I. Abstract

The Board for International Food and Agricultural Development (BIFAD) is a seven-member, presidentially appointed advisory board to USAID established in 1975 under Title XII of the Foreign Assistance Act, as amended, to ensure that USAID brings the assets of U.S. universities to bear on development challenges in agriculture and food security and supports their representation in USAID programming. BIFAD convenes diverse thought leadership through its public meetings around emerging issues related to food security, agricultural development, and nutrition. BIFAD has a strong interest in engaging with a broad and diverse stakeholder community, ensuring diverse participation in its events, and understanding how its public events and commissioned materials are used. A BIFAD support mechanism, implemented by Tetra Tech, also seeks to understand how effectively it is providing support to new BIFAD members through its orientation program.

The following six forms were developed:

1. Opt-in process for individuals electing to join a stakeholder database for Board for International Food and Agricultural Development (BIFAD), to receive occasional updates about BIFAD-led events and resources. for the stakeholder database and to better understand the types of participants reached through BIFAD activities. This information is important as BIFAD and USAID strive to diversify outreach of these activities.

2. An event registration form to facilitate the registration process for events hosted or co-hosted by the Board for International Food and Agricultural Development (BIFAD). This data will be collected by the BIFAD Support Contract implementer, Tetra Tech (as required in the Activity Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan) to facilitate event registration and to better understand the types of participants reached through BIFAD events. This information is important as BIFAD and USAID strive to diversify outreach of these activities.

3. A form to collect participant feedback following events hosted or co-hosted by the Board for International Food and Agricultural Development (BIFAD), related to participant reactions/level of satisfaction and intent to apply information to their work. This data will be collected by the BIFAD Support Contract implementer, Tetra Tech (as required in the Activity Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan) to inform BIFAD and USAID about participant engagement in BIFAD-supported activities.

4. A form to measure participant feedback before and after the new-member orientation process for the Board for International Food and Agricultural Development (BIFAD). The surveys will be administered to new BIFAD members with data collected by the BIFAD Support Contract implementer, Tetra Tech (as required in the Activity Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan) and maintained by Tetra Tech according to privacy and information protection protocols. This information is important as BIFAD and USAID strive to strengthen the new member orientation experience for the Board.

5. A form to collect information necessary when coordinating with speakers and authors for BIFAD-supported events and reports, while also collecting data to understand how well BIFAD is engaging a diverse community of experts. All speakers and authors will be asked to complete the survey with data collected by the BIFAD Support Contract implementer, Tetra Tech (as required in the Activity Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan) and maintained by Tetra Tech according to privacy and information protection protocols. This information is important as BIFAD and USAID strive to diversify engagement and to consistently collect information needed for planning and coordination with event speakers.

6. A form to collect information about BIFAD event participants' or report/product users' intent to use the information presented to inform their work, teaching, or research.

Electronic. The data will be collected and maintained by the BIFAD Support Contract implementer, Tetra Tech, Inc., as per the Activity Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan.

Title: BIFAD Stakeholder Database Opt-in Form.

OMB Number: Not yet known.

Expiration Date: Not yet known.

Type of Request: New collection.

Form Number: Not yet known.

Affected Public: Individuals.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 1,000.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 50.

Title: BIFAD Event Registration Form.

OMB Number: Not yet known.

Expiration Date: Not yet known.

Type of Request: New collection.

Form Number: Not yet known.

Affected Public: Individuals.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 1,000.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 80.

Title: BIFAD Post-Event Feedback Survey.

OMB Number: Not yet known.

Expiration Date: Not yet known.

Type of Request: New collection.

Form Number: Not yet known.

Affected Public: Individuals.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 500.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 40 hours.

Title: BIFAD New Member Orientation Survey.

OMB Number: Not yet known.

Expiration Date: Not yet known.

Type of Request: New collection.

Form Number: Not yet known.

Affected Public: Individuals.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 14.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 2.1.

Title: BIFAD Speaker Information Form.

OMB Number: Not yet known.

Expiration Date: Not yet known.

Type of Request: New collection.

Form Number: Not yet known.

Affected Public: Individuals.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 30.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 4.5.

Title: BIFAD Product Feedback Form.

OMB Number: Not yet known.

Expiration Date: Not yet known.

