
These priorities are:
Applications that propose to collaborate with one or more professional associations and/or businesses on activities designed to expand employment opportunities for international business students, such as internships and work-study opportunities.
Applications that propose significant and sustained collaborative activities with one or more MSIs (as defined in this notice) and/or with one or more community colleges (as defined in this notice). These activities must be designed to incorporate international, intercultural, or global dimensions into the business curriculum of the MSI(s) and/or community college(s). If an applicant institution is an MSI, that institution may propose intra-campus collaborative activities instead of, or in addition to, collaborative activities with other MSIs or community colleges.
For the purpose of this priority:
This priority is:
Applications that propose programs or activities focused on language instruction and/or performance testing and assessment to strengthen the preparation of international business professionals.
An applicant must submit, as part of its application—
(a) Evidence that the IHE, or consortium of such IHEs, will conduct extensive planning prior to the establishment of a center concerning the scope of the center's activities and the design of its programs in accordance with 20 U.S.C. 1130-1(d)(1);
(b) Assurance of ongoing collaboration in the establishment and operation of the center by faculty of the business, management, foreign language, international studies, professional international affairs, and other professional schools or departments, as appropriate;
(c) Assurance that the education and training programs of the center will be open to students concentrating in each of these respective areas, as appropriate, and that diverse perspectives will be made available to students in programs under 612(f) of the HEA; and
(d) Assurance that the IHE, or consortium of such IHEs, will use the assistance provided under this program to supplement and not to supplant activities conducted by IHEs described in 20 U.S.C. 1130-1(c)(1).
Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of applications, we may make additional awards in future fiscal years from the list of unfunded applications from this competition.
1.
2.
a. Not more than 90 percent for the first year in which Federal funds are received;
b. Not more than 70 percent for the second year; and
c. Not more than 50 percent for the third year and for each year thereafter.
The non-Federal share of the cost of planning, establishing, and operating centers under this program may be provided either in cash or in-kind.
d.
e.
3.
1.
2.
Consistent with Executive Order 12600, please designate in your application any information that you believe is exempt from disclosure under Exemption 4. In the appropriate Appendix section of your application, under “Other Attachments Form,” please list the page number or numbers on which we can find this information. For additional information please see 34 CFR 5.11(c).
3.
4.
• A “page” is 8.5″ x 11″, on one side only, with 1″ margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.
• Double space (no more than three lines per vertical inch) all text in the application narrative,
• Use a font that is either 12 point or larger or no smaller than 10 pitch (characters per inch).
• Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier, Courier New, or Arial.
The recommended page limit does not apply to the cover sheet; budget section, including the narrative budget justification; the assurance and certifications; or the abstract, the resumes, the biography, or letters of support. However, the recommended page limit does apply to all of the application narrative.
1.
(a)
The Secretary reviews each application to determine how well the applicant describes how it will establish and operate Centers for International Business Education which—
(1) Will be national resources for the teaching of improved business techniques, strategies, and methodologies which emphasize the international context in which business is transacted;
(2) Will provide instruction in critical foreign languages and international fields needed to provide understanding
(3) Will provide research and training in the international aspects of trade, commerce, and other fields of study.
(b)
In determining the significance of the proposed project, the Secretary considers—
(1) The national significance of the proposed project.
(2) The importance or magnitude of the results or outcomes likely to be attained by the proposed project.
(c)
In determining the quality of the design of the proposed project, the Secretary considers the extent to which the proposed activities constitute a coherent, sustained program of research and development in the field, including, as appropriate, a substantial addition to an ongoing line of inquiry.
(d)
In determining the quality of the management plan for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing project tasks.
(e)
In determining the quality of project personnel, the Secretary considers—
(1) The extent to which the applicant encourages applications for employment from persons who are members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability.
(2) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, of the project director or principal investigator.
(3) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, of key project personnel.
(f)
In determining the adequacy of resources for the proposed project, the Secretary considers—
(1) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed project.
(2) The adequacy of support, including facilities, equipment, supplies, and other resources, from the applicant organization or the lead applicant organization.
(g)
In determining the quality of the evaluation, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(1) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough, feasible, and appropriate to the goals, objectives, and outcomes of the proposed project.
(2) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are appropriate to the context within which the project operates.
(3) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide timely guidance for quality assurance.
(4) The extent to which the methods of evaluation will provide performance feedback and permit periodic assessment of progress toward achieving intended outcomes.
2.
In addition, in making a competitive grant award, the Secretary requires various assurances, including those applicable to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department (34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).
3.
4.
Please note that if the total value of your currently active grants, cooperative agreements, and procurement contracts from the Federal Government exceeds $10,000,000, the reporting requirements in 2 CFR part 200, Appendix XII, require you to report certain integrity information to FAPIIS semiannually. Please review the requirements in 2 CFR part 200, Appendix XII, if this grant plus all the other Federal funds you receive exceed $10,000,000.
5.
(a) Selecting recipients most likely to be successful in delivering results based on the program objectives through an objective process of evaluating Federal award applications (2 CFR 200.205);
(b) Prohibiting the purchase of certain telecommunication and video surveillance services or equipment in alignment with section 889 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2019 (Pub. L. 115-232) (2 CFR 200.216);
(c) Providing a preference, to the extent permitted by law, to maximize use of goods, products, and materials
(d) Terminating agreements in whole or in part to the greatest extent authorized by law if an award no longer effectuates the program goals or agency priorities (2 CFR 200.340).
1.
If your application is not evaluated or not selected for funding, we notify you.
2.
We reference the regulations outlining the terms and conditions of an award in the
3.
4.
(b) At the end of your project period, you must submit a final performance report, including financial information, as directed by the Secretary. If you receive a multiyear award, you must submit an annual performance report that provides the most current performance and financial expenditure information as directed by the Secretary under 34 CFR 75.118. The Secretary may also require more frequent performance reports under 34 CFR 75.720(c). For specific requirements on reporting, please go to
Performance reports for the CIBE Program must be submitted electronically into the office of International and Foreign Language Education (IFLE) web-based reporting system, International Resource Information System (IRIS). For information about IRIS and to view the reporting instructions, please go to
(c) Under 34 CFR 75.250(b), the Secretary may provide a grantee with additional funding for data collection analysis and reporting. If a grantee is provided additional funding for this purpose, the Secretary establishes a data collection period.
5.
(a) Percentage of CIBE Program participants who advanced in their professional field two years after their participation.
(b) Percentage of CIBE projects that established or internationalized a concentration, degree, or professional program with a focus on or connection to international business over the course of the CIBE grant period. (long-term measure).
(c) Percentage of CIBE projects for which there was an increase in the export business activities of the project's business industry participants.
The information provided by grantees in their performance reports submitted via IRIS will be the source of data for these measures. Reporting screens for institutions can be viewed at:
6.
In making a continuation award, the Secretary also considers whether the grantee is operating in compliance with the assurances in its approved application, including those applicable to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department (34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).
You may also access documents of the Department published in the
Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings:
Take notice that the Commission received the following qualifying facility filings:
The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system (
Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at:
Take notice that on October 19, 2021, WBI Energy Transmission, Inc. (WBI) requested that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) grant an extension of time, until November 1, 2022, to complete the 2020 Baker Storage Well Abandonment Project (Project), as authorized after the 60-day deadline of WBI's prior notice issued by the Commission on September 3, 2020. By that process, WBI was initially required to abandon the facilities in one year, by November 2, 2021.
WBI states that on October 12, 2021, the Project area received a measurable amount of rain and snow delaying the removal of the remaining 17 drip lines over concerns of excessive rutting along the right-of-way and within the approved workspace areas. WBI is requesting an extension of time due to the uncertainty in the workplace conditions over the next few weeks, that may prevent WBI from completing abandonment activities ahead of the original deadline.
This notice establishes a 15-calendar day intervention and comment period deadline. Any person wishing to comment on WBI's request for an extension of time may do so. No reply comments or answers will be considered. If you wish to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this request, you should, on or before the comment date stated below, file a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211)
As a matter of practice, the Commission itself generally acts on requests for extensions of time to complete construction for Natural Gas Act facilities when such requests are contested before order issuance. For those extension requests that are contested,
In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFile” link at
Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file comments, motions to intervene, and protests using the Commission's eFiling system at
The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person whose name appears on the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency.
k.
l.
m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
n.
o.
On October 15, 2021, Brookfield White Pine Hydro LLC (Brookfield) submitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission a copy of its application for a Clean Water Act section 401(a)(1) water quality certification filed with the Maine Department of Environmental Protection (Maine DEP), in conjunction with the above captioned project. On October 20, 2021, Brookfield filed documentation of the date that Maine DEP received the application. Pursuant to 40 CFR 121.6, we hereby notify the Maine DEP of the following:
If the Maine DEP fails or refuses to act on the water quality certification request by the above waiver date, then the agency's certifying authority is deemed waived pursuant to section 401(a)(1) of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1341(a)(1).
In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) regulations, 18 CFR part 380, the Office of Energy Projects has reviewed the application for a subsequent license for the Scopan Hydroelectric Project No. 2368, located on Scopan Stream in Aroostook County, Maine, and has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) for the project. No federal land would be occupied by project works or located within the project boundary.
The EA contains staff's analysis of the potential environmental impacts of the project and concludes that licensing the project, with appropriate environmental protective measures, would not constitute a major federal action that would significantly affect the quality of the human environment.
The Commission provides all interested persons with an opportunity to view and/or print the EA via the internet through the Commission's Home Page (
You may also register online at
Any comments should be filed within 30 days from the date of this notice.
The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file comments using the Commission's eFiling system at
For further information, contact John Baummer at (202) 502-6837, or at
This constitutes notice, in accordance with 18 CFR 385.2201(b), of the receipt of prohibited and exempt off-the-record communications.
Order No. 607 (64 FR 51222, September 22, 1999) requires Commission decisional employees, who make or receive a prohibited or exempt off-the-record communication relevant
Prohibited communications are included in a public, non-decisional file associated with, but not a part of, the decisional record of the proceeding. Unless the Commission determines that the prohibited communication and any responses thereto should become a part of the decisional record, the prohibited off-the-record communication will not be considered by the Commission in reaching its decision. Parties to a proceeding may seek the opportunity to respond to any facts or contentions made in a prohibited off-the-record communication and may request that the Commission place the prohibited communication and responses thereto in the decisional record. The Commission will grant such a request only when it determines that fairness so requires. Any person identified below as having made a prohibited off-the-record communication shall serve the document on all parties listed on the official service list for the applicable proceeding in accordance with Rule 2010, 18 CFR 385.2010.
Exempt off-the-record communications are included in the decisional record of the proceeding, unless the communication was with a cooperating agency as described by 40 CFR 1501.6, made under 18 CFR 385.2201(e)(1)(v).
The following is a list of off-the-record communications recently received by the Secretary of the Commission. The communications listed are grouped by docket numbers in ascending order. These filings are available for electronic review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's website at
On December 29, 2020, Cocheco Falls Associates filed an application for a subsequent license to continue operating the existing 714-kilowatt Cocheco Falls Dam Project No. 4718 (project). The project is located on the Cocheco River in the city of Dover, Strafford County, New Hampshire. The project does not occupy federal land.
In accordance with the Commission's regulations, on August 12, 2021, Commission staff issued a notice that the project was ready for environmental analysis (REA notice). Based on the information in the record, including comments filed on the REA notice, staff does not anticipate that licensing the project would constitute a major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. Therefore, staff intends to prepare an Environmental Assessment (EA) on the application to license the project.
The EA will be issued and circulated for review by all interested parties. All comments filed on the EA will be analyzed by staff and considered in the Commission's final licensing decision.
The application will be processed according to the following schedule. Revisions to the schedule may be made as appropriate.
Any
a.
b.
c.
d.
e. All local, state, and federal agencies, Indian tribes, and other interested parties are invited to attend. Discussion will be limited to the Lower Coosawattee Hydroelectric Project, P-14985. Please email the FERC contact
Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:
Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding.
Any person desiring to protest in any the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date.
The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system (
eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at:
The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) will prepare an environmental document, that will discuss the environmental impacts of the Rover-Brightmark Receipt and Delivery Meter Station Project involving construction and operation of facilities by Rover Pipeline LLC (Rover) in Lenawee County, Michigan. The Commission will use this environmental document in its decision-making process to determine whether the project is in the public convenience and necessity.
This notice announces the opening of the scoping process the Commission will use to gather input from the public and interested agencies regarding the project. As part of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review process, the Commission takes into account concerns the public may have about proposals and the environmental impacts that could result from its action whenever it considers the issuance of a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. This gathering of public input is referred to as “scoping.” The main goal of the scoping process is to focus the analysis in the environmental document on the important environmental issues. Additional information about the Commission's NEPA process is described below in the
By this notice, the Commission requests public comments on the scope of issues to address in the environmental document. To ensure that your comments are timely and properly recorded, please submit your comments so that the Commission receives them in Washington, DC on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on November 26, 2021. Comments may be submitted in written form. Further details on how to submit comments are provided in the
Your comments should focus on the potential environmental effects, reasonable alternatives, and measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts. Your input will help the Commission staff determine what issues they need to evaluate in the environmental document. Commission staff will consider all written comments during the preparation of the environmental document.
If you submitted comments on this project to the Commission before the opening of this docket on September 9, 2021, you will need to file those comments in Docket No. CP21-492-000 to ensure they are considered as part of this proceeding.
This notice is being sent to the Commission's current environmental mailing list for this project. State and local government representatives should notify their constituents of this
If you are a landowner receiving this notice, a pipeline company representative may contact you about the acquisition of an easement to construct, operate, and maintain the proposed facilities. The company would seek to negotiate a mutually acceptable easement agreement. You are not required to enter into an agreement. However, if the Commission approves the project, the Natural Gas Act conveys the right of eminent domain to the company. Therefore, if you and the company do not reach an easement agreement, the pipeline company could initiate condemnation proceedings in court. In such instances, compensation would be determined by a judge in accordance with state law. The Commission does not subsequently grant, exercise, or oversee the exercise of that eminent domain authority. The courts have exclusive authority to handle eminent domain cases; the Commission has no jurisdiction over these matters.
Rover provided landowners with a fact sheet prepared by the FERC entitled “An Interstate Natural Gas Facility On My Land? What Do I Need To Know?” which addresses typically asked questions, including the use of eminent domain and how to participate in the Commission's proceedings. This fact sheet along with other landowner topics of interest are available for viewing on the FERC website (
There are three methods you can use to submit your comments to the Commission. Please carefully follow these instructions so that your comments are properly recorded. The Commission encourages electronic filing of comments and has staff available to assist you at (866) 208-3676 or
(1) You can file your comments electronically using the
(2) You can file your comments electronically by using the
(3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to the Commission. Be sure to reference the project docket number (CP21-492-000) on your letter. Submissions sent via the U.S. Postal Service must be addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426. Submissions sent via any other carrier must be addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
Additionally, the Commission offers a free service called eSubscription which makes it easy to stay informed of all issuances and submittals regarding the dockets/projects to which you subscribe. These instant email notifications are the fastest way to receive notification and provide a link to the document files which can reduce the amount of time you spend researching proceedings. Go to
Rover has an Interconnect Agreement with Brightmark SunRyz RNG LLC (Brightmark) for installation of the proposed meter station. The Rove-Brightmark Receipt and Delivery Meter Station Project would allow Rover to receive up to 1,600 dekatherms per day of natural gas from the Brightmark Project and to allow Rover to deliver up to 100 dekatherms per day of natural gas to fuel the Brightmark Renewable Natural Gas Facility Equipment.
The Rover-Brightmark Receipt and Delivery Meter Station Project would consist of the following facilities constructed by Rover or Brightmark:
• Rover would construct, own, and operate two, 2-inch-diameter hot taps, two tap valves, 65 feet of interconnecting pipe (30 feet of receipt pipe and 35 feet of delivery pipe), two Coriolis Meter Skids, gas quality building, a measurement building, and satellite communications.
• Brightmark would construct and own the permanent access road and the 2-inch-diameter delivery and receipt gas lines from its facility to the proposed meter station.
The general location of the project facilities is shown in appendix 1.
Construction of the proposed facilities would disturb about 0.6 acre of agricultural land, of which 0.2 acre would be fenced and maintained for the permanent operation of the meter station. Rover would access the Project facilities using a permanent access road to be constructed by Brightmark. This access road would be approximately 2,987 feet long, 20 feet wide, and affect approximately 1.4 acres of land. Laydown for equipment and materials would be within the temporary workspace associated with the meter station. No other land would be required for construction or operation of the Project.
Any environmental document issued by the Commission will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of the construction and operation of the proposed project under the relevant general resource areas:
• Geology and soils;
• water resources and wetlands;
• vegetation and wildlife;
• threatened and endangered species;
• cultural resources;
• land use;
• air quality and noise; and
• reliability and safety.
Commission staff will also evaluate reasonable alternatives to the proposed project or portions of the project and make recommendations on how to lessen or avoid impacts on the various resource areas. Your comments will help Commission staff identify and focus on the issues that might have an effect on the human environment and potentially eliminate others from further study and discussion in the environmental document.
Following this scoping period, Commission staff will determine whether to prepare an Environmental Assessment (EA) or an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The EA or the EIS will present Commission staff's independent analysis of the issues. If Commission staff prepares an EA, a
With this notice, the Commission is asking agencies with jurisdiction by law and/or special expertise with respect to the environmental issues of this project to formally cooperate in the preparation of the environmental document.
In accordance with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's implementing regulations for section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, the Commission is using this notice to initiate consultation with the applicable State Historic Preservation Office(s), and to solicit their views and those of other government agencies, interested Indian tribes, and the public on the project's potential effects on historic properties.
The environmental mailing list includes federal, state, and local government representatives and agencies; elected officials; environmental and public interest groups; Native American Tribes; other interested parties; and local libraries and newspapers. This list also includes all affected landowners (as defined in the Commission's regulations) who are potential right-of-way grantors, whose property may be used temporarily for project purposes, or who own homes within certain distances of aboveground facilities, and anyone who submits comments on the project and includes a mailing address with their comments. Commission staff will update the environmental mailing list as the analysis proceeds to ensure that Commission notices related to this environmental review are sent to all individuals, organizations, and government entities interested in and/or potentially affected by the proposed project.
If you need to make changes to your name/address, or if you would like to remove your name from the mailing list, please complete one of the following steps:
(1) Send an email to
(2) Return the attached “Mailing List Update Form” (appendix 2).
Additional information about the project is available from the Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the FERC website at
Public sessions or site visits will be posted on the Commission's calendar located at
On August 27, 2021, Alliance Pipeline, L.P. (Alliance) submitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) a copy of its application for a Clean Water Act section 401(a)(1) water quality certification filed with Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA), in conjunction with the above captioned project. Pursuant to 40 CFR 121.6, we hereby notify the IEPA of the following:
If IEPA fails or refuses to act on the water quality certification request by the above waiver date, then the agency certifying authority is deemed waived pursuant to section 401(a)(1) of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1341(a)(1).
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Notice.
This notice announces EPA's order for the cancellations and/or amendments to terminate uses, voluntarily requested by the registrants and accepted by the Agency, of the products listed in Tables 1 and 2 of Unit II, pursuant to the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). This cancellation/use termination order follows a June 23, 2021
The cancellations and certain use terminations are effective November 1, 2021.
Carolyn Smith, Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number: (202) 566-2273; email address:
This action is directed to the public in general and may be of interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human health, farm worker, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry; pesticide users; and members of the public interested in the sale, distribution, or use of pesticides. Since others also may be interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action.
The docket for this action, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2021-0377, is available at
Due to the public health concerns related to COVID-19, the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC) and Reading Room are closed to visitors with limited exceptions. The staff continues to provide remote customer service via email, phone, and webform. For the latest information on EPA/DC services and docket access, visit
This notice announces the cancellation and amendments to terminate uses, as requested by registrants, of products registered under FIFRA section 3 (7 U.S.C. 136a). These registrations are listed in sequence by registration number in Tables 1 and 2 of this unit.
Table 3 of this unit includes the names and addresses of record for all registrants of the products in Tables 1 and 2 of this unit, in sequence by EPA company number. This number corresponds to the first part of the EPA registration numbers of the products listed in Tables 1 and 2 of this unit.
During the public comment period provided, EPA received no comments in response to the June 23, 2021
Pursuant to FIFRA section 6(f) (7 U.S.C. 136d(f)), EPA hereby approves the requested cancellations and/or amendments to terminate uses of the registrations identified in Tables 1 and 2 of Unit II. Accordingly, the Agency hereby orders that the product registrations identified in Tables 1 and 2 of Unit II are canceled and/or amended to terminate the affected uses. The effective date of the cancellations and amendments listed in Tables 1 and 2 that are the subject of this notice is November 1, 2021. Any distribution, sale, or use of existing stocks of the products identified in Tables 1 and 2 of Unit II in a manner inconsistent with any of the provisions for disposition of existing stocks set forth in Unit VI will be a violation of FIFRA.
Section 6(f)(1) of FIFRA (7 U.S.C. 136d(f)(1)) provides that a registrant of a pesticide product may at any time request that any of its pesticide registrations be canceled or amended to terminate one or more uses. FIFRA further provides that, before acting on the request, EPA must publish a notice of receipt of any such request in the
Existing stocks are those stocks of registered pesticide products which are currently in the United States and which were packaged, labeled, and released for shipment prior to the effective date of the cancellation and/or use termination action. The existing stocks provisions for the products subject to this order are as follows.
The registrants may continue to sell and distribute existing stocks of products listed in Table 1 of Unit II until November 1, 2022, which is 1 year after the publication of the cancellation/use termination order in the
EPA has recently approved or will shortly approve product labels reflecting the requested amendments to terminate uses listed in Table 2 of Unit II and is allowing registrants to continue to sell or distribute products under the previously approved labeling for a period of 18 months from the label approval date. Thereafter, registrants will be prohibited from selling or distributing the products whose labels include the terminated uses identified in Table 2 of Unit II, except for export consistent with FIFRA section 17 or for proper disposal. Amended product labels can be viewed on EPA's Pesticide Product Label System (see
Persons other than the registrants may sell, distribute, or use existing stocks of the canceled products and products whose labels include the terminated uses listed in Tables 1 and 2, respectively, of Unit II until existing supplies are exhausted, provided that such sale, distribution, or use is
Federal Communications Commission.
Notice and request for comments.
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or the Commission) invites the general public and other Federal Agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection. Pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, the FCC seeks specific comment on how it can further reduce the information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be submitted on or before December 1, 2021.
Comments should be sent to
For additional information or copies of the information collection, contact Cathy Williams at (202) 418-2918. To view a copy of this information collection request (ICR) submitted to OMB: (1) Go to the web page
The Commission may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid OMB control number.
As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the FCC invited the general public and other Federal Agencies to take this 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.”
On November 10, 2014, the Commission released a Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FCC 14-181) in WT Docket No. 12-40 to reform its rules governing the 800 MHz Cellular Radiotelephone (Cellular) Service. In the Report and Order (Cellular R&O), the Commission changed the Cellular licensing model from site-based to geographic-based. The revised Cellular Service licensing model entailed eliminating several filing requirements that had outlived their usefulness in this mature commercial wireless service that was launched in the early 1980s; it also streamlined application content requirements, and deleted obsolete provisions associated with the legacy site-based regime.
Subsequently, on March 24, 2017, the Commission released a Second Report and Order in that same docket (Cellular Second R&O), together with a companion Report and Order in WT Docket No. 10-112 concerning the Wireless Radio Services (WRS), which include the Cellular Service among others (WRS R&O) (FCC 17-27). The Cellular Second R&O and WRS R&O
On July 13, 2018, the Commission released a Third report and Order in the Cellular Reform proceeding (Cellular 3d R&O) (FCC 18-92), in which it deleted certain Part 22 rules that either imposed administrative and recordkeeping burdens that are outdated and no longer serve the public interest, or that are largely duplicative of later-adopted rules and are thus no longer necessary. Among the rule deletions and of relevance to this information collection, the Commission deleted rule section 22.303, resulting in discontinued information collection for that rule section.
The Commission is now seeking approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for a revision of this information collection.
Thursday, October 28, 2021 at 10:00 a.m.
Virtual meeting. Note: Because of the Covid-19 pandemic, we will conduct the open meeting virtually. If you would like to access the meeting, see the instructions below.
The October 28, 2021 Open Meeting has been canceled.
Judith Ingram, Press Officer, Telephone: (202) 694-1220.
Federal Housing Finance Agency.
30-Day notice of submission of information collection for approval from Office of Management and Budget.
In accordance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA or the Agency) is seeking public comments concerning an information collection known as “Minimum Requirements for Appraisal Management Companies,” which has been assigned control number 2590-0013 by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). FHFA intends to submit the information collection to OMB for review and approval of a three-year extension of the control number, which is due to expire on October 31, 2021.
Interested persons may submit comments on or before December 1, 2021.
Submit comments to FHFA, identified by “Proposed Collection; Comment Request: `Minimum Requirements for Appraisal Management Companies, (No. 2021-N-11)' ” by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
We will post all public comments we receive without change, including any personal information you provide, such as your name and address, email address, and telephone number, on the FHFA website at
Also send a copy of any comments that concern this information collection to
Robert Witt. Senior Policy Analyst, Office of Housing and Regulatory Policy, by email at
FHFA is seeking comments on its upcoming request to OMB to renew the PRA clearance for the following collection of information:
In 2015, FHFA, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Board) (collectively, the Agencies) jointly issued regulations
The regulations also implement the statutory requirement that states report to the Appraisal Subcommittee (ASC) of the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC) the information required by the ASC to administer the national registry of AMCs (AMC National Registry or Registry).
FHFA's AMC regulation, located at Subpart B of 12 CFR part 1222, is substantively identical to the AMC regulations of the FDIC, OCC, and the Board and contains the recordkeeping and reporting requirements described below.
FHFA's 60-day notice included an information collection named “State Reporting Requirements” regarding the regulatory requirement that each state electing to register AMCs for purposes of permitting AMCs to provide appraisal management services relating to covered transactions in the state submit to the ASC the information regarding such AMCs required to be submitted by ASC regulations or guidance concerning AMCs that operate in the state.
States seeking to register AMCs must have an AMC registration and supervision program. The regulation requires each participating state to establish and maintain within its appraiser certifying and licensing agency a registration and supervision program with the legal authority and mechanisms to: (i) Review and approve or deny an application for initial registration; (ii) periodically review and renew, or deny renewal of, an AMC's registration; (iii) examine an AMC's books and records and require the submission of reports, information, and documents; (iv) verify an AMC's panel members' certifications or licenses; (v) investigate and assess potential violations of laws, regulations, or orders; (vi) discipline, suspend, terminate, or deny registration renewals of, AMCs that violate laws, regulations, or orders; and (vii) report violations of appraisal-related laws, regulations, or orders, and disciplinary and enforcement actions to the ASC.
The regulation requires each participating state to impose requirements on AMCs that are not federally regulated (non-federally regulated AMCs) to: (i) Register with and be subject to supervision by a state appraiser certifying and licensing agency in each state in which the AMC operates; (ii) use only state-certified or state-licensed appraisers for federally regulated transactions in conformity with any federally regulated transaction regulations; (iii) establish and comply with processes and controls reasonably designed to ensure that the AMC, in engaging an appraiser, selects an appraiser who is independent of the transaction and who has the requisite education, expertise, and experience necessary to competently complete the appraisal assignment for the particular market and property type; (iv) direct the appraiser to perform the assignment in accordance with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice; and (v) establish and comply with processes and controls reasonably designed to ensure that the AMC conducts its appraisal management services in accordance with sections 129E(a) through (i) of the Truth-in-Lending Act.
FHFA is redesignating this IC from #2 to #3.
The regulation provides that an AMC may not be registered by a state or included on the AMC National Registry if the company is owned, directly or indirectly, by any person who has had an appraiser license or certificate refused, denied, cancelled, surrendered in lieu of revocation, or revoked in any state for a substantive cause.
In FHFA's 60-day notice, we combined federally and non-federally regulated AMCs in former IC #3, entitled “AMC Reporting Requirements.” Subsequently, the FDIC issued its 30-day notice dividing the same information collected in FHFA's “AMC Reporting Requirements” IC into two different ICs: One for state-regulated AMCs, for which FHFA would take 10 percent of the burden (FDIC IC #3); and one for federally regulated AMCs, for which FHFA would take zero burden (FDIC IC #4).
An entity meets the definition of an AMC that is subject to the requirements of the AMC regulation if, among other things, it oversees an appraiser panel of more than 15 state-certified or state-licensed appraisers in a state, or 25 or more state-certified or state-licensed appraisers in two or more states, within a given 12-month period.
For the information collections described above, the general methodology is to compute the industry-wide burden hours for participating states and AMCs and then assign a share of the burden hours to each of the Agencies for each information collection.
As noted above, each of the Agencies' AMC regulations contains reporting and recordkeeping requirements applying to participating states and to both federally regulated and non-federally regulated AMCs.
Thus, for IC #1 “State Recordkeeping Requirements,” which relates to reporting and recordkeeping requirements imposed upon participating states, each agency is responsible for 25 percent of the total estimated burden. For IC #3“AMC Disclosure Requirements (Written Notice of Appraiser Removal From Network or Panel)” which relates to disclosure requirements imposed upon both federally regulated AMCs and non-federally regulated AMCs, the OCC, FDIC, and the Board are each responsible for 30 percent of the total burden, while FHFA is responsible only for 10 percent of the burden imposed.
The Agencies estimate the total annualized hour burden placed on respondents by the information collection in the joint AMC regulations to be 8,208 hours. FHFA estimates its share of the hour burden to be 837 hours. The calculations on which those estimations are based are described below.
