Title: Analyzing Consumers' Value of “Product of USA” Labeling Claims.

OMB Number: 0583-XXXX.

Type of Request: Request for a new information collection.

Abstract: FSIS has been delegated the authority to exercise the functions of the Secretary (7 CFR 2.18, 2.53), as specified in the Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA) (21 U.S.C. 601, et seq. ). This statute mandates that FSIS protect the public by verifying that meat products are safe, wholesome, unadulterated, and properly labeled and packaged.

The FSIS Food Standards and Labeling Policy Book (the “Policy Book”) provides guidance to help meat and poultry product manufacturers prepare product labels that are truthful and not misleading. The Policy Book states that meat (beef and pork) labeling may bear the phrase “Product of USA” under one of the following conditions:

USDA has received three petitions from industry associations regarding the origin of meat products bearing the “Product of USA” labeling claim, requesting that the meaning of the claim be publicly revised by USDA. Additionally, in August 2021, bills were introduced in the House of Representatives and the Senate to require that cattle be born, raised, and slaughtered in the United States in order to bear the “Product of USA” labeling claim. To address the concern that the “Product of USA” labeling claim may not accurately reflect consumer understanding about the origin of FSIS-regulated products, FSIS intends to initiate rulemaking after conducting a comprehensive review of the current voluntary “Product of USA” labeling claim.

To provide information needed to support rulemaking, FSIS is requesting approval for a new information collection to conduct a consumer web-based survey/experiment on “Product of USA” labeling on meat (beef and pork) products. FSIS has not previously conducted consumer research on this topic. This is a new information collection with an estimated annual burden of 1,815.1 hours.

The web survey/experiment will address three primary research questions: (1) Do consumers notice the “Product of USA” labeling claim?; (2) Do consumers understand the current “Product of USA” definition and other “USDA” labeling ( e.g., “USDA Choice”) as it relates to country of origin?; and (3) How much are consumers willing to pay for meat products bearing the “Product of USA” labeling claim for the current definition and potential revised definitions ( e.g., if the meat were from an animal that was born, raised, slaughtered, and processed in the United States)?

FSIS has contracted with RTI International to conduct the web-based survey/experiment. The web-based survey/experiment will comprise three components. For the first component, respondents will complete a series of limited time exposure tasks (LTE) to measure their extrinsic value ( i.e., saliency) of the “Product of USA” labeling claim. Respondents will view up to six mock products that vary in terms of whether the “Product of USA” claim is present, and if present, the location and formatting of the “Product of USA” claim. Respondents will be exposed to each mock product for a limited time ( e.g., 20 seconds) then asked to list what labeling features they recall (unaided) and then to answer a series of recognition questions to indicate whether they saw specific images and phrases (including the “Product of USA” claim) or not. Responses will be statistically analyzed to determine respondents' saliency or degree of attention for the “Product of USA” labeling claim.

For the second component, respondents will answer survey questions to address (1) their understanding of the current “Product of USA” labeling claim as it relates to product country of origin ( e.g., born, raised, slaughtered, processed) and (2) their understanding of the meaning of other “USDA” labeling such as “USDA Choice” or the USDA mark of inspection, as related to product country of origin.

For the third component, respondents will complete a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to measure their intrinsic value (WTP) for meat products bearing the “Product of USA” labeling claim for the current definition and potential revised definitions ( e.g., the meat is from an animal that was both slaughtered and processed in the United States). Respondents will complete 8 to 10 choice questions in which they are asked to choose between two hypothetical products; for example, two ground beef products that differ based on the following attributes: Price ($/lb), definition for a “Product of USA” labeling claim, and the presence or absence of the following claims ( e.g., breed, diet, production conditions, raising conditions, and freshness). Responses will be statistically analyzed to determine respondents' WTP for the current definition and potential revised definitions of the voluntary “Product of USA” labeling claim.

To administer the survey, RTI will partner with Ipsos' KnowledgePanel, a probability-based panel that is designed to be nationally representative of the U.S. adult population, with panel members recruited using address-based sampling and weighting procedures to provide nationally representative estimates. Ipsos will select a sample that is sufficient to yield 4,400 responses (including 300 people who generally speak Spanish at home).

A selected sample of panel members will be invited to participate in the study via email. Surveyed individuals will be adults (18 years of age and older) who speak English or Spanish (the survey will be translated into Spanish), have primary or shared responsibility for grocery shopping for their household, and are purchasers of meat products.

Up to eight cognitive interviews will be conducted to evaluate and refine the survey instrument before receiving OMB approval. After receiving OMB approval, Ipsos will conduct a pilot study to ensure that programming logic for the online survey is correct before the full-scale study is implemented. Participants will receive a $50 incentive for participating in the cognitive interviews and a $5 (equivalent) incentive for participating in the pilot or full-scale study.

Estimate of Burden: Participants will be recruited for the cognitive interviews by posting ads on social media. It is expected that 12 individuals will complete a screener to determine eligibility for the cognitive interviews, with eight completing the cognitive interview. The cognitive interviews are expected to last 60 minutes. For the pilot study, it is expected that 83 panel members selected by Ipsos will receive email invitations and that 30 of the eligible panel members will subsequently complete the questionnaire. For the full-scale study, it is expected that 9,778 panel members selected by Ipsos will receive email invitations and that 4,400 of the eligible panel members will subsequently complete the questionnaire. The email invitation for the pilot study and the full-scale study is expected to take 2 minutes to read. The questionnaire is expected to take 20 minutes to complete. The total estimated burden of the web-based survey/experiment is 1,815.1 hours.

Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

Title: Disaster Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (D-SNAP).

Form: N/A.

OMB Number: 0584-0336.

Expiration Date: 10/31/2022.

Type of Request: Revision of a previously approved collection.

Abstract: Pursuant to § 412 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5179) and § 5(h)(1) the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2014(h)), the Secretary of Agriculture has the authority to establish a Disaster Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (D-SNAP), which is a temporary program that State agencies may operate to provide food assistance to households affected by disasters. D-SNAP is separate and distinct from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) because it has different standards of eligibility, is operated for a limited duration, and only provides one month's worth of benefits to eligible households.

State agencies submit formal requests to operate D-SNAP to the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) for approval and may only request to operate D-SNAP in areas that have received a Presidential Disaster Declaration with authorization for Individual Assistance, also known as an IA declaration, from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). In their D-SNAP requests, State agencies outline their proposed procedures for conducting D-SNAP facility, designate the areas where they wish to operate, and provide sufficient supporting information. FNS reviews all D-SNAP requests and supporting information to ensure that all necessary requirements to operate D-SNAP are met. Using clearly defined FNS' criteria, FNS created a template for State agencies submit their D-SNAP requests electronically through the Waiver Information Management System (WIMS).

Once the original request to operate D-SNAP is approved by FNS to operate D-SNAP, State agencies will submit any subsequent request to modify or expand operations to newly eligible areas via WIMS to FNS for approval. These modification or expansion requests are typically reserved for when a large-scale disaster impacts different areas of a State in different ways or at different times. Subsequent modification and expansion requests require substantially less time to prepare than initial D-SNAP requests.

This information collection request contains only burden estimates associated with the State agency request to operate a D-SNAP. All burden imposed on State agencies and households associated with the certification of D-SNAP households performed by State agencies is approved under OMB Control Number 0584-0064 (SNAP Forms: Applications, Periodic Reporting, Notices; expiration date: 2/29/2024).

Burden for State reporting of both the D-SNAP data on the FNS-292A (Report of Commodity Distribution for Disaster Relief) and FNS-292B (Report of Disaster Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Benefit Issuance) are approved under two separate OMB Control Numbers. The recordkeeping burden for FNS-292A and FNS-292B is approved under OMB Control Number 0584-0037 (expiration date: 05/31/2024), and the reporting burden for the FNS-292A and FNS-292B is approved under OMB Control Number 0584-0594 (Food Programs Reporting System; expiration date: 07/31/2023). None of the burden activities for the other approved OMB control numbers cited in this notice have been outlined in this submission.

Because it is impossible to predict the number of natural disasters and extreme weather events that result in an IA declaration in a given year, and because some State agencies may find that operation of a D-SNAP is not warranted even upon receipt of an IA declaration, FNS is revising this burden estimate based on the annual average number of formal D-SNAP requests submitted and approved since this collection was last approved. From Federal Fiscal Year 2019 to 2021 an average of 5 State agencies requested and were approved to operate D-SNAP each year and an average of 2 State agencies requested and were approved for a modification or extension. The number of hours per response has not changed, but the estimated total burden hours has increased due to the higher number of State agency requests. The agency understands based on respondent threshold outlined in the Paperwork Reduction Act, 1995 FNS does not need to submit a request to OMB; however, to err on the side of caution, the agency is seeking OMB approval in case more than nine States need to submit D-SNAP requests, which will require the agency to seek OMB approval.

In light of this, we also understand seeking and obtaining OMB approval now will allow the agency to request a change justification for any modifications in the burden estimates due to increase of the number of State agency respondents rather than complete the entire full-blown OMB process again for any changes in burden estimates due to an increase in respondents.

Affected Public: State agencies and local governments.

Estimated Total Annual Number of Respondents: 5. The total estimated number of respondents is 5. An average of 5 State agencies submit D-SNAP requests each year, and out of those original 5 State agencies, an average of 2 State agencies will submit subsequent requests to modify or expand those already approved D-SNAPs. Therefore, the agency is not double counting these 5 State agencies in our estimates.

Estimated Frequency of Responses per Respondents: 2.8. State agencies submit an average of 2 D-SNAP requests per year and average of 2 subsequent modification or expansion requests per year.

Estimated Total Annual Responses: 14.

Estimated Total Hours per Response: 8. Approximately 10 hours for State agency D-SNAP requests, and approximately 3 hours for each subsequent modification or expansion request.

Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 112.

Any interested member of the public may call this number and listen to the meeting. Callers can expect to incur charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, and the Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.

Members of the public are entitled to make comments during the open period at the end of the meeting. Members of the public may also submit written comments; the comments must be received in the Regional Programs Unit Office within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be mailed to Ana Victoria Fortes at afortes@usccr.gov in the Regional Programs Unit Office/Advisory Committee Management Unit. Persons who desire additional information may contact the Regional Programs Unit Office (202) 681-0587.