Type of Request: New collection.

Form Number: Not yet known.

Affected Public: Individuals.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 500.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 25.

Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of USAID, including whether the information collected has practical utility; (2) the accuracy of USAID's estimate of the burden (including both hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents.

Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection. The comments will also become a matter of public record.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) Action Plan  1 was developed after a 2012 workshop. The Action Plan informed USDA's commitments in the first National Action Plan for Combating Antibiotic Resistant Bacteria. 2 Over the last decade, the USDA has learned more about AMR and discovered challenges for furthering antimicrobial stewardship and agricultural science on AMR across the One Health interfaces of food safety, animal and human health, and the environment.

The USDA will be holding a public meeting to share with the public what has been learned and the challenges for furthering antimicrobial stewardship and agricultural science on AMR across the One Health interfaces of food safety, animal and human health, and the environment, including crops and wildlife. The Department is interested in feedback from the public as to what has been learned in the past decade and future planned activities in AMR and One Health. The meeting will be open to the public via Zoom and teleconference. A preregistered public comment session will also be held during the meeting.

Registration: This meeting is open to the public via Zoom and by telephone. For Zoom and teleconference details, you must register at https://www.zoomgov.com/webinar/register/WN_LFLkbcWuTdqGT0wxBZyuOQ. Registration by August 23, 2022, is required for members of the public who wish to speak during the public comment period. We will ask that comments be limited to 5 minutes. Members of the public will be heard in the order in which they pre-registered.

Public comment: Written comments by attendees or other interested stakeholders will be welcomed for the public record before and up to 2 weeks following the virtual meeting or by close of business Tuesday, September 13, 2022. All written comments must be sent to usdaamrpublicmeeting@usda.gov. Please refer to Docket No. APHIS-2022-0027 when submitting your comments.

Accessibility: If you require special accommodations, such as a sign language interpreter, please contact usdaamrpublicmeeting@usda.gov.

As agricultural producers and companies deal with the continued impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, ocean carriers' poor service and refusal to serve customers, including refusing to provide and ship containers, have exacerbated existing challenges. Specifically, ocean carriers have made fewer shipping containers available for U.S. agricultural commodities, repeatedly changed return dates, and charged unjust fees. These same ocean carriers have short-circuited the pathways typically used to make shipping containers available to be filled with agricultural and other goods, and they have subsequently rushed these containers back to foreign ports empty. These trends have and continue to be seen at several U.S. ports, including but not limited to the Port of Oakland, the Port of Seattle, and the Port of Tacoma, where many ocean carriers have partially or completely suspended their services. Historically, approximately 60 percent of the products marketed through the Port of Oakland were agricultural commodities. Now, because of ocean carriers' disruptive behavior, some American-grown agricultural commodities have faced severe challenges in reaching their markets. Containerized exports of agricultural goods fell by 17 percent from California ports, costing California agriculture an estimated $2.1 billion May to September 2021, 1 with a more severe decline of 34 percent for the Port of Oakland. Similar challenges exist at the ports managed by the NWSA in Washington, where congestion-induced impacts to vessel schedules have made it difficult for agricultural goods to be loaded on ships at the export terminals. Containerized exports of agricultural commodities from Seattle are down 30 percent during the last 6 months of 2021 while empty shipping containers leaving the Port of Seattle have increased by a similar percentage.

In accordance with 15 U.S.C. 714c, the Secretary is using CCC funds to assist owners of agricultural commodities in shipping domestic agricultural commodities out of the Port of Oakland and NWSA. Funds available to CCC will be used as authorized by section 5(b) of the CCC Charter Act (15 U.S.C. 714c(b)). This authority will be used to assist in making available materials and facilities in connection with the marketing of agricultural commodities. It will assist owners of U.S. agricultural commodities with ongoing market disruptions and facilitate the recovery of shipping and other logistical services required to bring domestically produced agricultural commodities to markets.