The estimated burden hours on participating states for developing and maintaining an AMC licensing program is calculated by multiplying the number of states without a registration and licensing program by the hour burden to develop the system. The total burden hours are then equally divided among the FDIC, OCC, Board, and FHFA. According to the ASC there are four states (the territories of Guam, Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands) that have not developed a system to register and oversee AMCs.
The burden for AMC disclosure requirements for information needed to determine the AMC National Registry fee and information regarding compliance with the AMC ownership restrictions is calculated by multiplying the number of AMCs by the frequency of response and then by the burden per response. As described above, 30 percent of the burden hours are then assigned to each of the FDIC, OCC, and the Board, while 10 percent are assigned to FHFA. There are 3,820 state-regulated AMCs.
The frequency of response is estimated as the number of states that do not have an AMC registration program in which the average AMC operates.
The burden for disclosure by AMCs of written notices of appraiser removal from a network or panel is estimated to be equal to the number of appraisers who leave the profession per year multiplied by the estimated percentage of appraisers who work for AMCs, then
The number of appraisers who leave an AMC annually, either by resigning, being laid off, or having their licenses revoked or surrendered, is estimated to be 4,130. The burden estimate of 0.08 hours per notice is unchanged from the estimate provided for the currently-approved ICR. Therefore, the estimated total hour burden is: 4,130 notices × 0.08 hours = 330 hours (rounded to the nearest whole number). The estimated burden hours attributable to FHFA are 330 hours × 10 percent = 33 hours.
In accordance with the requirements of 5 CFR 1320.8(d), FHFA published an initial notice and request for comments regarding the renewal of the PRA clearance for this information collection in the
FHFA received one comment. The commenter questioned FHFA's estimate that 3,860 entities meet the regulatory definitions of an AMC. The commenter stated that “[b]ased on the federal definition of an AMC and our understanding of the number of state licensed AMCs, this estimate of approximately 3,860 entities meeting the definition of an AMC seems exceedingly high. We believe there are approximately 300 licensed entities doing business as AMCs.” The commenter does not provide any detail to explain how they arrived at their much lower estimate of 300 compared to FHFA and FDIC's 3,860. Their comment gives no basis to ascertain the source of the discrepancy, either as to the underlying data or the analysis of the regulatory definition of AMCs.
FHFA has reviewed the comment and continues have confidence in the 3,860 estimate of AMCs. ASC's 2020 Annual Report states that “[a]s of December 31, 2020, the Registry contained 3,417 AMCs.” The FDIC's review determined that there are 3,854 total active AMCs in the Registry (both federally and non-federally regulated) as of June 2021, which we rounded to 3,860 in our 60-day notice. FHFA concurs with the FDIC's review of the ASC Registry in June 2021. Both the FDIC analysis and the ASC Annual Report substantiate FHFA's estimate and confirms our concurrence with the FDIC's review. FHFA remains confident that the number is accurate. Accordingly, FHFA will not change the number of AMCs in the 30-day notice.
In accordance with the requirements of 5 CFR 1320.10(a), FHFA is publishing this second notice to request comments regarding the following: (1) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of FHFA functions, including whether the information has practical utility; (2) the accuracy of FHFA's estimates of the burdens of the collection of information; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (4) 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 companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841
The public portions of the applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, if any, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank(s) indicated below and at the offices of the Board of Governors. This information may also be obtained on an expedited basis, upon request, by contacting the appropriate Federal Reserve Bank and from the Board's Freedom of Information Office at
Comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors, Ann E. Misback, Secretary of the Board, 20th Street and Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20551-0001, not later than December 1, 2021.
1.
Federal Trade Commission.
Notice.
Notice is hereby given of the appointment of members to the FTC Performance Review Board.
Vicki Barber (202-326-2700), Chief Human Capital Officer, Federal Trade Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20580.
Publication of the Performance Review Board (PRB) membership is required by 5 U.S.C. 4314 (c)(4). The PRB reviews and evaluates the initial appraisal of a senior executive's performance by the supervisor, and makes recommendations regarding performance ratings, performance awards, and pay-for-performance pay adjustments to the Chair.
The following individuals have been designated to serve on the Commission's Performance Review Board:
By direction of the Commission.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Notice of meeting and request for comment.
In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, CDC announces the following virtual meeting for the World Trade Center Health Program Scientific/Technical Advisory Committee (WTCHP STAC). A notice of this WTCHP STAC meeting has also been posted on the committee website at:
The meeting will be held on November 18, 2021, from 11:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., EST. Comments must be received by November 18, 2021. Written public comment received prior to the meeting will be part of the official record of the meeting.
You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. CDC-2021-0118; NIOSH 248-I by mail. CDC does not accept comments by email.
•
•
Tania Carreón-Valencia, Ph.D., Designated Federal Officer, World Trade Center Health Program, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, CDC, 1600 Clifton Road NE, MS R-12, Atlanta, GA 30329-4027, Telephone: (513) 841-4515; Email:
Title XXXIII of the PHS Act established the WTC Health Program within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The WTC Health Program provides medical monitoring and treatment benefits to eligible firefighters and related personnel, law enforcement officers, and rescue, recovery, and cleanup workers who responded to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in New York City, at the Pentagon, and in Shanksville, Pennsylvania (responders), and to eligible persons who were present in the dust or dust cloud on September 11, 2001 or who worked, resided, or attended school, childcare, or adult daycare in the New York City disaster area (survivors). Certain specific activities of the Administrator of the WTC Health Program are reserved to the Secretary, HHS, to delegate at his discretion; other duties not explicitly reserved to the Secretary, HHS, are assigned to the Director of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). The administration of the WTCHP STAC is left to the Director of NIOSH in his role as Administrator. CDC and NIOSH provide funding, staffing, and administrative support services for the WTCHP STAC. The charter was reissued on May 12, 2021 and will expire on May 12, 2023.
Interested parties may participate in this activity by submitting written views, opinions, recommendations, and data. You may submit comments on any topic related to this activity. Comments received, including attachments and other supporting materials, are part of the public record and subject to public disclosure. Do not include any information in your comment or supporting materials that you consider confidential or inappropriate for public disclosure. If you include your name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in the body of your comments, that information will be on public display. CDC will review all submissions and may choose to redact, or withhold, submissions containing private or proprietary information such as Social Security numbers, medical information, inappropriate language, or duplicate/near duplicate examples of a mass-mail campaign. CDC will carefully consider all comments submitted into the docket. CDC does not accept comment by email.
The Director, Strategic Business Initiatives Unit, Office of the Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has been delegated the authority to sign
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended, and the Determination of the Director, Strategic Business Initiatives Unit, Office of the Chief Operating Officer, CDC, pursuant to Public Law 92-463. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
The Director, Strategic Business Initiatives Unit, Office of the Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has been delegated the authority to sign
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Health and Human Services (HHS).
Notice.
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is announcing an opportunity for the public to comment on CMS' intention to collect information from the public. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), federal agencies are required to publish notice in the
Comments on the collection(s) of information must be received by the OMB desk officer by December 1, 2021.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
To obtain copies of a supporting statement and any related forms for the proposed collection(s) summarized in this notice, you may make your request using one of following:
1. Access CMS' Website address at Website address at:
William Parham at (410) 786-4669.
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. The term “collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires federal agencies to publish a 30-day notice in the
1.
2.
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Health and Human Services (HHS).
Notice.
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is announcing an opportunity for the public to comment on CMS' intention to collect information from the public. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA), federal agencies are required to publish notice in the
Comments must be received by January 3, 2022.
When commenting, please reference the document identifier or OMB control number. To be assured consideration, comments and recommendations must be submitted in any one of the following ways:
1.
2.
To obtain copies of a supporting statement and any related forms for the proposed collection(s) summarized in this notice, you may make your request using one of following:
1. Access CMS' website address at website address at
William N. Parham at (410) 786-4669.
This notice sets out a summary of the use and burden associated with the following information collections. More detailed information can be found in each collection's supporting statement and associated materials (see
Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management
1.
Collection of this information is mandated in Part D of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (MMA) in Subpart 3. The application requirements are codified in Subpart K of 42 CFR 423 entitled “Application Procedures and Contracts with PDP Sponsors.”
The information will be collected under the solicitation of proposals from PDP, MA-PD, Cost Plan, Program of All Inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE), and EGWP applicants. The collected information will be used by CMS to: (1) Ensure that applicants meet CMS requirements for offering Part D plans (including network adequacy, contracting requirements, and compliance program requirements, as described in the application), (2) support the determination of contract awards.
2.
CMS requires that MA and PDP organizations submit a completed PBP and formulary as part of the annual bidding process. During this process, organizations prepare their proposed plan benefit packages for the upcoming contract year and submit them to CMS for review and approval. CMS uses this data to review and approve the benefit packages that the plans will offer to Medicare beneficiaries. This allows CMS to review the benefit packages in a consistent way across all submitted bids during with incredibly tight timeframes. This data is also used to populate data on Medicare Plan Finder, which allows beneficiaries to access and compare Medicare Advantage and Prescription Drug plans.
Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, HHS.
Request for public comment.
The Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (OPRE), Administration for Children and Families (ACF), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), is proposing a data collection activity as part of the Integrating Financial Capability and Employment Services Project. The objective of this project is to better understand financial capability interventions offered in the context of delivering employment and training services for low-income adults. This descriptive study intends to use this information to build more evidence about the extent, forms, and practices of incorporating financial capability interventions into organizations delivering employment and training services for low-income adult populations, and to help establish a basis for future research and evaluation in this area. This project will focus on organizations delivering employment and training services that also offer financial capability services to low-income adults.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
• An online survey of organizations to document important factors driving the decision to incorporate financial capability services as well as key inputs, activities, and outputs involved in offering such services;
• phone interviews of administrators of organizations to gather qualitative information on how organizations implement financial capability across a variety of program types;
• virtual site visits to four organizations to collect in-depth qualitative information from multiple perspectives on notable models;
• interviews with participants to provide context on participants' perspectives on these services;
• interviews with employers offering financial capability services to collect qualitative information on the types of financial capability services delivered in the employer context; and
• focus groups with administrators of organizations to identify challenges integrating financial capability services into employment and training services.
Office of Child Care, Administration for Children and Families, HHS.
Request for public comment.
The Office of Child Care, Administration for Children and Families (ACF), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), is proposing to collect data for a new collection, ACF-901—American Rescue Plan (ARP) Stabilization Grants Provider-Level Data. The data collection will provide numbers and characteristics of child care providers receiving ARP Act stabilization grant awards.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
Notice.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) has determined the regulatory review period for SPINRAZA and is publishing this notice of that determination as required by law. FDA has made the determination because of the submission of applications to the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), Department of Commerce, for the extension of patents which claims that human drug product.
Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published (the
You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late, untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments must be submitted on or before January 3, 2022. The
Submit electronic comments in the following way:
•
• If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).
Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
•
• For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified, as confidential, if submitted as detailed in “Instructions.”
• Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” The Agency will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on
Beverly Friedman, Office of Regulatory Policy, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 6250, Silver Spring, MD 20993, 301-796-3600.
The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 (Pub. L. 98-417) and the Generic Animal Drug and Patent Term Restoration Act (Pub. L. 100-670) generally provide that a patent may be extended for a period of up to 5 years so long as the patented item (human drug or biologic product, animal drug product, medical device, food additive, or color additive) was subject to regulatory review by FDA before the item was marketed. Under these acts, a product's regulatory review period forms the basis for determining the amount of extension an applicant may receive.
A regulatory review period consists of two periods of time: A testing phase and an approval phase. For human drug products, the testing phase begins when the exemption to permit the clinical investigations of the drug becomes effective and runs until the approval phase begins. The approval phase starts with the initial submission of an application to market the human drug product and continues until FDA grants permission to market the drug product. Although only a portion of a regulatory review period may count toward the actual amount of extension that the Director of USPTO may award (for example, half the testing phase must be subtracted as well as any time that may have occurred before the patent was issued), FDA's determination of the length of a regulatory review period for a human drug product will include all of the testing phase and approval phase as specified in 35 U.S.C. 156(g)(1)(B).
FDA has approved for marketing the human drug product SPINRAZA (nusinersen sodium). SPINRAZA is indicated for the treatment of spinal muscular atrophy in pediatric and adult patients. Subsequent to this approval, the USPTO received patent term restoration applications for SPINRAZA (U.S. Patent Nos. 7,838,657 and 8,110,560 from University of Massachusetts, and U.S. Patent Nos. 8,361,977 and 8,980,853 from Biogen MA Inc., and Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory), and the USPTO requested FDA's assistance in determining the patents' eligibility for patent term restoration. In a letter dated February 8, 2018, FDA advised the USPTO that this human drug product had undergone a regulatory review period and that the approval of SPINRAZA represented the first permitted commercial marketing or use of the product. Thereafter, the USPTO requested that FDA determine the product's regulatory review period.
FDA has determined that the applicable regulatory review period for SPINRAZA is 1,891 days. Of this time, 1,799 days occurred during the testing phase of the regulatory review period, while 92 days occurred during the approval phase. These periods of time were derived from the following dates:
1.
2.
3.
This determination of the regulatory review period establishes the maximum potential length of a patent extension. However, the USPTO applies several statutory limitations in its calculations of the actual period for patent extension. In its applications for patent extension, these applicants seek 29 days, 210 days, 937 days, or 992 days of patent term extension.
Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published are incorrect may submit either electronic or written comments and, under 21 CFR 60.24, ask for a redetermination (see
Submit petitions electronically to
Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
Notice of availability.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled “Reporting Amount of Listed Drugs and Biological Products Under Section 510(j)(3) of the FD&C Act.” This draft guidance addresses the process through which registrants of drug establishments should submit to FDA reports on the amount of each listed drug manufactured, prepared, propagated, compounded, or processed for commercial distribution, as required by the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act).
Submit either electronic or written comments on the draft guidance by January 3, 2022 to ensure that the Agency considers your comment on this draft guidance before it begins work on the final version of the guidance.
You may submit comments on any guidance at any time as follows:
Submit electronic comments in the following way:
•
• If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).
Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
•
• For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified, as confidential, if submitted as detailed in “Instructions.”
• Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” The Agency will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on
You may submit comments on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR 10.115(g)(5)).
Submit written requests for single copies of the draft guidance to the Division of Drug Information, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10001 New Hampshire Ave., Hillandale Building, 4th Floor, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002; Office of Communication, Outreach and Development, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Room 3128, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002; or Policy and Regulations Staff, HFV-6, Center for Veterinary Medicine, Food and Drug Administration, 7500 Standish Place, Rockville, MD 20855. Send one self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing your requests. See the
Neil Stiber, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 4128, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-8944; Stephen Ripley, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 7301, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 240-402-7911; Neal Bataller, Center for Veterinary Medicine, Food and Drug Administration, 7519 Standish Place, (HFV-210), Rm. 2612, Rockville, MD 20855, 240-402-5745.
FDA is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled “Reporting Amount of Listed Drugs and Biological Products Under Section 510(j)(3) of the FD&C Act.” On March 27, 2020, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) was enacted to aid response efforts and ease the economic impact of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). In addition, the CARES Act included authorities to enhance FDA's ability to identify, prevent, and mitigate possible drug shortages by, among other things, improving FDA's visibility into drug supply chains. Section 3112(e) of the CARES Act (Pub. L. 116-136) added section 510(j)(3) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360(j)(3)) to require that each person (including repackers and relabelers) who registers with FDA under section 510 of the FD&C Act with regard to a drug must report annually to FDA the amount of each listed drug that was manufactured, prepared, propagated, compounded, or processed by such person for commercial distribution.
This draft guidance is intended to assist registrants of drug establishments in submitting to FDA reports on the amount of each listed drug manufactured, prepared, propagated, compounded, or processed for commercial distribution, as required by section 510(j)(3) of the FD&C Act. The draft guidance addresses the content of reports, the timing of reports, and the process for report submission.
This draft guidance describes the process that should be used for reporting by each person who registers with FDA under section 510 of the FD&C Act with regard to a listed drug (including a finished dosage form product, an active pharmaceutical ingredient, and other listed drugs), except for biological products or categories thereof exempted by an order under section 510(j)(3)(B)). The process described in this guidance applies to such reporting with respect to listed drugs, including medical gases, homeopathic products, products
This draft guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance, when finalized, will represent the current thinking of FDA on “Reporting Amount of Listed Drugs and Biological Products Under Section 510(j)(3) of the FD&C Act.” It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations.
While this guidance contains no collection of information, it does refer to previously approved FDA collections of information. Therefore, clearance by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521) is not required for this guidance. The previously approved collections of information are subject to review by OMB under the PRA.
The regulatory citations and associated collections of information that OMB approved are as follows:
• Registrants who own or operate a domestic or foreign establishment that manufactures, prepares, propagates, compounds, or processes a drug must submit to FDA information on the amount of listed drugs that they manufacture, prepare, propagate, compound, or process. Registrants must submit information on the following listed drugs: (1) Finished dosage form products, (2) drug products with active pharmaceutical ingredients, and (3) other listed drugs. The collection of information under section 510(j)(3) of the FD&C Act (as added by section 3112 of the CARES Act) on the amount of listed drug products has been approved under OMB control number 0910-0045. FDA is developing an electronic portal for registrants to submit this information.
• FDA requires that applicants submit annual reports for abbreviated new drug applications, biologics license applications, and new drug applications. The collections of information in parts 314 and 601 have been approved under OMB control numbers 0910-0001 and 0910-0338.
Persons with access to the internet may obtain the draft guidance at
Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
Notice.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is withdrawing approval of 18 new drug applications (NDAs) from multiple applicants. The applicants notified the Agency in writing that the drug products were no longer marketed and requested that the approval of the applications be withdrawn.
Approval is withdrawn as of December 1, 2021.
Kimberly Lehrfeld, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 6226, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-3137.
The applicants listed in the table have informed FDA that these drug products are no longer marketed and have requested that FDA withdraw approval of the applications under the process in § 314.150(c) (21 CFR 314.150(c)). The applicants have also, by their requests, waived their opportunity for a hearing. Withdrawal of approval of an application or abbreviated application under § 314.150(c) is without prejudice to refiling.
Therefore, approval of the applications listed in the table, and all amendments and supplements thereto, is hereby withdrawn as of December 1, 2021. Approval of each entire application is withdrawn, including any strengths and dosage forms inadvertently missing from the table. Introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate commerce of products without approved new drug applications violates section 301(a) and (d) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 331(a) and (d)). Drug products that are listed in the table that are in inventory on December 1, 2021 may continue to be dispensed until the inventories have been depleted or the drug products have reached their expiration dates or otherwise become violative, whichever occurs first.
Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
Notice.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) has determined the regulatory review period for ENHERTU and is publishing this notice of that determination as required by law. FDA has made the determination because of the submission of applications to the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), Department of Commerce, for the extension of a patent which claims that human biological product.
Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published (see
You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late, untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments must be submitted on or before January 3, 2022. The
Submit electronic comments in the following way:
•
• If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).
Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
•
• For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified, as confidential, if submitted as detailed in “Instructions.”
• Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” The Agency will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on
Beverly Friedman, Office of Regulatory Policy, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 6250, Silver Spring, MD 20993, 301-796-3600.
The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 (Pub. L. 98-417) and the Generic Animal Drug and Patent Term Restoration Act (Pub. L. 100-670) generally provide that a patent may be extended for a period of up to 5 years so long as the patented item (human drug or biologic product, animal drug product, medical device, food additive, or color additive) was subject to regulatory review by FDA before the item was marketed. Under these acts, a product's regulatory review period forms the basis for determining the amount of extension an applicant may receive.
A regulatory review period consists of two periods of time: A testing phase and an approval phase. For human biological products, the testing phase begins when the exemption to permit the clinical investigations of the biological product becomes effective and runs until the approval phase begins. The approval phase starts with the initial submission of an application to market the human biological product and continues until FDA grants permission to market the biological product. Although only a portion of a regulatory review period may count toward the actual amount of extension that the Director of USPTO may award (for example, half the testing phase must be subtracted as well as any time that may have occurred before the patent was issued), FDA's determination of the length of a regulatory review period for a human biological product will include all of the testing phase and approval phase as specified in 35 U.S.C. 156(g)(1)(B).
FDA has approved for marketing the human biologic product ENHERTU (fam-trastuzumab deruxtecan-nxki). ENHERTU is indicated for the treatment of adult patients with unresectable or metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer who have received two or more prior anti-HER2-based regimens in the metastatic setting. This indication is approved under accelerated approval based on tumor response rate and duration of response. Continued approval for this indication may be contingent upon verification and description of clinical benefit in a confirmatory trial. Subsequent to this approval, the USPTO received a patent term restoration application for ENHERTU (U.S. Patent Nos. 9,808,537; 10,155,821; and 10,195,288) from Daiichi Sankyo Company, Limited, and the USPTO requested FDA's assistance in determining the patents' eligibility for patent term restoration. In a letter dated October 13, 2020, FDA advised the USPTO that this human biological product had undergone a regulatory review period and that the approval of ENHERTU represented the first permitted commercial marketing or use of the product. Thereafter, the USPTO requested that FDA determine the product's regulatory review period.
FDA has determined that the applicable regulatory review period for ENHERTU is 1,395 days. Of this time, 186 days occurred during the testing phase of the regulatory review period, while 1,209 days occurred during the approval phase. These periods of time were derived from the following dates:
1.
2.
3.
This determination of the regulatory review period establishes the maximum potential length of a patent extension. However, the USPTO applies several statutory limitations in its calculations of the actual period for patent extension. In its applications for patent extension, this applicant seeks 71 days of patent term extension.
Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published are incorrect may submit either electronic or written comments and, under 21 CFR 60.24, ask for a redetermination (see
Submit petitions electronically to
Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
Notice.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA, Agency, or we) is announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in the
Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection of information by January 3, 2022.
You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late, untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments must be submitted on or before January 3, 2022. The
Submit electronic comments in the following way:
•
• If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).
Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
•
• For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified, as confidential, if submitted as detailed in “Instructions.”
• Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” The Agency will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on
Ila S. Mizrachi, Office of Operations, Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A-12M, 11601 Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852, 301-796-7726,
Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521), Federal Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. “Collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the
With respect to the following collection of information, FDA invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques, when appropriate, and other forms of information technology.
Section 1701(a)(4) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300u(a)(4)) authorizes FDA to conduct research relating to health information. Section 1003(d)(2)(C) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 393(d)(2)(C)) authorizes FDA to conduct research relating to drugs and other FDA regulated products in carrying out the provisions of the FD&C Act.
The Office of Prescription Drug Promotion's (OPDP) mission is to protect the public health by helping to ensure that prescription drug promotion is truthful, balanced, and accurately communicated. OPDP's research program provides scientific evidence to help ensure that our policies related to prescription drug promotion will have the greatest benefit to public health. Toward that end, we have consistently conducted research to evaluate the aspects of prescription drug promotion that are most central to our mission. Our research focuses in particular on three main topic areas: (1) Advertising features, including content and format; (2) target populations; and (3) research quality. Through the evaluation of advertising features, we assess how elements such as graphics, format, and disease and product characteristics impact the communication and understanding of prescription drug risks and benefits. Focusing on target populations allows us to evaluate how understanding of prescription drug risks and benefits may vary as a function of audience, and our focus on research quality aims at maximizing the quality of research data through analytical methodology development and investigation of sampling and response issues. This study will inform all three topic areas.
Because we recognize the strength of data and the confidence in the robust nature of the findings are improved through the results of multiple converging studies, we continue to develop evidence to inform our thinking. We evaluate the results from our studies within the broader context of research and findings from other sources, and this larger body of knowledge collectively informs our policies as well as our research program. Our research is documented on our home page, which can be found at:
As part of the prescription drug regulatory review process, sponsors propose proprietary names for their products. These names undergo a proprietary name review that involves the Office of Drug Safety, the relevant medical office, and OPDP. OPDP reviews names to assess for alignment with the FD&C Act, which provides, among other things, that labeling can misbrand a product if false or misleading representations are made (see 21 U.S.C. 321(n) and 352(a)). A proprietary name that appears in labeling could result in such misbranding if it is false or misleading. OPDP reviews, among other things, whether names: (1) Overstate the efficacy or safety of the drug; (2) suggest drug indications that are not accurate; (3) suggest superiority without substantiation; or (4) are of a fanciful nature that misleadingly implies unique effectiveness or composition. It would be helpful in OPDP's review of promotional implications of proprietary names for data on consumer and prescriber interpretations of proposed proprietary names to be more readily available for consideration. The proposed research will utilize text analysis (
This proposed research builds upon and extends OPDP research entitled “Empirical Study of Promotional Implications of Proprietary Prescription Drug Names” (86 FR 14440). That research involves an experimental design intended to assess names that potentially overstate the efficacy of a product. In contrast, the proposed research involves a survey design that comprises primarily open-ended questions intended to generate text for analysis, an approach that is unrestricted in its ability to assess different types of promotional implications (
The key objectives of the proposed research are as follows:
1. To apply new techniques such as topic modeling and sentiment analysis (forms of text analysis) to answer OPDP's research questions about consumer and PCP interpretations of proprietary prescription drug names.
2. To help develop a methodological approach for assessing consumer and prescriber interpretations of drug names, which can potentially be used in the future as a standard assessment tool.
Our methodological approach will involve nationally representative samples. Consumers will be recruited from Ipsos Public Affairs KNOWLEDGEPANEL. PCPs will be recruited using a two-stage approach that will begin with a purchased list of PCPs based on the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile. These members will then be matched to one or more sample provider lists to recruit PCP participants for this study. We propose a sample of 300 consumers and 300 PCPs for the main study. We have designed a within-subjects experiment in which participants will be exposed to multiple drug names to maximize power to find differences with this sample size. The stimuli will comprise 60 experimental names and 60 control names. Participants will be randomized to 1 of 10 groups so that no one responds to more than 12 names in total. Each participant will see six experimental names and six control names. The experimental names will be names with suspected promotional implications, whereas the control names will not have suspected promotional implications. Names will be viewed in random order. Participants will respond in open-ended text boxes about their perceptions of each drug name. Supplementary closed-ended questions may also be presented. We will conduct text analysis of the responses and present descriptive results for individual drug names by participant cohort (
FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as follows:
Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
Notice.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) has determined the regulatory review period for VYONDYS 53 and is publishing this notice of that determination as required by law. FDA has made the determination because of the submission of applications to the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), Department of Commerce, for the extension of a patent which claims that human drug product.
Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published (see
You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late, untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments must be submitted on or before January 3, 2022. The
Submit electronic comments in the following way:
•
• If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).
Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
•
• For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified, as confidential, if submitted as detailed in “Instructions.”
• Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” The Agency will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on
Beverly Friedman, Office of Regulatory Policy, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 6250, Silver Spring, MD 20993, 301-796-3600.
The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 (Pub. L. 98-417) and the Generic Animal Drug and Patent Term Restoration Act (Pub. L. 100-670) generally provide that a patent may be extended for a period of up to 5 years so long as the patented item (human drug or biologic product, animal drug product, medical device, food additive, or color additive) was subject to regulatory review by FDA before the item was marketed. Under these acts, a product's regulatory review period forms the basis for determining the amount of extension an applicant may receive.
A regulatory review period consists of two periods of time: a testing phase and an approval phase. For human drug products, the testing phase begins when the exemption to permit the clinical investigations of the drug becomes effective and runs until the approval phase begins. The approval phase starts with the initial submission of an application to market the human drug product and continues until FDA grants permission to market the drug product. Although only a portion of a regulatory review period may count toward the actual amount of extension that the Director of USPTO may award (for example, half the testing phase must be subtracted as well as any time that may have occurred before the patent was issued), FDA's determination of the length of a regulatory review period for a human drug product will include all of the testing phase and approval phase as specified in 35 U.S.C. 156(g)(1)(B).
FDA has approved for marketing the human drug product VYONDYS 53 (golodirsen). VYONDYS 53 is indicated for the treatment of Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) in patients who have a confirmed mutation of the DMD gene that is amenable to exon 53 skipping. This indication is approved under accelerated approval based on an increase in dystrophin production in skeletal muscle observed in patients treated with VYONDYS 53. Continued approval for this indication may be contingent upon verification of a clinical benefit in confirmatory trials. Subsequent to this approval, the USPTO received patent term restoration applications for VYONDYS 53 (U.S. Patent Nos. 9,024,007; 9,994,851; 10,227,590; 10,266,827; 10,421,966; and RE47,691) from The University of Western Australia, and the USPTO requested FDA's assistance in determining the patents' eligibility for patent term restoration. In a letter dated July 14, 2020, FDA advised the USPTO that this human drug product had undergone a regulatory review period and that the approval of VYONDYS 53 represented the first permitted commercial marketing or use of the product. Thereafter, the USPTO requested that FDA determine the product's regulatory review period.
FDA has determined that the applicable regulatory review period for VYONDYS 53 is 1,833 days. Of this time, 1,474 days occurred during the testing phase of the regulatory review period, while 359 days occurred during the approval phase. These periods of time were derived from the following dates:
1.
2.
3.
This determination of the regulatory review period establishes the maximum potential length of a patent extension. However, the USPTO applies several statutory limitations in its calculations of the actual period for patent extension. In its applications for patent extension, this applicant seeks 80 days, 124 days, 276 days, 454 days, or 888 days of patent term extension.
Anyone with knowledge that any of the dates as published are incorrect may submit either electronic or written comments and, under 21 CFR 60.24, ask for a redetermination (see
Submit petitions electronically to
Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
Notice.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA, Agency, or we) is announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in the
Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection of information by January 3, 2022.
You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late, untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments must be submitted on or before January 3, 2022. The
Submit electronic comments in the following way:
•
• If you want to submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner detailed (see “Written/Paper Submissions” and “Instructions”).
Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
•
• For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified, as confidential, if submitted as detailed in “Instructions.”