Records and documents discussed during the meeting will be available for public viewing prior to and after the meetings at https://www.facadatabase.gov/FACA/FACAPublicViewCommitteeDetails?id=a10t0000001gzlJAAQ.

Please click on the “Committee Meetings” tab. Records generated from these meetings may also be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit, as they become available, both before and after the meetings. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's website, https://www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Regional Programs Unit at the above email or street address.

Background: The Middle-Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 (codified at 47 U.S.C. 1401 et seq. ) (Act) established the FirstNet Authority as an independent authority within NTIA. The Act directs the FirstNet Authority to ensure the building, deployment, and operation of a nationwide interoperable public safety broadband network. The FirstNet Authority Board is responsible for making strategic decisions regarding the operations of the FirstNet Authority.

Matters to be Considered: The FirstNet Authority will post a detailed agenda for the Combined Board and Board Committees Meeting on FirstNet.gov prior to the meeting. The agenda topics are subject to change. Please note that the subjects discussed by the Board and Board Committees may involve commercial or financial information that is privileged or confidential, or other legal matters affecting the FirstNet Authority. As such, the Board may, by majority vote, close the meeting only for the time necessary to preserve the confidentiality of such information, pursuant to 47 U.S.C. 1424(e)(2).

Other Information: The public Combined Board and Board Committees Meeting is accessible to people with disabilities. Individuals requiring accommodations, such as sign language interpretation or other ancillary aids, are asked to notify Janell Smith at (202) 257-5929 or email: Janell.Smith@FirstNet.gov at least five (5) business days (February 2) before the meeting.

Records: The FirstNet Authority maintains records of all Board proceedings. Minutes of the Combined Board and Board Committees Meeting will be available on FirstNet.gov.

On November 17, 2016, Commerce published the CVD order on WSPP from India in the Federal Register . 1 On October 1, 2021, Commerce published the notice of initiation of the first five-year (sunset) review of the Order, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). 2 On October 15, 2021, Commerce received a notice of intent to participate from Bristol Metals, LLC, Felker Brothers Corporation, and Primus Pipe & Tube, Inc. (collectively, domestic interested parties) within the deadline specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(i). 3 The domestic interested parties claimed interested party status under section 771(9)(C) of the Act as domestic producers of WSPP. 4 On October 29, 2021, Commerce received a substantive response from the domestic interested parties within the 30-day deadline specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i). 5 Commerce did not receive a substantive response from any respondent interested parties.

On November 30, 2021, Commerce notified the U.S. International Trade Commission that it did not receive an adequate substantive response from respondent interested parties. 6 Accordingly, pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)(2), Commerce conducted an expedited (120-day) sunset review of the Order.

The merchandise covered by the Order is welded stainless pressure pipe from India. For a full description of the scope, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum. 7

All issues raised in this sunset review are addressed in the accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum, which is hereby adopted by this notice. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Services System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at http://access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at https://access.trade.gov/public/FRNotices/ListLayout.aspx. A list of the issues discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum is attached as an appendix to this notice.

Pursuant to sections 751(c)(1) and 752(b) of the Act, Commerce determines that revocation of the Order would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of countervailable subsidies at the following net countervailable subsidy rates:

This notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to an administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a). Timely written notification of the destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction.

Commerce is issuing and publishing these final results in accordance with sections 751(c), 752(b), and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.218.

On August 4, 2021, Commerce published the preliminary results for this administrative review. 1 In the Preliminary Results, we invited interested parties to comment within 30 days. The petitioners  2 also requested an extension of the briefing schedule on August 25, 2021. 3 Commerce issued a memorandum to all interested parties on August 27, 2021, which granted the petitioners' request and stated that we would reset the deadlines to submit case briefs on a later date. 4 On September 1, 2021, we issued a supplemental questionnaire to SRF. 5 On September 10, 2021, we issued a supplemental questionnaire to Jindal. 6 On September 16, 2021, SRF submitted its response to our supplemental questionnaire. 7 On September 24, 2021, Jindal submitted its response to our supplemental questionnaire. 8 On November 18, 2021, Commerce extended these final results and then on November 23, 2021, Commerce established the revised deadlines for the briefing schedule. 9 No interested party submitted comments or requested a hearing in this administrative review. The current deadline for these final results is January 28, 2022. Commerce conducted this administrative review in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).

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

As noted above, Commerce received no comments concerning the Preliminary Results. Jindal submitted corrected information for a movement charge, which had been inadvertently omitted in its prior filings. 11 Also, in response to instructions from Commerce, Jindal separated information for discounts and rebates that were grouped together. 12 We incorporated these corrections and updated information into these final results; we continue to find that sales of subject merchandise by Jindal were not made at less than normal value during the POR. SRF submitted corrected information for its quantity discount as explained in its supplemental questionnaire. 13 We also incorporated the corrections and updated information into these final results; we also continue to find that sales of subject merchandise made by SRF were not made at less than normal value during the POR. Accordingly, no decision memorandum accompanies this Federal Register notice. For further details of the issues addressed in this proceeding, see the Preliminary Results and the accompanying Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 14

The final weighted-average dumping margins for the period July 1, 2019, through June 30, 2020, are as shown below:

Commerce will determine, and CBP shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries in this review, in accordance with section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). Because we calculated a zero margin in the final results of this review for both Jindal and SRF, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212, we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without regard to dumping duties.

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

The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this administrative review for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as provided for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) The cash deposit rate for Jindal and SRF will both be zero, the rate established in the final results of this review; (2) for previously reviewed or investigated companies not covered in this review, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recent period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this or any previous review or in the original less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation but the manufacturer is, the cash-deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4) if neither the exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm covered in this or any previous review or the investigation, the cash-deposit rate will continue to be the all-others rate of 5.71 percent, which is the all-others rate established by Commerce in the LTFV investigation. 15 These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

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

This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3), which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation, which is subject to sanction.

We are issuing and publishing these final results of administrative review in accordance with sections 751(a) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5).

On October 5, 2021, Commerce published the preliminary results of the administrative review with respect to Ozdemir, 1 and gave interested parties an opportunity to comment. 2 No interested party submitted comments. Commerce has conducted this review in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).

Background: The Secretary of Commerce established the REEEAC pursuant to discretionary authority and in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. app.), on July 14, 2010. The REEEAC was re-chartered most recently on June 5, 2020. The REEEAC provides the Secretary of Commerce with advice from the private sector on the development and administration of programs and policies to expand the export competitiveness of U.S. renewable energy and energy efficiency products and services. More information about the Committee, including the list of appointed members for this charter, is published online at http://trade.gov/reeeac.

On February 17, 2022, the REEEAC will hold the sixth meeting of its current charter term. The Committee, with officials from the Department of Commerce and other agencies, will discuss major issues affecting the competitiveness of the U.S. renewable energy and energy efficiency industries, covering four broad themes: Trade promotion and market access, global decarbonization, clean energy supply chains, and technology and innovation. The Committee will also review recommendations developed by subcommittee in these areas. This meeting will also include a briefing from interagency officials on U.S. government efforts to deploy offshore wind energy and develop a domestic supply chain for offshore wind goods and services. To receive an agenda please make a request to REEEAC DFO Cora Dickson per above. The agenda will be made available no later than February 11, 2022.

The Committee meeting will be open to the public and will be accessible to people with disabilities. All guests are required to register in advance by the deadline identified under the DATE caption. Requests for auxiliary aids must be submitted by the registration deadline. Last minute requests will be accepted but may not be possible to fill.

A limited amount of time before the close of the meeting will be available for oral comments from members of the public attending the meeting. To accommodate as many speakers as possible, the time for public comments will be limited to two to five minutes per person (depending on number of public participants). Individuals wishing to reserve speaking time during the meeting must contact REEEAC DFO Cora Dickson using the contact information above and submit a brief statement of the general nature of the comments, as well as the name and address of the proposed participant, by 5:00 p.m. EST on Friday, February 11, 2022. If the number of registrants requesting to make statements is greater than can be reasonably accommodated during the meeting, the International Trade Administration may conduct a lottery to determine the speakers. Speakers are requested to submit a copy of their oral comments by email to Cora Dickson for distribution to the participants in advance of the meeting.

Any member of the public may submit written comments concerning the REEEAC's affairs at any time before or after the meeting. Comments may be submitted via email to the Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Advisory Committee, c/o: Cora Dickson, DFO, Office of Energy and Environmental Industries, U.S. Department of Commerce; Cora.Dickson@trade.gov. To be considered during the meeting, public comments must be transmitted to the REEEAC prior to the meeting. As such, written comments must be received no later than 5:00 p.m. EST on Friday, February 11, 2022. Comments received after that date will be distributed to the members but may not be considered at the meeting.

Copies of REEEAC meeting minutes will be available within 30 days following the meeting.

Commerce published the Preliminary Results of this review on August 2, 2021, and invited comments from interested parties. 1 On November 1, 2021, Commerce extended the deadline for the final results of this review until January 28, 2022. 2

For a complete description of the events that occurred since the Preliminary Results, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum. 3

The products covered by this order are all gauges of raw, pretreated, or primed polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet and strip, whether extruded or coextruded from India. For a complete description of the scope of this order, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

All issues raised by the interested parties in their case and rebuttal briefs are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of these issues is provided in Appendix I to this notice. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and CVD Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at http:// access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at https://access.trade.gov/public/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx.