Specifically, FSA will provide a $125 per container payment to partially assist agricultural commodity owners with the additional logistical expenses associated with picking up empty shipping containers at the Port of Oakland to be filled with agricultural commodities. The Port of Oakland has opened a 25-acre temporary terminal to prepare and ease the provision of empty containers to be filled, which will ultimately reduce congestion at the main terminal. Through its separate gate, this terminal will allow for quicker pickup of empty containers and provide a pathway to bypass the congestion at the main terminals. The separate gate will also provide for increased access to available equipment and ultimately help avoid fewer unpredictable congestion surcharges for trucks. Under normal circumstances empty containers would be easily available from ocean carriers at the regular terminals, the combination of congestion, potential for additional drayage, and the terminal fees will add cost to the agricultural commodity owners and necessitates the $125 per container payment.

Additionally, through the partnerships with both the Port of Oakland and NWSA, FSA will offer payments of $200 per container for filled dry containers and $400 per container for filled refrigerated containers (generally referred to as “reefer containers”) to owners who deliver such filled containers to designated temporary storage terminals. These payments will help address the logistical costs of moving a container twice—first to the preposition terminal, and second to the terminal loading the vessel—along with the costs associated with temporary storage. Prior to the recent unpredictable delivery and export windows, owners of agricultural commodities had been provided sufficient delivery windows and notice to deliver the agricultural commodities directly to the terminal that loads the vessel.

In each of these cases, the agricultural commodity owner will likely incur an extra charge for short distance transportation, or “drayage,” fees from the terminal operator or ocean carrier and daily storage for any prepositioned filled containers. The drayage alone is expected to range between $150 and $250 per container based on discussions with agricultural shippers operating in the Oakland, Seattle, and Tacoma regions. Temporary storage of filled containers is expected to cost about $50 per dry container per day and $200 for reefer containers. The per-container fee for reefer containers is higher, since reefer containers require additional electricity and labor costs, which directly result in higher storage and transportation costs. The value of CCAP for U.S. companies lies in the benefits of increasing the ability of moving containers to meet narrow and changing shipping windows provided by the ocean carriers. These payments will lessen the burden on owners to manage the logistical challenges and continue to move containers despite the service challenges. All payments to agricultural commodity owners will be made in arrears and verified with terminal records.

USDA will make payments as frequently as monthly to eligible owners or designated marketing agents of U.S. agricultural commodities based on the number of eligible shipping containers they picked up or stored starting retroactively back to March 1, 2022, through December 31, 2022, from eligible ports to ship agricultural commodities to their designated markets on container ships.

FSA is administering the direct payments under the general supervision and direction of the Deputy Administrator.

The following definitions apply to this notice:

Deputy Administrator means Deputy Administrator for Farm Programs, Farm Service Agency, U.S. Department of Agriculture, or their designee.

Designated marketing agent means an individual or entity that has explicit written permission to apply for CCAP from, and on behalf of, the owner of the agricultural commodities.

Owner means a business entity, including cooperative, handler, company, or exporter that is liable for and has ownership of the agricultural commodities in transit. Only one owner is allowed to apply for payment per container.

Picked up means the applicant picked up empty shipping containers from the designated port terminal to be filled with eligible agricultural commodities.

Stored means the applicant delivered the shipping container filled with eligible agricultural commodities to the designated port terminal for temporary storage at a designated storage terminal.

United States means all 50 states of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and any other territory or possession of the United States.

Eligible agricultural commodities are agricultural commodities (other than tobacco) that are grown or produced in the United States for food, feed, or fiber, and products made from those commodities, including forestry products, that are to be or were shipped in a shipping container picked up from the Port of Oakland or contained within a filled shipping container stored at the Port of Oakland or the NWSA locations from March 1, 2022, through December 31, 2022. A list of examples of eligible and ineligible commodities will be posted on the FSA website for CCAP.

To be eligible for a CCAP payment, each applicant must:

• Own domestically-grown or produced agricultural commodities or be the designated marketing agent of the owner;

• Have picked up containers from the Port of Oakland or stored containers at the Port of Oakland or NWSA and filled the containers with agricultural commodities that are grown or produced in the United States for food, feed, or fiber, and products made from those commodities;

• Have properly executed power of attorney or signature authority if representing an individual or entity;

• Submit completed application as specified in the Application Process section below; and

• Have a Unique Entity Identifier (created in and used by www.SAM.gov ).