• Confidential Submissions—To submit a comment with confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states “THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.” The Agency will review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing and posted on
Ila S. Mizrachi, Office of Operations, Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A-12M, 11601 Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852, 301-796-7726,
Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521), Federal Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. “Collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the
With respect to the following collection of information, FDA invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques, when appropriate, and other forms of information technology.
The bottled water regulations in parts 129 and 165 (21 CFR parts 129 and 165) require that if any coliform organisms are detected in weekly total coliform testing of finished bottled water, followup testing must be conducted to determine whether any of the coliform organisms are
FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as follows:
Based on a review of the information collection since our last request for OMB approval, we have made no adjustments to our burden estimate.
The current CGMP regulations already reflect the time and associated recordkeeping costs for those bottlers that are required to conduct microbiological testing of their source water, as well as total coliform testing of their finished bottled water products. We therefore conclude that any additional burden and costs in recordkeeping based on followup testing that is required if any coliform organisms detected in the source water test positive for
Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), Department of Health and Human Services.
Notice.
In compliance with the requirement for opportunity for public comment on proposed data collection of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, HRSA announces plans to submit an Information Collection Request (ICR), described below, to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Prior to submitting the ICR to OMB, HRSA seeks comments from the public regarding the burden estimate, below, or any other aspect of the ICR.
Comments on this Information Collection Request must be received no later than January 3, 2022.
Submit your comments to
To request more information on the proposed project or to obtain a copy of the data collection plans and draft instruments, email
When submitting comments or requesting information, please include the ICR title for reference.
In order to evaluate the F2F HIC program, HRSA developed two Family-to-Family Health Information Center Feedback Surveys for family members of CYSHCN and health professionals who serve such families. Each F2F HIC administers the surveys and reports data back to HRSA. Survey respondents will be asked to answer questions about how useful they found the information, assistance, or resources received from the F2F HICs. The purpose of this notice is to solicit comments regarding the continuation of previously approved feedback surveys; no changes will be made to the survey instruments.
The eventual estimated respondent count per year is approximately 3,000 families and 1,000 professionals.
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.
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meetings.
The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, HHS.
Notice.
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) notifies federal agencies of the laboratories and Instrumented Initial Testing Facilities (IITFs) currently certified to meet the standards of the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs using Urine or Oral Fluid (Mandatory Guidelines).
Anastasia Donovan, Division of Workplace Programs, SAMHSA/CSAP, 5600 Fishers Lane, Room 16N06B, Rockville, Maryland 20857; 240-276-2600 (voice);
In accordance with Section 9.19 of the Mandatory Guidelines, a notice listing all currently HHS-certified laboratories and IITFs is published in the
If any laboratory or IITF has withdrawn from the HHS National Laboratory Certification Program (NLCP) during the past month, it will be listed at the end and will be omitted from the monthly listing thereafter.
This notice is also available on the internet at
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) notifies federal agencies of the laboratories and Instrumented Initial Testing Facilities (IITFs) currently certified to meet the standards of the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs (Mandatory Guidelines) using Urine and of the laboratories currently certified to meet the standards of the Mandatory Guidelines using Oral Fluid.
The Mandatory Guidelines using Urine were first published in the
The Mandatory Guidelines using Oral Fluid were first published in the
The Mandatory Guidelines were initially developed in accordance with Executive Order 12564 and section 503 of Public Law 100-71 and allowed urine drug testing only. The Mandatory Guidelines using Urine have since been revised, and new Mandatory Guidelines allowing for oral fluid drug testing have been published. The Mandatory Guidelines require strict standards that laboratories and IITFs must meet in order to conduct drug and specimen validity tests on specimens for federal agencies. HHS does not allow IITFs to conduct oral fluid testing.
To become certified, an applicant laboratory or IITF must undergo three rounds of performance testing plus an on-site inspection. To maintain that certification, a laboratory or IITF must participate in a quarterly performance testing program plus undergo periodic, on-site inspections.
Laboratories and IITFs in the applicant stage of certification are not to be considered as meeting the minimum requirements described in the HHS Mandatory Guidelines using Urine and/or Oral Fluid. An HHS-certified laboratory or IITF must have its letter of certification from HHS/SAMHSA (formerly: HHS/NIDA), which attests that the test facility has met minimum standards. HHS does not allow IITFs to conduct oral fluid testing.
In accordance with the Mandatory Guidelines using Oral Fluid dated October 25, 2019 (84 FR 57554), the following HHS-certified laboratories meet the minimum standards to conduct drug and specimen validity tests on oral fluid specimens:
At this time, there are no laboratories certified to conduct drug and specimen validity tests on oral fluid specimens.
In accordance with the Mandatory Guidelines using Urine dated January 23, 2017 (82 FR 7920), the following HHS-certified IITFs meet the minimum standards to conduct drug and specimen validity tests on urine specimens:
In accordance with the Mandatory Guidelines using Urine dated January 23, 2017 (82 FR 7920), the following HHS-certified laboratories meet the minimum standards to conduct drug and specimen validity tests on urine specimens:
Upon finding a Canadian laboratory to be qualified, HHS will recommend that DOT certify the laboratory (
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.
Notice.
New or modified Base (1-percent annual chance) Flood Elevations (BFEs), base flood depths, Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) boundaries or zone designations, and/or regulatory floodways (hereinafter referred to as flood hazard determinations) as shown on the indicated Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) for each of the communities listed in the table below are finalized. Each LOMR revises the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and in some cases the Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports, currently in effect for the listed communities.
Each LOMR was finalized as in the table below.
Each LOMR is available for inspection at both the respective Community Map Repository address
Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-7659, or (email)
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) makes the final flood hazard determinations as shown in the LOMRs for each community listed in the table below. Notice of these modified flood hazard determinations has been published in newspapers of local circulation and 90 days have elapsed since that publication. The Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation has resolved any appeals resulting from this notification.
The modified flood hazard determinations are made pursuant to section 206 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4105, and are in accordance with the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, 42 U.S.C. 4001
The currently effective community number is shown and must be used for all new policies and renewals.
The new or modified flood hazard information is the basis for the floodplain management measures that the community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of being already in effect in order to remain qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).
This new or modified flood hazard information, together with the floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies established by other Federal, State, or regional entities.
This new or modified flood hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management requirements of the NFIP. The changes in flood hazard determinations are in accordance with 44 CFR 65.4.
Interested lessees and owners of real property are encouraged to review the final flood hazard information available at the address cited below for each community or online through the FEMA Map Service Center at
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.
Notice.
Flood hazard determinations, which may include additions or modifications of Base Flood Elevations (BFEs), base flood depths, Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) boundaries or zone designations, or regulatory floodways on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) and where applicable, in the supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports have been made final for the communities listed in the table below.
The FIRM and FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management measures that a community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of having in effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA's) National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).
The date of February 25, 2022 has been established for the FIRM and, where applicable, the supporting FIS report showing the new or modified flood hazard information for each community.
The FIRM, and if applicable, the FIS report containing the final flood hazard information for each community is available for inspection at the respective Community Map Repository address listed in the tables below and will be available online through the FEMA Map Service Center at
Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-7659, or (email)
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) makes the final determinations listed below for the new or modified flood hazard information for each community listed. Notification of these changes has been published in newspapers of local circulation and 90 days have elapsed since that publication. The Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation has resolved any appeals resulting from this notification.
This final notice is issued in accordance with section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR part 67. FEMA has developed criteria for floodplain management in floodprone areas in accordance with 44 CFR part 60.
Interested lessees and owners of real property are encouraged to review the new or revised FIRM and FIS report available at the address cited below for each community or online through the FEMA Map Service Center at
The flood hazard determinations are made final in the watersheds and/or communities listed in the table below.
Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.
Notice.
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security.
Notice.
Comments are requested on proposed flood hazard determinations, which may include additions or modifications of any Base Flood Elevation (BFE), base flood depth, Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) boundary or zone designation, or regulatory floodway on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and where applicable, in the supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports for the communities listed in the table below. The purpose of this notice is to seek general information and comment regarding the preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, the FIS report that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has provided to the affected communities. The FIRM and FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management measures that the community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of having in effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).
Comments are to be submitted on or before January 31, 2022.
The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, the FIS report for each community are available for inspection at both the online location
You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-2173, to Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-7659, or (email)
Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-7659, or (email)
FEMA proposes to make flood hazard determinations for each community listed below, in accordance with section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).
These proposed flood hazard determinations, together with the floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies established by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These flood hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management requirements of the NFIP.
The communities affected by the flood hazard determinations are provided in the tables below. Any request for reconsideration of the revised flood hazard information shown on the Preliminary FIRM and FIS report that satisfies the data requirements outlined in 44 CFR 67.6(b) is considered an appeal. Comments unrelated to the flood hazard determinations also will be considered before the FIRM and FIS report become effective.
Use of a Scientific Resolution Panel (SRP) is available to communities in support of the appeal resolution process. SRPs are independent panels of experts in hydrology, hydraulics, and other pertinent sciences established to review conflicting scientific and technical data and provide recommendations for resolution. Use of the SRP only may be exercised after FEMA and local communities have been engaged in a collaborative consultation process for at least 60 days without a mutually acceptable resolution of an appeal. Additional information regarding the SRP process can be found online at
The watersheds and/or communities affected are listed in the tables below. The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, FIS report for each community are available for inspection at both the online location
Science and Technology Directorate, DHS.
Committee management; notice of Federal Advisory Committee charter re-establishment.
The Secretary of Homeland Security has determined that the re-establishment of the Homeland Security Science and Technology Advisory Committee (HSSTAC) is necessary and in the public interest in connection with the Department of Homeland Security, Science and Technology Directorate's performance of its duties. This determination follows consultation with the Committee Management Secretariat, General Services Administration.
If you desire to submit comments on this action, they must be submitted by October 22, 2021. Comments must be identified by (DHS-2021-0043) and may be submitted by
•
•
•
•
Adam Cox, HSSTAC Executive Director, and Stanley Cunningham, HSSTAC Designated Federal Official, S&T Department of Homeland Security,
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department of Homeland Security.
60-day notice.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on this proposed revision of a currently approved collection of information. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, this information collection notice is published in the
Comments are encouraged and will be accepted until January 3, 2022.
All submissions received must include the OMB Control Number 1653-0049 in the body of the correspondence, the agency name and Docket ID ICEB-2019-0010. All comments received will be posted without change to
If you have questions related to this revision, please contact: Jody C. Fasenmyer (802) 662-8115,
(This is not a toll-free number. Comments are not accepted via telephone message).
You may access the information collection instrument with instructions or additional information by visiting the Federal eRulemaking Portal site at:
Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information should address one or more of the following four points:
(1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology,
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
Transportation Security Administration, DHS.
Committee management; notice of Federal Advisory Committee public meeting.
The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) will hold a public meeting of the Surface Transportation Security Advisory Committee (STSAC) on November 18, 2021. The meeting agenda and information on public participation is provided below under
The meeting will take place on Thursday, November 18, 2021. The meeting will begin at 1:00 p.m. and will adjourn at 4:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time. As listed in the section below, requests to attend the meeting, to address the STSAC, and/or for
The meeting will be held virtually by teleconference.
Judith Harroun-Lord, Surface Transportation Security Advisory Committee, Designated Federal Officer, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Transportation Security Administration, 6595 Springfield Center Drive, Springfield, Virginia 20598,
TSA is providing notice of this meeting in accordance with the section 404 of the TSA Modernization Act, Division K of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018, Public Law 115-254 (132 Stat. 3186; Oct. 5, 2018), as codified at 6 U.S.C. 204. The STSAC provides advice and industry perspective to the Administrator of TSA on surface transportation security matters, including the development, refinement, and implementation of policies, programs, rulemaking, and security directives pertaining to aviation security. While the STSAC is exempt from the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.),
The Committee will meet to discuss the following agenda items:
The meeting will be open to the public and attendance may be limited due to telephonic meeting constraints. Members of the public, all non-STSAC members, and non-TSA staff who wish to attend are asked to register via email by submitting their name, contact number, and affiliation to
In addition, members of the public must make advance arrangements by November 8, 2021, to present oral or written statements. The statements must specifically address issues pertaining to the items listed above in the discussion of the Meeting Agenda; requests must be submitted, via email to:
The STSAC and TSA are committed to providing equal access to this virtual meeting for all participants. If you need alternative formats or services because of a disability, please contact the person listed in the
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), Interior.
Notice of intent (NOI) to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS); request for comments.
Consistent with the regulations implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), BOEM announces its intent to prepare an EIS for the review of a construction and operations plan (COP) submitted by Mayflower Wind Energy, LLC (Mayflower Wind) for the construction and operation of a wind energy facility offshore Massachusetts with proposed interconnection locations at Falmouth, Massachusetts, and at Brayton Point in Somerset, Massachusetts. This NOI announces the EIS scoping process for the Mayflower COP. Additionally, this NOI seeks public comment and input under section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and its implementing regulations. Detailed information about the proposed wind energy facility, including the COP, can be found on BOEM's website at:
Comments received by December 1, 2021, will be considered.
BOEM will hold virtual public scoping meetings for the Mayflower Wind EIS at the following dates and times (eastern time):
• Wednesday, November 10, 5 p.m.;
• Monday, November 15, 1 p.m.; and
• Thursday, November 18, 5 p.m.
Registration for the virtual public meetings may be completed here:
Written comments can be submitted in any of the following ways:
• Delivered by mail or delivery service, enclosed in an envelope labeled, “MAYFLOWER WIND COP EIS” and addressed to Program Manager, Office of Renewable Energy, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, 45600 Woodland Road, Sterling, Virginia 20166; or
• Through the
Genevieve Brune, BOEM Office of Renewable Energy Programs, 45600 Woodland Road, Sterling, Virginia 20166, telephone (703) 787-1553, or email
In Executive Order 14008, “Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad,” issued on January 27, 2021, President Biden stated that it is the policy of his administration “to organize and deploy the full capacity of its agencies to combat the climate crisis to implement a Government-wide approach that reduces climate pollution in every sector of the economy; increases resilience to the impacts of climate change; protects public health; conserves our lands, waters, and biodiversity; delivers environmental justice; and spurs well-paying union jobs and economic growth, especially through innovation, commercialization, and deployment of clean energy technologies and infrastructure.”
Mayflower Wind has the exclusive right to submit a COP for activities located offshore Massachusetts in the
Mayflower Wind's goal is to develop a commercial-scale, offshore wind energy generation facility in the Lease Area, with up to 149 total foundation locations to be occupied by a combination of up to 147 wind turbine generators (WTGs) and up to 5 offshore substation platforms (OSPs). The Project would include two export cable corridors, one making landfall and interconnecting to the ISO New England Inc. (ISO-NE) grid in Falmouth, Massachusetts, and one making landfall and interconnecting to the ISO-NE grid at Brayton Point in Somerset, Massachusetts (See Section 1.3 of the COP).
The Project would provide between 1,600 to 2,400 megawatts (MW) of clean, renewable wind energy to the northeast United States, including Massachusetts, in accordance with section 83C of the Massachusetts' Green Communities Act, which allows electric distribution companies (EDCs) to solicit proposals for offshore wind energy generation (
Based on Mayflower Wind's goals and BOEM's authority, the purpose of BOEM's action is to respond to Mayflower Wind's COP proposal and determine whether to approve, approve with modifications, or disapprove the Mayflower Wind COP (the Proposed Action). BOEM's approval of the COP and any modifications is needed to construct and install, operate and maintain, and decommission a commercial-scale offshore wind energy facility within the Lease Area. BOEM's purpose and need is consistent with the United States' policy to make Outer Continental Shelf energy resources available for expeditious and orderly development, subject to environmental safeguards (43 U.S.C. 1332(3)), including consideration of natural resources, safety of navigation, and existing ocean uses.
In addition, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) anticipates receipt of a request for authorization to take marine mammals incidental to construction-related activities related to the Project under the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). NMFS issuance of an MMPA incidental take authorization is a major Federal action and, in relation to BOEM's action, is considered a connected action (40 CFR 1501.9(e)(1)). The purpose of the NMFS action—which is a direct outcome of Mayflower Wind's request for authorization to take marine mammals incidental to specified activities associated with the Project (
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New England District, (USACE) anticipates a permit action to be undertaken through authority delegated to the District Engineer by 33 CFR 325.8, under section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (RHA) (33 U.S.C. 403) and section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 U.S.C. 1344). In addition, it is anticipated that a section 408 permission will be required pursuant to Section 14 of the RHA (33 U.S.C. 408) for any proposed alterations that have the potential to alter, occupy or use any USACE federally authorized Civil Works projects. The USACE considers issuance of a permit/permission under these three delegated authorities a major Federal action connected to BOEM's Proposed Action (40 CFR 1501.9(e)(1)).
As described in Section 1.3 of the COP, the applicant's stated purpose and need for the Project, is to provide a commercially viable offshore wind energy project (1,600 to 2,400 MW) within Lease OCS-A 0521 to help states achieve their renewable energy goals. The basic project purpose, as determined by USACE for section 404(b)(1) guidelines evaluation, is offshore wind energy generation. The overall project purpose for section 404(b)(1) guidelines evaluation, as determined by USACE, is the construction and operation of a commercial-scale offshore wind energy project for renewable energy generation and distribution to the New England energy grid. The purpose of USACE section 408 action, as determined by EC 1165-2-220, is to evaluate the applicant's request and determine whether the proposed alterations are injurious to the public interest or impair the usefulness of the USACE project. The USACE section 408 permission is needed to ensure that Congressionally authorized projects continue to provide their intended benefits to the public.
USACE intends to adopt BOEM's EIS to support its decision on any permits/permissions requested under section 10 of the RHA, section 404 of the CWA, and section 14 of the RHA. The USACE would adopt the EIS pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.3 if, after its independent review of the document, it concludes that the EIS satisfies the USACE's comments and recommendations. Based on its participation as a cooperating agency and its consideration of the final EIS, USACE would issue a Record of Decision (ROD) to formally document its decision on the Proposed Action.
As noted above, Mayflower Wind is proposing to construct and operate 149 total foundation locations to be occupied by a combination of up to 147 WTGs and up to 5 OSPs. The Project would also include two export cable corridors, one making landfall and interconnecting to the ISO-NE grid in Falmouth, Massachusetts, and one making landfall and interconnecting to the ISO-NE grid at Brayton Point in Somerset, Massachusetts. The WTG foundations may be monopiles, piled jackets, suction-bucket jackets, or gravity-based structures or some combination. The WTGs, OSPs, foundations, and inter-array cables would be located within the Lease Area on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf approximately 30 statute miles (mi) (26 nautical miles [nm], 48 kilometers [km]) south of Martha's Vineyard, Massachusetts, and approximately 23 mi (20 nm, 37 km) south of Nantucket, Massachusetts. The offshore export cables would be buried in the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf and in the seabed under State waters of Massachusetts and Rhode Island.
If any reasonable alternatives to the Proposed Action are identified during
Once BOEM completes the EIS and associated consultations, BOEM will decide whether to approve, approve with modification, or disapprove the Mayflower Wind COP. If BOEM approves the COP, Mayflower Wind must comply with all conditions of its approval.
The draft EIS will identify and describe the potential effects of the Proposed Action and the alternatives on the human environment that are reasonably foreseeable and have a reasonably close causal relationship to the Proposed Action and the alternatives. This includes such effects that occur at the same time and place as the Proposed Action and alternatives and effects that are later in time or occur in a different place. Potential impacts to resources include, but are not limited to, impacts (whether beneficial or adverse) on air quality, water quality, bats, benthic habitat, essential fish habitat, invertebrates, finfish, birds, marine mammals, terrestrial and coastal habitats and fauna, sea turtles, wetlands and other waters of the United States, commercial fisheries and for-hire recreational fishing, cultural resources, demographics, employment, economics, environmental justice, land use and coastal infrastructure, navigation and vessel traffic, other marine uses, recreation and tourism, and visual resources. These potential impacts will be analyzed in the draft and final EIS.
Based on a preliminary evaluation of these resources, BOEM expects potential impacts on sea turtles and marine mammals from underwater noise caused by construction and from collision risks with Project-related vessel traffic. Structures installed by the Project could permanently change benthic and fish habitats (
In addition to the requested COP approval, various other Federal, State, and local authorizations will be required for the Project. Applicable Federal laws include the Endangered Species Act, Magnuson‐Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, MMPA, RHA, CWA, and the Coastal Zone Management Act. BOEM will also conduct government-to-government Tribal consultations. For a detailed listing of regulatory requirements applicable to the Project, please see the COP, volume I, available at
BOEM has chosen to use the NEPA process to fulfill its obligations under NHPA. While BOEM's obligations under NHPA and NEPA are independent, regulations implementing section 106 of NHPA, at 36 CFR 800.8(c), allow the NEPA process and documentation to substitute for various aspects of the NHPA review. This process is intended to improve efficiency, promote transparency and accountability, and support a broadened discussion of potential effects that a project could have on the human environment. During preparation of the EIS, BOEM will ensure that the NEPA process will fully meet all NHPA obligations.
After the draft EIS is completed, BOEM will publish a notice of availability (NOA) and request public comments on the draft EIS. BOEM currently expects to issue the NOA in January 2023. After the public comment period ends, BOEM will review and respond to comments received and will develop the final EIS. BOEM currently expects to make the final EIS available to the public in September 2023. A ROD will be completed no sooner than 30 days after the final EIS is released, in accordance with 40 CFR 1506.11.
This Project is a “covered project” under section 41 of the Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST-41). FAST-41 provides increased transparency and predictability by requiring Federal agencies to publish comprehensive permitting timetables for all covered projects. FAST-41 also provides procedures for modifying permitting timetables to address the unpredictability inherent in the environmental review and permitting process for significant infrastructure projects. To view the FAST-41 Permitting Dashboard for the Project, visit:
This NOI commences the public scoping process to identify issues and potential alternatives for consideration in the Mayflower Wind EIS. BOEM will hold virtual public scoping meetings at the times and dates described above under the
As noted above, BOEM will use the NEPA process to comply with NHPA. BOEM will consider all written requests from individuals and organizations to participate as consulting parties under NHPA and, as discussed below, will determine who among those parties will be a consulting party in accordance with the NHPA regulations.
BOEM invites other Federal agencies and Tribal, State, and local governments to consider becoming cooperating agencies in the preparation of this EIS. The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) NEPA regulations specify that qualified agencies and governments are those with “jurisdiction by law or special expertise.” Potential cooperating agencies should consider their authority and capacity to assume the responsibilities of a cooperating agency and should be aware that an agency's role in the environmental analysis neither enlarges nor diminishes the final decision-making authority of any other agency involved in the NEPA process.
Upon request, BOEM will provide potential cooperating agencies with a written summary of expectations for cooperating agencies, including schedules, milestones, responsibilities, scope and detail of cooperating agencies' expected contributions, and availability of pre-decisional information. BOEM anticipates this summary will form the basis for a memorandum of agreement between BOEM and any non-Department of the Interior cooperating agency. Agencies also should consider the factors for determining cooperating agency status in the CEQ memorandum entitled, “Cooperating Agencies in Implementing the Procedural Requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act,” dated January 30, 2002. This document is available on the internet at:
BOEM, as the lead agency, does not provide financial assistance to cooperating agencies. Governmental entities that are not cooperating agencies will have opportunities to provide information and comments to BOEM during the public input stages of the NEPA process.
Individuals and organizations with a demonstrated interest in the Project can request to participate as NHPA consulting parties under 36 CFR 800.2(c)(5) based on their legal or economic stake in historic properties affected by the Project.
Before issuing this NOI, BOEM compiled a list of potential consulting parties and invited them to become consulting parties. To become a consulting party, those invited must respond in writing by the requested response date.
Interested individuals and organizations that did not receive a written invitation can request to be consulting parties by writing to the staff NHPA contact at ICF International, Inc., the third party EIS contractor supporting BOEM in its administration of this review. ICF's NHPA contact for this review is Karen Crawford at
Comments: Federal agencies, Tribal, State, and local governments, and other interested parties are requested to comment on the scope of this EIS, significant issues that should be addressed, and alternatives that should be considered. For information on how to submit comments, see the
BOEM does not consider anonymous comments. Please include your name and address as part of your comment. BOEM makes all comments, including the names, addresses, and other personally identifiable information included in the comment, available for public review online. Individuals can request that BOEM withhold their names, addresses, or other personally identifiable information included in their comment from the public record; however, BOEM cannot guarantee that it will be able to do so. To help BOEM determine whether to withhold from disclosure your personally identifiable information, you must identify any information contained in your comments that, if released, would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of your privacy. You also must briefly describe any possible harmful consequences of the disclosure of information, such as embarrassment, injury, or other harm.
Additionally, under section 304 of NHPA, BOEM is required, after consultation with the Secretary of the Interior, to withhold the location, character, or ownership of historic resources if it determines that disclosure may, among other things, cause a significant invasion of privacy, risk harm to the historic resources, or impede the use of a traditional religious site by practitioners. Tribal entities and other parties providing information on historic resources should designate information that they wish to be held as confidential and provide the reasons why BOEM should do so.
All submissions from organizations or businesses and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses will be made available for public inspection in their entirety.
BOEM requests data, comments, views, information, analysis, alternatives, or suggestions relevant to the Proposed Action from the public; affected Federal, Tribal, State, and local governments, agencies, and offices; the scientific community; industry; or any other interested party. Specifically, BOEM requests information on the following topics:
1. Potential effects that the Proposed Action could have on biological resources, including bats, birds, coastal fauna, finfish, invertebrates, essential fish habitat, marine mammals, and sea turtles.
2. Potential effects that the Proposed Action could have on physical resources and conditions including air quality, water quality, wetlands, and other waters of the United States.
3. Potential effects that the Proposed Action could have on socioeconomic and cultural resources, including commercial fisheries and for-hire recreational fishing, demographics, employment, economics, environmental justice, land use and coastal infrastructure, navigation and vessel traffic, other uses (marine minerals, military use, aviation), recreation and tourism, and scenic and visual resources.
4. Other possible reasonable alternatives to the Proposed Action that BOEM should consider, including additional or alternative avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures.
5. As part of its compliance with NHPA section 106 and its implementing regulations (36 CFR part 800), BOEM seeks comment and input from the public and consulting parties regarding the identification of historic properties within the Proposed Action's area of potential effects, the potential effects on those historic properties from the activities proposed in the COP, and any information that supports identification of historic properties under NHPA. BOEM also solicits proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate any adverse effects on historic properties. BOEM will present available information regarding known historic properties during the public scoping period at
6. Information on other current or planned activities in, or in the vicinity of, the Proposed Action, their possible impacts on the Project, and the Project's possible impacts on those activities.
7. Other information relevant to the Proposed Action and its impacts on the human environment.
To promote informed decision-making, comments should be as specific as possible and should provide as much detail as necessary to meaningfully and fully inform BOEM of the commenter's position. Comments should explain why the issues raised are important to the consideration of potential environmental impacts and possible alternatives to the Proposed Action as well as economic, employment, and other impacts affecting the quality of the human environment.
The draft EIS will include a summary of all alternatives, information, and analyses submitted during the scoping
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Interior.
Proposed sale notice; request for comments.
This document is the proposed sale notice (PSN) for the sale of a commercial wind energy lease on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) in the Carolina Long Bay area offshore North Carolina (Lease Area). The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) proposes to offer a single lease using a multiple-factor bidding auction format. The PSN contains information pertaining to the areas available for leasing, certain provisions and conditions of the lease, auction details, lease forms, criteria for evaluating competing bids, award procedures, appeal procedures, and lease execution procedures. The issuance of a lease resulting from this sale, if any, would not constitute an approval of project-specific plans to develop offshore wind energy. Such plans, if submitted by the lessee, would be subject to subsequent environmental, technical, and public reviews prior to a decision on whether the proposed development should be authorized.
Comments should be submitted electronically or postmarked no later than January 3, 2022.
Prospective bidders in the proposed lease sale must submit qualification materials by the end of the 60-day comment period for this PSN. Qualification materials must be postmarked no later than January 3, 2022.
Submit comments on the PSN in one of the following ways:
•
•
For more information regarding the submission of public comments and qualification materials, see section V under the caption
Casey Reeves, BOEM Office of Renewable Energy Programs, 45600 Woodland Road, VAM-OREP, Sterling, Virginia 20166, (703) 787-1671, or
BOEM also considered multiple existing uses of the North Carolina offshore area in developing the call areas and wind energy areas (WEAs). BOEM found that existing uses having the highest potential to interact with offshore wind energy development in the call areas are (i) North Atlantic right whale migration routes; (ii) maritime navigation; and (iii) Department of Defense (DoD) activities.
BOEM completed the Area ID on August 7, 2014, by identifying the following three WEAs within the call areas: Wilmington East, Wilmington West, and Kitty Hawk. The Area ID announcement and map of the WEAs are available at:
Concurrently with its preparation of the EA, BOEM conducted consultations under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, and the Coastal Zone Management Act.
On August 13, 2021, BOEM announced its intent to prepare a supplemental EA to the
The area available for sale is proposed to be auctioned as a single lease, Lease OCS-A 0545:
The proposed lease area includes the majority of the Wilmington East WEA. BOEM requests input on potentially subdividing the Wilmington East Lease Area into as many as three lease areas from the existing 127,865 acres.
BOEM is aware of potential conflicts with the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) in portions of the Wilmington East Lease Area. BOEM is working closely with USCG and DoD to ensure the final lease area is deconflicted and suitable for offshore wind energy development. For more information regarding DoD's evaluation, please see the February 13, 2020, letter from the DoD Military Aviation and Installation Assurance Siting Clearinghouse to BOEM posted on our website:
A description of the proposed Lease Area can be found in addendum “A” of the proposed lease, which BOEM has made available with this notice on its website at:
a.
b.
i.
ii.
c.
i.
a.
b.