Based on the comments received from interested parties, we revised the calculation of the net countervailable subsidy rates for all companies. For a discussion of these issues, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

Commerce conducted this review in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). For each of the subsidy programs found countervailable, we determine that there is a subsidy, i.e., a government-provided financial contribution that gives rise to a benefit to the recipient, and that the subsidy is specific. 4 For a description of the methodology underlying all of Commerce's conclusions, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

It is Commerce's practice to rescind an administrative review of a countervailing duty order, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), when there are no reviewable entries of subject merchandise during the POR for which liquidation is suspended. 5 Normally, upon completion of an administrative review, the suspended entries are liquidated at the countervailing duty assessment rate calculated for the review period. 6 Therefore, for an administrative review of a company to be conducted, there must be a reviewable, suspended entry that Commerce can instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to liquidate at the calculated countervailing duty assessment rate calculated for the review period. 7

According to the CBP import data, one company subject to this review, Vacmet India Limited, did not have reviewable entries of subject merchandise during the POR for which liquidation is suspended. Because there is no evidence on the record of this segment of the proceeding to indicate that this company had entries, exports, or sales of subject merchandise to the United States during the POR, we are rescinding the administrative review with respect to this company consistent with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3).

There are three companies for which a review was requested and not rescinded, and which were not selected as mandatory respondents. For these companies, because the rates calculated for the sole mandatory respondent, SRF, was above de minimis and not based entirely on facts available, we are applying to the non-selected companies SRF's rate. This methodology to establish the all-others subsidy rate is consistent with our practice and section 705(c)(5)(A) of the Act, which governs the calculation of the all-others rate in investigations.

We determine the following net countervailable subsidy rate for the POR January 1, 2019, through December 31, 2019:

We intend to disclose to interested parties the calculations and analysis performed for these final results of review within five days of the date of publication of this notice, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

In accordance with section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b)(2), Commerce shall determine, and CBP shall assess, countervailing duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review. Commerce intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP no earlier than 35 days after publication of the final results of this review in the Federal Register . If a timely summons is filed at the U.S. Court of International Trade, the assessment instructions will direct CBP not to liquidate relevant entries until the time for parties to file a request for a statutory injunction has expired ( i.e., within 90 days of publication).

With respect to the company for which this administrative review is rescinded ( i.e., Vacmet India Limited), countervailing duties shall be assessed at rates equal to the cash deposit rate required at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption, during the period January 1, 2019, through December 31, 2019, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(c)(1)(i).

In accordance with section 751(a)(1) of the Act, Commerce also intends to instruct CBP to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing duties in the amounts shown above for the above-listed companies with regard to shipments of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of these final results of review. For all non-reviewed firms, CBP will continue to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing duties at the all-others rate or the most recent company-specific rate applicable to the company, as appropriate. These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

This notice also serves as a final reminder to parties subject to an administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of the return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order, is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.

The final results are issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5).

On October 1, 2021, Commerce published the notice of initiation of the sunset review of the AD order  1 on WSPP from India, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). 2 On October 15, 2021, Commerce received a notice of intent to participate from the domestic producers  3 in the underlying investigation, within the deadline specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(i). 4 The domestic producers claimed domestic interested party status under section 771(9)(C) of the Act, as manufacturers of domestic like product in the United States. 5 On October 29, 2021, the domestic producers submitted a timely substantive response within the 30-day deadline specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i). 6 Commerce did not receive a substantive response from any other interested parties with respect to the Order covered by this sunset review, nor was a hearing requested. On November 30, 2021, Commerce notified the U.S. International Trade Commission that it did not receive an adequate substantive response from respondent interested parties. 7 As a result, pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(C)( 2 ), Commerce is conducting an expedited (120-day) sunset review of the Order.

The product covered by the Order is welded stainless pressure pipe from India. For a full description of the scope, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum. 8

All issues raised in this sunset review are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, including the likelihood of continuation or recurrence of dumping and the magnitude of the margins of dumping likely to prevail if the Order were revoked. A list of topics discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum is included as an appendix to this notice. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov. A complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at https://access.trade.gov/public/FRNotices/ListLayout.aspx. A list of the issues discussed in the decision memorandum is attached as an appendix to this notice.

Pursuant to sections 751(c) and 752(c) of the Act, Commerce determines that revocation of the Order would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping, and that the magnitude of the dumping margins likely to prevail would be weighted-average margins of up to 12.66 percent.

This notice serves as the only reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a). Timely notification of the destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective orders is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction.

We are issuing and publishing these final results in accordance with sections 751(c), 752(c), and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.221(c)(5)(ii).

Commerce's procedures for the conduct of Sunset Reviews are set forth in its Procedures for Conducting Five-Year (Sunset) Reviews of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders, 63 FR 13516 (March 20, 1998) and 70 FR 62061 (October 28, 2005). Guidance on methodological or analytical issues relevant to Commerce's conduct of Sunset Reviews is set forth in Antidumping Proceedings: Calculation of the Weighted-Average Dumping Margin and Assessment Rate in Certain Antidumping Duty Proceedings; Final Modification, 77 FR 8101 (February 14, 2012).

In accordance with section 751(c) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(c), we are initiating the Sunset Reviews of the following AD and CVD 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: https://enforcement.trade.gov/sunset/. All submissions in these Sunset Reviews must be filed in accordance with Commerce's regulations regarding format, translation, and service of documents. These rules, including electronic filing requirements via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS), can be found at 19 CFR 351.303.

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 Federal Register of this notice of initiation. Commerce's regulations on submission of proprietary information and eligibility to receive access to business proprietary information under APO can be found at 19 CFR 351.304-306. Note that Commerce has temporarily modified certain of its requirements for serving documents containing business proprietary information, until further notice. 1

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 Federal Register of this notice of initiation by filing a notice of intent to participate. The required contents of the notice of intent to participate are set forth at 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(ii). In accordance with Commerce's regulations, if we do not receive a notice of intent to participate from at least one domestic interested party by the 15-day deadline, Commerce will automatically revoke the order without further review. 2

If we receive an order-specific notice of intent to participate from a domestic interested party, Commerce's regulations provide that all parties wishing to participate in a Sunset Review must file complete substantive responses not later than 30 days after the date of publication in the Federal Register of this notice of initiation. The required contents of a substantive response, on an order-specific basis, are set forth at 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3). Note that certain information requirements differ for respondent and domestic parties. Also, note that Commerce's information requirements are distinct from the ITC 's information requirements. Consult Commerce's regulations for information regarding Commerce's conduct of Sunset Reviews. Consult Commerce's regulations at 19 CFR part 351 for definitions of terms and for other general information concerning antidumping and countervailing duty proceedings at Commerce.

This notice of initiation is being published in accordance with section 751(c) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(c).

On May 18, 2021, NAS, a domestic producer of SSWR requested that Commerce initiate a circumvention inquiry proceeding, pursuant to section 781(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act) and 19 CFR 351.225(i), to determine whether SS round wire from Vietnam involves a minor alteration to subject merchandise, such that it should be subject to the order  1 on SSWR from Korea. 2 On July 12, 2021, we issued a supplemental questionnaire. 3 On July 26, 2021, NAS responded to our supplemental questionnaire. 4 On July 2, 2021, August 12, 2021, and again on September 22, 2021, we extended the deadline by 45 days respectively, to determine whether to initiate the circumvention allegation. 5 Because we granted NAS an extension of time to respond to Commerce's second supplemental questionnaire response, on November 10, 2021, we determined that additional time was required to review and assess NAS's request for Commerce to determine whether to initiate a circumvention inquiry and, therefore, extended the deadline by 60 days, until January 14, 2022. On November 19, 2021, NAS responded to our second supplemental questionnaire. 6 On January 4, 2022, we extended the deadline by 14 days, until January 28, 2022. 7

For a complete description of the scope of the Order, see Appendix I.

This circumvention inquiry covers SSWR from Korea that has been cold-drawn and further processed into SS round wire in Vietnam and exported into the United States.

Section 781(c) of the Act provides that Commerce may find circumvention of an AD or countervailing duty (CVD) order when products which are of the class or kind as merchandise subject to an AD or CVD order have been “altered in form or appearance in minor respects . . . whether or not included in the same tariff classification.” Section 781(c)(2) of the Act provides an exception that “{p}aragraph 1 shall not apply with respect to altered merchandise if the administering determines that it would be unnecessary to consider the altered merchandise within the scope of the {order}.”

While the Act is silent as to what factors to consider in determining whether alterations are properly considered “minor,” the legislative history of this provision indicates that there are certain factors that should be considered before reaching a circumvention determination. In conducting a circumvention inquiry under section 781(c) of the Act, Commerce has generally relied upon “such criteria as the overall physical characteristics of the merchandise, the expectations of the ultimate users, the use of the merchandise, the channels of marketing and the cost of any modification relative to the total value of the imported products.”  8 Concerning the allegation of minor alteration under section 781(c) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.225(i), Commerce examines such factors as: (1) Overall physical characteristics; (2) expectations of ultimate users; (3) use of merchandise; (4) channels of marketing; and (5) cost of any modification relative to the value of the imported products. 9

After analyzing the record evidence and the petitioner's allegation, we determine that there is sufficient information to at minimum warrant the initiation of a minor alterations circumvention inquiry, pursuant to section 781(c) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.225(i). 10 For a full discussion of the basis for our decision to initiate a minor alterations circumvention inquiry, see the Initiation Decision Memorandum. 11 The Initiation Decision Memorandum is a public document, on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete version of the Initiation Decision Memorandum is available at https://access.trade.gov/public/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx. As explained in the Initiation Decision Memorandum, the information provided by NAS warrants initiating this circumvention inquiry on a country-wide basis. Commerce has taken this approach in prior circumvention inquiries, where the facts warranted initiation on a country-wide basis. 12

Consistent with the approach in the prior circumvention inquiries that were initiated on a country-wide basis, Commerce intends to issue questionnaires to solicit information from producers and exporters in Vietnam concerning their shipments of SS round wire to the United States made from SSWR produced in Korea. A company's failure to respond completely to Commerce's requests for information may result in the application of partial or total facts available, pursuant to section 776(a) of the Act, which may include adverse inferences, pursuant to section 776(b) of the Act.

Commerce will determine whether the merchandise subject to the inquiry (as described in the “Merchandise Subject to the Circumvention Inquiry” section above) is circumventing the Order such that it should be included within the scope of the Order, pursuant to section 781(c) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.225(i).

In accordance with 19 CFR 351.225(1)(2), if Commerce issues a preliminary affirmative determination, we will then instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to suspend liquidation and require a cash deposit of estimated duties, at the applicable rate, for each unliquidated entry of the merchandise at issue entered or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption on or after the date of initiation of the inquiry.