FSA will accept applications from May 31, 2022 through January 31, 2023. To apply for CCAP, each eligible applicant must submit a completed form FSA-862, Commodity Container Assistance Program (CCAP) Application to provide the monthly number of containers picked up or stored by type of container and by port. Applicants may submit applications on a monthly basis, all at once at the end of CCAP, or for a combination of months, but applicants should not submit duplicate information for a month that has already been previously submitted. Applications should be submitted to the FSA National Office by email to the following email address: SM.FPAC.FSA.CCAP@usda.gov .

Applicants are to submit only one FSA-862 for all shipping containers picked up or stored and report the number of containers picked up from the specified port for the relevant month(s), regardless of the number of agricultural commodities that are packed and shipped out of the designated port. In other words, the application is based on the number of shipping containers picked up or stored and used for U.S. agricultural commodities, but it is not based on the type of agricultural commodity. Shipping containers that are filled with non-agricultural commodities are not eligible for CCAP payments. Revised applications will not be allowed without supporting documentation if the application has been approved for payment and any revised applications must be submitted no later than January 31, 2023. Subject to available funds, CCAP payments will not be issued until an applicant certifies the number of containers picked up or stored each month or group of months at the designated port, as applicable. The applicant must certify to the total number of containers picked up or stored by the application period deadline as specified in this document.

The number and type of shipping containers claimed on the FSA-862 will be as certified by the applicant and are subject to spot check. Applicants may also be asked to provide documentation of what agricultural commodity was loaded into the container in order to confirm that the shipping container was used for agricultural commodities.

If requested by FSA, the applicant must provide supporting documentation to verify the accuracy of information provided on the application, including to substantiate the number and type of shipping containers, ownership of the commodities, or authority to act as a designated marketing agent. If any supporting documentation is requested, the documentation must be submitted to FSA within 30 days from the request or the application will be disapproved by FSA.

Information and expert opinion from the Port of Oakland and the NWSA authorities, along with information associated with the logistics movement costs of different container types, were used to estimate the increased additional movement logistics costs associated with agricultural containerized exports.

Payments will be calculated based upon the port, whether containers are picked up or stored, and the type of containers (empty containers versus filled dry or reefer containers). The CCAP payment rate is on a per container basis as shown in the following table.

The CCAP payment will be calculated as follows:

Number of containers picked up from or stored in the designated port multiplied by the respective CCAP payment rate for that type of container.

For example, the owner of agricultural goods that are stored at the NWSA facility submits an application specifying 10 dry containers and 3 reefer containers for the month of March 2022. FSA calculates the payment by multiplying 10 × $200 for the dry containers, and 3 × $400 for the reefer containers, for a total payment of $3,200 for that month.

The temporary storage of a container should be reported only for the month that the container was delivered to the designated port terminal for temporary storage even if the storage period covers parts of more than one month. This is a one-time storage payment. It does not matter how long a container is stored. Therefore, the same container and shipment should not be included for a storage payment on an application more than once.

The applicant may be eligible to receive separate payments for the same container: Once for being picked up empty and later for being temporarily stored at a designated port. For example, if an almond producer picked up 10 empty containers in May to be filled with almonds from the designated terminal to provide empty containers at the Port of Oakland, that almond producer would be eligible to apply for the $125 per container payment for those 10 empty containers. If that same almond producer then immediately filled and shipped 5 of those containers directly through the export terminal, but the remaining 5 containers were filled and delivered to the designated terminal to be temporarily stored for a few days in June before being drayed to the export terminal and loaded in a vessel later in June, the almond producer would be eligible to apply for the $200 per container payment for the temporary storage of 5 containers in June (dry containers in this example). Only containers picked up or temporarily stored at the designated storage terminal are eligible, so even if the 5 containers that were exported in May were held for a few days at the export terminal, they would not be eligible for CCAP. In this example, FSA calculates the payment by multiplying 10 × $125 for picking up empty containers in May, and 5 × $200 for the temporary storage of dry containers in June, for a total payment of $2,250 ($1,250 for May and $1,000 for June).

In the event that any application for a CCAP payment resulted from erroneous information reported by the applicant, FSA will recalculate the payment, and the applicant must refund any excess payment to FSA, including interest to be calculated from the date of the disbursement to the applicant. If, for whatever reason, FSA determines that the applicant misrepresented the number and type of shipping containers, the application will be disapproved, and the applicant must refund the full CCAP payment to FSA with interest from the date of disbursement. Any required refunds must be resolved in accordance with 7 CFR part 3.