BOEM considers two entities to be affiliated if (a) one entity (or its parent or subsidiary) has or retains any right, title, or interest in the other entity (or its parent or subsidiary), including any ability to control or direct actions with respect to such entity, either directly or indirectly, individually or through any other party; or (b) the entities are both direct or indirect subsidiaries of the same parent company.
Stakeholders are encouraged to comment on any matters related to this lease sale that are of interest or concern to them. However, BOEM has identified certain issues as particularly important in developing this lease sale and encourages commenters to address these issues specifically.
a.
b.
c.
d.
To the extent of its statutory and regulatory authorities, BOEM is considering lease stipulations to ensure communities, particularly underserved communities, are engaged early and often throughout the offshore wind energy development process and to encourage direct investments in underserved communities that include, but are not limited to:
i. Workforce training and development.
ii. contracting with and supporting the development of minority- and women-owned businesses.
iii. programs that promote and deliver environmental justice.
BOEM invites comment on the appropriate mechanisms, evaluation metrics, and valuation of these additional lease requirements. Commenters are encouraged to describe how these or similar measures would further development of the proposed Lease Area and the purposes of OCS Lands Act. BOEM requests commenters provide references to any studies that support their recommendations.
e.
i. The proposed bidding credit would allow bidders to receive a credit of up to 20 percent off their winning bid in exchange for financial commitments to a workforce training program or to development of a domestic supply chain. To qualify, the winning bidder would be required to financially commit at least 80 percent of the bidding credit value toward a workforce training program or development of a domestic supply chain. For example, a winning bidder with a high bid of $31.25 million could receive a credit of $6.25 million toward their winning bid in exchange for a $5 million (80 percent of $6.25 million) commitment to a workforce training or development of the domestic supply chain. Bidders could choose to limit their commitment (20 percent of bid up to $X.0 million) or simply commit to a bidding credit worth 20 percent of their high bid.
ii. The qualifying programs for the workforce training credit would contribute to well-trained personnel pursuant to congressional policy under 43 U.S.C. 1332(6), which states that operations on the OCS should be conducted in a safe manner by well-trained personnel. Workforce training would also promote “expeditious and orderly development” as called for by 43 U.S.C. 1332(3).
iii. The qualifying programs for the domestic supply chain credit would contribute to the development of a domestic supply chain, which would facilitate congressional policy set forth in 43 U.S.C. 1332(3) to promote expeditious and orderly development on the OCS.
iv. Bidders who are interested in pursuing bidding credits would be able to choose to commit to workforce training programs, domestic supply chain initiatives, or a combination of both. Payment fulfilling the commitment could be deferred until submission of the facility design report (FDR) to BOEM. Documentation of the lessee's contribution and of how the commitment would benefit workforce training or the domestic supply chain would be due no later than the lessee's first FDR. By deferring the payment until the FDR, the lessee would be able to identify programs or recipients with the greatest potential to expedite or facilitate orderly OCS renewable energy development.
v. Examples of programs that would qualify for the workforce training credit include specific job and workforce training, union apprenticeships, labor management training partnerships, stipends for workforce training, or other technical training programs focused on providing skills needed for the construction, maintenance, or operation of offshore wind energy projects. BOEM encourages lessees to maximize training opportunities for individuals from underserved communities.
vi. Examples of programs that would qualify for the domestic supply chain credit include commitments to technical assistance grants to help U.S. manufacturers re-tool or certify (
vii.
viii.
f. BOEM invites comment on the appropriate mechanisms, evaluation metrics, recipient program examples, and relative value of bidding credits for workforce training and supply chain development.
g.
h.
i.
j.
k.
This section describes the major deadlines and milestones in the auction process from publication of this PSN to potential execution of the lease pursuant to this sale.
a.
Neither registration nor RSVP is required to attend.
b.
c.
Once BOEM has processed a bidder's BFF, the bidder may log into
a. Please accompany your submission with a transmittal letter on company letterhead.
b. BOEM prefers that your BFF be submitted using a company email address.
c. The BFF must be executed by an authorized representative listed in the bidder's legal qualifications. Each bidder is required to sign the self-certification in the BFF truthfully, under threat of criminal penalty for false statements in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1001 (fraud and false statements).
d. BOEM will consider the date an emailed submission was received in the mailbox
e. Additional information regarding BFF may be found below in section IX “Bidder's Financial Form.”
BOEM reserves the right to withdraw all or portions of the Lease Area prior to executing the lease with the winning bidder.
BOEM has made available proposed terms, conditions, and stipulations for the commercial lease that will be offered through this proposed sale. BOEM reserves the right to require compliance with additional terms and conditions associated with approval of a site assessment plan (SAP) and COP. The proposed lease is on BOEM's website at: The lease includes the following attachments:
1. Addendum A (“Description of Leased Area and Lease Activities”);
2. Addendum B (“Lease Term and Financial Schedule”);
3. Addendum C (“Lease-Specific Terms, Conditions, and Stipulations”);
4. Addendum D (“Project Easement”); and
5. Addendum E (“Rent Schedule”).
Addenda A, B, and C provide detailed descriptions of lease terms and conditions. Addendum D will be completed at the time of COP approval or approval with modifications. Addendum E will be completed after COP approval or approval with modifications. After considering comments on the PSN and proposed lease, BOEM will publish final lease terms and conditions in the FSN.
Mitigation measures adopted during the consultation rely upon the most up-to-date science and mirror those included in recent IHAs. Adopting these measures would reduce the number of requests by the lessee to modify its lease stipulations consistent with its respective NMFS-issued IHAs, which in
i. Expeditious and orderly development (43 U.S.C. 1332(3));
ii. Safe operations conducted by well-trained personnel (43 U.S.C. 1332(6));
iii. Any activity is carried out in a manner that provides for safety (43 U.S.C. 1337(p)(4)(A)); and
iv. Fair return (43 U.S.C. 1337(p)(2)(A)).
PLAs may support the achievement of these goals—including expeditious development and potentially more years of operating fee receipts.
This section provides an overview of the required annual payments and financial assurances under the lease. Please see the proposed lease for more information.
If the lessee submits an application for relinquishment of a portion of its leased area within the first 45-calendar days after receiving the lease copies from BOEM and BOEM approves that application, no rent payment would be due on the relinquished portion of the lease area. Later relinquishments of any portion of the lease area would reduce the lessee's rent payments starting in the year following BOEM's approval of the relinquishment.
The lessee also must pay rent for any project easement associated with the lease. Rent commences on the date that BOEM approves the COP (or modification thereof) that describes the project easement as outlined in 30 CFR 585.508. Annual rent for a project easement that is 200 feet wide, centered on the transmission cable, will be $70 per statute mile. For any additional acreage, the lessee must pay the greater of $5 per acre per year or $450 per year.
The subsequent annual operating fee payments will be calculated by multiplying the operating fee rate by the imputed wholesale market value of the projected annual electric power production. For the purposes of this calculation, the imputed market value will be the product of the project's annual nameplate capacity, the total number of hours in the year (8,760), the capacity factor, and the annual average price of electricity derived from a regional wholesale power price index. For example, the annual operating fee for a 1,622 megawatt (MW) wind facility operating at a 40 percent capacity (
BOEM proposes to set the capacity factor at 0.4 (
BOEM will base the amount of all SAP, COP, and decommissioning financial assurance on cost estimates for meeting all accrued lease obligations at the respective stages of development. The required amount of supplemental and decommissioning financial assurance will be determined on a case-by-case basis.
The financial terms described above can be found in addendum B of the lease, which is available at:
Each bidder must fill out the BFF referenced in this PSN. A copy of the form is available at:
Each qualified bidder must submit a bid deposit no later than the date listed in the FSN. Typically, this deadline is approximately 30-calendar days after the publication of the FSN. BOEM may consider extensions to this deadline only if BOEM determines that the failure to timely submit the bid deposit was caused by events beyond the bidder's control.
Following the auction, bid deposits will be applied against the winning bid and other obligations owed to BOEM. If a bid deposit exceeds that bidder's total financial obligation, BOEM will refund the balance of the bid deposit to the bidder. BOEM will refund bid deposits to the other bidders once BOEM has announced the provisional winner.
If BOEM offers a lease to the provisionally winning bidder and that bidder neither timely returns the signed leases, establishes financial assurance, nor pays the balance of its bid, BOEM will retain that bidder's $2,000,000 bid deposit. In such a circumstance, BOEM reserves the right to offer a lease to the next highest bidder as determined by BOEM.
The minimum bid is the lowest bid BOEM will accept as a winning bid, and it is where BOEM will start the bidding in the auction. BOEM proposes a minimum bid of $50.00 per acre for this lease sale.
The auction will be conducted in a series of rounds. At the start of each round, BOEM will state an asking price for the Lease Area. If a bidder is willing to meet that asking price, it would indicate its intent by submitting a bid equal to the asking price. A bid at the full asking price submitted in a round
As long as there are two or more live bids for the Lease Area, the auction moves to the next round. BOEM will continue to raise the asking price if two or more live bids are made in the previous round. Asking price increments would be determined based on several factors, including (but not necessarily limited to) the expected time needed to conduct the auction and the number of rounds that have already occurred. BOEM reserves the right to increase or decrease bidding increments as it deems appropriate.
Generally, a bidder that submitted a live bid in the previous round is free to continue bidding in the current round. If a bidder decides to stop bidding in a subsequent round, that bidder could still win the auction. For example, that bidder could be ultimately selected in the winner determination that is described in detail below, or the winning bidder may be disqualified at the award stage of the auction. If this happens, the bidder may be bound by its bid and thus obligated to pay the full bid amount. Bidders may be bound by any of their bids until the auction results are finalized.
Between rounds, BOEM would disclose to all bidders that submitted bids in the previous round: (1) The number of live bids in the previous round of the auction (
In any round after the first round, a bidder may submit an “exit bid.” An exit bid is a bid that is higher than the previous round's asking price, but less than the current round's asking price. An exit bid is
The auction will end after the first round in which only one or zero live bids is received. BOEM will then determine the provisional winner to be the bidder with the highest bid, whether the bid was a live bid or an exit bid. The auction system will resolve any tie by generating pseudo-random numbers. The provisional winner must pay the amount of its provisionally winning bid.
A provisional winner may be disqualified if it is subsequently found to have violated auction rules or BOEM regulations, or otherwise engaged in conduct detrimental to the integrity of the competitive auction. If a bidder submits a bid that BOEM determines to be a provisionally winning bid, the bidder will be expected to sign the applicable lease documents, establish financial assurance, and submit the balance (if any) of its bonus bid (
BOEM will publish the provisionally winning bidder and bid amount. The bid results, including exit bids, will be published on BOEM's website after review of the results and announcement of the provisional winner.
The second package will contain login credentials for authorized bidders. The login credentials are mailed to the address provided in the BFF for each authorized individual. Bidders can confirm these addresses by calling 703-787-1121. BOEM may also use email to provide login credentials. This package will contain user login information and instructions for accessing the auction system's Bidder Manual and the Auction System Technical Supplement (ASTS). The login information, along with the tokens, will be tested during the mock auction.
Bidders may place bids at any time during the round. At the top of the bidding page, a countdown clock shows how much time remains in the round. Bidders have until the scheduled time to place bids. Bidders should do so according to the procedures described in this notice and the ASTS. Information about the round results will be made available only after the round has closed, so there is no strategic advantage to placing bids early or late in the round.
The ASTS elaborates on the auction procedures described in this PSN. In the event of an inconsistency between the Bidder Manual, the ASTS, and the FSN, the FSN is controlling.
BOEM reserves the right and authority to reject any and all bids that do not satisfy the requirements and rules of the auction, the FSN, or applicable regulations and statutes.
Bidding behavior in this sale is subject to Federal antitrust laws. Accordingly, following the auction, but before the acceptance of bids and the issuance of the lease, BOEM must “allow the Attorney General, in consultation with the Federal Trade Commission, thirty days to review the results of [the] lease sale.” 43 U.S.C. 1337(c)(1). If a provisionally winning bidder is found to have engaged in anti-competitive behavior in connection with this lease sale, BOEM may reject its provisionally winning bid. Compliance with BOEM's auction procedures and regulations is not an absolute defense to violations of antitrust laws.
Anti-competitive behavior determinations are fact-specific. However, such behavior may manifest itself in several different ways, including, but not limited to:
1. An express or tacit agreement among bidders not to bid in an auction, or to bid a particular price;
2. An agreement among bidders not to bid;
3. An agreement among bidders not to bid against each other; or
4. Other agreements among bidders that have the potential to affect the final auction price.
Pursuant to 43 U.S.C. 1337(c)(3), BOEM may decline to award a lease if the Attorney General, in consultation with the Federal Trade Commission, determines that awarding the lease may be inconsistent antitrust laws.
For more information on whether specific communications or agreements could constitute a violation of Federal antitrust law, please see
Once all post-auction reviews have been completed to BOEM's satisfaction, BOEM will issue three unsigned copies of the lease to the provisionally winning bidder. Within 10-business days after receiving the lease copies, the provisionally winning bidders must:
1. Sign and return the lease copies on the bidder's behalf;
2. File financial assurance, as required under 30 CFR 585.515-537; and
3. Pay by electronic funds transfer (EFT) the balance (if any) of the bonus bid (winning monetary bid less the applicable non-monetary bidding credit and bid deposit). BOEM requires bidders to use EFT procedures (not
BOEM will not execute the lease until the three requirements above have been satisfied. BOEM may extend the 10-business-day deadline if BOEM determines the delay was caused by events beyond the provisionally winning bidder's control.
If the provisionally winning bidder does not meet these requirements or otherwise fails to comply with applicable regulations or the terms of the FSN, BOEM reserves the right not to issue the lease to that bidder. In such a case, the provisionally winning bidder would forfeit its bid deposit. Also, in such a case, BOEM reserves the right to offer the lease to the next highest bidder as determined by BOEM.
Within 45-calendar days after receiving the lease copies, the provisionally winning bidder must pay the first year's rent using the “ONRR Renewable Energy Initial Rental Payments” form available at:
Subsequent annual rent payments must be made following the detailed instructions contained in the “Instructions for Making Electronic Payments,” available on BOEM's website at:
Pursuant to 43 CFR part 42, subpart C, an OCS renewable energy lessee must comply with the Department of the Interior's non-procurement debarment and suspension regulations at 2 CFR parts 180 and 1400. The lessee must also communicate this requirement to persons with whom the lessee does business relating to this lease by including this term as a condition in their contracts and other transactions.
The development of the FSN will be informed through the EA, related consultations, and comments received during the PSN comment period. The FSN will provide the final details concerning the offering and issuance of an OCS commercial wind energy lease in the Lease Area in the vicinity of Carolina Long Bay. The FSN will be published in the
The program manager of BOEM's Office of Renewable Energy Programs has the discretion to change any auction detail specified in the FSN, including the date and time, if the manager deems that events outside BOEM's control may interfere with a fair and proper lease sale. Such events may include, but are not limited to, natural disasters (
The appeals and reconsideration procedures are provided in BOEM's regulations at 30 CFR 585.225 and 585.118(c). Under 30 CFR 585.225:
(a) If BOEM rejects your bid, BOEM will provide a written statement of the reasons and will refund any money deposited with your bid, without interest.
(b) You may ask the BOEM Director for reconsideration, in writing, within 15-business days of bid rejection, under 30 CFR 585.118(c)(1). The Director will send you a written response either affirming or reversing the rejection.
The procedures for requesting reconsideration of a bid rejection are described in 30 CFR 585.118(c).
BOEM does not consider anonymous comments; please include your name and address as part of your comment. You should be aware that your entire comment, including your name, address, and any other personal identifiable information (PII) included in your comment, may be made publicly available. All submissions from identified individuals, businesses, and organizations may be available for public viewing on
In order for BOEM to withhold from disclosure your PII, you must identify
BOEM will protect privileged or confidential information that you submit consistent with the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and 30 CFR 585.113. Exemption 4 of FOIA applies to “trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person” that is privileged or confidential. 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4). If you wish to protect the confidentiality of such information, clearly mark it “Contains Privileged or Confidential Information” and consider submitting such information as a separate attachment. BOEM will not disclose such information, except as required by FOIA. Information that is not labeled as privileged or confidential may be regarded by BOEM as suitable for public release. Further, BOEM will not treat as confidential aggregate summaries of otherwise non-confidential information.
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Interior.
Call for information and nominations; request for comments.
In June 2021, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) issued a request for interest (RFI) to gauge specific interest in obtaining commercial wind energy leases in an area on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) in the Gulf of Mexico (GOM). Based on the expressions of interest received in response to the RFI, BOEM has determined that competitive interest exists in the area identified. This call for information and nominations (“Call” or “notice”) initiates the competitive leasing process on the GOM OCS for the area identified herein. The publication of this Call does not mean that BOEM will ultimately grant a lease to any particular party in the area identified in the GOM OCS. Rather, the publication of this Call indicates that the area described (“Call Area”) may be subject to future leasing.
Submissions indicating your nomination or interest in or providing comments on commercial leasing within the Call Area must be received no later than December 16, 2021. Late submissions may not be considered.
Please submit nomination or interest information as discussed under the
Please submit comments and other information as discussed in the section entitled “Requested Information from Interested or Affected Parties
1.
2.
For information about submitting public comments, please see the section under
Tershara Matthews, Chief, Office of Emerging Programs, 1201 Elmwood Park Boulevard, New Orleans, Louisiana 70123, (504) 736-2676 or
43 U.S.C. 1337(p)(3); 30 CFR 585.210 and 585.211.
BOEM is using this notice both to solicit lease nominations beyond those identified in response to the earlier RFI and to request comments from interested and affected parties regarding site conditions, resources, and uses of the identified area that would be relevant to BOEM's potential leasing and development authorization process. Those interested in leasing within the Call Area for a commercial wind energy project should provide detailed and specific information described in the section 5 of this Call entitled “Required Nomination Information.” Those interested in providing public comments and information regarding site conditions, resources, and multiple uses in close proximity to, or within, the Call Area should provide information requested in the section 4 of this Call entitled “Requested Information from Interested or Affected Parties.” Any nominations, expressions of interest, or any other information and comments that were previously submitted in response to the RFI do not need to be resubmitted. BOEM will consider previously submitted nominations, expressions of interest, and any other information and comments along with any information received in response to this notice
BOEM is also preparing an environmental assessment, which will analyze leasing and reasonably foreseeable site assessment activities. Additional opportunities will be provided for public involvement during
The Call Area was established in consultation with BOEM's GOM Intergovernmental Renewable Energy Task Force. Comments received in response to the RFI also were considered when delineating the Call Area. A detailed description of the Call Area is found in section 3 below.
The OCS Lands Act requires BOEM to award leases competitively, unless BOEM determines that there is no competitive interest (43 U.S.C. 1337(p)(3)). BOEM has determined that competitive interest exists in the identified Call area. BOEM now solicits nominations for any additional areas not previously identified as being of interest for obtaining a lease in the Call Area and requests information from interested and affected parties on issues relevant to BOEM's review of nominations for potential leases.
The responses to this Call could lead BOEM to proceed with the competitive leasing process in some parts of the Call Area (
Whether issued through a competitive or noncompetitive process, a lease does not grant the lessee the right to construct any facilities on the OCS. The lease only grants the lessee the exclusive right to submit site assessment and development plans to BOEM. BOEM must approve these plans before the lessee may proceed to the next stages of lease development (30 CFR 585.600 and 585.601).
Whether competitive or noncompetitive, the leasing process will include subsequent opportunities for public input and review of any proposed actions for potential environmental impacts and multiple use conflicts. BOEM has not yet determined which areas may be offered for lease, if any. Further, BOEM may include less than the total footprint of the Call Area in any leasing decision or may offer no areas for leasing at all.
The Call Area comprises the area located seaward of the Gulf of Mexico Submerged Lands Act boundary, bounded on the east by the north-south line located at 89.858° W longitude, and bounded on the south by the 400-meter bathymetry contour and the United States-Mexico maritime boundary established by the Treaty between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the United Mexican States on the Delimitation of the Continental Shelf in the Western Gulf of Mexico beyond 200 Nautical Miles, which took effect in January 2001. The area for potential wind energy leasing consists of approximately 29,901,285 acres. BOEM may issue an additional Call for areas in water depths between 400 meters and 1,300 meters when a better understanding exists of the competitive interest for floating wind energy development in the GOM.
On June 11, 2021, BOEM published in the
BOEM requests specific and detailed comments from the public and other interested or affected parties regarding the following features, activities, mitigations, or concerns within or around the Call Area:
a. Geological, geophysical, and biological bathymetric conditions (including bottom and shallow hazards and live bottom).
b. Known archaeological and cultural resource sites on the seabed.
c. Information regarding the identification of historic properties or potential effects to historic properties from leasing, site assessment activities (including the construction of meteorological towers or the installation of meteorological buoys), or commercial wind energy development in the areas identified in the Call Area. This includes potential offshore archaeological sites or other historic properties within the areas described in this notice and also onshore historic properties that could potentially be affected by renewable energy activities within the Call Areas. This information will inform BOEM's review of future undertakings under section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
d. Information about potentially conflicting uses of the Call Area, including navigation (in particular, commercial and recreational vessel use), recreation, and fisheries (commercial and recreational). Additional information regarding recreational and commercial fisheries including, but not limited to, the use of the areas, the types of fishing gear used, seasonal use, and recommendations for reducing use conflicts.
e. Information regarding the identification of protected species, federally designated (or proposed) critical habitat, essential fish habitat, or areas that are environmentally sensitive or crucial to marine productivity and are State or federally managed for their conservation value.
f. Available and pertinent data and information concerning renewable energy resources and environmental conditions. Where applicable, spatial information should be submitted in a format compatible with ArcGIS 10.8.1 in a geographic coordinate system (NAD 27).
g. Information relating to visual resources and aesthetics, the potential impacts of wind turbines and associated infrastructure on those resources, and potential strategies to help mitigate or minimize any visual effects.
h. Other relevant socioeconomic, cultural, biological, and environmental information.
i. Any other relevant information BOEM should consider during its planning and decision-making process for the purpose of issuing leases in the Call Area.
j. BOEM is interested in understanding potential opportunities for all types of renewable energy development in the GOM. Please provide information to develop an understanding of the potential opportunities or interest in developing clean energy in the area. BOEM would like information on the economic viability of offshore renewable energy in the GOM, the potential insurance support, private equity investment, capacity of grid expansion, transmission concerns, and any positive net value analysis for industry support. Specifically,
• Is development and production of offshore wind energy feasible when compared to the cost of electricity in GOM coastal States?
• What impetus is necessary for utility companies located along the GOM to purchase offshore wind energy?
• What could make offshore wind energy development in the GOM more attractive to investors?
• What could make offshore wind energy development in the GOM more attractive to consumers?
• What is the viability, economic or otherwise, of using offshore wind to power green hydrogen production in the GOM?
• What is the economic viability of offshore wind energy in the GOM considering turbine size, hurricane class turbines, fixed charge rates, and insurance costs?
• What are the most viable locations for offshore wind energy projects in the GOM based on water depth, wind resources, turbine size, distance to port, and interconnection?
• What are the transmission constraints, known or anticipated, and advantages, including but not limited to points of interconnection, load, etc., in the GOM?
If you wish to nominate one or more areas for a commercial wind energy lease within the Call Area, you must provide the following information for each nomination. Any nominations or information submitted in response to the RFI section entitled “Required Indication of Interest Information,” does not need to be resubmitted; BOEM will consider it along with any information received in response to this notice.
a. The BOEM leasing map name and number, or official protraction diagram number, and the specific whole or partial OCS blocks within the Call Area that you are interested in leasing. This information should be submitted as a spatial file compatible with ArcGIS 10.8.1 in a geographic coordinate system (NAD 27) in addition to your hard copy submittal. If your nomination includes one or more partial blocks, please describe those partial blocks in terms of a sixteenth (
b. A description of your objectives and the facilities that you would use to achieve those objectives.
c. A preliminary schedule of proposed activities, including those leading to commercial operations.
d. Available and pertinent data and information concerning renewable energy resources and environmental conditions in each area that you wish to lease, including energy and resource data and information used to evaluate the area. Where applicable, spatial information should be submitted in a format compatible with ArcGIS 10.8.1 in a geographic coordinate system (NAD 27).
e. Documentation demonstrating that you are legally qualified to hold a lease in accordance with the requirements in 30 CFR 585.106 and 585.107(c). Examples of the documentation appropriate for demonstrating your legal qualifications and related guidance can be found in BOEM's “Qualification Guidelines to Acquire and Hold Renewable Energy Leases and Grants and Alternate Use Grants on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf,” available at
f. Documentation demonstrating that you are technically and financially capable of constructing, operating, maintaining, and decommissioning the commercial wind energy facility described in your submission in accordance with 30 CFR 585.107(a). Guidance regarding the documentation to demonstrate your technical and financial qualifications can be found in “Qualification Guidelines to Acquire and Hold Renewable Energy Leases and Grants and Alternate Use Grants on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf,” available at:
BOEM will protect your privileged or confidential information in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Exemption 4 of FOIA applies to trade secrets and commercial or financial information that is privileged or confidential. If you wish to protect the confidentiality of such information, clearly label it and request that BOEM treat it as confidential. BOEM will not disclose such information if BOEM determines under 30 CFR 585.113(b) that it qualifies for exemption from disclosure under FOIA. Please label privileged or confidential information with the words “Contains Confidential Information” and consider submitting such information as a separate attachment.
BOEM will not treat as confidential any aggregate summaries of such information or comments not containing such privileged or confidential information. Additionally, BOEM will not treat as confidential (1) the legal title of the nominating entity (for example, the name of your company), or (2) the list of whole or partial blocks that you are nominating. Information that is not labeled as privileged or confidential may be regarded by BOEM as suitable for public release.
BOEM does not consider anonymous comments; please include your name and address as part of your comment. You should be aware that your entire comment, including your name, address, and any personally identifiable information (PII) included in your comment may be made publicly available. All submissions from identified individuals, businesses, and organizations will be available for public viewing on regulations.gov. For BOEM to withhold your PII from disclosure, you must identify any information contained in your comments that, if released, would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of your personal privacy. You must also briefly describe any possible harmful consequences of the disclosure of information, such as embarrassment, injury, or other harm.
After consultation with the Secretary of the Interior, BOEM is required to withhold the location, character, or ownership of historic resources if it determines that disclosure may, among other things, risk harm to the historic resources or impede the use of a traditional religious site by practitioners. Tribal entities should designate in their submissions information that falls under section 304 of NHPA as confidential.
Before deciding whether and where leases may be issued, BOEM will prepare an environmental assessment (EA) under the NEPA process, including a public scoping period to determine the scope of the EA and a public review and comment period on the draft EA. The EA will consider the reasonably foreseeable environmental consequences associated with leasing, such as site characterization activities (including geophysical, geotechnical, archaeological, and biological surveys) and site assessment activities (including installation of a meteorological tower or meteorological buoy). BOEM also will conduct consultations to consider the environmental consequences associated with issuing commercial wind energy leases within the Call Area. These consultations include, but are not limited to, those required by the Coastal Zone Management Act, the Endangered Species Act, the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, section 106 of NHPA, and Executive Order 13175—“Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments.” Through the NEPA and consultation process, BOEM may evaluate mitigation measures to minimize possible impacts resulting from potential project activities to resources, such as migratory birds, marine mammals, and sea turtles.
Before BOEM allows a lessee to begin construction of a wind energy project on a lease issued within the Call Area, BOEM will consider the potential environmental effects of the construction and operation of any wind energy facility under a separate, project-specific NEPA process. This separate NEPA process will include additional opportunities for public involvement and likely will result in the publication of an environmental impact statement.
1.
For areas with two or more valid nominations, BOEM may consider proceeding with competitive leasing as described in section 8.2 of this Call entitled “Competitive Leasing Process.” For areas where BOEM determines that there is only one interested entity, BOEM may consider proceeding with noncompetitive leasing, as described in section 8.3 entitled “Noncompetitive Leasing Process.”
If BOEM determines that competitive interest exists and that those areas are appropriate to lease, BOEM may hold one or more competitive lease sales for those areas. In the event BOEM holds a lease sale, all qualified bidders, including bidders that did not submit a nomination in response to this Call or the RFI, will be able to participate in the lease sale.
BOEM reserves the right to not lease nominated areas or to modify nominated areas before offering them for lease.
2.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
3.
(a)
(b)
(c)
United States International Trade Commission.
Notice.
The Commission hereby gives notice that it has instituted reviews pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (“the Act”), as amended, to determine whether revocation of the antidumping duty orders on seamless refined copper pipe and tube from China and Mexico would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury. Pursuant to the Act, interested parties are requested to respond to this notice by submitting the information specified below to the Commission.
Instituted November 1, 2021. To be assured of consideration, the deadline for responses is December 1, 2021. Comments on the adequacy of responses may be filed with the Commission by January 13, 2022.
Lawrence Jones (202-205-3358), Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436. Hearing-impaired persons can obtain information on this matter by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server (
(1)
(2) The
(3) The
(4) The
(5) An
Former Commission employees who are seeking to appear in Commission five-year reviews are advised that they may appear in a review even if they participated personally and substantially in the corresponding underlying original investigation or an earlier review of the same underlying investigation. The Commission's designated agency ethics official has advised that a five-year review is not the same particular matter as the underlying original investigation, and a five-year review is not the same particular matter as an earlier review of the same underlying investigation for purposes of 18 U.S.C. 207, the post-employment statute for Federal employees, and Commission rule 201.15(b) (19 CFR 201.15(b)), 79 FR 3246 (Jan. 17, 2014), 73 FR 24609 (May 5, 2008). Consequently, former employees are not required to seek Commission approval to appear in a review under Commission rule 19 CFR 201.15, even if the corresponding underlying original investigation or an earlier review of the same underlying investigation was pending when they were Commission employees. For further ethics advice on this matter, contact Charles Smith, Office of the General Counsel, at 202-205-3408.