Commerce will establish a schedule for questionnaires and comments on the issues related to the inquiry. In accordance with section 781(f) of the Act, to the maximum extent practicable, Commerce intends to issue its final determination within 300 days of the date of publication of this initiation.

This notice is published in accordance with sections 781(c) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.225(i).

Management strategy evaluation (MSE) is a process that allows fishery managers and stakeholders ( e.g., industry, scientists, and non-governmental organizations) to assess how well different strategies achieve specified management objectives for a fishery. After several years of work, ICCAT expects to finalize its bluefin tuna MSE in 2022 and anticipates adopting a management procedure in November 2022 to set Total Allowable Catch (TACs) for 2023 and future years for both the western Atlantic and eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean stocks of bluefin tuna. NMFS and the United States more broadly participate in this MSE development process and have been engaging stakeholders and considering their input throughout the process through various means, including consultation with the Advisory Committee to the U.S. Section to ICCAT. The United States also participates in the development of the bluefin tuna MSE through active engagement by U.S. scientists in ICCAT's Standing Committee on Research and Statistics (SCRS).

The February 25 meeting is intended to update stakeholders and solicit their input on the MSE approach being developed by ICCAT. This includes SCRS progress in developing initial candidate management procedures (CMPs) illustrating potential management tradeoffs and the related process by ICCAT to refine management objectives to assist the SCRS in further refining and narrowing those CMPs. This open session Advisory Committee meeting is primarily informational in nature and intended to increase the opportunity for stakeholder awareness and input on the bluefin tuna MSE process. Discussions at the meeting will help to inform U.S. scientists who are participating in work of the SCRS. In addition, while no binding decisions or formal, consensus-based recommendations will be made, input provided during the meeting will be considered by the United States to assist its preparations for a March 2022 meeting of ICCAT's Panel 2 and other ICCAT bluefin tuna MSE meetings planned for 2022.

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

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 Workshop. The product of the Data Workshop is a data report which 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 which 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, Highly Migratory Species 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 non-governmental organizations (NGOs); international experts; and staff of Councils, Commissions, and state and federal agencies.

The items of discussion at the SEDAR 78 South Atlantic Spanish Mackerel Assessment Webinar 4 are as follows:

Finalize any data issues as needed; continue the discussion on base model configuration and discuss proposed changes to the model, sensitivity runs, and projections; and finalize the base model configuration if possible.

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 ADDRESSES ) at least 5 business days prior to the meeting.

Note: The times and sequence specified in this agenda are subject to change.

The DSB's charter is being amended in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) (5 U.S.C., appendix) and 41 CFR 102-3.50(d). The charter and contact information for the DSB's Designated Federal Officer (DFO) are found at https://www.facadatabase.gov/FACA/apex/FACAPublicAgencyNavigation.

The DSB provides the Secretary of Defense and Deputy Secretary of Defense with independent advice on matters supporting the DoD's scientific and technical enterprise. The DSB shall focus on matters concerning science, technology, manufacturing, acquisition process, and other topics of special interest to the Department in response to specific tasks from the Secretary of Defense, the Deputy Secretary of Defense (“the DoD Appointing Authority”), or the Under Secretary of Defense (Research and Engineering) (USD(R&E)). The DSB is composed of no more than 40 members who are eminent authorities in the fields of science, technology, manufacturing, acquisition process, and other matters of special interest to the DoD. Members will consist of talented, innovative private sector leaders with a diversity of background, experience, and thought in support of the DSB missions.

Individual members are appointed according to DoD policy and procedures, and serve a term of service of one-to-four years with annual renewals. One member will be appointed as Chair of the DSB. No member, unless approved according to DoD policy and procedures, may serve more than two consecutive terms of service on the DSB, or serve on more than two DoD Federal advisory committees at one time.

DSB members who are not full-time or permanent part-time Federal civilian officers or employees, or active duty members of the Uniformed Services, are appointed as experts or consultants, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 3109, to serve as special government employee members. DSB members who are full-time or permanent part-time Federal civilian officers or employees, or active duty members of the Uniformed Services are appointed pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.130(a), to serve as regular government employee members.

All DSB members are appointed to provide advice based on their best judgment without representing any particular point of view and in a manner that is free from conflict of interest. Except for reimbursement of official DSB-related travel and per diem, members serve without compensation.

The public or interested organizations may submit written statements about the DSB's mission and functions. Written statements may be submitted at any time or in response to the stated agenda of planned meeting of the DSB. All written statements shall be submitted to the DFO for the DSB, and this individual will ensure that the written statements are provided to the membership for their consideration.

Pursuant to section 102(2)(c) of the NEPA, regulations implemented by the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), and Presidential Executive Order 12114, the DoN announced its intent to prepare a supplement to the 2011 GOA Navy Training Activities EIS/OEIS and 2016 GOA Navy Training Activities Supplemental EIS/OEIS in the Federal Register (FR) on February 10, 2020 (85 FR 7538), and invited the public to comment on the scope of the Supplemental EIS/OEIS. A Draft Supplemental EIS/OEIS was subsequently released on December 11, 2020 (85 FR 80093), in which the potential environmental effects associated with military readiness training activities conducted within the GOA Study Area were evaluated.

Since the release of the Draft Supplemental EIS/OEIS on December 11, 2020, the DoN has recognized that the size and shape of the Temporary Maritime Activities Area (TMAA) in the Gulf of Alaska does not provide sufficient space for the realistic maneuvering of vessels and aircraft during training exercises. The proposed study area will now include additional air space and sea space to the west and south of the TMAA. This additional area is referred to as the Western Maneuver Area (WMA) and is approximately 185,806 square nautical miles. The TMAA, as currently defined (approximately 42,146 square nautical miles), would remain unchanged with all activities involving active sonar and explosives still occurring in this area only. No new or increased training activities are proposed as part of the revised proposed action, only an expansion of the overall training area for vessel and aircraft maneuvering purposes. In addition, DoN proposes implementing a new mitigation area within the continental shelf and shelf slope area of the TMAA. To protect marine species and biologically important habitat, use of explosives (up to 10,000 feet altitude) would be restricted in this area.

All public comments received during the Draft Supplemental EIS/OEIS comment period (December 11, 2020, through February 16, 2021) are still valid and will be considered in the Final Supplemental EIS/OEIS for this action. Previously submitted comments need not be resubmitted. The supplement to the Draft Supplemental EIS/OEIS is expected to be available in March 2022. A Notice of Availability of the supplement to the Draft Supplemental EIS/OEIS will be published in the Federal Register at that time, and the supplement to the Draft Supplemental EIS/OEIS will be released for a public comment period of 45 days. No decision will be made to implement any alternative in the GOA Study Area until the NEPA process is complete and a Record of Decision is signed by the DoN.

Purpose of Meeting: To charge HEPAP with a study of the international competitiveness of the U.S. program in high energy physics.

Tentative Agenda:

Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. A webcast of this meeting will be available. Please check the website below for updates and information on how to view the meeting. If you would like to file a written statement with the Committee, you may do so either before or after the meeting. If you would like to make oral statements regarding any of these items on the agenda, you should contact John Kogut, (301) 903-1298 or by email at: John.Kogut@science.doe.gov. You must make your request for an oral statement at least five business days before the meeting. Reasonable provision will be made to include the scheduled oral statements on the agenda. The Chairperson of the Panel will conduct the meeting to facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Public comment will follow the 10-minute rule.

Minutes: The minutes of the meeting will be available on the High Energy Physics Advisory Panel website: https://science.osti.gov/hep/hepap/meetings/.

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).

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

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

3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to achieve environmental justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of any group, including minority and/or low-income populations, in the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, the Agency seeks information on any groups or segments of the population who, as a result of their location, cultural practices, or other factors, may have atypical or disproportionately high and adverse human health impacts or environmental effects from exposure to the pesticide discussed in this document, compared to the general population.

Under section 18 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) (7 U.S.C. 136p), at the discretion of the EPA Administrator, a Federal or State agency may be exempted from any provision of FIFRA if the EPA Administrator determines that emergency conditions exist which require the exemption. The FDACS has requested the EPA Administrator to issue a specific exemption for the use of clothianidin as a soil drench application on immature (3-5 years old) citrus trees to control the transmission of HLB disease vectored by ACP. Information in accordance with 40 CFR part 166 was submitted as part of this request.

As part of this request, the applicant asserts that clothianidin is needed to suppress the transmission of HLB disease vectored by ACP due to the lack of available alternative pesticides and effective control practices. Without the use of this tool, Florida citrus growers are expected to experience significant economic losses due to the severity of this invasive disease and vector complex.

The Applicant proposes to make no more than two applications of clothianidin at a maximum rate of 0.4 lb. a.i./A (24.0 fl. oz per acre) per 12-month period on up to 125,376 acres of immature (3-5 years old) citrus trees grown in Florida from January 14 to October 31, 2022. A total of 50,150 lbs. of clothianidin could be used on the maximum acreage of 125,376 at the highest rate.

This notice does not constitute a decision by EPA on the application itself. The regulations governing FIFRA section 18 require publication of a notice of receipt of an application for a specific exemption proposing a use which is supported by the IR-4 program and has been requested in 5 or more previous years; and for which a complete application for registration of that use and/or a petition for tolerance for residues in or on the commodity has not been submitted to the Agency.

The FDACS submitted in 2011 a petition for tolerance to EPA that was subsequently withdrawn, and an application/petition has not been resubmitted to the Agency. The notice provides an opportunity for public comment on the application. The Agency will review and consider all comments received during the comment period in determining whether to issue the specific exemption requested by the FDACS.

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.

In 2007, Congress enacted the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) with the stated goals of “mov[ing] the United States toward greater energy independence and security [and] to increase the production of clean renewable fuels.” In accordance with these goals, EISA revised the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) Program, which was created under the 2005 Energy Policy Act and is administered by EPA, to increase the volume of renewable fuel required to be blended into transportation fuel to 36 billion gallons per year by 2022. Section 204 of EISA directs EPA, in consultation with the U.S. Departments of Agriculture and Energy, to assess and report triennially to Congress on the environmental and resource conservation impacts of the RFS Program.