All applicants must provide the name and address of the entity receiving payment. Appeal regulations specified in 7 CFR parts 11 and 780 and equitable relief and finality provisions specified in 7 CFR part 718, subpart D, apply to determinations under CCAP. The determination of matters of general applicability that are not in response to, or result from, an individual set of facts in an individual participant's application for payment are not matters that can be appealed. Such matters of general applicability include, but are not limited to, the determination of applicable time periods and the payment calculation for CCAP.

Participants are required to retain documentation in support of their application for 3 years after the date of approval. Participants receiving CCAP payments or any other person that furnishes such information to USDA must permit authorized representatives of USDA or the Government Accountability Office, during regular business hours, to enter the participant's business and to inspect, examine, and to allow representatives to make copies of books, records, or other items for the purpose of confirming the accuracy of the information provided by the participant.

Applicants have a right to a decision in response to their application. If an applicant files a late CCAP application, the application will be considered a request to waive the deadline.

Requests to waive or modify program provisions, including requests to waive the deadline, are at the discretion of the Deputy Administrator. The Deputy Administrator has the authority to waive or modify application deadlines and other requirements or program provisions not specified in law in cases where the Deputy Administrator determines it is (1) equitable to do so and (2) where the lateness or failure to meet such other requirements or program provisions do not adversely affect the operation of CCAP.

Applicants who request to waive or modify CCAP provisions do not have a right to a decision on those requests, and the Deputy Administrator's refusal to exercise discretion on requests to waive or modify CCAP provisions will not be considered an adverse decision and is, by itself, not appealable.

The regulations governing offsets in 7 CFR part 3 apply to CCAP payments.

In either applying for or participating in CCAP, or both, the applicant is subject to laws against perjury (including but not limited to 18 U.S.C. 1621). If the applicant willfully makes and represents as true any verbal or written declaration, certification, statement, or verification that the applicant knows or believes not to be true, in the course of either applying for or participating in CCAP, or both, then the applicant may be found to be guilty of perjury. Except as otherwise provided by law, if guilty of perjury the applicant may be fined, imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both, regardless of whether the applicant makes such verbal or written declaration, certification, statement, or verification within or outside the United States.

In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), FSA is requesting comments from interested individuals and organizations on the information collection request associated with CCAP. After the 60-day period ends, the information collection request will be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for a 3-year approval. To start the CCAP information collection approval, prior to publishing this notice, FSA received emergency approval from OMB for 6 months.

Title: Commodity Container Assistance Program (CCAP).

OMB Control Number: 0560-0310.

Type of Request: New Collection.

Abstract: FSA will provide assistance to eligible owners or designated marketing agents of U.S. agricultural commodities using eligible shipping containers from the Port of Oakland and designated ports associated with the NWSA. The eligible owners or designated marketing agents must complete the form FSA-862, CCAP Application for FSA to qualify for CCAP payments and to calculate the CCAP payments based upon the port, type of service (temporary storage versus providing empty containers) and the type of the shipping containers (empty containers or filled dry or reefer containers). FSA may request additional supporting documents for verification of information on a completed CCAP Application.

For the following estimated total annual burden on respondents, the formula used to calculate the total burden hour is the estimated average time per response multiplied by the estimated total annual responses.

Estimate of Respondent Burden: Public reporting burden for this information collection is estimated to average 0.33 hours per response to include the time for reviewing instructions, searching for information, gathering and maintaining the data, and completing and reviewing the collection of information.

Type of Respondents: Businesses.

Estimated Annual Number of Respondents: 200.

Estimated Number of Responses Per Respondent: 8.

Estimated Total Annual Responses: 1,600.

Estimated Average Time Per Response: 0.33.

Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 528.

We are requesting comments on all aspects of this information collection to help us to:

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

(2) Evaluate the accuracy of FSA's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

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

(4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those that are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

All comments received in response to this document, including names and addresses when provided, will be a matter of public record. Comments will be summarized and included in the submission for Office of Management and Budget approval.