Please note the Secretary's Office will accept only electronic filings at this time. Filings must be made through the Commission's Electronic Document Information System (EDIS,
No response to this request for information is required if a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) number is not displayed; the OMB number is 3117 0016/USITC No. 21-5-502, expiration date June 30, 2023. Public reporting burden for the request is estimated to average 15 hours per response. Please send comments regarding the accuracy of this burden estimate to the Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436.
(1) The name and address of your firm or entity (including World Wide Web address) and name, telephone number, fax number, and Email address of the certifying official.
(2) A statement indicating whether your firm/entity is an interested party under 19 U.S.C. 1677(9) and if so, how, including whether your firm/entity is a U.S. producer of the
(3) A statement indicating whether your firm/entity is willing to participate in this proceeding by providing information requested by the Commission.
(4) A statement of the likely effects of the revocation of the antidumping duty orders on the
(5) A list of all known and currently operating U.S. producers of the
(6) A list of all known and currently operating U.S. importers of the
(7) A list of 3-5 leading purchasers in the U.S. market for the
(8) A list of known sources of information on national or regional prices for the
(9) If you are a U.S. producer of the
(a) Production (quantity) and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total U.S. production of the
(b) Capacity (quantity) of your firm to produce the
(c) the quantity and value of U.S. commercial shipments of the
(d) the quantity and value of U.S. internal consumption/company transfers of the
(e) the value of (i) net sales, (ii) cost of goods sold (COGS), (iii) gross profit, (iv) selling, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses, and (v) operating income of the
(10) If you are a U.S. importer or a trade/business association of U.S. importers of the
(a) The quantity and value (landed, duty-paid but not including antidumping duties) of U.S. imports and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total U.S. imports of
(b) the quantity and value (f.o.b. U.S. port, including antidumping duties) of U.S. commercial shipments of
(c) the quantity and value (f.o.b. U.S. port, including antidumping duties) of U.S. internal consumption/company transfers of
(11) If you are a producer, an exporter, or a trade/business association of producers or exporters of the
(a) Production (quantity) and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total production of
(b) Capacity (quantity) of your firm(s) to produce the
(c) the quantity and value of your firm's(s') exports to the United States of
(12) Identify significant changes, if any, in the supply and demand conditions or business cycle for the
(13) (OPTIONAL) A statement of whether you agree with the above definitions of the
By order of the Commission.
United States International Trade Commission.
Notice.
The Commission hereby gives notice that it has instituted reviews pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (“the Act”), as amended, to determine whether revocation of the antidumping duty orders on circular welded carbon-quality steel pipe from Oman, Pakistan, and the United Arab Emirates would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury. Pursuant to the Act, interested parties are requested to respond to this notice by submitting the information specified below to the Commission.
Instituted November 1, 2021. To be assured of consideration, the deadline for responses is December 1, 2021. Comments on the adequacy of responses may be filed with the Commission by January 13, 2022.
Lawrence Jones (202-205-3358), Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436. Hearing-impaired persons can obtain information on this matter by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office
(1)
(2) The
(3) The
(4) The
(5) The
(6) An
Former Commission employees who are seeking to appear in Commission five-year reviews are advised that they may appear in a review even if they participated personally and substantially in the corresponding underlying original investigation or an earlier review of the same underlying investigation. The Commission's designated agency ethics official has advised that a five-year review is not the same particular matter as the underlying original investigation, and a five-year review is not the same particular matter as an earlier review of the same underlying investigation for purposes of 18 U.S.C. 207, the post-employment statute for Federal employees, and Commission rule 201.15(b) (19 CFR 201.15(b)), 79 FR 3246 (Jan. 17, 2014), 73 FR 24609 (May 5, 2008). Consequently, former employees are not required to seek Commission approval to appear in a review under Commission rule 19 CFR 201.15, even if the corresponding underlying original investigation or an earlier review of the same underlying investigation was pending when they were Commission employees. For further ethics advice on this matter, contact Charles Smith, Office of the General Counsel, at 202-205-3408.
Please note the Secretary's Office will accept only electronic filings at this time. Filings must be made through the Commission's Electronic Document Information System (EDIS,
No response to this request for information is required if a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) number is not displayed; the OMB number is 3117 0016/USITC No. 21-5-501, expiration date June 30, 2023. Public reporting burden for the request is estimated to average 15 hours per response. Please send comments regarding the accuracy of this burden estimate to the Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436.
(1) The name and address of your firm or entity (including World Wide Web address) and name, telephone number, fax number, and Email address of the certifying official.
(2) A statement indicating whether your firm/entity is an interested party under 19 U.S.C. 1677(9) and if so, how, including whether your firm/entity is a U.S. producer of the
(3) A statement indicating whether your firm/entity is willing to participate in this proceeding by providing information requested by the Commission.
(4) A statement of the likely effects of the revocation of the antidumping duty orders on the
(5) A list of all known and currently operating U.S. producers of the
(6) A list of all known and currently operating U.S. importers of the
(7) A list of 3-5 leading purchasers in the U.S. market for the
(8) A list of known sources of information on national or regional prices for the
(9) If you are a U.S. producer of the
(a) Production (quantity) and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total U.S. production of the
(b) Capacity (quantity) of your firm to produce the
(c) the quantity and value of U.S. commercial shipments of the
(d) the quantity and value of U.S. internal consumption/company transfers of the
(e) the value of (i) net sales, (ii) cost of goods sold (COGS), (iii) gross profit, (iv) selling, general and administrative (SG&A) expenses, and (v) operating income of the
(10) If you are a U.S. importer or a trade/business association of U.S. importers of the
(a) The quantity and value (landed, duty-paid but not including antidumping duties) of U.S. imports and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total U.S. imports of
(b) the quantity and value (f.o.b. U.S. port, including antidumping duties) of U.S. commercial shipments of
(c) the quantity and value (f.o.b. U.S. port, including antidumping duties) of U.S. internal consumption/company transfers of
(11) If you are a producer, an exporter, or a trade/business association of producers or exporters of the
(a) Production (quantity) and, if known, an estimate of the percentage of total production of
(b) Capacity (quantity) of your firm(s) to produce the
(c) the quantity and value of your firm's(s') exports to the United States of
(12) Identify significant changes, if any, in the supply and demand conditions or business cycle for the
(13) (
By order of the Commission.
U.S. International Trade Commission.
Notice.
Notice is hereby given that on October 21, 2021, the presiding administrative law judge (“ALJ”) issued an Initial Determination on Violation of Section 337. The ALJ also issued a Recommended Determination on remedy and bonding should a violation be found in the above-captioned investigation. The Commission is soliciting submissions on public interest issues raised by the recommended relief should the Commission find a violation. This notice is soliciting comments from the public only.
Amanda P. Fisherow, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2737. Copies of non-confidential documents filed in connection with this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at
Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 provides that, if the Commission finds a violation, it shall exclude the articles concerned from the United States:
The Commission is soliciting submissions on public interest issues raised by the recommended relief should the Commission find a violation, specifically: A limited exclusion order directed to certain digital video-capable devices and components thereof imported, sold for importation, and/or sold after importation by respondents Dell Technologies Inc. and Dell Inc. (together “Dell”), Hisense Co. Ltd., Hisense Visual Technology Co., Ltd., Hisense Electronics Manufacturing Company of America Corporation, Hisense USA Corporation, Hisense Import & Export Co. Ltd., Hisense International Co., Ltd., Hisense International (HK) Co., Ltd., and Hisense International (Hong Kong) America Investment Co., Ltd. (together “Hisense”), HP, Inc. “HP”); Lenovo Group Ltd. and Lenovo (United States), Inc. (together, “Lenovo”), TCL Industries Holdings Co., Ltd., TCL Electronics Holdings Ltd., TCL King Electrical Appliances (Huizhou) Co. Ltd., TTE Technology, Inc., TCL Moka International Ltd., and TCL Moka Manufacturing S.A. de C.V., TCL Smart Device (Vietnam) Company Ltd. (together, “TCL”), Realtek Semiconductor Corp., and Intel Corporation; and cease and desist orders directed to Dell, Hisense, Lenovo, TCL, and HP. Parties are to file public interest submissions pursuant to 19 CFR 210.50(a)(4).
The Commission is interested in further development of the record on the public interest in this investigation. Accordingly, members of the public are invited to file submissions of no more than five (5) pages, inclusive of attachments, concerning the public interest in light of the ALJ's Recommended Determination on Remedy and Bonding issued in this
In particular, the Commission is interested in comments that:
(i) Explain how the articles potentially subject to the recommended remedial orders are used in the United States;
(ii) identify any public health, safety, or welfare concerns in the United States relating to the recommended 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 recommended orders within a commercially reasonable time; and
(v) explain how the recommended orders would impact consumers in the United States.
Written submissions must be filed no later than by close of business on November 20, 2021.
Persons filing written submissions must file the original document electronically on or before the deadlines stated above. The Commission's paper filing requirements in 19 CFR 210.4(f) are currently waived. 85 FR 15798 (March 19, 2020). Submissions should refer to the investigation number (“Inv. No. 337-TA-1224”) in a prominent place on the cover page and/or the first page. (
Any person desiring to submit a document to the Commission in confidence must request confidential treatment by marking each document with a header indicating that the document contains confidential information. This marking will be deemed to satisfy the request procedure set forth in Rules 201.6(b) and 210.5(e)(2) (19 CFR 201.6(b) & 210.5(e)(2)). Documents for which confidential treatment by the Commission is properly sought will be treated accordingly. A redacted non-confidential version of the document must also be filed simultaneously with any confidential filing. 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, solely for cybersecurity purposes. All contract personnel will sign appropriate nondisclosure agreements. All nonconfidential written submissions will be available for public inspection on EDIS.
This action is taken under the authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in Part 210 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR part 210).
By order of the Commission.
Notice of availability; Correction.
The Department of Labor (DOL) is correcting a notice that appeared in the
This correction is effective on November 1, 2021.
Crystal Rennie by telephone at 202-693-0456 or by email at
In FR. Doc. 2021-22744 appearing at 86 FR 57861 in the
1. On page 57861, in the
Notice of availability; Correction
The Department of Labor (DOL) is correcting a notice that appeared in the
Crystal Rennie by telephone at 202-693-0456 or by email at
In FR. Doc. 2021-22488 appearing at 86 FR 57451 in the
1. In the
Bureau of Labor Statistics, Department of Labor.
Notice of information collection; request for comment.
The Department of Labor, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, conducts a pre-clearance consultation program to provide the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing collections of information in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. This program helps to ensure that requested data can be provided in the desired format, reporting burden (time and financial resources) is minimized, collection instruments are clearly understood, and the impact of collection requirements on respondents can be properly assessed. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) is soliciting comments concerning the proposed extension of the International Price Program (IPP) U.S. Import and Export Price Indexes. A copy of the proposed information collection request can be obtained by contacting the individual listed below in the Addresses section of this notice.
Written comments must be submitted to the office listed in the Addresses section of this notice on or before January 3, 2022.
Send comments to Nora Kincaid, BLS Clearance Officer, Division of Management Systems, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Room 4080, 2 Massachusetts Avenue NE, Washington, DC 20212. Written comments also may be transmitted by email to
Nora Kincaid, BLS Clearance Officer, at 202-691-7628 (this is not a toll free number). (See
The U.S. Import and Export Price Indexes, produced by the Bureau of Labor Statistics' International Price Program (IPP), measure price change over time for all categories of imported and exported products, as well as selected services. The IPP has produced the U.S. Import Price Indexes (MPI) continuously since 1973 and the U.S. Export Price Indexes (XPI) continuously since 1971. The Office of Management and Budget has listed the Import and Export Price Indexes (MXPI) as a Principal Federal Economic Indicator since 1982. The indexes are widely used in both the public and private sectors. The primary public sector use is the deflation of the U.S. monthly trade statistics and the quarterly estimates of U.S. Gross Domestic Product; the indexes also are used in formulating U.S. trade policy and in trade negotiations with other countries. In the private sector, uses of the Import Price Indexes include market analysis, inflation forecasting, contract escalation, and replacement cost accounting.
The MXPI are closely followed statistics, and are viewed as a key indicator of the economic environment. The U.S. Department of Commerce uses the monthly statistics to produce monthly and quarterly estimates of inflation-adjusted trade flows. Without continuation of data collection, it would be extremely difficult to construct accurate estimates of the U.S. Gross Domestic Product. In fact, a budget proposal to curtail publication of the export price indexes beginning in FY15 was met with resistance from the Commerce Department who explained that a viable substitute is not available. The
Additionally, Federal policymakers in the Department of Treasury, the Council of Economic Advisers, and the Federal Reserve Board utilize these statistics on a regular basis to improve these agencies' formulation and evaluation of monetary and fiscal policy and evaluation of the general business environment.
Office of Management and Budget clearance is being sought for the U.S. Import and Export Price Indexes. The IPP continues to modernize data collection and processing to permit more timely release of its indexes, and to reduce reporter burden. The IPP has expanded the use of its web application, introduced in 2003, and in 2018, it replaced the mail out and fax back of paper forms as IPP's primary repricing method. The web application allows respondents to update their data online and more rapidly than using a paper-based form. As of September 2021, 93 percent of IPP respondents were providing prices via the web application or had agreed to start using this repricing method. Respondents who provide price information using non-web options do so via non-automated telephone, special arrangements between the analysts and respondents, or email.
The IPP has implemented several systems changes over the years in order to reduce burden for web respondents. Most recently, the IPP adopted the use of a new web application format/layout (deployed in 2019). Previously, the web survey used separate pages for each part of the repricing process; now, the web application utilizes modal windows in combination with separate pages.
Of particular note, the Program has been conducting research into whether administrative trade data can be used in place of directly collected price data for more homogenous product areas. As part of this effort, IPP published historical research export unit value price indexes calculated using trade transaction data. Should IPP's research efforts result in the replacement of directly collected data with trade data collected by other government agencies, the Program would achieve a milestone in burden reduction. More details are available on the MXP Research page (
The Bureau of Labor Statistics is particularly interested in comments that:
• Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility.
• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used.
• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected.
• 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,
Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for Office of Management and Budget approval of the information collection request; they also will become a matter of public record.
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.
Notice of NACOSH meeting.
The National Advisory Committee on Occupational Safety and Health (NACOSH) will meet Tuesday, November 16, 2021, by teleconference and WebEx.
NACOSH will meet from 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m., ET, Tuesday, November 16, 2021.
NACOSH was established by Section 7(a) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSH Act) (29 U.S.C. 651, 656) to advise, consult with, and make recommendations to the Secretary of Labor and the Secretary of Health and Human Services on matters relating to the administration of the OSH Act. NACOSH is a continuing advisory committee of indefinite duration.
NACOSH operates in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) (5 U.S.C. App. 2), its implementing regulations (41 CFR part
Attendance at this NACOSH meeting will be by teleconference and WebEx only. The teleconference dial-in number and passcode are as follows: Dial-in number: 1-800-621-7762; Passcode: 2239082 and the WebEx link is:
Amanda L. Edens, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health, authorized the preparation of this notice under the authority granted by 29 U.S.C. 655(b)(1) and 656(b), 5 U.S.C. App. 2, and 29 CFR part 1912 and 1912a.
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.
Notice.
In this notice, OSHA announces the application of TUV Rheinland of North America, Inc., for expansion of the scope of recognition as a Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL) and presents the agency's preliminary finding to grant the application.
Submit comments, information, and documents in response to this notice, or requests for an extension of time to make a submission, on or before November 16, 2021.
Comments may be submitted as follows:
Information regarding this notice is available from the following sources:
OSHA is providing notice that TUV Rheinland of North America, Inc. (TUVRNA), is applying for an expansion of current recognition as a NRTL. TUVRNA requests the addition of one test standard to the NRTL scope of recognition.
OSHA recognition of a NRTL signifies that the organization meets the requirements specified in 29 CFR 1910.7. Recognition is an acknowledgment that the organization can perform independent safety testing and certification of the specific products covered within the scope of recognition. Each NRTL's scope of recognition includes (1) the type of products the NRTL may test, with each type specified by the applicable test standard and (2) the recognized site(s) that has/have the technical capability to perform the product-testing and product-certification activities for test standards within the NRTL's scope. Recognition is not a delegation or grant of government authority; however, recognition enables employers to use products approved by the NRTL to meet OSHA standards that require product testing and certification.
The agency processes applications by a NRTL for initial recognition, as well as for an expansion or renewal of recognition, following requirements in Appendix A to 29 CFR 1910.7. This appendix requires that the agency publish two notices in the
TUVRNA currently has eight facilities (sites) recognized by OSHA for product testing and certification, with the headquarters located at: TUV Rheinland of North America, Inc., 12 Commerce Road, Newtown, Connecticut 06470. A complete list of TUVRNA sites recognized by OSHA is available at
TUVRNA submitted an application, dated May 14, 2019 (OSHA-2007-0042-0055), to expand recognition as a NRTL to include one additional test standard. OSHA staff performed a detailed analysis of the application packet and reviewed other pertinent information. OSHA did not perform any on-site reviews in relation to this application.
Table 1 shows the test standard found in TUVRNA's application for expansion for testing and certification of products under the NRTL Program.
TUVRNA submitted an acceptable application for expansion of the scope of recognition. OSHA's review of the application file and pertinent documentation preliminarily indicates that TUVRNA can meet the requirements prescribed by 29 CFR 1910.7 for expanding its recognition to include the addition of the one test standard shown in Table 1, above, for NRTL testing and certification. This preliminary finding does not constitute an interim or temporary approval of TUVRNA's application.
OSHA seeks public comment on this preliminary determination.
OSHA welcomes public comment as to whether TUVRNA meets the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.7 for expansion of recognition as a NRTL. Comments should consist of pertinent written documents and exhibits.
Commenters needing more time to comment must submit a request in writing, stating the reasons for the request by the due date for comments. OSHA will limit any extension to 10 days unless the requester justifies a longer time period. OSHA may deny a request for an extension if it is not adequately justified.
To review copies of the exhibits identified in this notice, as well as comments submitted to the docket, contact the Docket Office, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor. These materials also are generally available online at
OSHA staff will review all comments to the docket submitted in a timely manner. After addressing the issues raised by these comments, staff will make a recommendation to the Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health on whether to grant TUVRNA's application for expansion of the scope of recognition. The Assistant Secretary will make the final decision on granting the application. In making this decision, the Assistant Secretary may undertake other proceedings prescribed in Appendix A to 29 CFR 1910.7.
OSHA will publish a public notice of the final decision in the
James S. Frederick, Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20210, authorized the preparation of this notice. Accordingly, the agency is issuing this notice pursuant to 29 U.S.C. 657(g)(2), Secretary of Labor's Order No. 8-2020 (85 FR 58393; Sept. 18, 2020), and 29 CFR 1910.7.
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.
Request for public comments.
OSHA solicits public comments concerning the proposal to extend the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) approval of the information collection requirements specified in the General Working Conditions in Shipyard Employment Standard.
Comments must be submitted (postmarked, sent or received) by January 3, 2022.
Seleda Perryman or Theda Kenney, Directorate of Standards and Guidance, OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor; telephone (202) 693-2222.
The Department of Labor, as part of the continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent (
The following sections describe who uses the information collected under each requirement, as well as how they use it. The purpose of these requirements is to reduce employees' risk of death or serious injury by ensuring that employment has been tested and is in safe operating condition.
The standard on General Working Conditions in Shipyard Employment (29 CFR part 1915, subpart F) covers provisions that address conditions and operations in shipyard employment that may produce hazards for workers. The subpart is comprised of 14 sections that include housekeeping; lighting; utilities; working alone; vessel radar and communication systems; lifeboats; medical services and first aid; sanitation; control of hazardous energy; safety color code for marking physical hazards; accident prevention signs and tags; retention of DOT markings, placards, and labels; motor vehicle safety equipment, operation and maintenance; and servicing multi-piece and single-piece rim wheels.
OSHA has a particular interest in comments on the following issues:
• Whether the proposed information collection requirements are necessary for proper performance of the agency's functions, including whether the information is useful;
• The accuracy of OSHA's estimate of the burden (time and costs) of the information collection requirements, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
• The quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and
• Ways to minimize the burden on employers who must comply. For example, by using automated or other technological information collection and transmission techniques.
OSHA is requesting that OMB extend the approval of the information collection requirements contained in subpart F of the General Working Conditions in Shipyard Employment Standard (29 CFR 1915). The agency is proposing an adjustment decrease of 15,906 hours, from 98,905 to 82,999 hours. The decrease in hours is a result of updated data showing a decrease in the number of large to medium establishments covered by the standard.
OSHA will summarize the comments submitted in response to this notice and will include this summary in the request to OMB to extend the approval of the information collection requirements.
You may submit comments in response to this document as follows: (1) Electronically at
Due to security procedures, the use of regular mail may cause a significant delay in the receipt of comments.
Comments and submissions are posted without change at
James S. Frederick, Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health, directed the preparation of this notice. The authority for this notice is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Labor.
Notice.
In this notice, OSHA announces the application of SGS North America, Inc., for expansion of recognition as a Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL) and presents the agency's preliminary finding to grant the application. Additionally, OSHA proposes to add four test standards to the NRTL Program's List of Appropriate Test Standards.
Submit comments, information, and documents in response to this notice, or requests for an extension of time to make a submission, on or before November 16, 2021.
Submit comments by any of the following methods:
Information regarding this notice is available from the following sources:
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration is providing notice that SGS North America, Inc. (SGS) is applying for an expansion of the current recognition as a NRTL. SGS requests the addition of nineteen test standards to its NRTL scope of recognition.
OSHA recognition of a NRTL signifies that the organization meets the requirements specified in 29 CFR 1910.7. Recognition is an acknowledgment that the organization can perform independent safety testing and certification of the specific products covered within the scope of recognition. Each NRTL's scope of recognition includes (1) the type of products the NRTL may test, with each type specified by the applicable test standard; and (2) the recognized site(s) that has/have the technical capability to perform the product-testing and product-certification activities for test standards within the NRTL's scope. Recognition is not a delegation or grant of government authority; however, recognition enables employers to use products approved by the NRTL to meet OSHA standards that require product testing and certification.
The agency processes applications by NRTLs or applicant organizations for initial recognition, as well as for expansion or renewal of recognition, following requirements in Appendix A to 29 CFR 1910.7. This appendix requires that the agency publish two notices in the
SGS currently has nine facilities (sites) recognized by OSHA for product testing and certification, with the headquarters located at: SGS North America, Inc., 620 Old Peachtree Road, Suwanee, Georgia 30024. A complete list of SGS's scope of recognition is available at
SGS submitted an application to OSHA to expand recognition as a NRTL to include twenty additional test standards on June 5, 2020 (OSHA-2006-0040-0067). This application was amended on June 8, 2021, to remove one standard from the original application. OSHA staff performed a detailed analysis of the application packet and reviewed other pertinent information. OSHA did not perform any on-site reviews in relation to this application. OSHA has determined that one of the standards requested in the application, UL 4200A, Standard for Products Incorporating Button or Coin Cell Batteries of Lithium Technologies does not meet the appropriate test standard requirements in 29 CFR 1910.7(c) and will not consider this standard in SGS's expansion application. UL 4200A does not specify the safety requirements for specific equipment or class of equipment as required by the regulation. OSHA will consider the expansion application for the remaining eighteen standards.
Table 1 lists the eighteen test standards in SGS's amended expansion application that OSHA has determined are appropriate.
Periodically, OSHA will propose to add new test standards to the NRTL list of appropriate test standards following an evaluation of the test standard document. To qualify as an appropriate test standard, the agency evaluates the document to (1) verify it represents a product category for which OSHA requires certification by a NRTL, (2) verify the document represents an end product and not a component, and (3) verify the document defines safety test specifications (not installation or operational performance specifications). OSHA becomes aware of new test standards through various avenues. For example, OSHA may become aware of new test standards by: (1) Monitoring notifications issued by certain Standards Development Organizations; (2) reviewing applications by NRTLs or applicants seeking recognition to include new test standard in their scopes of recognition; and (3) obtaining notification from manufacturers, manufacturing organizations, government agencies, or other parties. OSHA may determine to include a new test standard in the list, for example, if the test standard is for a particular type of product that another test standard also covers or it covers a type of product that no standard previously covered.
In this notice, OSHA proposes to add four new test standards to the NRTL Program's list of appropriate test standards. Table 2, below, lists these test standards.
SGS submitted an acceptable application for expansion of the scope of recognition. OSHA's review of the application file and pertinent documentation preliminarily indicates that SGS can meet the requirements prescribed by 29 CFR 1910.7 for expanding its recognition to include the addition of the eighteen test standards listed in Table 1, above, for NRTL testing and certification. This preliminary finding does not constitute an interim or temporary approval of SGS's application.
OSHA has also preliminarily determined that the four test standards listed in Table 2, above, are appropriate test standard and that these test standards should be added to the NRTL Program's List of Appropriate Test Standards.
OSHA seeks public comment on these preliminary determinations.
OSHA welcomes public comment as to whether SGS meets the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.7 for expansion of the recognition as a NRTL and whether the test standards listed in Table 2, above, are appropriate test standard that should be included in the NRTL Program's List of Appropriate Test Standards. Comments should consist of pertinent written documents and exhibits.
Commenters needing more time to comment must submit a request in
To review copies of the exhibits identified in this notice, as well as comments submitted to the docket, contact the Docket Office, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, U.S. Department of Labor. These materials also are generally available online at
OSHA staff will review all comments to the docket submitted in a timely manner and, after addressing the issues raised by these comments, will make a recommendation to the Assistant Secretary for Occupational Safety and Health whether to grant SGS's application for expansion of the scope of recognition and to add the test standards listed in Table 2, above, to the NRTL Program's List of Appropriate Test Standards. The Assistant Secretary will make the final decision on granting the application and on adding the test standards listed in Table 2, above, to the NRTL Program's List of Appropriate Test Standards. In making these decisions, the Assistant Secretary may undertake other proceedings prescribed in Appendix A to 29 CFR 1910.7.
OSHA will publish a public notice of the final decision in the
James S. Frederick, Acting Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20210, authorized the preparation of this notice. Accordingly, the agency is issuing this notice pursuant to 29 U.S.C. 657(g)(2), Secretary of Labor's Order No. 8-2020 (85 FR 58393, September 18, 2020) and 29 CFR 1910.7.
Signed at Washington, DC, on October 25, 2021.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
Notice of availability of inventions for licensing.
Patent applications on the invention listed below assigned to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration have been filed in the United States Patent and Trademark Office under the Patent Cooperation Treaty and are available for licensing as listed in the
The following application filed in the United States Patent and Trademark Office under the Patent Cooperation Treaty is available for licensing: NASA Case No.: MSC-26540-1-PCT, “Systems and Methods for Oxygen Concentration with Electrochemical Stacks in Series Gas Flow.”
The patent rights in this invention have been assigned to the United States of America as represented by the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Any prospective license will comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR part 404.
Information about other NASA inventions available for licensing can be found online at
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).
Notice of availability of proposed records schedules; request for comments
The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) publishes notice of certain Federal agency requests for records disposition authority (records schedules). We publish notice in the
NARA must receive responses on the schedules listed in this notice by December 16, 2021.
You may submit comments by the following method:
•
Due to COVID-19 building closures, we are currently temporarily not accepting comments by mail. However, if you are unable to comment via
Kimberly Keravuori, Regulatory and External Policy Program Manager, by email at
We are publishing notice of records schedules in which agencies propose to dispose of records they no longer need to conduct agency business. We invite public comments on these records schedules, as required by 44 U.S.C. 3303a(a), and list the schedules at the end of this notice by agency and subdivision requesting disposition authority.
In addition, this notice lists the organizational unit(s) accumulating the records or states that the schedule has agency-wide applicability. It also provides the control number assigned to each schedule, which you will need if you submit comments on that schedule.
We have uploaded the records schedules and accompanying appraisal memoranda to the
We will post comments, including any personal information and attachments, to the public docket unchanged. Because comments are public, you are responsible for ensuring that you do not include any confidential or other information that you or a third party may not wish to be publicly posted. If you want to submit a comment with confidential information or cannot otherwise use the
We will consider all comments submitted by the posted deadline and consult as needed with the Federal agency seeking the disposition authority. After considering comments, we will post on
We will post schedules on our website in the Records Control Schedule (RCS) Repository, at
Each year, Federal agencies create billions of records. To control this accumulation, agency records managers prepare schedules proposing retention periods for records and submit these schedules for NARA's approval. Once approved by NARA, records schedules provide mandatory instructions on what happens to records when no longer needed for current Government business. The records schedules authorize agencies to preserve records of continuing value in the National Archives or to destroy, after a specified period, records lacking continuing administrative, legal, research, or other value. Some schedules are comprehensive and cover all the records of an agency or one of its major subdivisions. Most schedules, however, cover records of only one office or program or a few series of records. Many of these update previously approved schedules, and some include records proposed as permanent.
Agencies may not destroy Federal records without the approval of the Archivist of the United States. The Archivist grants this approval only after thorough consideration of the records' administrative use by the agency of origin, the rights of the Government and of private people directly affected by the Government's activities, and whether or not the records have historical or other value. Public review and comment on these records schedules is part of the Archivist's consideration process.
1. National Archives and Records Administration, Government-wide, Addition to General Records Schedule 2.7 for Vaccination-related Records (DAA-GRS-2021-0003).
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Appointments.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has announced appointments to the NRC Performance Review Board (PRB) responsible for making recommendations on performance appraisal ratings and performance awards for NRC Senior Executives and Senior Level System employees and appointments to the NRC PRB Panel responsible for making recommendations to the appointing and awarding authorities for NRC PRB members.