The first report to Congress (RtC1) was completed in 2011 and provided an assessment of the environmental and resource conservation impacts associated with increased biofuel production and use (EPA/600/R-10/183F). The overarching conclusions of this first report were: (1) The environmental impacts of increased biofuel production and use were likely negative but limited in impact; (2) there was a potential for both positive and negative impacts in the future; and (3) EISA goals for biofuels production could be achieved with minimal environmental impacts if best practices were used and if technologies advanced to facilitate the use of second-generation biofuel feedstocks (corn stover, perennial grasses, woody biomass, algae, and waste).

The second report to Congress (RtC2) was completed in 2018 and reaffirmed the overarching conclusions of the RtC1 (EPA/600/R-18/195). The RtC2 noted that the biofuel production and use conditions that led to the conclusions of the RtC1 had not materially changed, and that the production of biofuels from cellulosic feedstocks anticipated by both the EISA and the RtC1 had not materialized. Noting observed increases in acreage for corn and soybean production in the period prior to and following implementation of the RFS2 Program, the RtC2 concluded that the environmental and resource conservation impacts associated with land use change were likely due, at least in part, to the RFS and associated production of biofuel feedstocks but that further research was needed.

This RtC3 builds on the previous two reports and provides an update on the impacts to date of the RFS Program on the environment. This report assesses air, water, and soil quality; ecosystem health and biodiversity; and other effects. This third report also includes new analyses not previously included in the first and second reports.

Expertise sought: EPA is seeking candidates who are nationally and/or internationally recognized scientific experts to serve as external peer reviewers for the draft report. Nominees should possess a strong background and demonstrated expertise in one or more of the following areas: Economics, engineering, agronomics, land use change, remote sensing, air quality, biogeochemistry, water quality, hydrology, conservation biology, limnology, and ecology. Economists should have expertise in partial equilibrium modeling (PE), computable general equilibrium modeling (CGE), and/or econometric studies. All candidates should have scientific credentials equivalent to a Ph.D., broad expertise in biofuels, and should be familiar with the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) Program.

Selection criteria: From the pool of nominees, EPA's contractor, ERG, will select nine peer reviewers, in a manner consistent with EPA's Peer Review Handbook 4th Edition, 2015 (EPA/100/B-15/001), based on the following factors: (1) Demonstrated expertise in the areas listed above through relevant peer-reviewed publications; (2) professional accomplishments and recognition by professional societies; (3) demonstrated ability to work constructively and effectively in a committee setting; (4) absence of conflicts of interest; (5) no appearance of a lack of impartiality; (6) willingness to commit adequate time for a thorough review of the draft report, including preparation of individual written comments that will be made publicly available; and (7) availability to participate virtually in a public two-day or three-day peer review meeting and to provide subsequent revised individual comments. Registration information, meeting dates, and other logistical information will be provided in a subsequent FRN at least 30 days prior to the external peer review meeting.

Required nominee information: To receive full consideration, the following information should be provided for each nominee in the submission to ERG at peerreview@erg.com (subject line: RtC3 Peer Review): (1) Contact information for the person making the nomination; (2) contact information for the nominee; (3) the disciplinary and specific areas of expertise of the nominee; (4) the nominee's curriculum vitae; (5) a biographical sketch of the nominee indicating current position, educational background, past and current research activities, recent service on other advisory committees, peer review panels, editorial boards or professional organizations, sources of recent grant and/or contract support, and (6) any other comments on the relevance of the nominee's expertise to this peer review topic. Compensation for non-federal peer reviewers will be provided by ERG.

Selection process: ERG will notify nominees of selection or non-selection. ERG will also conduct an independent search for candidates to assemble a balanced group representing the expertise needed to fully evaluate EPA's Third Triennial Biofuels and the Environment Report to Congress (RtC3). ERG will consider and screen all nominees against the criteria previously described. Following the screening process, ERG will narrow the list of potential reviewers to eighteen candidates. Prior to selecting the final peer reviewers, an FRN will be published (exact date to be determined) to solicit comments on the pool of eighteen candidates. In that notice, the public will be requested to provide relevant information or documentation on the candidate pool within 15 days of the announcement of the interim list of candidates. After considering the public comments on the candidate pool, ERG will select nine peer reviewers, carefully weighing a number of factors including the candidates' areas of expertise and professional qualifications.

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

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

OMB Control Number: 3060-0748.

Title: Section 64.104, 64.1509, 64.1510 Pay-Per-Call and Other Information Services.

Form Number: N/A.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities.

Number of Respondents and Responses: 5,125 respondents; 5,175 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: 2 to 260 hours.

Frequency of Response: Annual and on occasion reporting and recordkeeping requirements; Third party disclosure requirement.

Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. The statutory authority(s) for the information collection is found at 47 U.S.C. 228(c)(7)-(10); Public Law 192-556, 106 stat. 4181 (1992), codified at 47 U.S.C. 228 (The Telephone Disclosure and Dispute Resolution Act of 1992).

Total Annual Burden: 47,750 hours.

Total Annual Cost: None.

Needs and Uses: 47 CFR 64.1504 of the Commission's rules incorporates the requirements of Sections 228(c)(7)-(10) of the Communications Act restricting the manner in which toll-free numbers may be used to charge telephone subscribers for information services. Common carriers may not charge a calling party for information conveyed on a toll-free number call, unless the calling party: (1) Has executed a written agreement that specifies the material terms and conditions under which the information is provided, or (2) pays for the information by means of a prepaid account, credit, debit, charge, or calling card and the information service provider gives the calling party an introductory message disclosing the cost and other terms and conditions for the service. The disclosure requirements are intended to ensure that consumers know when charges will be levied for calls to toll-free numbers and are able to obtain information necessary to make informed choices about whether to purchase toll-free information services. 47 CFR 64.1509 of the Commission rules incorporates the requirements of 47 U.S.C. (c)(2) and 228 (d)(2)-(3) of the Communications Act. Common carriers that assign telephone numbers to pay- per-call services must disclose to all interested parties, upon request, a list of all assigned pay-per-call numbers. For each assigned number, carriers must also make available: (1) A description of the pay-per-call services; (2) the total cost per minute or other fees associated with the service; and (3) the service provider's name, business address, and telephone number. In addition, carriers handling pay-per-call services must establish a toll-free number that consumers may call to receive information about pay-per-call services. Finally, the Commission requires carriers to provide statements of pay-per-call rights and responsibilities to new telephone subscribers at the time service is established and, although not required by statute, to all subscribers annually.

Under 47 CFR 64.1510 of the Commission's rules, telephone bills containing charges for interstate pay-per-call and other information services must include information detailing consumers' rights and responsibilities with respect to these charges. Specifically, telephone bills carrying pay-per-call charges must include a consumer notification stating that: (1) The charges are for non-communication services; (2) local and long distance telephone services may not be disconnected for failure to pay per-call charges; (3) pay-per-call (900 number) blocking is available upon request; and (4) access to pay-per-call services may be involuntarily blocked for failure to pay per-call charges. In addition, each call billed must show the type of services, the amount of the charge, and the date, time, and duration of the call. Finally, the bill must display a toll-free number which subscribers may call to obtain information about pay-per-call services. Similar billing disclosure requirements apply to charges for information services either billed to subscribers on a collect basis or accessed by subscribers through a toll-free number. The billing disclosure requirements are intended to ensure that telephone subscribers billed for pay-per-call or other information services can understand the charges levied and are informed of their rights and responsibilities with respect to payment of such charges.

OMB Control Number: 3060-0692.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Title: Sections 76.802 and 76.804, Home Wiring Provisions; Section 76.613, Interference from a Multi-channel Video Programming Distributor (MVPD).

Form Number: N/A.

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

Number of Respondents and Responses: 22,000 respondents and 253,010.

Estimated Time per Response: 0.083-2 hours.

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

Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. The statutory authority for this collection is contained in Sections 1, 4, 224, 251, 303, 601, 623, 624 and 632 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.

Total Annual Burden: 36,114 hours.

Total Annual Cost: No cost.

Needs and Uses: In the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992, Congress directed the FCC to adopt rules governing the disposition of home wiring owned by a cable operator when a subscriber terminates service. The rules at 76.800 et seq., implement that directive. The intention of the rules is to clarify the status and provide for the disposition of existing cable operator-owned wiring in single family homes and multiple dwelling units upon the termination of a contract for cable service by the home owner or MDU owner. Section 76.613(d) requires that when Multichannel Video Programming Distributors (MVPDs) cause harmful signal interference MVPDs may be required by the District Director and/or Resident Agent to prepare and submit a report regarding the cause(s) of the interference, corrective measures planned or taken, and the efficacy of the remedial measures.

Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and Control Special Emphasis Panel (SEP)—RFA-CE-22-001, Grants to Support New Investigators in Conducting Research Related to Understanding Polydrug Use Risk and Protective Factors; March 15-16, 2022, 8:30 a.m.-5:30 p.m., EDT. The web conference was published in the Federal Register on January 5, 2022, Volume 87, Number 3, page 460.

This meeting is being canceled in its entirety.

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

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

1. Type of Information Collection Request: Reinstatement with change of a previously approved collection; Title of Information Collection: Standards Related to Reinsurance, Risk Corridors, and Risk Adjustment; Use: The data collection and reporting requirements will be used by HHS to run the permanent risk adjustment program, including validation of data submitted by issuers, on behalf of States that requested HHS to run it for them. Risk adjustment is one of three market stability programs established by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and is intended to mitigate the impact of adverse selection in the individual and small group health insurance markets inside and outside of the Health Insurance Exchanges. HHS will also use this data to adjust the payment transfer formula for risk associated with high-cost enrollees. State regulators can use the reporting requirements outlined in this collection to request a reduction to the statewide average premium factor of the risk adjustment transfer formula, beginning for the 2019 benefit year, and thereby avoid having to establish their own programs. Issuers and providers can use the alternative reporting requirements for mental and behavioral health records described herein to comply with State privacy laws. Form Number: CMS-10401 (OMB control number: 0938-1155); Frequency: Annually; Affected Public: State, Local, or Tribal Governments; Number of Respondents: 650; Total Annual Responses: 173,918; Total Annual Hours: 4,126,850. For policy questions regarding this collection contact Jacqueline Wilson at jacqueline.wilson1@cms.hhs.gov.