The environmental impacts have been considered in a manner consistent with the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321-4347), the regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), and the FSA regulations for compliance with NEPA (7 CFR part 799).

The purpose of CCAP is to establish a marketing assistance program to support agricultural commodity owners of U.S. agricultural commodities for pick up or temporary storage of eligible shipping containers from the Port of Oakland and NWSA from March 1, 2022, through December 31, 2022. The limited discretionary aspects of CCAP do not have the potential to impact the human environment as they are administrative. Accordingly, these discretionary aspects are covered by the Categorical Exclusions in 7 CFR 799.31(b)(6)(iii) that applies to price support programs.

No Extraordinary Circumstances (7 CFR 799.33) exist. As such, the implementation of CCAP and the participation in CCAP do not constitute major Federal actions that would significantly affect the quality of the human environment, individually or cumulatively. Therefore, FSA will not prepare an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement for this action and this document serves as documentation of the programmatic environmental compliance decision for this federal action.

The title and number of the Federal assistance programs, as found in the Assistance Listing, 2 to which this document applies is 10.966, Commodity Container Assistance Program (CCAP).

In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family or parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident.

Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (for example, braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or (844) 433-2774 (toll-free nationwide). Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English.

To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at https://www.usda.gov/oascr/how-to-file-a-program-discrimination-complaint and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by mail to: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or email: OAC@usda.gov.

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.

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

Title: Senior Farmers' Market Nutrition Program (SFMNP).

Form Number: FNS-683A (under OMB Control Number 0584-0594) is associated with this collection.

OMB Number: 0584-0541.

Expiration Date: December 31, 2022.

Type of Request: Revision of a currently approved collection.

Abstract: The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), created the Senior Farmers' Market Nutrition Program (SFMNP) in 2000 as a pilot program awarding grants to State agencies (including geographic States, U.S. Territories, and federally recognized Indian Tribal Organizations (ITOs)) on a competitive basis. The Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (2002 Farm Bill), Public Law 107-171, authorized the SFMNP, beginning Fiscal Year (FY) 2003, and gave USDA the authority to develop regulations for the SFMNP. These regulations are published at 7 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 249. The Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (2018 Farm Bill), Public Law 115-334, reauthorized the SFMNP through fiscal year 2023.

The purpose of the SFMNP is to provide resources in the form of fresh, nutritious, unprepared, locally grown fruits, vegetables, herbs, and honey from farmers' markets, roadside stands, and community supported agriculture (CSA) programs to low income seniors; to increase the domestic consumption of agricultural commodities by expanding or aiding in the expansion of domestic farmers' markets, roadside stands, and CSA programs; and to develop or aid in the development of new and additional farmers' markets, roadside stands, and CSA programs.

The 2018 Farm Bill and SFMNP regulations at 7 CFR part 249 require that certain program-related information be collected and that full and complete records concerning SFMNP operations are maintained. The information reporting and recordkeeping requirements are necessary to ensure appropriate and efficient management of the SFMNP program. These burden activities are covered by this Information Collection Request (ICR) which include requirements that involve the authorization and monitoring of State agencies; the certification of SFMNP participants; the nutrition education that is provided to participants; farmer, farmers' market, roadside stand, and CSA program authorization, training, monitoring, and management; and financial and participation data (using Senior Farmers Market Nutrition Program (SFMNP) Annual Financial and Program Data Report (FNS 683A), which is approved (both the form and its associated reporting burden) under OMB Control Number: 0584-0594 Food Programs Reporting System (FPRS), Expiration Date: 07/31/2023). The recordkeeping burden associated with this form is not approved under OMB Control Number 0584-0594. State agencies must maintain records in order to support data reported in FPRS, and the recordkeeping burden for such record maintenance is captured in this ICR, OMB Control Number: 0584-0541. State plans are the principal source of information about how each State agency operates its SFMNP. Information from participants and local agencies is collected through State-developed forms or Management Information Systems. The information collected is used by the Department of Agriculture/Food and Nutrition Service to manage, plan, evaluate, make decisions and report on SFMNP program operations. Along with the State Plans, State agencies also submit the Federal-State Supplemental Nutrition Programs Agreements (FNS-339) whose reporting and recordkeeping burden is associated and approved under OMB Control Number: 0584-0332, Expiration Date: 04/30/2022.