November 1, 2021.
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2021-0195 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You may obtain publicly available information related to this document using any of the following methods:
•
•
•
Mary A. Lamary, Secretary, Executive Resources Board, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-3300, email:
The following individuals appointed as members of the NRC PRB are responsible for making recommendations to the appointing and awarding authorities on performance appraisal ratings and performance awards for Senior Executives and Senior Level System employees:
The following individuals will serve as members of the NRC PRB Panel that was established to review appraisals and make recommendations to the appointing and awarding authorities for NRC PRB members:
All appointments are made pursuant to Section 4314 of Chapter 43 of Title 5 of the United States Code.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Weeks of November 1, 8, 15, 22, 29, December 6, 2021.
Commissioners' Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland.
Public.
There are no meetings scheduled for the week of November 1, 2021.
There are no meetings scheduled for the week of November 8, 2021.
There are no meetings scheduled for the week of November 15, 2021.
There are no meetings scheduled for the week of November 22, 2021.
There are no meetings scheduled for the week of November 29, 2021.
For more information or to verify the status of meetings, contact Wesley Held at 301-287-3591 or via email at
The NRC Commission Meeting Schedule can be found on the internet at:
The NRC provides reasonable accommodation to individuals with disabilities where appropriate. If you need a reasonable accommodation to participate in these public meetings or need this meeting notice or the transcript or other information from the public meetings in another format (
Members of the public may request to receive this information electronically. If you would like to be added to the distribution, please contact the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of the Secretary, Washington, DC 20555, at 301-415-1969, or by email at
The NRC is holding the meetings under the authority of the Government in the Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 552b.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.
Notice.
The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) is soliciting nominations for appointment to the Advisory Committee of the PBGC.
Nominations must be received on or before December 16, 2021. Please allow three weeks for regular mail delivery to PBGC.
Nominations must be submitted electronically to
The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC or the Corporation) administers the pension plan termination insurance program under Title IV of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). Section 4002(h) of ERISA provides for the establishment of an Advisory Committee to the Corporation. The Advisory Committee consists of seven members appointed by the President from among individuals recommended by the PBGC Board of Directors, which consists of the Secretaries of Labor, Treasury, and Commerce. The Advisory Committee members are as follows:
• Two representatives of employee organizations;
• two representatives of employers who maintain pension plans; and
• three representatives of the general public.
Advisory Committee members must have experience with employee organizations, employers who maintain defined benefit pension plans, the administration or advising of pension plans, or in related fields. Appointments are for 3-year terms. Reappointments are possible but are subject to the appointment process.
The Advisory Committee's prescribed duties include advising the Corporation as to its policies and procedures relating to investment of moneys, and other issues as the Corporation may request or as the Advisory Committee determines appropriate. The Advisory Committee meets at least six times each year. At least one meeting is a joint meeting with the PBGC Board of Directors.
By February 19, 2022, the terms of three of the Advisory Committee members, one representing the general public and two representing employers, will have expired. Therefore, PBGC is seeking nominations for three seats.
PBGC is committed to equal opportunity in the workplace and seeks a broad-based and diverse Advisory Committee.
If you or your organization wants to nominate one or more people for appointment to the Advisory Committee to represent the general public or employers, you may submit nominations to PBGC. Nominations may be in the form of a letter, resolution or petition, signed by the person making the nomination. PBGC encourages you to include additional supporting letters of nomination. PBGC will not consider self-nominees who have no supporting letters. Please do not include any information that you do not want publicly disclosed.
Nominations, including supporting letters, should:
• State the person's qualifications to serve on the Advisory Committee (including any specialized knowledge or experience relevant to the nominee's proposed Advisory Committee position to represent the general public or employers);
• state that the candidate will accept appointment to the Advisory Committee if offered;
• include the nominee's full name, work affiliation, mailing address, phone number, and email address;
• include the nominator's full name, mailing address, phone number, and email address; and
• include the nominator's signature, whether sent by email or otherwise.
PBGC will contact nominees for information on their political affiliation and their status as registered lobbyists. Nominees should be aware of the time commitment for attending meetings and actively participating in the work of the Advisory Committee. Historically, this has meant a commitment of at least 15 days per year. PBGC has a process for vetting nominees under consideration for appointment.
Issued in Washington, DC.
Office of Personnel Management.
60-Day notice and request for comments.
Federal Employee Insurance Operations (FEIO), Healthcare & Insurance, Office of Personnel Management (OPM) offers the general public and other federal agencies the opportunity to comment on an expiring information collection request (ICR) without change, Health Benefits Election Form, Standard Form 2809.
Comments are encouraged and will be accepted until January 3, 2022.
You may submit comments, identified by docket number and/or Regulatory Information Number (RIN) and title, by the following method:
All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number or RIN for this document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing at
A copy of this ICR with applicable supporting documentation, may be obtained by contacting the Retirement Services Publications Team, Office of Personnel Management, 1900 E Street NW, Room 3316-L, Washington, DC 20415, Attention: Cyrus S. Benson, or sent via electronic mail to
As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 OPM is soliciting comments for this collection (OMB No. 3206-0160). The Office of Management and Budget is particularly interested in comments that:
1. Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
2. Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
3. Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
4. Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology,
Standard Form 2809, Health Benefits Election Form, is used by Federal employees, annuitants other than those under the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS) and the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS) including individuals receiving benefits from the Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, former spouses eligible for benefits under the Spouse Equity Act of 1984, and separated employees and former dependents eligible to enroll under the Temporary Continuation of Coverage provisions of the FEHB law (5 U.S.C. 8905a). A different form (OPM 2809) is used by CSRS and FERS annuitants whose health benefit enrollments are administered by OPM's Retirement Operations.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The principal purpose of the proposed rule change is to adopt and formalize the ICC Counterparty Monitoring Procedures (the “CMPs”) and the ICC Credit Rating System (“CRS”) Model Description and Parameterization (the “CRS Policy”) (together, the “Documents”) and to retire the ICC CDS Clearing Counterparty Monitoring Procedures: Futures Commission Merchant (“FCM”) Counterparties (the “FCM Procedures”) and the ICC CDS Clearing Counterparty Monitoring Procedures: Bank Counterparties (the “Bank Procedures”) (together, the “FCM and Bank Procedures”). These revisions do not require any changes to the ICC Clearing Rules (the “Rules”).
In its filing with the Commission, ICC included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change, security-based swap submission, or advance notice and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change, security-based swap submission, or advance notice. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. ICC has prepared summaries, set forth in sections (A), (B), and (C) below, of the most significant aspects of these statements.
ICC's counterparty monitoring policies and procedures and credit scoring approach are divided by counterparty type in the FCM and Bank Procedures. Information with respect to FCM/broker-dealer (“BD”) counterparties and bank counterparties (
The proposed CMPs consolidate ICC's existing counterparty monitoring policies and procedures for CPs and FSPs into one document. The proposed document would enhance and provide more clarity on ICC's counterparty monitoring practices. This document is divided into 11 sections, which are detailed below.
The CMPs provide background with respect to ICC for the purpose of counterparty monitoring. Section 1 serves as an introduction with fundamental information about ICC's organization and operation. FSPs are defined as the entities to which ICC has actual or potential credit exposure (
Section 3 discusses ICC's standards for counterparty relationships, namely the requirements for CPs and FSPs, and includes references to relevant existing documentation. Chapter 2 of the ICC Rules continues to set forth the membership requirements for CPs, which remain unchanged. Section 3 requires ICC, through the PRC, to perform an annual review of such criteria in the Rules to ensure continued sufficiency and appropriateness of the membership requirements. Further, under this section, FSPs must meet certain requirements and be approved by the PRC, meet the operational requirements of the ICC Treasury Department, and be subject to regulation and supervision by a competent authority. Section 3 also describes key steps, responsible parties, and relevant documentation regarding the processes of on-boarding new counterparties and the withdrawal of existing counterparties. For on-boarding new FSPs, the Risk Department is responsible for collecting necessary information and requiring the completion of a risk questionnaire which is presented to the Subcommittee and PRC. The PRC is responsible for overseeing the withdrawal process for FSPs, which includes confirmation from relevant departments that all exposures
The CMPs explain how ICC monitors the stability of its counterparties. Section 4 includes the financial elements of ongoing CP monitoring and discusses monitoring of other CP requirements, such as participation in ICC's price discovery process and default management simulations. Section 4 details the procedures associated with the Risk Department's intraday and daily monitoring functions for CPs and FSPs and specifies how issues are escalated and resulting actions are documented. This includes intraday monitoring of Risk Filter Threshold (“RFT”) consumption to manage the intraday risk associated with incoming real-time position changes to a portfolio that may require pre-funding; a daily end-of-day review of initial margin and guaranty fund changes; intraday and daily monitoring of news and market metrics for CPs and FSPs; and monitoring and review of timely payments and notices from CPs. This section discusses the preparation and review of a monthly credit report on the financial condition of ICC's counterparties as part of the monthly monitoring process. The monthly credit report includes, among other items, a summary of the data used for the analysis, current and historical counterparty credit scores and changes per credit risk factor, exposures of CPs with respect to their total requirements, exposures of FSPs and current allocation and investment limits, and counterparties on the Watch List. Additional reviews of exposure to CPs and FSPs, counterparty qualitative analysis, RFT and investment allocations conducted as part of monthly monitoring are set out in Section 4 along with the procedures for escalating identified issues and documenting resulting actions. Furthermore, Section 4 further discusses how ICC monitors and manages its aggregate exposure to entities and their affiliates with which ICC maintains multiple counterparty relationships, including through limits on FSPs and CPs which are reviewed on a specified basis and more frequently as warranted. Exposures to FSPs are managed through investment allocations, which represent limits established by the Risk Department for entities and are reviewed at least once a year. With respect to CPs, ICC manages the risk that it is willing to take, considering real-time position changes, through the RFT level which is reviewed at least once a month by the Risk Department. Moreover, this section describes the risk reviews that ICC completes for its counterparties. All counterparties are subject to an initial risk review and periodic risk reviews, which allow ICC to monitor the capacity of its counterparties to perform as required. The periodicity of these reviews is within a four-year time frame. The timing of review, the steps for conducting a risk review, the possible review outcomes, and escalation procedures are detailed. Under the CMPs, more frequent risk reviews may be performed if the latest periodic risk review was considered unsatisfactory or the counterparty was recently placed on the highest Watch List level. Section 5 describes ICC's CRS that computes credit scores for counterparties and specifies the frequency of review of the credit scoring methodology.
The CMPs detail how ICC identifies counterparties that may pose additional risk to it and include additional information relevant to ICC's monitoring responsibilities. Section 6 sets out the criteria for placing counterparties on the Watch List and the procedures for adding and removing counterparties to and from the Watch List. Regarding Watch List criteria, this section distinguishes between automatic placement on the Watch List based on credit score and qualitative considerations of counterparty deterioration that may merit placement on the Watch List or movement to a higher Watch List level. A credit score of 3.0 or higher warrants a counterparty to be automatically placed on the Watch List. Qualitative considerations include decreasing levels of capitalization and failure to maintain operations, infrastructure, and personnel capable of meeting requirements. The CRO determines if a counterparty should be added to the Watch List, except for automatic placement, and if a counterparty should be removed. The CRO may consider recommendations regarding which counterparties to add to the Watch List as well as counterparty Watch List level changes from the Subcommittee and PRC. Section 7 details the actions available to ICC with respect to CPs or FSPs on the Watch List or for whom a deficiency is identified during the monitoring process. Actions the CRO may take include, among others, an increase in initial margin requirements, notification to the Board, recommendation for suspension of clearing privileges, or termination of the relationship with the FSP. Section 7 also discusses how such actions are determined, documented, and escalated. The Risk Department is responsible for contacting firms to discuss activity that raised concern. The CRO is responsible for documenting the details, rationale, and criteria used in determining actions taken against the CP, and the documentation is presented to the Subcommittee. For FSPs, concerns are escalated to ICC Senior Management to evaluate the issues and determine what, if any, additional actions should be taken. Finally, the CMPs include additional information regarding the confidentiality of credit scores in Section 8, record keeping responsibilities in Section 9, references in Section 10, and the revision history in Section 11.
The proposed CRS Policy describes ICC's CRS and provides additional clarity on the processes and procedures related to ICC's credit scoring approach. The proposed document is divided into 9 sections, which are detailed below.
The CRS Policy contains background on ICC's CRS that computes credit scores for counterparties. Section 1 describes the CRS and sets out its purpose, which is to rate counterparties and identify counterparties that may exhibit inconsistent financial performance or that show signs of operational and risk management weaknesses and require more extensive analysis. The CRS estimates a credit score representative of the financial condition of the counterparty and relies on credit risk factors representing a combination of data and performance ratios derived from financial reporting and market information. Section 1 specifies that the ICC Risk Department is responsible for calibrating the credit risk factor metrics. Section 2 explains the scope of the CRS, which features two credit scoring models due to the variety of CPs and FSPs facing ICC. Section 2 summarizes each credit scoring model and its corresponding model components and provides a range of possible credit scores and credit score interpretations. The credit scoring scale ranges from 1 to 5, with a score of 1 indicating the strongest financial stability and the level of least concern and a score of 5 indicating the weakest financial stability and the greatest level of concern. This section further summarizes the data required for the CRS and describes how implementation of the CRS is supported internally.
The CRS Policy describes the model components of each credit scoring model in detail. Section 3 discusses the selection of credit risk factors, which are divided into financial and market metrics. Financial metrics provide a point in time view of the state of the company, while market metrics are used
Model specifications are also included in the CRS Policy. Section 4 describes the calibration of the model component weights. Each credit risk factor receives its own credit risk factor-specific weight. This section notes how credit risk factor weights are determined and discusses the testing of the weights between the financial and market metrics to measure the effectiveness of the scoring model in identifying early signs of weakness. Section 4 further discusses metric parameterization for each credit risk factor and provides input values, metric descriptions, graphical representations, assumptions, parameter sets, and calibrated values, among others.
The CRS Policy specifies the data required for the CRS to compute credit scores and memorializes other information relevant to the CRS. Section 5 includes procedures for collecting data from internal and external sources and describes the case in which component weights are reallocated based on the availability of data. Section 5 further explains how the adequacy of the data is ensured and assigns responsibility for checking the validity of data and remedying inconsistencies. Under Section 6, the credit risk factors, corresponding metrics and parameterization of the credit scoring model are reviewed at least once a year. Results are evaluated based on predefined thresholds, which are set out in this section, and actions are taken to update the model parameterization if needed. Section 7 specifies the assumptions and limitations of the CRS. Section 8 contains a list of references, and Section 9 includes the revision history. The appendices maintain other relevant information for the purpose of using the CRS, including a list of proxies and information relevant to metric parameterization.
ICC proposes retiring the FCM and Bank Procedures. The below list summarizes where the information in the FCM and Bank Procedures would reside following retirement and differences from the proposed Documents.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
• Appendices 1 and 2 are moved to the appendices of the CRS Policy and Appendix 3 is removed.
Consolidation of the FCM and Bank Procedures with respect to counterparty monitoring in the CMPs and with respect to the credit scoring approach in the CRS Policy would allow ICC to avoid unnecessary repetition. The Documents are generally designed to enhance, clarify, and more clearly document descriptions of key ICC
ICC believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of Section 17A of the Act
The proposed rule change would also satisfy the relevant requirements of Rule 17Ad-22.
Rule 17Ad-22(e)(4)(ii)
Rule 17Ad-22(e)(16)
Rule 17Ad-22(e)(18)
ICC does not believe the proposed rule change would have any impact, or impose any burden, on competition. The proposed rule change to adopt and formalize the Documents and to retire the FCM and Bank Procedures will apply uniformly across all market participants. Therefore, ICC does not believe the proposed rule change would impose any burden on competition that is inappropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
Written comments relating to the proposed rule change have not been solicited or received. ICC will notify the Commission of any written comments received by ICC.
Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
(A) By order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change, or
(B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved.
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's internet comment form (
• Send an email to
Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549.
All comments received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying information from comment submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ICC-2021-021 and should be submitted on or before November 22, 2021.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
2:00 p.m. on Thursday, November 4, 2021.
The meeting will be held via remote means and/or at the Commission's headquarters, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549.
This meeting will be closed to the public.
Commissioners, Counsel to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the Commission, and recording secretaries will attend the closed meeting. Certain staff members who have an interest in the matters also may be present.
In the event that the time, date, or location of this meeting changes, an announcement of the change, along with the new time, date, and/or place of the meeting will be posted on the Commission's website at
The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions set forth in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (6), (7), (8), 9(B) and (10) and 17 CFR 200.402(a)(3), (a)(5), (a)(6), (a)(7), (a)(8), (a)(9)(ii) and (a)(10), permit consideration of the scheduled matters at the closed meeting.
The subject matter of the closed meeting will consist of the following topics:
Institution and settlement of injunctive actions;
Institution and settlement of administrative proceedings;
Resolution of litigation claims; and
Other matters relating to examinations and enforcement proceedings.
At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in the scheduling of meeting agenda items that may consist of adjudicatory, examination, litigation, or regulatory matters.
For further information; please contact Vanessa A. Countryman from the Office of the Secretary at (202) 551-5400.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The Exchange is filing a proposal to amend the Exchange's Fee Schedule (“Fee Schedule”) to establish fees for the market data product known as MIAX Emerald Complex Top of Market (“cToM”).
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.
The Exchange proposes to amend Section 6)a) of the Fee Schedule to establish fees for the cToM data product.
The Exchange previously adopted rules governing the trading of Complex Orders
In summary, cToM provides subscribers with the same information as the MIAX Emerald Top of Market (“ToM”) data product as it relates to the Strategy Book,
The Exchange now proposes to amend Section 6)a) of the Fee Schedule to charge monthly fees to Distributors
Like it does today for ToM, the Exchange proposes to assess cToM fees on Internal and External Distributors in each month the Distributor is credentialed to use cToM in the production environment. Also, like the Exchange does today for ToM, market data fees for cToM will be reduced for new Distributors for the first month during which they subscribe to cToM, based on the number of trading days that have been held during the month prior to the date on which that subscriber has been credentialed to use cToM in the production environment. Such new Distributors will be assessed a pro-rata percentage of the fees in the table in Section 6)a) of the Fee Schedule, which is the percentage of the number of trading days remaining in the affected calendar month as of the date on which they have been credentialed to use cToM in the production environment, divided by the total number of trading days in the affected calendar month.
The Exchange initially filed this proposal on June 30, 2021 with the proposed fees to be effective beginning July 1, 2021.
The Exchange also proposes to amend the paragraph below the table of fees for ToM and cToM in Section 6)a) of the Fee Schedule to make a minor, non-substantive corrective edit. In particular, the Exchange proposes to delete the phrase “(as applicable)” in the first sentence following the table of fees for ToM and cToM. The purpose of this proposed change is to remove unnecessary text from the Fee Schedule.
The proposed rule change is immediately effective upon filing.
The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend its Fee Schedule is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act
In adopting Regulation NMS, the Commission granted self-regulatory organizations (“SROs”) and broker-dealers increased authority and flexibility to offer new and unique market data to the public. It was believed that this authority would expand the amount of data available to consumers, and also spur innovation and competition for the provision of market data. Particularly, cToM further broadens the availability of U.S. option market data to investors consistent with the principles of Regulation NMS. The data product also promotes increased transparency through the dissemination of cToM. Particularly, cToM provides subscribers with the same information as ToM as it relates to the Strategy Book (
The Exchange believes that its proposal is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because it is a business decision of each subscriber of cToM whether to subscribe to the feed or not. cTom is also not the exclusive source for Complex Order information from the Exchange and market participants may choose to subscribe to the Exchange's other data products to receive such information. Specifically, market participants that choose not to subscribe to cToM can derive much, if not all, of the same information provided in the cToM feed from other Exchange sources, including, for example, the MIAX Emerald Order Feed (“MOR”).
The Exchange also notes that no market participant is required by any rule or regulation to utilize the Exchange's Complex Order functionality or subscribe to the cToM data feed. Further, unlike orders on the Exchange's Simple Order Book, Complex Orders are not protected and will never trade through Priority Customer
The Exchange believes the proposed fees are reasonable as the proposed fees are both modest and similar to, or even lower than, the fees assessed by other exchanges that provide similar data products.
Selling market data, such as cToM, is also a means by which exchanges compete to attract business. If the market deems the proposed fees to be unfair or inequitable, firms can diminish or discontinue their use of the data and/or avail themselves of similar products offered by other exchanges.
The Exchange also believes the proposed cToM fees are reasonable and not unfairly discriminatory because since the Exchange initially established the cToM data product when it launched trading operations on March 1, 2019, all Exchange Members have had the ability to receive the Exchange's cToM data free of charge for the past two and a half years.
The Exchange believes that it is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to assess Internal Distributors fees that are less than the fees assessed for External Distributors for subscriptions to the cToM data feed because Internal Distributors have limited, restricted usage rights to the market data, as compared to External Distributors, which have more expansive usage rights. All Members and non-Members that determine to receive any market data feed of the Exchange (or its affiliates, MIAX PEARL, LLC and MIAX), must first execute, among other things, the MIAX Exchange Group Exchange Data Agreement (the “Exchange Data Agreement”).
Further, the Exchange no longer believes it is necessary to provide cToM data for free to attract market participants since the Exchange's Strategy Book is now established and the Exchange no longer needs to rely on such waivers to attract market participants to its Complex Order market or cToM subscribers. The Exchange believes that the proposal is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because the proposed cToM fees will apply to all market participants of the Exchange on a uniform basis. The Exchange also notes that the proposed monthly cToM fees for Internal and External Distributors are the same prices that the Exchange charges for its ToM data product, and are generally lower than other options exchanges' data feed prices for their comparable data feed products.
The Exchange believes the proposed change to delete certain text from Section 6)a) of the Fee Schedule promotes just and equitable principles of trade and removes impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system because the proposed change is a non-substantive edit to the Fee Schedule to remove unnecessary text. The Exchange believes that this proposed change will provide greater clarity to Members and the public regarding the Exchange's Fee Schedule and that it is in the public interest for the Fee Schedule to be accurate and concise so as to eliminate the potential for confusion.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Rather, the Exchange believes that the proposal will promote competition by permitting the Exchange to sell a data product similar to those offered by other competitor options exchanges.
Furthermore, the Exchange operates in a highly competitive environment, and its ability to price cToM is constrained by competition among exchanges that offer similar data products and complex order functionality to their customers. As discussed, there are currently a number of similar products available to market participants and investors. Other U.S. options exchanges offer market data products that are substantially similar to cToM, which the Exchange must consider in its pricing discipline in order to compete for the market data.
The Exchange also does not believe the proposed fees would cause any unnecessary or inappropriate burden on intermarket competition as other exchanges are free to introduce their own comparable data product and lower their prices to better compete with the Exchange's offering. The Exchange does not believe the proposed rule change would cause any unnecessary or inappropriate burden on intramarket competition. Particularly, the proposed product and fees apply uniformly to any purchaser, in that it does not differentiate between subscribers that purchase cToM. The proposed fees are set at a modest level that would allow any interested Member or non-Member to purchase such data based on their business needs.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change to make a minor, non-substantive edit to Section 6)a) of the Fee Schedule by deleting unnecessary text will result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. This proposed rule change is not being made for competitive reasons, but rather is designed to remedy a minor non-substantive issue and will provide added clarity to the Fee Schedule. The Exchange believes that it is in the public interest for the Fee Schedule to be accurate and concise so as to eliminate the potential for confusion on the part of market participants. In addition, the Exchange does not believe the proposal will impose any burden on inter-market competition as the proposal does not address any competitive issues and is intended to protect investors by providing further transparency regarding the Exchange's Fee Schedule.
Written comments were neither solicited nor received.
The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act,
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”),
The Exchange is filing a proposal to amend the MIAX Options Fee Schedule (the “Fee Schedule”) to establish fees for the market data product known as MIAX Complex Top of Market (“cToM”).
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.
The Exchange proposes to amend Section 6)a) of the Fee Schedule to establish fees for the cToM data product.
The Exchange previously adopted rules governing the trading of Complex Orders
In summary, cToM provides subscribers with the same information as the MIAX Top of Market (“ToM”) data product as it relates to the Strategy Book,
The Exchange now proposes to amend Section 6)a) of the Fee Schedule to charge monthly fees to Distributors
Like it does today for ToM, MIAX proposes to assess cToM fees on Internal and External Distributors in each month the Distributor is credentialed to use cToM in the production environment. Also, like the Exchange does today for ToM, market data fees for cToM will be reduced for new Distributors for the first month during which they subscribe to cToM, based on the number of trading days that have been held during the month prior to the date on which that subscriber has been credentialed to use cToM in the production environment. Such new Distributors will be assessed a pro-rata percentage of the fees in the table in Section 6)a) of the Fee Schedule, which is the percentage of the number of trading days remaining in the affected calendar month as of the date on which they have been credentialed to use cToM in the production environment, divided by the total number of trading days in the affected calendar month.
The Exchange initially filed this proposal on June 30, 2021 with the proposed fees to be effective beginning July 1, 2021.
The Exchange also proposes to amend the paragraph below the table of fees for ToM and cToM in Section 6)a) of the Fee Schedule to make a minor, non-substantive corrective edit. In particular, the Exchange proposes to delete the phrase “(as applicable)” in the first sentence following the table of fees for ToM and cToM. The purpose of this proposed change is to remove unnecessary text from the Fee Schedule.
The proposed rule change is immediately effective upon filing.
The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend its Fee Schedule is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act
In adopting Regulation NMS, the Commission granted self-regulatory organizations (“SROs”) and broker-dealers increased authority and flexibility to offer new and unique market data to the public. It was believed that this authority would expand the amount of data available to consumers, and also spur innovation and competition for the provision of market data. Particularly, cToM further broadens the availability of U.S. option market data to investors consistent with the principles of Regulation NMS. The data product also promotes increased transparency through the dissemination of cToM. Particularly, cToM provides subscribers with the same information as ToM as it relates to the Strategy Book (
The Exchange believes that its proposal is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because it is a business decision of each subscriber of cToM whether to subscribe to the feed or not. cTom is also not the exclusive source for Complex Order information from the Exchange and market participants may choose to subscribe to the Exchange's other data products to receive such information. Specifically, market participants that choose not to subscribe to cToM can derive much, if not all, of the same information provided in the cToM feed from other Exchange sources, including, for example, the MIAX Options Order Feed
The Exchange also notes that no market participant is required by any rule or regulation to utilize the Exchange's Complex Order functionality or subscribe to the cToM data feed. Further, unlike orders on the Exchange's Simple Order Book, Complex Orders are not protected and will never trade through Priority Customer
The Exchange believes the proposed fees are reasonable as the proposed fees are both modest and similar to, or even lower than, the fees assessed by other exchanges that provide similar data products.
Selling market data, such as cToM, is also a means by which exchanges compete to attract business. If the market deems the proposed fees to be unfair or inequitable, firms can diminish or discontinue their use of the data and/or avail themselves of similar products offered by other exchanges.
The Exchange also believes the proposed cToM fees are reasonable and not unfairly discriminatory because since the Exchange initially established the cToM data product in 2016, all Exchange Members have had the ability to receive the Exchange's cToM data free of charge for the past five years.
The Exchange believes that it is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to assess Internal Distributors fees that are less than the fees assessed for External Distributors for subscriptions to the cToM data feed because Internal Distributors have limited, restricted usage rights to the market data, as compared to External Distributors, which have more expansive usage rights. All Members and non-Members that determine to receive any market data feed of the Exchange (or its affiliates, MIAX PEARL, LLC and MIAX Emerald), must first execute, among other things, the MIAX Exchange Group Exchange Data Agreement (the “Exchange Data Agreement”).
Further, the Exchange no longer believes it is necessary to provide cToM data for free to attract market participants since the Exchange's Strategy Book is now established and the Exchange no longer needs to rely on such waivers to attract market participants to its Complex Order market or cToM subscribers. The Exchange believes that the proposal is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because the proposed cToM fees will apply to all market participants of the Exchange on a uniform basis. The Exchange also notes that the proposed monthly cToM fees for Internal and External Distributors are the same prices that the Exchange charges for its ToM data product, and are generally lower than other options exchanges' data feed prices for their comparable data feed products.
The Exchange believes the proposed change to delete certain text from Section 6)a) of the Fee Schedule promotes just and equitable principles of trade and removes impediments to and perfects the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market system because the proposed change is a non-substantive edit to the Fee Schedule to remove unnecessary text. The Exchange believes that this proposed change will provide greater clarity to Members and the public regarding the Exchange's Fee Schedule and that it is in the public interest for the Fee Schedule to be accurate and concise so as to eliminate the potential for confusion.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. Rather, the Exchange believes that the proposal will promote competition by permitting the Exchange to sell a data product similar to those offered by other competitor options exchanges.
Furthermore, the Exchange operates in a highly competitive environment, and its ability to price cToM is constrained by competition among exchanges that offer similar data products and complex order functionality to their customers. As discussed, there are currently a number of similar products available to market participants and investors. Other U.S. options exchanges offer market data products that are substantially similar to cToM, which the Exchange must consider in its pricing discipline in order to compete for the market data.