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

1. Type of Information Collection Request: Revision of a currently approved collection; Title of Information Collection: Cooperative Agreement to Support Navigators in Federally-facilitated Exchanges; Use: Section 1311(i) of the PPACA requires Exchanges to establish a Navigator grant program under which it awards grants to eligible individuals and entities (as described in Section 1311(i)(2) of the PPACA and 45 CFR 155.210(a) and (c)) applying to serve consumers in States with a FFE. Navigators assist consumers by providing education about and facilitating selection of qualified health plans (QHPs) within the Exchanges, as well as other required duties. Entities and individuals cannot serve as federally certified Navigators and carry out the required duties without receiving federal cooperative agreement funding. On July 1, 2021, HHS published the Updating Payment Parameters, Section 1332 Waiver Implementing Regulations, and Improving Health Insurance Markets for 2022 and Beyond Proposed Rule proposed rule. The proposed regulations would amend federal regulations at 45 CFR 155.210(e)(9) to reinstitute the requirement that FFE Navigators provide consumers with information and assistance on access, affordability and certain post-enrollment topics, such as the eligibility appeals process, the Exchange-related components of the Premium Tax Credit (PTC) reconciliation process, and the basic concepts and rights of health coverage and how to use it.

Under the Terms and Conditions of the Navigator program cooperative agreements, awardees must provide progress reports on a weekly, monthly, quarterly and annual basis during the cooperative agreement period of performance, and a final report at the end of the period of performance. Awardees will submit their progress reports electronically to CMS staff for evaluation and analysis. The results of this evaluation will provide feedback on the effectiveness of the Navigator program, so that HHS and CMS leadership may evaluate the effectiveness of the program and address any areas that need revisions. CMS will also use the information collected from Navigator grant awardees to inform the public about the availability of application and enrollment assistance services from designated organizations. Form Number: CMS-10463 (OMB control number: 0938-1215); Frequency: Annually, Monthly, Quarterly, Weekly; Affected Public: Private sector; Number of Respondents: 100; Total Annual Responses: 5,200; Total Annual Hours: 529,000. For questions regarding this collection contact Gian Johnson at 301-492-4323.

Description: The ACF-800 provides annual aggregate data on the children and families receiving direct child care services under CCDF, and is used by OCC to analyze and evaluate the CCDF program to the extent which state and territory lead agencies are assisting families in addressing child care needs.

Respondents: State and territory lead agencies.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 2,240.

Authority: The Child Care and Development Block Grant Act (42 U.S.C. 9857 et seq. ); regulations at 45 CFR 98.70 and 98.71.

In accordance with Section 9.19 of the Mandatory Guidelines, a notice listing all currently HHS-certified laboratories and IITFs is published in the Federal Register during the first week of each month. If any laboratory or IITF certification is suspended or revoked, the laboratory or IITF will be omitted from subsequent lists until such time as it is restored to full certification under the Mandatory Guidelines.

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 https://www.samhsa.gov/workplace/resources/drug-testing/certified-lab-list.

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 Federal Register on April 11, 1988 (53 FR 11970), and subsequently revised in the Federal Register on June 9, 1994 (59 FR 29908); September 30, 1997 (62 FR 51118); April 13, 2004 (69 FR 19644); November 25, 2008 (73 FR 71858); December 10, 2008 (73 FR 75122); April 30, 2010 (75 FR 22809); and on January 23, 2017 (82 FR 7920).

The Mandatory Guidelines using Oral Fluid were first published in the Federal Register on October 25, 2019 (84 FR 57554) with an effective date of January 1, 2020.

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:

The CMHS NAC is required to meet at least twice per fiscal year. To attend virtually, submit written or brief oral comments, or request special accommodation for persons with disabilities, contact Pamela Foote. Individuals can also register on-line at: https://snacregister.samhsa.gov/MeetingList.aspx.

The public comment section will be scheduled at the conclusion of the meeting. Individuals interested in submitting a comment, must notify Pamela Foote on or before March 14, 2022 via email to: Pamela.Foote@samhsa.hhs.gov.

Up to three minutes will be allotted for each approved public comment as time permits. Written comments received in advance of the meeting will be considered for inclusion in the official record of the meeting.

Meeting information and a roster of Council members may be obtained by accessing the SAMHSA website at: http://www.samhsa.gov/about-us/advisory-councils/cmhs-national-advisory-council or by contacting the CMHS NAC Designated Federal Officer; Pamela Foote.

Council Name: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Center for Mental Health Services National Advisory Council.

The ISMICC was established on March 15, 2017, in accordance with section 6031 of the 21st Century Cures Act, and the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. app., as amended, to report to the Secretary, Congress, and any other relevant federal department or agency on advances in SMI and SED, research related to the prevention of, diagnosis of, intervention in, and treatment and recovery of SMIs, SEDs, and advances in access to services and supports for adults with SMI or children with SED. In addition, the ISMICC will evaluate the effect federal programs related to SMI and SED have on public health, including public health outcomes such as: (A) Rates of suicide, suicide attempts, incidence and prevalence of SMIs, SEDs, and substance use disorders, overdose, overdose deaths, emergency hospitalizations, emergency room boarding, preventable emergency room visits, interaction with the criminal justice system, homelessness, and unemployment; (B) increased rates of employment and enrollment in educational and vocational programs; (C) quality of mental and substance use disorders treatment services; or (D) any other criteria determined by the Secretary. Finally, the ISMICC will make specific recommendations for actions that agencies can take to better coordinate the administration of mental health services for adults with SMI or children with SED. Not later than one (1) year after the date of enactment of the 21st Century Cures Act, and five (5) years after such date of enactment, the ISMICC shall submit a report to Congress and any other relevant federal department or agency.

This ISMICC consists of federal members listed below or their designees, and non-federal public members.

Federal Membership: Members include, The Secretary of Health and Human Services; The Assistant Secretary for Mental Health and Substance Use; The Attorney General; The Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs; The Secretary of the Department of Defense; The Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development; The Secretary of the Department of Education; The Secretary of the Department of Labor; The Administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services; and The Commissioner of the Social Security Administration.

Non-federal Membership: Members include, not less than 14 non-federal public members appointed by the Secretary, representing psychologists, psychiatrists, social workers, peer support specialists, and other providers, patients, family of patients, law enforcement, the judiciary, and leading research, advocacy, or service organizations.

The ISMICC is required to meet at least twice per year.

To attend virtually, submit written or brief oral comments, or request special accommodation for persons with disabilities, contact Pamela Foote. Individuals can also register on-line at: https://snacregister.samhsa.gov/MeetingList.aspx.

The public comment section will be scheduled at the conclusion of the meeting. Individuals interested in submitting a comment, must notify Pamela Foote on or before April 4, 2021 via email to: Pamela.Foote@samhsa.hhs.gov.

Up to three minutes will be allotted for each approved public comment as time permits. Written comments received in advance of the meeting will be considered for inclusion in the official record of the meeting.

Substantive meeting information and a roster of Committee members is available at the Committee's website: https://www.samhsa.gov/about-us/advisory-councils/meetings

The National Boating Safety Advisory Committee is a Federal advisory committee. The Committee operates under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, (5 U.S.C. appendix) in addition to the administrative provisions in section 601 of the Frank LoBiondo Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2018 (specifically, 46 U.S.C. 15109).

The Committee was established on December 4, 2018, by section 601 of the Frank LoBiondo Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2018 (Pub. L. No 115-282, 132 Stat 4192). That authority is codified, at 46 U.S.C. 15105. The Committee is required to meet at least once a year in accordance with 46 U.S.C. 15109(a). We expect the Committee will hold meetings at least twice a year. The meetings are held virtually or at a location selected by the U.S. Coast Guard.

All members serve at their own expense and receive no salary or other compensation from the Federal Government. Members may be reimbursed for travel and per diem in accordance with Federal Travel Regulations.

Under provisions in 46 U.S.C. 15109(f)(6), if you are appointed as a member of the Committee, your membership term will expire on December 31st of the third full year after the effective date of your appointment. The Secretary may require an individual to have passed an appropriate security background examination before appointment to the Committee, 46 U.S.C. 15109(f)(4).

In this solicitation for Committee members, we will consider applications for two (2) positions:

• One member to represent State officials responsible for State boating safety programs.

• One member to represent recreational vessel and associated equipment manufacturers.

Each member of the Committee must have particular expertise, knowledge, and experience on matters related to national boating safety.

The Department of Homeland Security does not discriminate in selection of Committee members on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, political affiliation, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, disabilities and genetic information, age, membership in an employee organization, or any other non-merit factor. The Department of Homeland Security strives to achieve a widely diverse candidate pool for all of its recruitment selections.

If you are interested in applying to become a member of the Committee, email your cover letter and resume along with the brief biography to NBSAC@uscg.mil via the transmittal method provided in the ADDRESSES section by the deadline in the DATES section of this notice.

In the Federal Register of January 6, 2022, in FR Doc. 87-784, on page 784, in the second column, correct the DATES caption to read:

• Wednesday, January 5, 2022, from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. Eastern Time (ET).

• Wednesday, January 12, 2022, from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. ET.

• Wednesday, January 19, 2022, from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. ET.

• Wednesday, February 2, 2022, from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. ET.

The AFG Program awards grants directly to fire departments, nonaffiliated emergency medical services (EMS) organizations, and State Fire Training Academies (SFTAs) for the purpose of enhancing the health and safety of first responders and improving their abilities to protect the public from fire and fire-related hazards.