This information collection is requesting a revision in the burden hours due to program changes and adjustments that primarily reflect the inclusion of existing requirements that have been in use without PRA approval and are being added into this collection to correct this oversight, such as requirements related to the activities that authorized outlets need to perform in order to participate in the Program and the maintenance of records and systems by State and local agencies. This information collection is requesting a revision in the burden hours due to program changes and adjustments that also reflects expected decreases in the number of SFMNP participants; SFMNP authorized farmers, farmers' markets, roadside stands, and CSA programs (authorized outlets); and SFMNP local agencies.

The currently approved burden for this collection is 449,090. FNS estimates the new burden at 1,143,986 burden hours, which is an increase of 694,896. The currently approved total annual responses are 2,549,454; we are requesting 2,400,726, which is a decrease of 148,728 total annual responses.

Affected Public: Individual/Households; Business or Other For Profit; Not For Profit Organizations; State, Local and Tribal Government: Respondent groups identified include: (1) SFMNP participants who are low-income seniors; (2) authorized farmers, farmers' markets, roadside stands and CSA programs; (3) nonprofit businesses operating as local agencies; and (4) local and State agencies (including geographic States, U.S. Territories, and Indian Tribal Organizations (ITOs)) administering the Program).

Estimated Number of Respondents: The total estimated number of respondents is 746,264. This includes: 55 State agencies, 678 local agencies, 725,686 individuals/households (program recipients), 290 nonprofit business, and 19,555 authorized outlets.

Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: The total estimated number of responses per respondent for this collection is 3.22.

Estimated Total Annual Responses: 2,400,726. The estimated total for reporting is 1,671,921 while the estimated total for recordkeeping is 728,805.

Estimated Time per Response: The estimated time per response averages .48 hours for all participants. For the reporting and recordkeeping burden, the estimated time of response varies from approximately 1 minute to 40 hours depending on the respondent group.

Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 1,143,986 hours. The estimated total for reporting burden is 958,511 while the estimated total for recordkeeping is 185,474 burden hours.

See the table below for estimated total annual burden for each type of respondent.

The Forest Service's purpose for action is to consider approval of Stillwater Mining Company's East Boulder Plan of Operations Amendment 004 to expand operations on National Forest System lands in order to continue to develop and mine platinum and palladium deposits from the J-M Reef. The Forest Service purpose and need for action are established by the agency's responsibilities under the Organic Administration Act of 1897 (16 United States Code 478, 482, and 551) and the locatable minerals regulations at 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 228, subpart A, which set forth rules and procedures through which use of the surface of NFS lands in connection with operations authorized by the United States Mining Laws (30 United States Code 21-54), which confer a statutory right to enter upon the public lands to search for minerals, shall be conducted so as to minimize adverse environmental impacts on National Forest System lands surface.

The East Boulder Mine Amendment 004 project proposes continuation of mining operations by constructing a new tailings storage facility, waste rock storage area, and constructing supporting infrastructure or relocating existing infrastructure to support the expansion activities in the vicinity of the existing East Boulder Mine on National Forest System and private lands. The Plan of Operations incorporates closure and reclamation, monitoring, and mitigation activities throughout the life of the mine. Under the plan of operations, construction, operation, closure, and reclamation phases of the Amendment 004 project would take place over a period of approximately 20 years. Environmental monitoring and maintenance would continue for as long as needed to demonstrate that the site has been fully reclaimed.

Preliminary impacts were identified based on regulatory requirements, input from Forest Service Interdisciplinary Team and previous public involvement and collaboration related to mineral development projects. Preliminary impacts include:

Surface Water and Groundwater —Construction and operation of mine infrastructure may inpact water quality and quantity.

Public Health and Safety —Public health and safety could potentially be impacted throughout the life of the mine.

Wildlife —Construction activities and operations could affect wildlife species and habitats including fish such as Yellowstone cutthroat trout.

USDA Forest Service—Custer Gallatin National Forest and Montana Department of Environmental Quality.

Mary C. Erickson, Forest Supervisor, Custer Gallatin National Forest.

This notice of intent initiates the scoping process, which guides the development of the environmental impact statement. In this process the Agency is requesting comments on potential alternatives and impacts, and identification of any relevant information, studies or analyses of any kind concerning impacts affecting the quality of the human environment.