The Exchange also does not believe the proposed fees would cause any unnecessary or in appropriate [sic] burden on intermarket competition as other exchanges are free to introduce their own comparable data product and lower their prices to better compete with the Exchange's offering. The Exchange does not believe the proposed rule change would cause any unnecessary or inappropriate burden on intramarket competition. Particularly, the proposed product and fees apply uniformly to any purchaser, in that it does not differentiate between subscribers that purchase cToM. The proposed fees are set at a modest level that would allow any interested Member or non-Member to purchase such data based on their business needs.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change to make a minor, non-substantive edit to Section 6)a) of the Fee Schedule by deleting unnecessary text will result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. This proposed rule change is not being made for competitive reasons, but rather is designed to remedy a minor non-substantive issue and will provide added clarity to the Fee Schedule. The Exchange believes that it is in the public interest for the Fee Schedule to be accurate and concise so as to eliminate the potential for confusion on the part of market participants. In addition, the Exchange does not believe the proposal will impose any burden on inter-market competition as the proposal does not address any competitive issues and is intended to protect investors by providing further transparency regarding the Exchange's Fee Schedule.
Written comments were neither solicited nor received.
The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act,
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
On July 12, 2021, The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (“Nasdaq” or “Exchange”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”)
The Exchange proposes to adopt the Extended Trading Close (“ETC”), which would be a process during which eligible orders in Nasdaq-listed securities
As proposed, only “ETC Orders” and “ETC Eligible LOC Orders” (together, “ETC Eligible Orders”) would be eligible to participate in the ETC.
As proposed, the ETC would commence upon the conclusion of the Closing Cross and end at 4:05 p.m. (or 1:05 p.m. on a day when the Exchange closes early).
Also as proposed, beginning at 4:00:05 p.m. (or 1:00:05 p.m. on a day when the Exchange closes early), the Exchange would disseminate by electronic means an ETC order imbalance indicator every 5 seconds until the ETC concludes.
Moreover, as proposed, the Exchange system would suspend execution of ETC Eligible Orders in a security whenever it detects: (i) An order in that same security resting on the Nasdaq continuous book in after-hours trading
The Exchange represents that it will surveil the ETC for any unfair or manipulative trading practices.
The Commission received a comment letter opposing the proposal.
Specifically, this commenter does not believe that the ETC would enhance the Closing Cross process, or improve price discovery or liquidity in the Closing Cross.
This commenter also believes that the ETC would allow sophisticated participants to engage in arbitrage by quickly identifying price differences between the Closing Cross price and the prevailing after-hours market price before other participants.
Finally, this commenter states that the availability of information going into the closing auction becomes the principal driver of price discovery in the continuous market in the last five to ten minutes of trading.
In its response letter, the Exchange disagrees with the commenter's concerns that the ETC would threaten the integrity of the Closing Cross.
In addition, the Exchange does not share the commenter's concerns regarding arbitrage, and states that any risk that ETC participants would face harm from arbitrageurs is likely to be considerably less than the risks that market participants presently face when they trade after-hours.
The Commission is instituting proceedings pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act,
The Commission is instituting proceedings to allow for additional analysis of, and input from commenters with respect to, the consistency of the proposal with Sections 6(b)(5)
The Commission requests that interested persons provide written submissions of their data, views, and arguments with respect to the issues identified above, as well as any other concerns they may have with the proposal. In particular, the Commission invites the written views of interested persons concerning whether the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, is consistent with Section 6(b)(5), 6(b)(8), or any other provision of the Act, or rules and regulations thereunder. Although there do not appear to be any issues relevant to approval or disapproval that would be facilitated by an oral presentation of data, views, and arguments, the Commission will consider, pursuant to Rule 19b-4 under the Act,
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments regarding whether the proposed rule change, as modified by Amendment No. 1, should be approved or disapproved by November 22, 2021. Any person who wishes to file a rebuttal to any other person's submission must file that rebuttal by December 6, 2021. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Act”)
The Exchange is filing a proposal to amend the MIAX Options Fee Schedule (the “Fee Schedule”) to adopt an incentive program for Market Makers
The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website at
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.
The Exchange proposes to amend the Fee Schedule to implement a SPIKES Options Market Maker Incentive Program (the “Incentive Program”) for the period beginning October 1, 2021, and ending December 31, 2021.
On October 12, 2018, the Exchange received approval from the Commission to list and trade options on the SPIKES® Index, which measures expected 30-day volatility of the SPDR® S&P 500 ETF Trust (commonly known and referred to by its ticker symbol, “SPY”).
The Exchange proposes to implement a SPIKES Options Market Maker Incentive Program for SPIKES options to incentivize Market Makers to improve liquidity, available volume, and the quote spread width of SPIKES options. To be eligible to participate in the Incentive Program, a Market Maker must meet certain minimum requirements related to quote spread width in certain in-the-money (ITM) and out-of-the-money (OTM) options as determined by the Exchange and communicated to Members via Regulatory Circular.
The Exchange proposes to establish two separate incentive compensation pools that will be used to compensate Market Makers that satisfy the criteria pursuant to the proposed Incentive Program.
The first pool (Incentive 1) will be a total amount of $40,000 per month, which will be allocated to Market Makers that meet the minimum requirements of the Incentive Program. Market Makers will be required to meet minimum spread width requirements in a select number of ITM and OTM SPIKES option contracts as determined by the Exchange and communicated to
The second pool (Incentive 2 Pool) will be capped at a total amount of $100,000 per month which will be used during the Incentive Program to further incentivize Market Makers who meet or exceed the requirements of Incentive 1 (“qualifying Market Makers”) to provide tighter quote width spreads. The Exchange will rank each qualifying Market Maker's quote width spread relative to each other qualifying Market Maker's quote width spread. Market Makers with tighter spreads in certain strikes, as determined by the Exchange and communicated to Members via Regulatory Circular,
Each qualifying Market Maker's ITM/OTM market width for eligible Incentive Program options will be calculated, weighted, and ranked. ITM market width will be given a 25% weighting and OTM market width will be given a 75% weighting. Eligible ITM options require a maximum quote width spread of 150 basis points (“bps”) and each eligible OTM option requires a maximum quote width of 100 bps (as calculated below).
The formula employed by the Exchange to calculate the bps for an individual strike is: {(Ask Quote−Bid Quote)/Futures price} * 10,000, where the futures price is in the same expiry being measured. For example, a SPIKE 19 Put expiring on 10/20/2021 has a bid quote of $0.25 and an ask quote of $.45 and the October SPIKE Future is trading at 20.30. Using the aforementioned formula the Exchange can calculate the Member's bps on that strike as: {($0.45−$0.25)/20.30} * 10,000; or ($0.20/20.30) * 10,000; or .009852 * 10,000 = 98.52217 bps. To establish the market quality baseline bps the Exchange combines target bps in ITM and OTM options (150 bps * 25% = 37.5 bps and 100 bps * 75% = 75 bps; 37.5 bps + 75 bps = 112.50 bps).
To determine the pool amount the Exchange will contribute $5,000 for each basis point improvement from the Exchange established baseline of 112.50 bps. The Exchange will calculate a Member's Improvement Value (“MIV”) by subtracting the Member's monthly average bps from the Exchange established baseline of 112.50 bps. If for the month “Market Maker A” has an average score of 109 and “Market Maker B” has an average score of 107 the Exchange will calculate the amount of Incentive Pool 2 based on the average total improvement of the qualifying Market Makers from the baseline and for every bps of improvement the Exchange will contribute $5,000 to Incentive Pool 2. In this example, the average of “Market Maker A” (109) and “Market Maker B” (107) is 108. The Exchange would therefore contribute $22,500 to Incentive Pool 2 (112.5−108 = 4.5 * $5,000).
The Exchange will calculate a pro-rata distribution for each Market Maker based upon their improvement value, which is the number of bps improvement from the Exchange established baseline of 112.5. “Market Maker A” has an MIV of 3.5 (112.5−109) and “Market Maker B” has an MIV of 5.5 bps (112.5 = 107). To determine each Market Makers' pro-rata share of the Incentive 2 Pool the Exchange sums the MIVs of each Market Maker (3.5 + 5.5) = 9 and divides each Market Maker's MIV by that total to establish their weighted percentage: 38.89% and 61.11% for “Market Maker A” and “Market Maker B,” respectively. “Market Maker A” would then be entitled to 38.89% of the $22,500 Incentive 2 Pool or $8,750. Whereas “Market Maker B” would be entitled to 61.11% of the $22,500 Incentive 2 Pool or $13,750.
The total amount in Incentive Pool 2 is capped at $100,000 per month and the total amount allocated to any one Member is capped at $25,000 per month.
The details of the Incentive Program are contained in a Regulatory Circular distributed to all Members.
The Exchange believes that its proposal to amend its Fee Schedule is consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act
The Exchange believes that it is reasonable, equitable, and not unfairly discriminatory to adopt an Incentive Program for Market Makers in SPIKES options. The Incentive Program is reasonably designed because it will incent Market Makers to provide quotes and increased liquidity in select SPIKES options contracts. The proposed Incentive Program is reasonable, equitably allocated and not unfairly discriminatory because all Market Makers in SPIKES options may qualify for Incentive 1 and Incentive 2, dependent upon each Market Maker's quoting in SPIKES options in a particular month. Additionally, if a
The Exchange believes that it is reasonable, equitable and not unfairly discriminatory to offer this financial incentive to SPIKES Market Makers because it benefits all market participants trading in SPIKES. SPIKES Options is a Proprietary Product
The Exchange believes that the Incentive Program is equitable and not unfairly discriminatory because it will promote an increase in SPIKES options liquidity, which may facilitate tighter spreads and an increase in trading opportunities to the benefit of all market participants. The Exchange believes it is reasonable to operate the Incentive Program for a limited period of time to strengthen market quality for all market participants. The resulting increased volume and liquidity will benefit those Members who are eligible to participate in the Incentive Program and will also benefit those Members who are not eligible to participate in the Incentive Program by providing more trading opportunities and tighter spreads.
The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
The Exchange believes that the proposal to adopt an Incentive Program does not impose any burden on intra-market competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
The Exchange believes that the proposal would increase intra-market competition by incentivizing Market Makers to quote SPIKES options, which will enhance the quality of quoting and increase the volume of contracts available to trade in SPIKES options. To the extent that this purpose is achieved, all the Exchange's market participants should benefit from the improved market liquidity for SPIKES options. Enhanced market quality and increased transaction volume in SPIKES options that results from the anticipated increase in Market Maker activity on the Exchange will benefit all market participants and improve competition on the Exchange.
The Exchange believes the proposed rule change does not impose any burden on inter-market competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed changes in connection with the Incentive Program are limited to SPIKES options which are a proprietary product of the Exchange and as such are listed and traded exclusively on the Exchange.
Additionally, as noted above, the Incentive Program is designed to improve volume and liquidity in SPIKES options. Greater volume and liquidity benefits all market participants by providing more trading opportunities, tighter spreads, and added market transparency and price discovery. The Exchange notes that it operates in a highly competitive market in which market participants can readily direct order flow to competing venues if they deem fee levels at a particular venue to be excessive or incentives to be insufficient. More specifically, the Exchange is only one of 16 options venues to which market participants may direct their order flow. Based on publicly available information, no single options exchange has more than 13% of the market share.
Accordingly, the Exchange does not believe its proposal to adopt an Incentive Program imposes any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
Written comments were neither solicited nor received.
The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Act,
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
• Use the Commission's internet comment form (
• Send an email to
• Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated authority.
U.S. Small Business Administration.
Notice.
This is a notice of an Administrative declaration of a disaster for the State of California dated 10/26/2021.
Issued on 10/26/2021.
Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.
A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.
Notice is hereby given that as a result of the Administrator's disaster declaration, applications for disaster loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally announced locations.
The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster:
The Interest Rates are:
The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 17242 5 and for economic injury is 17243 0.
The State which received an EIDL Declaration # is California.
U.S. Small Business Administration.
Notice.
This is a notice of an Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) declaration for the State of CALIFORNIA dated 10/27/2021.
Issued on 10/27/2021.
Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.
A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.
Notice is hereby given that as a result of the Administrator's EIDL declaration, applications for economic injury disaster loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally announced locations.
The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster:
The Interest Rates are:
The number assigned to this disaster for economic injury is 172400.
The State which received an EIDL Declaration #17240 is California.
U.S. Small Business Administration.
Amendment 2.
This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major
Issued on 10/26/2021.
Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.
A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.
The notice of the President's major disaster declaration for the State of California, dated 08/24/2021, is hereby amended to extend the deadline for filing applications for physical damages as a result of this disaster to 11/08/2021.
All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.
U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA).
Notice of open Federal Advisory Committee meeting.
The SBA is issuing this notice to announce the date, time, and agenda for the next meeting of the Interagency Task Force on Veterans Small Business Development (IATF).
Wednesday, December 1, 2021, from 1:00 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. EST.
Due to the coronavirus pandemic, the meeting will be held via Microsoft Teams.
The meeting is open to the public; however advance notice of attendance is strongly encouraged. To RSVP and confirm attendance, the general public should email
Participants can join the meeting via computer
Special accommodation requests should be directed to OVBD at (202) 205-6773 or
Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), SBA announces the meeting of the Interagency Task Force on Veterans Small Business Development (IAFT). The IATF is established pursuant to Executive Order 13540 to coordinate the efforts of Federal agencies to improve capital, business development opportunities, and pre-established federal contracting goals for small business concerns owned and controlled by veterans and service-disabled veterans.
The purpose of this meeting is to discuss efforts that support veteran-owned small businesses, updates on past and current events, and the IATF's objectives for fiscal year 2022.
U.S. Small Business Administration.
Notice.
This is a notice of an Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) declaration for the State of Washington dated 10/26/2021.
Issued on 10/26/2021.
Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.
A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.
Notice is hereby given that as a result of the Administrator's EIDL declaration, applications for economic injury disaster loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally announced locations. The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster:
The Interest Rates are:
The number assigned to this disaster for economic injury is 172410.
The State which received an EIDL Declaration #17241 is Washington.
U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA).
Notice of open Federal Advisory Committee meeting.
The SBA is issuing this notice to announce the date, time, and agenda for a meeting of the Advisory Committee on Veterans Business Affairs (ACVBA).
Thursday, December 2, 2021, from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. EST.
Due to the coronavirus pandemic, the meeting will be held via Microsoft Teams using a call-in number listed below.
The meeting is open to the public; however advance notice of attendance is strongly encouraged. To RSVP and confirm attendance, the general public should email
Participants can join the meeting via computer
Special accommodation requests should be directed to OVBD at (202) 205-6773 or
Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), SBA announces the meeting of the Advisory Committee on Veterans Business Affairs. The ACVBA is established pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 657(b) note and serves as an independent source of advice and policy. The purpose of this meeting is to discuss efforts that support veteran-owned small businesses, updates on past and current events, and the ACVBA's objectives for fiscal year 2022.
Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: I hereby determine that certain objects being imported from abroad pursuant to agreements with their foreign owners or custodians for temporary display in the exhibition “Andy Warhol, Lifetimes” at the Aspen Museum of Art, Aspen, Colorado, and at possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, are of cultural significance, and, further, that their temporary exhibition or display within the United States as aforementioned is in the national interest. I have ordered that Public Notice of these determinations be published in the
Chi D. Tran, Program Administrator, Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-632-6471; email:
The foregoing determinations were made pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 (79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), E.O. 12047 of March 27, 1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681,
Notice of request for public comment.
The Department of State is seeking Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval for the information collection described below. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we are requesting comments on this collection from all interested individuals and organizations. The purpose of this notice is to allow 60 days for public comment preceding submission of the collection to OMB.
The Department will accept comments from the public up to
You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
•
•
•
You must include the DS form number (if applicable), information collection title, and the OMB control number in any correspondence.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
We are soliciting public comments to permit the Department to:
• Evaluate whether the proposed information collection is necessary for the proper functions of the Department.
• Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the time and cost burden for this proposed collection, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used.
• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected.
• Minimize the reporting burden on those who are to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Please note that comments submitted in response to this notice are public record. Before including any detailed personal information, you should be aware that your comments as submitted, including your personal information, will be available for public review.
MyTravelGov is an electronic account creation and validation portal. U.S. citizens interested in submitting electronic applications for consular benefits vice submission of a paper application will need to create a unique account through MyTravelGov in order to ensure secure electronic transmission of personally identifiable information to the Department. The information collected will also be used by servers to validate subsequent logons to the account or attempts to reset the account password to ensure the security and integrity of accounts.
Information is collected when an individual logs on to the MyTravelGov web portal and elects to create an account.
Notice of request for public comment and submission to OMB of proposed collection of information.
The Department of State has submitted the information collection described below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval. In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 we are requesting comments on this collection from all interested individuals and organizations. The purpose of this Notice is to allow 30 days for public comment.
Submit comments up to December 1, 2021.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
Direct requests for additional information regarding the collection listed in this notice, including requests for copies of the proposed collection instrument and supporting documents, to Andrea Battista, SA-1, 12th Floor, Directorate of Defense Trade Controls, Bureau of Political Military Affairs, U.S. Department of State, Washington, DC 20522-0112, via phone at (202) 663-3136, or via email at
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
We are soliciting public comments to permit the Department to:
• Evaluate whether the proposed information collection is necessary for the proper functions of the Department.
• Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the time and cost burden for this proposed collection, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used.
• Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected.
• Minimize the reporting burden on those who are to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Please note that comments submitted in response to this Notice are public record. Before including any detailed personal information, you should be aware that your comments as submitted, including your personal information, will be available for public review.
The export, temporary import, and brokering of defense articles, including technical data, and defense services are authorized by the Department of State, Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC) in accordance with the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (“ITAR,” 22 CFR parts 120-130) and section 38 of the Arms Export Control Act. Those who manufacture, broker, export, or temporarily import defense articles, including technical data, or defense services must register with the Department of State and obtain a decision from the Department as to whether it is in the interests of U.S. foreign policy and national security to approve covered transactions. Also, registered brokers must submit annual reports regarding all brokering activity that was transacted, and registered manufacturers and exporter must maintain records of defense trade activities for five years.
•
•
•
•
•
•
This information collection may be sent to the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls via the following methods: Electronically or mail.
City Utilities of Springfield, Mo. (City Utilities), has filed with the Surface Transportation Board (Board) a petition under 49 CFR 10502 for exemption from the prior approval requirements of 49 U.S.C. 10903 to abandon approximately 1.24 miles of rail line extending from approximately milepost 248.86 to approximately milepost 250.1, in Greene County, Mo. (the Line).
City Utilities states that, based on information in its possession, the Line does not contain federally granted rights-of-way. Any documentation in City Utilities' possession will be made available promptly to those requesting it.
The interest of railroad employees will be protected by the conditions set forth in
By issuing this notice, the Board is instituting an exemption proceeding pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 10502(b). A final decision will be issued by January 28, 2022.
Any offer of financial assistance (OFA) under 49 CFR 1152.27(b)(2) will be due no later than 120 days after the filing of the petition for exemption, or 10 days after service of a decision granting the petition for exemption, whichever occurs sooner. Persons interested in submitting an OFA must first file a formal expression of intent to file an offer by November 12, 2021, indicating the type of financial assistance they wish to provide (
Following abandonment, the Line may be suitable for other public use, including interim trail use. Any request for a public use condition under 49 CFR 1152.28 or for interim trail use/rail banking under 49 CFR 1152.29 will be due no later than November 22, 2021.
All pleadings, referring to Docket No. AB 1319X, should be filed with the Surface Transportation Board via e-filing on the Board's website. In addition, a copy of each pleading must be served on City Utilities' representative, Thomas W. Wilcox, Law Office of Thomas W. Wilcox, LLC, 1629 K Street NW, Suite 300, Washington, DC 20006. Replies to the petition are due on or before November 22, 2021.
Persons seeking further information concerning abandonment procedures may contact the Board's Office of Public Assistance, Governmental Affairs, and Compliance at (202) 245-0238 or refer to the full abandonment regulations at 49 CFR part 1152. Questions concerning environmental issues may be directed to the Board's Office of Environmental Analysis (OEA) at (202) 245-0294. Assistance for the hearing impaired is available through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.
An environmental assessment (EA) (or environmental impact statement (EIS), if necessary) prepared by OEA will be served upon all parties of record and upon any other agencies or persons who comment during its preparation.
Board decisions and notices are available at
By the Board, Scott M. Zimmerman, Acting Director, Office of Proceedings.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
Notice.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) approval to renew an information
Written comments and recommendations for the FAA's request for OMB's approval to renew this information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
Susan Staehle by electronic mail at:
Federal Transit Administration (FTA), Department of Transportation (DOT).
Notice of Safety Advisory.
As a result of the derailment of a Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Metrorail train on October 12, 2021, FTA has issued Safety Advisory 21-1 to direct State Safety Oversight Agencies (SSOAs) to report information to FTA regarding out-of-tolerance wheel gauges on all rail transit rolling stock in revenue service. The Safety Advisory also advises SSOAs to require fleet-wide inspections of wheel gauges at rail fixed guideway public transportation systems (RTAs) in their jurisdiction. A copy of Safety Advisory 21-1 can be found on the FTA website at
FTA is requesting SSOA program managers to submit data on the rail transit fleets in revenue service at each RTA in its jurisdiction by December 1, 2021 and to report on the results of wheel gauge inspections conducted by each RTA in its jurisdiction by January 3, 2022.
Gail Lyssy, Acting Associate Administrator for Transit Safety and Oversight and Chief Safety Officer, FTA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, telephone (202) 366-1783 or
On October 12, 2021, at about 4:50 p.m. local time, outbound Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) Metrorail train 407 derailed between the Rosslyn and Arlington Cemetery stations. The train was traveling southbound on track No. 2 of WMATA's Blue Line toward Franconia-Springfield with 187 passengers onboard. The National Transportation Safety Board is investigating this safety event, focusing on the pressed wheel/axle interface and widening wheel gauge on wheels and axles.
In accordance with 49 CFR part 674, SSOAs are responsible for overseeing the safety of the rail fixed guideway public transportation systems (RTAs) within their State. Each SSOA has investigative and enforcement authority with respect to the safety of all RTAs within their State (§ 674.13(a)(5)).
Within 30 days of November 1, 2021, the SSOA must submit the following information to FTA, for the rail transit fleet in revenue service at each RTA in its jurisdiction:
• Total fleet size, by mode;
• Wheel gauge inspection protocols (specifically, the routine periodicity of inspections), by mode; and
• The number of vehicles that failed wheel gauge tolerance levels, based on the RTA's internal and approved procedures, from October 1, 2020 to September 30, 2021, by mode.
FTA seeks to collect this information as a periodic request for information under OMB control number 2132-0558. Equipment subject to Federal Railroad Administration safety oversight is excluded from this reporting requirement.
FTA advises the SSOA to direct each RTA in its jurisdiction to conduct a wheel gauge inspection of its rail transit fleet in revenue service, which may include inspections conducted on or after October 1, 2021. Within 60 days of November 1, 2021, the SSOA should submit to FTA, for the rail transit fleet in revenue service at each RTA in its jurisdiction:
• The time frame during which these inspections were conducted (starting no earlier than October 1, 2021);
• The total number of revenue service vehicles inspected; and
• The total number of revenue service vehicles that failed wheel gauge
Equipment subject to Federal Railroad Administration safety oversight is excluded from this inspection advisory.
Federal Transit Administration, DOT.
Notice of request for comments.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces the intention of the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) to request the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to approve the extension of a currently approved information collection: Nondiscrimination as it Applies to FTA Grant Programs.
Comments must be submitted before January 3, 2022.
To ensure that your comments are not entered more than once into the docket, submit comments identified by the docket number by only one of the following methods:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Anita Heard (202) 493-0318 or email:
Interested parties are invited to send comments regarding any aspect of this information collection, including: (1) The necessity and utility of the information collection for the proper performance of the functions of the FTA; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the collected information; and (4) ways to minimize the collection burden without reducing the quality of the collected information. Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection.
Maritime Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation; U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security.
Notice of availability; notice of virtual public meeting; request for comments.
The Maritime Administration (MARAD) and the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) announce the availability of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Bluewater Texas Terminal SPM (Bluewater) Deepwater Port License Application for the export of crude oil from the United States to nations abroad. Additionally, MARAD and USCG announce a virtual public meeting and informational open house website for the Bluewater DEIS. Publication of this notice announces availability of the DEIS, initiates a 45-day comment period, requests public participation in the environmental impact review process, provides information on how to participate in the environmental impact review process, and announces the virtual informational open house and public meeting that will take place online to best comply with Coronavirus Disease 2019 safety guidelines. Previously, a notice of application summarizing the original
The virtual public meeting will be held on Thursday November 18, 2021 from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m.
Additionally, materials submitted in response to this request for comments on the Bluewater DEIS must be submitted to the
The public docket for the Bluewater Deepwater Port License Application is maintained by the U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Management Facility, West Building, Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590. Comments on the DEIS may be submitted to this address and must include the docket number for this project, which is MARAD-2019-0094. The Federal Docket Management Facility's telephone number is 202-366-9317 or 202-366-9826; the fax number is 202-493-2251.
We encourage you to submit comments electronically through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at
Mr. Ken Smith, Project Manager, USCG, telephone: 202-372-1413, email:
A Notice of Application that summarized the original Bluewater Deepwater Port License Application was published in the
A Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement and Notice of Public Meeting was published in the
The Bluewater Deepwater Port License Application proposes the construction and operation of a deepwater port terminal in the Gulf of Mexico (GOM) off Corpus Christi, Texas and close by Aransas and San Patricio Counties to export domestically produced crude oil.
MARAD and USCG will hold one virtual public meeting in connection with the Bluewater DEIS. As stated, the virtual public meeting will be held remotely due to the nationwide impacts of the existing public health emergency under Section 319 of the Public Health Service Act in response to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Further, the President's declaration of a national emergency due to the COVID-19 outbreak, and state and local actions in response to COVID-19, have impacted the public's ability to assemble and provide feedback on the Bluewater Deepwater Port License Application through in-person public meetings.
The public meeting may end later than the stated time, depending on the number of persons who wish to make a comment on the record. Anyone that is interested in attending the virtual public meeting or speaking during the virtual public meeting must register. Information on how to register for the virtual public meeting is provided in the Virtual Public Meeting and Informational Open House website section.
We request public comments or other relevant information related to the DEIS for the proposed Bluewater Deepwater Port License Application. These comments will inform our preparation of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). We encourage attendance at the virtual public meeting; however, you may submit comments electronically and it is preferred that comments be submitted electronically. Regardless of the method you use to submit comments or materials, all submissions will be posted, without change, to the Federal Docket Management Facility website (
You are invited to learn about the proposed Bluewater Deepwater Port License Application at the virtual informational open house website (
The public meeting will be hosted on the Zoom platform. The public meeting will be recorded and transcribed for placement in the public docket for the Bluewater Deepwater Port License Application. Comments will be accepted during the public meeting. The Zoom program can be accessed online by visiting the Zoom website at
Registered speakers will be recognized in the following order: Elected officials, public agency representatives, then individuals or groups in the order in which they registered. In order to accommodate all speakers, speaker time may be limited, meeting hours may be extended, or both. Speakers' transcribed remarks will be included in the public docket. You may also submit written material for inclusion in the public docket. Written material must include the author's name. We ask attendees to respect the meeting procedures in order to ensure a constructive information-gathering session. The presiding officer will use their discretion to conduct the meeting in an orderly manner.
Public meetings are intended to be accessible to all participants. Individuals who require special assistance such as sign language interpretation, non-English language translation services, or other reasonable accommodations, please notify the USCG or MARAD (see
For the purposes of this application, the proposed Bluewater Deepwater Port Project is described in three distinguishable segments by locality to include the onshore components, the inshore components, and the offshore components.
Onshore components associated with the proposed Bluewater project are defined as those components on the landward side of the western Redfish Bay Mean High Tide (MHT) line, located in San Patricio and Aransas Counties, Texas. The onshore project components include:
• Approximately 22.13 miles of two new parallel 30-inch-diameter crude oil pipelines extending from a planned multi-use terminal located south of the City of Taft in San Patricio County, Texas.
• The planned Multi-Use Terminal will connect to multiple inbound and outbound crude oil pipelines. Two of those outbound pipelines are the proposed pipeline infrastructure that will extend to the inshore pipeline(s), which connect to the proposed operation facility located on Harbor Island described below. One water tank will be constructed at the Multi-Use Terminal to flush the offshore pipelines running to the Single Point Mooring (SPM) buoys described below.
Inshore components associated with the proposed Bluewater Deepwater Port Project are defined as those components located between the western Redfish Bay MHT line and the MHT line located at the interface of San Jose Island and the Gulf of Mexico. Inshore project components include:
• Approximately 7.29 miles of two new 30-inch-diameter crude oil pipelines connecting to the onshore facility, an approximately 12-acre operations station and a connection to the offshore pipeline. The onshore pipeline would be located within San Patricio County, Texas and Nueces County, Texas and a proposed operations facility would be located on Harbor Island in Nueces County, Texas.
• The operations facility located on Harbor Island will include approximately 12 acres of land and house the necessary infrastructure to support the transport of crude oil through the proposed pipeline infrastructure to the deepwater port for the loading of moored vessels. The facility would consist of pig launchers/receivers, meters and valves, operations building, and a communications facility, but no crude oil storage.
Offshore components associated with the proposed Bluewater Deepwater Port Project are defined as those components located seaward of the MHT line located at the interface of San Jose Island and the Gulf of Mexico. The offshore project components include:
• Approximately 26.76 miles of two new 30-inch-diameter crude oil pipelines extending from the shoreline crossing at the interface of San Jose Island to the offshore Bluewater Deepwater Port Project for crude oil delivery to Single Point Mooring (SPM) buoys.
• Two SPMs in Outer Continental Shelf Matagorda Island Area TX4 lease blocks 698 and 699, approximately 15 nautical miles (17.26 statute miles) off the coast of San Patricio County, Texas in a water depth of approximately 89 feet.
• A catenary anchor leg mooring (CALM) system for each SPM buoy connected to a pipeline end manifold (PLEM) system, mooring hawsers, floating hoses, and submarine hoses to allow for the loading of crude oil to vessels moored at the proposed deepwater port. The SPM buoy system will be permanently moored with a symmetrically arranged six-leg anchor dual chain configuration extending to twelve 72-inch-diameter pile anchors installed on the seafloor.