Applications for the FY 2021 AFG Program are submitted and processed online at https://go.fema.gov. Before the application period started, the FY 2021 AFG Program Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) was published on FEMA's AFG Program website at Assistance to Firefighters Grants Program | FEMA.gov. The AFG Program website provides additional information and materials useful for FY 2021 AFG Program applicants including Frequently Asked Questions, Application Checklist, Get Ready Guide Narrative, Self-Evaluation Sheets for Vehicle Acquisition and Operations Safety, and a Cost Share Calculator. Based on past AFG Program application periods, FEMA anticipates receiving 8,000 to 10,000 applications for the FY 2021 AFG Program, and the ability to award approximately 2,000 grants.

For the FY 2021 AFG Program, Congress appropriated a total of $460 million through the DHS Appropriations Act, 2021 (Pub. L. 116-260) ($360 million) and the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (Pub. L. 117-2) ($100 million). From this amount, $414 million will be made available for FY 2021 AFG Program awards. In addition, section 33 of the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974, as amended (15 U.S.C. 2229), requires that a minimum of 10 percent of available funds be expended for Fire Prevention and Safety (FP&S) Program grants. FP&S Program awards will be made directly to local fire departments and to local, regional, state, or national entities recognized for their expertise in the fields of fire prevention and firefighter safety research and development. The majority of the funds appropriated for FY 2021 are available for obligation and award until September 30, 2022. The $100 million from the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 is available for obligation and award until September 30, 2025, but FEMA anticipates obligating and awarding all of this funding with the rest of the FY 2021 funding by September 30, 2022.

The Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 further directs FEMA to administer these appropriations according to the following requirements:

• Career fire departments: Not less than 25% of available grant funds.

• Volunteer fire departments: Not less than 25% of available grant funds.

• Combination fire departments and departments using paid-on-call firefighting personnel: Not less than 25% of available grant funds.

• Open competition (career, volunteer, and/or combination fire departments and departments using paid-on-call firefighting personnel): Not less than 10% of available grant funds awarded.

• EMS providers including fire departments and nonaffiliated EMS organizations: Not less than 3.5% of available grant funds awarded, with nonaffiliated EMS providers receiving no more than 2 percent of the total available grant funds.

• SFTAs: Not more than 3% of available grant funds shall be collectively awarded to SFTA applicants, with a maximum of $1 million per applicant.

• Vehicles: Not more than 25% of available grant funds may be used for the purchase of vehicles; by policy and based on recommendations, FEMA intends to dedicate 10% of those vehicle funds for ambulances.

• Micro grants: This is a voluntary funding limitation choice made by the applicant for requests submitted within the operations and safety activity; it is not an additional funding opportunity. Micro grants are awards that have a Federal participation (share) that does not exceed $50,000. Only fire departments and nonaffiliated EMS organizations are eligible to choose micro grants, and the only eligible micro grants requests are for training, equipment, personal protective equipment (PPE), and wellness and fitness activities. Applicants that select micro grants may receive additional consideration for award. If an applicant selects micro grants in their application, they will be limited in the total amount of funding their organization can be awarded. If they are requesting funding in excess of $50,000 Federal participation, they should not select micro grants.

Since 2001, the AFG Program has helped firefighters and other first responders obtain critically needed equipment, protective gear, emergency vehicles, training, and other resources needed to protect the public and emergency personnel from fire and related hazards. FEMA awards grants on a competitive basis to the applicants that best address the AFG Program's priorities and provide the most compelling justification. Applications that best address AFG Program priorities, as identified in the Application Evaluation Criteria, are reviewed by a panel composed of fire service personnel.

The AFG Program has three program activities:

The priorities for each activity are fully outlined in the funding notice.

Before making a grant award, FEMA is required by 31 U.S.C. 3354, as amended by the Payment Integrity Information Act of 2019, Public Law 116-117 (2020), 41 U.S.C. 2313, and 2 CFR 200.206 to review information available through any Office of Management and Budget (OMB) designated repositories of government-wide eligibility qualification or financial integrity information. Therefore, application evaluation criteria may include the following risk-based considerations of the applicant: (1) Financial stability; (2) quality of management systems and ability to meet management standards; (3) history of performance in managing Federal awards; (4) reports and findings from audits; and (5) ability to effectively implement statutory, regulatory, or other requirements.

FEMA will rank all complete and submitted applications based on how well they align with program priorities for the type of jurisdiction(s) served. Answers to activity-specific questions provide information used to determine each application's ranking relative to the stated program priorities.

Funding priorities and criteria for evaluating AFG Program applications are established by FEMA based on the recommendations from the Criteria Development Panel (CDP). The CDP is composed of fire service professionals that make recommendations to FEMA regarding the creation of new, or the modification of previously established, funding priorities, as well as developing criteria for awarding grants. The content of the funding notice reflects implementation of the CDP's recommendations with respect to the priorities and evaluation criteria for awards.

The nine major fire service organizations represented on the CDP are:

AFG Program applications are reviewed through a multi-phase process. All applications are electronically pre-scored and ranked based on how well they align with the funding priorities outlined in the NOFO. Applications with the highest pre-score rankings are then scored competitively by no less than three members of a Peer Review Panel. Applications are also evaluated through a series of internal FEMA review processes for completeness, adherence to programmatic guidelines, technical feasibility, and anticipated effectiveness of the proposed project(s). Below is the process by which applications are reviewed:

The application undergoes an electronic pre-scoring process based on established program priorities listed within the NOFO and answers to activity specific questions within the online application. Application narratives are not reviewed during pre-scoring. Request details and budget information should comply with program guidance and statutory funding limitations. The pre-score is 50% of the total application score.

Applications with the highest pre-score undergo peer review. The peer review is comprised of fire service representatives recommended by the organizations represented on the CDP. The panelists assess the merits of each application based on the narrative section of the application, including the evaluation elements listed in the Narrative Evaluation Criteria below. Panelists independently score each project within the application, discuss the merits and/or shortcomings of the application with their peers, and document the findings. A consensus is not required. The panel score is 50% of the total application score.

The highest ranked applications are considered within the fundable range. Applications that are in the fundable range undergo both a technical review by a subject-matter expert, as well as a FEMA AFG Branch review before being recommended for an award. The FEMA AFG Branch assesses the request with respect to costs, quantities, feasibility, eligibility and recipient responsibility prior to recommending an application for award. Once the technical evaluation process is complete, the cumulative score for each application is determined and FEMA generates a final ranking of applications. FEMA awards grants based on this final ranking and the statutorily required funding limitations listed in this notice and the NOFO.

Applicants should describe their financial need and how consistent it is with the intent of the AFG Program. This statement should include details describing the applicant's financial distress, summarized budget constraints, unsuccessful attempts to secure other funding, and proof that their financial distress is out of their control.

This statement should clearly explain the applicant's project objectives and the relationship between those objectives and the applicant's budget and risk analysis. The applicant should describe the activities, including program priorities or facility modifications, ensuring consistency with project objectives, the applicant's mission, and any national, state and/or local requirements. Applicants should link the proposed expenses to operations and safety, as well as the completion of the project goals.

Applicants should describe how they plan to address the operations and personal safety needs of their organization, including cost effectiveness and sharing assets. This statement should also include details about gaining the maximum benefits from grant funding by citing reasonable or required costs, such as specific overhead and administrative costs. The applicant's request should also be consistent with their mission and identify how funding will benefit their organization and personnel.

This statement should explain how these funds will enhance the applicant's overall effectiveness. It should address how an award will improve daily operations and reduce the applicant's risks. Applicants should include how frequently the requested items will be used, and in what capacity. Applicants should also indicate how the requested items will help the community and increase the organization's ability to save additional lives or property. Jurisdictions that demonstrate their commitment and proactive posture to reducing fire risk, by explaining their code enforcement (to include Wildland Urban Interface code enforcement) and mitigation strategies (including whether or not the jurisdiction has a FEMA-approved mitigation strategy) may receive stronger consideration under this criterion.

Fire Departments: Fire departments operating in any of the 50 states, as well as fire departments in the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or any federally recognized Indian Tribe or tribal organization.

A fire department is an agency or organization having a formally recognized arrangement with a state, territory, local (city, county, parish, fire district, township, town, or other governing body), or tribal authority to provide fire suppression to a population within a geographically fixed primary first due response area.

Nonaffiliated EMS organizations: Nonaffiliated EMS organizations operating in any of the 50 states, as well as the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or any federally recognized Indian Tribe or tribal organization.

A nonaffiliated EMS organization is an agency or organization that is a public or private nonprofit emergency medical services entity providing medical transport that is not affiliated with a hospital and does not serve a geographic area in which emergency medical services are adequately provided by a fire department.

FEMA considers the following as hospitals under the AFG Program:

State Fire Training Academies: SFTAs operating in any of the 50 states, as well as the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. Applicants must be designated either by legislation or by a Governor's declaration as the sole fire service training agency within a state, territory, or the District of Columbia. The designated SFTA shall be the only agency/bureau/division, or entity within that state, territory or the District of Columbia.

• To avoid a duplication of benefits, FEMA reserves the right to review all program activities or grant applications where two or more organizations share a single facility. To be eligible as a separate organization, two or more fire departments or nonaffiliated EMS organizations will have different funding streams, personnel rosters, Employer Identification Numbers (EINs), or Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) Number/unique entity identifier. If two or more organizations share facilities and each submits an application in the same program area ( e.g., Equipment, Modify Facilities, PPE, Training, and/or Wellness and Fitness Programs) FEMA will carefully review each application for eligibility.

• Fire-based EMS organizations are not eligible to apply as nonaffiliated EMS organizations. Fire-based EMS training and equipment must be requested by a fire department under the AFG Program component program of Operations and Safety.

• Eligible applicants may submit only one application for each activity ( e.g., Operations and Safety, Regional, etc.), but may submit for multiple projects within each activity. Under the Vehicle Activity, applicants may submit one application for vehicles for their department and one separate application to host a regional vehicle. Duplicate applications (more than one application in the same activity) may be disqualified.

• An Operations and Safety applicant may submit one application for an eligible project ( e.g., turn out gear); it may not submit a regional application for the same project.