• Each of the proposed SPM buoy systems will consist of inner and outer cylindrical shells subdivided into twelve equal-sized watertight radial compartments. A rotating table will be affixed to the SPM buoy and allow for the connection of moored vessels to the SPM buoy system via mooring hawsers. Two floating hoses equipped with marine break-away couplings will be utilized for the transfer of crude oil from the SPM buoy systems to the moored vessel. Floating hoses will be equipped with strobe lights at 15-foot intervals for detection at night and low-light conditions.
You may wish to read the Privacy and Security Notice and the User Notice that are available at
By Order of the Acting Maritime Administrator.
Maritime Administration, DOT.
Notice.
The Secretary of Transportation, as represented by the Maritime Administration (MARAD), is authorized to issue coastwise endorsement eligibility determinations for foreign-built vessels which will carry no more than twelve passengers for hire. A request for such a determination has been received by MARAD. By this notice, MARAD seeks comments from interested parties as to any effect this action may have on U.S. vessel builders or businesses in the U.S. that use U.S.-flag vessels. Information about the requestor's vessel, including a brief description of the proposed service, is listed below.
Submit comments on or before December 1, 2021.
You may submit comments identified by DOT Docket Number MARAD-2021-0245 by any one of the following methods:
•
•
If you mail or hand-deliver your comments, we recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a telephone number in the body of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission.
James Mead, U.S. Department of Transportation, Maritime Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W23-459, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone 202-366-5723, Email
As described in the application, the intended service of the vessel NSN AGAIN is:
Please submit your comments, including the attachments, following the instructions provided under the above heading entitled
Go to the docket online at
Yes. Be aware that your entire comment, including your personal identifying information, will be made publicly available.
If you wish to submit comments under a claim of confidentiality, you should submit the information you claim to be confidential commercial information by email to
In the event MARAD receives a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for the information, procedures described in the Department's FOIA regulation at 49 CFR 7.29 will be followed. Only information that is ultimately determined to be confidential under those procedures will be exempt from disclosure under FOIA.
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these comments, without edit, to
By Order of the Acting Maritime Administrator.
Maritime Administration, DOT.
Notice.
The Secretary of Transportation, as represented by the Maritime Administration (MARAD), is authorized to issue coastwise endorsement eligibility determinations for foreign-built vessels which will carry no more than twelve passengers for hire. A request for such a determination has been received by MARAD. By this notice, MARAD seeks comments from interested parties as to any effect this action may have on U.S. vessel builders or businesses in the U.S. that use U.S.-flag vessels. Information about the requestor's vessel, including a brief description of the proposed service, is listed below.
Submit comments on or before December 1, 2021.
You may submit comments identified by DOT Docket Number MARAD-2021-0241 by any one of the following methods:
•
•
If you mail or hand-deliver your comments, we recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a telephone number in the body of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission.
James Mead, U.S. Department of Transportation, Maritime Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W23-459, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone 202-366-5723, Email
As described in the application, the intended service of the vessel EUPHORIA is:
The complete application is available for review identified in the DOT docket as MARAD 2021-0241 at
Please submit your comments, including the attachments, following the instructions provided under the above heading entitled
Go to the docket online at
Yes. Be aware that your entire comment, including your personal identifying information, will be made publicly available.
If you wish to submit comments under a claim of confidentiality, you should submit the information you claim to be confidential commercial information by email to
In the event MARAD receives a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for the information, procedures described in the Department's FOIA regulation at 49 CFR 7.29 will be followed. Only information that is ultimately determined to be confidential under those procedures will be exempt from disclosure under FOIA.
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these comments, without edit, to
By Order of the Acting Maritime Administrator.
Maritime Administration, DOT.
Notice.
The Secretary of Transportation, as represented by the Maritime Administration (MARAD), is authorized to issue coastwise endorsement eligibility determinations for foreign-built vessels which will carry no more than twelve passengers for hire. A request for such a determination has been received by MARAD. By this notice, MARAD seeks comments from interested parties as to any effect this action may have on U.S. vessel builders or businesses in the U.S. that use U.S.-flag vessels. Information about the requestor's vessel, including a brief description of the proposed service, is listed below.
Submit comments on or before December 1, 2021.
You may submit comments identified by DOT Docket Number MARAD-2021-0242 by any one of the following methods:
•
•
If you mail or hand-deliver your comments, we recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a telephone number in the body of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission.
James Mead, U.S. Department of Transportation, Maritime Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W23-459, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone 202-366-5723, Email
As described in the application, the intended service of the vessel SUBLIME is:
Please submit your comments, including the attachments, following the instructions provided under the above heading entitled
Go to the docket online at
Yes. Be aware that your entire comment, including your personal identifying information, will be made publicly available.
If you wish to submit comments under a claim of confidentiality, you should submit the information you claim to be confidential commercial information by email to
In the event MARAD receives a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for the information, procedures described in the Department's FOIA regulation at 49 CFR 7.29 will be followed. Only information that is ultimately determined to be confidential under those procedures will be exempt from disclosure under FOIA.
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these comments, without edit, to
By Order of the Acting Maritime Administrator.
Maritime Administration, DOT.
Notice.
The Secretary of Transportation, as represented by the Maritime Administration (MARAD), is authorized to issue coastwise endorsement eligibility determinations for foreign-built vessels which will carry no more than twelve passengers for hire. A request for such a determination has been received by MARAD. By this notice, MARAD seeks comments from interested parties as to any effect this action may have on U.S. vessel builders or businesses in the U.S. that use U.S.-flag vessels. Information about the requestor's vessel, including a brief description of the proposed service, is listed below.
Submit comments on or before December 1, 2021.
You may submit comments identified by DOT Docket Number MARAD-2021-0249 by any one of the following methods:
•
•
If you mail or hand-deliver your comments, we recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a telephone number in the body of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission.
James Mead, U.S. Department of Transportation, Maritime Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W23-459, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone 202-366-5723, Email
As described in the application, the intended service of the vessel FISH is:
Please submit your comments, including the attachments, following the instructions provided under the above heading entitled
Go to the docket online at
Yes. Be aware that your entire comment, including your personal identifying information, will be made publicly available.
If you wish to submit comments under a claim of confidentiality, you should submit the information you claim to be confidential commercial information by email to
In the event MARAD receives a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for the information, procedures described in the Department's FOIA regulation at 49 CFR 7.29 will be followed. Only information that is ultimately determined to be confidential under those procedures will be exempt from disclosure under FOIA.
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these comments, without edit, to
By Order of the Acting Maritime Administrator.
Maritime Administration, DOT.
Notice.
The Secretary of Transportation, as represented by the Maritime Administration (MARAD), is authorized to issue coastwise endorsement eligibility determinations for foreign-built vessels which will carry no more than twelve passengers for hire. A request for such a determination has been received by MARAD. By this notice, MARAD seeks comments from interested parties as to any effect this action may have on U.S. vessel builders or businesses in the U.S. that use U.S.-flag vessels. Information about the requestor's vessel, including a brief description of the proposed service, is listed below.
Submit comments on or before December 1, 2021.
You may submit comments identified by DOT Docket Number MARAD-2021-0251 by any one of the following methods:
•
•
If you mail or hand-deliver your comments, we recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a telephone number in the body of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission.
James Mead, U.S. Department of Transportation, Maritime Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W23-459, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone 202-366-5723, Email
As described in the application, the intended service of the vessel BORN 2 WINN is:
Please submit your comments, including the attachments, following the instructions provided under the above heading entitled
Go to the docket online at
Yes. Be aware that your entire comment, including your personal identifying information, will be made publicly available.
If you wish to submit comments under a claim of confidentiality, you should submit the information you claim to be confidential commercial information by email to
In the event MARAD receives a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for the information, procedures described in the Department's FOIA regulation at 49 CFR 7.29 will be followed. Only information that is ultimately determined to be confidential under those procedures will be exempt from disclosure under FOIA.
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these comments, without edit, to
By Order of the Acting Maritime Administrator.
Maritime Administration, DOT.
Notice.
The Secretary of Transportation, as represented by the Maritime Administration (MARAD), is authorized to issue coastwise endorsement eligibility determinations for foreign-built vessels which will carry no more than twelve passengers for hire. A request for such a determination has been received by MARAD. By this notice, MARAD seeks comments from interested parties as to any effect this action may have on U.S. vessel builders or businesses in the U.S. that use U.S.-flag vessels. Information about the requestor's vessel, including a brief description of the proposed service, is listed below.
Submit comments on or before December 1, 2021.
You may submit comments identified by DOT Docket Number MARAD-2021-0250 by any one of the following methods:
•
•
If you mail or hand-deliver your comments, we recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a telephone number in the body of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission.
James Mead, U.S. Department of Transportation, Maritime Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W23-459, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone 202-366-5723, Email
As described in the application, the intended service of the vessel LIVIN IT is:
Please submit your comments, including the attachments, following the instructions provided under the above heading entitled
Go to the docket online at
Yes. Be aware that your entire comment, including your personal identifying information, will be made publicly available.
If you wish to submit comments under a claim of confidentiality, you should submit the information you claim to be confidential commercial information by email to
In the event MARAD receives a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for the information, procedures described in the Department's FOIA regulation at 49 CFR 7.29 will be followed. Only information that is ultimately determined to be confidential under those procedures will be exempt from disclosure under FOIA.
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these comments, without edit, to
By Order of the Acting Maritime Administrator.
Maritime Administration, DOT.
Notice.
The Secretary of Transportation, as represented by the Maritime Administration (MARAD), is authorized to issue coastwise endorsement eligibility determinations for foreign-built vessels which will carry no more than twelve passengers for hire. A request for such a determination has been received by MARAD. By this notice, MARAD seeks comments from interested parties as to any effect this action may have on U.S. vessel builders or businesses in the U.S. that use U.S.-flag vessels. Information about the requestor's vessel, including a brief description of the proposed service, is listed below.
Submit comments on or before November 29, 2021.
You may submit comments identified by DOT Docket Number MARAD-2021-0243 by any one of the following methods:
•
•
If you mail or hand-deliver your comments, we recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a telephone number in the body of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission.
James Mead, U.S. Department of Transportation, Maritime Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W23-459, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone 202-366-5723, Email
As described in the application, the intended service of the vessel KOHINOOR is:
Please submit your comments, including the attachments, following the instructions provided under the above heading entitled
Go to the docket online at
Yes. Be aware that your entire comment, including your personal identifying information, will be made publicly available.
If you wish to submit comments under a claim of confidentiality, you should submit the information you claim to be confidential commercial information by email to
In the event MARAD receives a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for the information, procedures described in the Department's FOIA regulation at 49 CFR 7.29 will be followed. Only information that is ultimately determined to be confidential under those procedures will be exempt from disclosure under FOIA.
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these comments, without edit, to
By Order of the Acting Maritime Administrator.
Maritime Administration, DOT.
Notice.
The Secretary of Transportation, as represented by the Maritime Administration (MARAD), is authorized to issue coastwise endorsement eligibility determinations for foreign-built vessels which will carry no more than twelve passengers for hire. A request for such a determination has been received by MARAD. By this notice, MARAD seeks comments from interested parties as to any effect this action may have on U.S. vessel builders or businesses in the U.S. that use U.S.-flag vessels. Information about the requestor's vessel, including a brief description of the proposed service, is listed below.
Submit comments on or before December 1, 2021.
You may submit comments identified by DOT Docket Number MARAD-2021-0246 by any one of the following methods:
•
•
If you mail or hand-deliver your comments, we recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a telephone number in the body of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission.
James Mead, U.S. Department of Transportation, Maritime Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W23-459, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone 202-366-5723, Email
As described in the application, the intended service of the vessel CANDERE is:
The complete application is available for review identified in the DOT docket as MARAD 2021-0246 at
Please submit your comments, including the attachments, following the instructions provided under the above heading entitled
Go to the docket online at
Yes. Be aware that your entire comment, including your personal identifying information, will be made publicly available.
If you wish to submit comments under a claim of confidentiality, you should submit the information you claim to be confidential commercial information by email to
In the event MARAD receives a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for the information, procedures described in the Department's FOIA regulation at 49 CFR 7.29 will be followed. Only information that is ultimately determined to be confidential under those procedures will be exempt from disclosure under FOIA.
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these comments, without edit, to
By Order of the Acting Maritime Administrator.
Maritime Administration, DOT.
Notice.
The Secretary of Transportation, as represented by the Maritime Administration (MARAD), is authorized to issue coastwise endorsement eligibility determinations for foreign-built vessels which will carry no more than twelve passengers for hire. A request for such a determination has been received by MARAD. By this notice, MARAD seeks comments from interested parties as to any effect this action may have on U.S. vessel builders or businesses in the U.S. that use U.S.-flag vessels. Information about the requestor's vessel, including a brief description of the proposed service, is listed below.
Submit comments on or before December 1, 2021.
You may submit comments identified by DOT Docket Number MARAD-2021-0247 by any one of the following methods:
•
•
If you mail or hand-deliver your comments, we recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a telephone number in the body of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission.
James Mead, U.S. Department of Transportation, Maritime Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W23-459, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone 202-366-5723, Email
As described in the application, the intended service of the vessel WHY KNOT AGAIN is:
The complete application is available for review identified in the DOT docket as MARAD 2021-0247 at
Please submit your comments, including the attachments, following the instructions provided under the above heading entitled
Go to the docket online at
Yes. Be aware that your entire comment, including your personal identifying information, will be made publicly available.
If you wish to submit comments under a claim of confidentiality, you should submit the information you claim to be confidential commercial information by email to
In the event MARAD receives a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for the information, procedures described in the Department's FOIA regulation at 49 CFR 7.29 will be followed. Only information that is ultimately determined to be confidential under those procedures will be exempt from disclosure under FOIA.
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these comments, without edit, to
By Order of the Acting Maritime Administrator.
Maritime Administration, DOT.
Notice.
The Secretary of Transportation, as represented by the Maritime Administration (MARAD), is authorized to issue coastwise endorsement eligibility determinations for foreign-built vessels which will carry no more than twelve passengers for hire. A request for such a determination has been received by MARAD. By this notice, MARAD seeks comments from interested parties as to any effect this action may have on U.S. vessel builders or businesses in the U.S. that use U.S.-flag vessels. Information about the requestor's vessel, including a brief description of the proposed service, is listed below.
Submit comments on or before December 1, 2021.
You may submit comments identified by DOT Docket Number MARAD-2021-0244 by any one of the following methods:
•
•
If you mail or hand-deliver your comments, we recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a telephone number in the body of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission.
James Mead, U.S. Department of Transportation, Maritime Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W23-459, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone 202-366-5723, Email
As described in the application, the intended service of the vessel ANNIE is:
The complete application is available for review identified in the DOT docket as MARAD 2021-0244 at
Please submit your comments, including the attachments, following the instructions provided under the above heading entitled
Go to the docket online at
Yes. Be aware that your entire comment, including your personal identifying information, will be made publicly available.
If you wish to submit comments under a claim of confidentiality, you should submit the information you claim to be confidential commercial information by email to
In the event MARAD receives a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for the information, procedures described in the Department's FOIA regulation at 49 CFR 7.29 will be followed. Only information that is ultimately determined to be confidential under those procedures will be exempt from disclosure under FOIA.
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these comments, without edit, to
By Order of the Acting Maritime Administrator.
Maritime Administration, DOT.
Notice.
The Secretary of Transportation, as represented by the Maritime Administration (MARAD), is authorized to issue coastwise endorsement eligibility determinations for foreign-built vessels which will carry no more than twelve passengers for hire. A request for such a determination has been received by MARAD. By this notice, MARAD seeks comments from interested parties as to any effect this action may have on U.S. vessel builders or businesses in the U.S. that use U.S.-flag vessels. Information about the requestor's vessel, including a brief description of the proposed service, is listed below.
Submit comments on or before December 1, 2021.
You may submit comments identified by DOT Docket Number MARAD-2021-0248 by any one of the following methods:
•
•
If you mail or hand-deliver your comments, we recommend that you include your name and a mailing address, an email address, or a telephone number in the body of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission.
James Mead, U.S. Department of Transportation, Maritime Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W23-459, Washington, DC 20590. Telephone 202-366-5723, Email
As described in the application, the intended service of the vessel IRON GRYPHON is:
Please submit your comments, including the attachments, following the instructions provided under the above heading entitled
Go to the docket online at
Yes. Be aware that your entire comment, including your personal identifying information, will be made publicly available.
If you wish to submit comments under a claim of confidentiality, you should submit the information you claim to be confidential commercial information by email to
In the event MARAD receives a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for the information, procedures described in the Department's FOIA regulation at 49 CFR 7.29 will be followed. Only information that is ultimately determined to be confidential under those procedures will be exempt from disclosure under FOIA.
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these comments, without edit, to
By Order of the Acting Maritime Administrator.
Maritime Administration, Transportation (DOT).
Notice and request for comments.
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces that the Information Collection Request (ICR) abstracted below is being forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comments. A
Comments must be submitted on or before December 1, 2021.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
James Mead, 202-366-5723, Office of Cargo and Commercial Sealift, Maritime Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, Email:
By Order of the Acting Maritime Administrator.
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Department of Transportation (DOT).
Grant of petition.
TAP Worldwide, LLC, (TAP) has determined that certain model year (MY) 2017-2019 Smittybilt SCOUT Trailer Kits do not fully comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 110,
Kerrin Bressant, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), telephone (202) 366-1110.
TAP has determined that certain MY 2017-2019 Smittybilt SCOUT Trailer Kits do not fully comply with paragraph S4.3.5 and Figure 1 of FMVSS No. 110,
Notice of receipt of TAP's petition was published with a 30-day public comment period, on September 20, 2019, in the
Approximately 176 MY 2017-2019 Smittybilt SCOUT Trailer Kits, manufactured between March 31, 2017, and April 28, 2019, are potentially involved.
TAP explains that the noncompliance is that the vehicle placards on the subject trailer kits, do not fully comply with the formatting and color requirements (which require either “yellow text on black background” or “black text on yellow background”) as required by paragraph S4.3.5 and Figure 1 of FMVSS No. 110. The TAP placards were mounted with black text on a white background.
S4.3.5 and Figure 1 of FMVSS No. 110 include the requirements relevant to this petition. Each trailer, except for an incomplete vehicle, must show the information specified in S4.3(c) through (g). This information, per Figures 1 and 2 of FMVSS No. 110, should be illustrated with EITHER “Yellow Text on Black Background” or “Black Text on Yellow Background.” Additionally, at the manufacturer's option, they may show the information specified in S4.3(h) proximate to the placard or the Tire Information Pressure Label and the listed elements of S4.3(i) in accordance with S4.3(d). The information specified in S4.3(e) shall be shown on both the vehicle placard and on the tire inflation pressure label (if such a label is affixed to provide the information specified in S4.3(c), (d), (h), and (i)) in the format and color scheme set forth in Figures 1 and 2.
TAP described the subject noncompliance and stated its belief that the noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
In support of its petition, TAP submitted the following reasoning:
1. The subject tire pressure information labels provide all required and correct technical information, and because such information is found in three other locations, there is no safety risk or risk of tire overloading.
a. TAP states that the SCOUT Trailers are equipped with tires that can handle their load carrying capacity, and there is, accordingly, no risk of overloading. The SCOUT Trailer's tires are safe and comply with all applicable standards. The sole noncompliance at issue in this petition relates to formatting, namely the tire information label, not conforming to the formatting and color requirements provided in Figure 1 of FMVSS No. 110. TAP says that because the tire pressure information labels contain all the information required by FMVSS No. 110 and because such information is accurate, the subject noncompliance will not create a safety
b. Additionally, the correct tire pressure information can be found in three other locations: (1) On the SCOUT Trailer's certification label, as required under 49 CFR part 565; (2) in the SCOUT Trailer owner's manual; and (3) on the SCOUT Trailer's tire sidewall markings. Accordingly, including the tire pressure information label, there are four separate places where a SCOUT Trailer owner can view the tire size, pressure, and load-carrying capacity information of his/her SCOUT Trailer.
c. TAP also stated that because the label provides correct information regarding tire size and inflation pressure, TAP's failure to utilize the formatting, provided in Figure 1 of FMVSS No. 110, will not present a motor vehicle safety risk or cause consumers to misunderstand the label.
2. NHTSA has previously granted petitions with inconsequential noncompliances where the noncompliance relates solely to the labeling that does not conform with formatting requirements and where the manufacturer can show that the noncompliance is unlikely to cause consumer misunderstanding.
a. TAP believes that granting this petition would be consistent with NHTSA's prior decisions on petitions involving label formatting requirements. For example, in connection with a prior petition for inconsequential noncompliance, NHTSA found that deviations in the wording on the label required by FMVSS No. 303 were inconsequential because the rationale and intent of the labeling requirement was nonetheless met, even though the exact, prescribed wording was not used,
Finally, in connection with a petition similar to this one, NHTSA recently found that a tire pressure information label that was not completely legible but provided all of the correct information was an inconsequential noncompliance,
Here, TAP's petition for inconsequential noncompliance meets the criteria that NHTSA has previously held such petitions must meet in order to be granted.
3. NHTSA has also granted petitions for inconsequential noncompliances where tire pressure information labels contained incorrect or missing information.
a. TAP says that NHTSA has also granted petitions for inconsequential noncompliance relating to the tire pressure information labels when the label contained incorrect information or was missing tire pressure information altogether,
Here, not only can the correct tire pressure information for the SCOUT Trailer be found in various other places, but unlike the petitions referenced above, it can also be found on the tire pressure information label itself, as TAP has confirmed that the information listed on the label is accurate.
4. TAP will correct the formatting and color noncompliance on all SCOUT Trailers subsequently sold.
a. To address the noncompliance referenced in the part 573 Report, TAP has reformatted the SCOUT Trailer tire pressure information label and will utilize the properly formatted label on all SCOUT Trailers sold subsequent to the filing of its June 26, 2019, part 573 Report.
TAP concluded by expressing the belief that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety, and that its petition to be exempted from providing notification of the noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30118, and a remedy for the noncompliance, as required by 49 U.S.C. 30120, should be granted.
TAP Worldwide explained that the noncompliance is that while containing all technical information required by FMVSS No. 110, the installed labels on the subject vehicles do not conform to the formatting and color requirements referenced in Figure 1 of FMVSS No. 110.
The intent of FMVSS No. 110 is to ensure that vehicles are equipped with tires appropriate to handle maximum vehicle loads and prevent overloading. As notated by TAP in their petition submission, the actual technical information (in this case, the appropriate tire pressure and cargo carrying capacity value) is correct. However, the format of the label (
In consideration of the foregoing analysis, NHTSA finds that TAP Worldwide has met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 110 noncompliance at issue is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, TAP's petition is hereby granted and TAP Worldwide is consequently exempted from the obligation of providing notification of, and a free remedy for, that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.
NHTSA notes that the statutory provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to file petitions for a determination of inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to exempt manufacturers only from the duties found in sections 30118 and 30120, respectively, to notify owners, purchasers, and dealers of a defect or noncompliance and to remedy the defect or noncompliance. Therefore, this decision applies to the subject trailers that TAP no longer controlled at the time it determined that the noncompliance existed. However, the
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA); DOT.
Notice.
PHMSA is publishing this notice to solicit public comments on a request for special permit received from the Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America, LLC (NGPL). The special permit request is seeking relief from compliance with certain requirements in the Federal pipeline safety regulations. At the conclusion of the 30-day comment period, PHMSA will review the comments received from this notice as part of its evaluation to grant or deny the special permit request.
Submit any comments regarding this special permit request by December 1, 2021.
Comments should reference the docket number for this special permit request and may be submitted in the following ways:
•
•
•
•
There is a privacy statement published on
PHMSA received a special permit request from NGPL, a subsidiary of Kinder Morgan, Inc., seeking a waiver from the requirements of 49 CFR 192.611(a) and (d): Change in class location: Confirmation or revision of maximum allowable operating pressure, and 49 CFR 192.619(a): Maximum allowable operating pressure: Steel or plastic pipelines. This special permit is being requested in lieu of pipe replacement, pressure testing, or pressure reduction for one (1) pipeline segment totaling 205.84 feet (approximately 0.039 miles) of 30-inch diameter pipe on the Gulf Coast Line 1 Pipeline located in Miller County, Arkansas. The proposed special permit will allow operation of the original Class 1 or Class 2 pipe in the Class 3 location.
The proposed special permit segment on the Gulf Coast Line 1 Pipeline has a maximum allowable operating pressure of 858 pounds per square inch gauge and was constructed in 1950.
The special permit request, proposed special permit with conditions, and Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for the Gulf Coast Line 1 Pipeline is available for review and public comments in Docket No. PHMSA-2017-0162. PHMSA invites interested persons to review and submit comments on the special permit request and DEA in the docket. Please include any comments on potential safety and environmental impacts that may result if the special permit is granted. Comments may include relevant data.
Before issuing a decision on the special permit request, PHMSA will evaluate all comments received on or before the comments closing date. Comments received after the closing date will be evaluated, if it is possible to do so without incurring additional expense or delay. PHMSA will consider each relevant comment it receives in making its decision to grant or deny this special permit request.
Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.
Notice and request for comments.
The Internal Revenue Service, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The IRS is soliciting comments concerning Form 6118, Claim for Refund of Income Tax Return Preparer Penalties.
Written comments should be received on or before January 3, 2022 to be assured of consideration.
Direct all written comments to Andres Garcia, Internal Revenue Service, Room 6526, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20224.
Requests for additional information or copies of the form and instructions should be directed to Sara Covington at Internal Revenue Service, Room 6526, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20224, or at (737) 800-6149 or through the internet, at
The following paragraph applies to all of the collections of information covered by this notice:
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a valid OMB control number. Books or records relating to a collection of information must be retained as long as their contents may become material in the administration of any internal revenue law. Generally, tax returns and tax return information are confidential, as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103.
November 4, 2021, from 12:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m., Eastern time.
This meeting will be accessible via conference call and screensharing. Any interested person may call 877-853-5247 (US toll free), 888-788-0099 (US toll free), +1 929-205-6099 (US toll), or +1 669-900-6833 (US toll), Conference ID 958 0140 0508, to participate in the meeting. The website to participate via Zoom meeting and screenshare is
This meeting will be open to the public.
The Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board of Directors (the “Board”) will continue its work in developing and implementing the Unified Carrier Registration Plan and Agreement. The subject matter of the meeting will include:
The UCR Board Chair will welcome attendees, call the meeting to order, call roll for the Board, confirm the presence of a quorum, and facilitate self-introductions.
The UCR Executive Director will verify publication of the meeting notice on the UCR website and distribution to the UCR contact list via email followed by subsequent publication of the notice in the
The proposed Agenda will be reviewed, and the Board will consider adoption.
➢ Board actions taken only in designated areas on agenda
Draft Minutes of the September 23, 2021 UCR Board meeting will be reviewed. The Board will consider action to approve.
The FMCSA will provide a report on any relevant activity.
The UCR Board Chair will call for updates regarding UCR legislation since the last Board meeting.
A.
The UCR Executive Director and the UCR Depository Manager will present a proposal to the Board for consideration to initiate a request for proposal (RFP) to identify and engage a new independent auditing firm to conduct an assurance engagement of the UCR Depository's financial statements for the year ending December 31, 2021. It is a widespread practice to rotate auditing firms every four years to ensure proper integrity of the audit process. The current firm has now provided these audit services for the past four years from 2017-2020. The UCR Audit Subcommittee recommends to the Board
B.
The UCR Executive Director and the UCR Depository Manager will lead a review of the draft of written internal control policies and procedures entitled, “Accounting Guidelines” intended for implementation by the Depository. The UCR Audit Subcommittee recommends to the Board that it adopts the written internal control policies and procedures. The Board may take action to adopt written internal control policies and procedures.
C.
The UCR Audit Subcommittee Chair and DSL will lead a discussion regarding methods to help participating states improve registration compliance (percentages). Suggested methods include educating various constituents such as state registration offices, state motor carrier association offices, state highway patrols, etc. New entrant audits are an additional suggestion. The UCR Audit Subcommittee recommends a process to document “best practices”, develop guidelines for process improvements and a checklist to improve registration compliance percentages.
D.
The UCR Audit Subcommittee Chair will review the latest numbers and statistics pertaining to states' compliance with Board mandated registration and audit percentages.
A.
The UCR Depository Manager will provide an update on the CD that will mature on November 12, 2021. The Board may take action to reinvest the proceeds.
B.
The UCR Depository Manager will provide an update on the continued development of the 2022 operating budget. The budget will be presented to the UCR Board at the December 16, 2021 Board meeting for the Board's consideration and adoption.
A.
The UCR Education and Training Subcommittee Chair will provide an update on the planned future training initiatives for the UCR Plan.
The UCR Executive Director will provide a report covering recent activity for the UCR Plan.
Seikosoft will provide an update on recent/new activity related to the National Registration System.
The UCR staff will provide a management report covering recent activity for the Depository, Operations, and Communications.
The UCR Board Chair will call for any other items Board members would like to discuss.
The UCR Board Chair will adjourn the meeting.
This agenda will be available no later than 5:00 p.m. Eastern time, October 28, 2021 at:
Elizabeth Leaman, Chair, Unified Carrier Registration Plan Board of Directors, (617) 305-3783,
Veterans Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs.
Notice.
In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, this notice announces that the Veterans Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, will submit the collection of information abstracted below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and comment. The PRA submission describes the nature of the information collection and its expected cost and burden and it includes the actual data collection instrument.
Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice to
Maribel Aponte, Office of Enterprise and Integration, Data Governance Analytics (008), 1717 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20006, (202) 266-4688 or email
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The
By direction of the Secretary.