• Congress has enacted statutory limits to the amount of funding that a grant recipient may receive from the AFG Program in any single fiscal year based on the population served (15 U.S.C. 2229(c)(2)). Awards will be limited based on the size of the population protected by the applicant, as indicated below. Notwithstanding the annual limits stated below, the FEMA Administrator may not award a grant in an amount that exceeds one percent of the available grant funds in such fiscal year, except where it is determined that such recipient has an extraordinary need for a grant in an amount that exceeds the 1% aggregate limit.

• In the case of a recipient that serves a jurisdiction with 100,000 people or fewer, the amount of available grant funds awarded to such recipient shall not exceed $1 million in any fiscal year.

• In the case of a recipient that serves a jurisdiction with more than 100,000 people, but not more than 500,000 people, the amount of available grant funds awarded to such recipient shall not exceed $2 million in any fiscal year.

• In the case of a recipient that serves a jurisdiction with more than 500,000 people, but not more than 1 million people, the amount of available grant funds awarded to such recipient shall not exceed $3 million in any fiscal year.

• In the case of a recipient that serves a jurisdiction with more than 1 million people, but not more than 2.5 million people, the amount of available grant funds awarded to such recipient is subject to the one percent aggregate cap of $4.6 million for FY 2021, but FEMA may waive this aggregate cap in individual cases where FEMA determines that a recipient has an extraordinary need for a grant that exceeds the aggregate cap; if FEMA waives the aggregate cap, the amount of grant funds awarded to such recipient shall not exceed $6 million for any fiscal year.

• In the case of a recipient that serves a jurisdiction with more than 2.5 million people, the amount of available grant funds awarded to such recipient is subject to the one percent aggregate cap of $4.6 million for FY 2021, but FEMA may waive this aggregate cap in individual cases where FEMA determines that a recipient has an extraordinary need for a grant that exceeds the aggregate cap; if FEMA waives the aggregate cap, the amount of grant funds awarded to such recipient shall not exceed $9 million for any fiscal year.

• FEMA may not waive the population-based limits on the amount of grant funds awarded as set by 15 U.S.C. 2229(c)(2)(A).

The cumulative total of the Federal share of awards in Operations and Safety, Regional, and Vehicle Acquisition activities will be considered when assessing award amounts and any limitations thereto. Applicants may request funding up to the statutory limit on each of their applications.

For example, an applicant that serves a jurisdiction with more than 100,000 people, but not more than 500,000 people, may request up to $2 million on their Operations and Safety Application, and up to $2 million on their Vehicle Acquisition request. However, should both grants be awarded, the applicant would have to choose which award to accept if the cumulative value of both applications exceeds the statutory limits.

Grant recipients must share in the costs of the projects funded under this grant program as required by 15 U.S.C. 2229(k)(1) and in accordance with applicable Federal regulations at 2 CFR part 200, but they are not required to have the cost-share at the time of application nor at the time of award. However, before a grant is awarded, FEMA validates that the grant recipient has provided sufficient evidence that the cost-share requirement will be fulfilled during the performance period of the grant award.

In general, an eligible applicant seeking a grant shall agree to make available non-Federal funds equal to not less than 15% of the grant awarded. However, the cost share will vary as follows based on the size of the population served by the organization, with exceptions to this general requirement for entities serving smaller communities:

• Applicants that serve populations of 20,000 or less shall agree to make available non-Federal funds in an amount equal to not less than 5% of the grant awarded.

• Applicants serving areas with populations above 20,000, but not more than 1 million, shall agree to make available non-Federal funds in an amount equal to not less than 10% of the grant awarded.

• Applicants serving areas with populations above 1 million shall agree to make available non-Federal funds in an amount equal to not less than 15% of the grant awarded.

The cost share for SFTAs will apply the requirements above based on the total population of the state.

The cost share for a regional application will apply the requirements above based on the aggregate population of the primary first due response areas of the host and participating partner organizations that execute a Memorandum of Understanding as described in Appendix B, Section J, Regional projects, of the FY 2021 AFG Program NOFO.

On a case-by-case basis, FEMA may allow a grant recipient that may already own assets (equipment or vehicles), acquired with non-Federal cash, to use the trade-in allowance/credit value of those assets as “cash” for the purpose of meeting the cost-share obligation of their AFG Program award. In-kind, cost-share matches are not allowed.

Grant recipients under this grant program must also agree to a maintenance of effort requirement as required by 15 U.S.C. 2229(k)(3) (referred to as a “maintenance of expenditure” requirement in that statute). A grant recipient shall agree to maintain during the term of the grant the applicant's aggregate expenditures relating to the activities allowable under the NOFO at not less than 80% of the average amount of such expenditures in the two fiscal years preceding the fiscal year in which the grant amounts are received.

In cases of demonstrated economic hardship, and at the request of the grant recipient, the Administrator of FEMA may waive or reduce a grant recipient's cost share requirement or maintenance of effort requirement. AFG Program applicants for FY 2021 must indicate at the time of application whether they are requesting a waiver and whether the waiver is for the cost share requirement, for the maintenance of effort requirement, or both. As required by statute, the Administrator of FEMA is required to establish guidelines for determining what constitutes economic hardship. FEMA has published these guidelines on FEMA's website at https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/2020-04/Eco_Hardship_Waiver_FPS_SAFER_AFG_IB_FINAL.pdf.

Before the start of the FY 2021 AFG Program application period, FEMA conducted applicant internet webinars to inform potential applicants about the AFG Program. In addition, FEMA provided applicants with information at the AFG Program website, https://www.fema.gov/grants/preparedness/firefighters, to help them prepare quality grant applications. The AFG Program Help Desk is staffed throughout the application period to assist applicants with the automated application process as well as answer any questions.

Applicants can reach the AFG Program Help Desk through a toll-free telephone number Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. AM-4:30 p.m. ET at 1-866- 274-0960 or electronic mail at firegrants@fema.dhs.gov.

Organizations may submit one application per application period in each of the three AFG Program activities ( e.g., one application for Operations and Safety, one for Vehicle Acquisition, and/or a separate application to be a Joint/Regional project host). If an organization submits more than one application for any single AFG Program activity ( e.g., two applications for Operations and Safety, two for Vehicles, etc.), either intentionally or unintentionally, both applications may be disqualified.

Applicants may access the grant application electronically at https://go.fema.gov. The application is also accessible from the U.S. Fire Administration's website at http://www.usfa.fema.gov and the Grants.gov website at http://www.grants.gov. New applicants must register and establish a username and password for secure access to the grant application. Previous AFG Program applicants must use their previously established username and password.

Applicants are expected to answer questions about their grant request that reflect the AFG Program funding priorities. In addition, each applicant must complete four separate narratives for each project or grant activity requested. Grant applicants will also provide relevant information about their organization's characteristics, call volume, and existing organizational capabilities.

Per 2 CFR 25.200, all Federal grant applicants and recipients must register at https://SAM.gov. SAM is the Federal Government's System for Award Management, and registration is free of charge. Applicants must maintain current information in SAM that is consistent with the data provided in their AFG Program grant application and in the Dun & Bradstreet database, which currently provides the official unique entity identifier, the Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number. Per 2 CFR 25.205, FEMA may not make a federal award or make any financial modifications to an existing award unless the applicant or grant recipient has complied with all applicable DUNS and SAM requirements. The grant applicant's banking information, EIN, organization/entity name, address and DUNS number must match the same information provided in SAM.

If there are any differences between the published AFG Program guidelines and the recommendations made by the CDP, FEMA must explain them and publish the information in the Federal Register prior to awarding any grant under the AFG Program. For FY 2021, FEMA accepted, and will implement, all but two of the CDP's recommendations for the prioritization of eligible activities.

The FY 2021 AFG Program NOFO contains some changes to definitions, descriptions, and priority categories. Changes to the FY 2021 AFG Program NOFO include:

• Under the PPE Activity:

Inclusion of pre-scoring emphasis for this Activity to ensure replacing out of service and non-compliant PPE is of high priority. Therefore, the following PPE priorities and definitions have been updated:

○ Increase supply for new hire/existing firefighters that do not have one set of turnout gear (PPE) or allocated seated position Self Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA). This includes replacing out of service PPE and SCBA as High Priority.

○ Replace in-service/in-use/damaged/unsafe/unrepairable PPE or SCBA to meet current standard as High Priority.

○ Replace in-service/in-use/expired/noncompliant PPE or SCBA to current standard as High Priority.

○ Upgrade technology to current standard as Low Priority.

Additional considerations for PPE and SCBA:

○ The applicant's call volume has a lesser impact on scoring and therefore the final funding decision.

• Under the Equipment Activity:

The following equipment priorities and definitions have been updated:

○ Obtain equipment to achieve minimum operational and deployment standards for existing missions as High Priority.

○ Replace non-compliant equipment to current standard as High Priority.

○ Obtain equipment for new mission as Medium Priority.

○ Upgrade technology to current standard as Low Priority.

• Under Supporting Definitions:

○ Paid on-call/stipend departments are added to the definition of Combination Fire Department.

○ Firefighting personnel definition is added.

• Under Modifications to Facility Activity:

○ New first-time installation of exhaust, sprinkler, carbon monoxide and/or smoke/fire detection systems are now listed as High Priority, while replacement or update/upgrade to existing systems is considered Low Priority.

• Under Equipment Activity List:

○ Respirator decontamination system is added as Medium Priority.

• Under Additions to the Application:

○ Question about frequency of live fire training is added for statistical purposes only.

○ Question about self-inflicted fatalities within the department is added for statistical purposes only.

○ Question regarding quantity of equipped Advanced Life Support Response vehicles (transport and non-transport) is added.

• Under Allocations and Restrictions of Available Grant Funds by Organization Type:

○ Outline the funding available for Micro Grants applications.

• Under Application Tips:

○ Recommendation to consider non-Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) when recipients purchase new protective gear.

• Under Micro Grants:

○ Funding allocation for Micro Grants was updated. Of the 25% allocated to each of the career, combination, and volunteer departments, FEMA will aim to fund no less than 25% of the allocation for Micro Grants.

• Proposed changes to reduce the size of the Micro Grant applications were not adopted for the FY 2021 application cycle.

• Proposed change that all items that are PFAS free receiving higher funding priority was not adopted for the FY 2021 application cycle.

Authority : 15 U.S.C. 2229.