It is important that reviewers provide their comments at such times and in such manner that they are useful to the agency's preparation of the environmental impact statement. Therefore, comments should be provided prior to the close of the comment period and should clearly articulate the reviewer's concerns and contentions. Commenting during scoping and any other designated opportunity to comment provided by the Responsible Official will also establish standing to object once the final EIS and Draft Record of Decision has been published. Comments received in response to this solicitation, including names and addresses of those who comment, will be part of the public record for this proposed action. Comments submitted anonymously will be accepted and considered, however, they will not be used to establish standing for the objection process.

Department of Environmental Quality—Mine Operations and Reclamations Permit Amendment.

List of Petitions Received by EDA for Certification of Eligibility To Apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance [5/3/2022 through 5/20/2022] Firm name Firm address Date

Any party having a substantial interest in these proceedings may request a public hearing on the matter. A written request for a hearing must be submitted to the Trade Adjustment Assistance Division, Room 71030, Economic Development Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC 20230, no later than ten (10) calendar days following publication of this notice. These petitions are received pursuant to section 251 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended.

Please follow the requirements set forth in EDA's regulations at 13 CFR 315.8 for procedures to request a public hearing. The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance official number and title for the program under which these petitions are submitted is 11.313, Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms.

On March 15, 2022, Commerce published in the Federal Register the Preliminary Determination in this investigation. 1 The deadline for the final determination in this investigation is May 23, 2022.

On April 11, 2022, we issued a post-preliminary decision memorandum addressing a scope issue raised in the context of this and the companion countervailing duty investigation, in which we preliminarily found that it was unnecessary to alter the scope stated in the Initiation Notice. 2 We received case briefs addressing this preliminary scope decision from two importers of subject merchandise, Strato, Inc. (Strato) and Wabtec Corporation (Wabtec), on April 18, 2022, 3 and rebuttal comments from the petitioner on April 22, 2022. 4

We received no comments or case briefs addressing any of the other findings in the Preliminary Determination; therefore, there is no Issues and Decision Memorandum accompanying this notice.

The period of investigation is January 1, 2021, through June 30, 2021.

The products covered by this investigation are freight rail coupler systems and certain components thereof from China. For a complete description of the scope of this investigation, see the appendix to this notice.

In Commerce's Preliminary Determination, 5 we set aside a period of time for parties to raise issues regarding product coverage ( i.e., scope) in scope case briefs or other written comments on scope issues. As noted above, the petitioner and two interested parties, Strato and Wabtec, commented on the scope of the investigation as it appeared in the Initiation Notice   6 and Preliminary Determination. 7 For a summary of the product coverage comments and rebuttal comments, and an analysis of all comments received, see the final scope memorandum issued concurrently with this final determination. 8 For the reasons discussed in the final scope memorandum, Commerce is not modifying the scope language as it appeared in the Initiation Notice. See the final “Scope of the Investigation” in the appendix to this notice.

For the purposes of this final determination, consistent with the Preliminary Determination, 9 we relied solely on the application of AFA for the China-wide entity, pursuant to sections 776(a) and (b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Further, because no companies are eligible for a rate separate from the China-wide entity, we continue to find that all exporters of Chinese freight rail couplers are part of the China-wide entity. No interested party submitted comments on the Preliminary Determination. Thus, we made no changes to our analysis or to the China-wide entity's dumping margin for the final determination. A detailed discussion of our application of AFA is provided in the Preliminary Determination. 10

Because no Chinese exporters qualified for a separate rate, producer/exporter combination rates were not calculated for this final determination.

The final estimated weighted-average dumping margins are as follows:

Because Commerce continues to find that all Chinese exporters of freight rail couplers are part of the China-wide entity and continues to rely solely on the application of AFA for the China-wide entity, there are no calculations to disclose for this final determination.

As a result of our Preliminary Determination and pursuant to section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, Commerce will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to continue to suspend liquidation of subject merchandise as described in the “Scope of the Investigation” section entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption, on or after March 15, 2022, which is the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination in the Federal Register , at the cash deposit rate indicated above.

Pursuant to section 735(c)(1)(B)(ii) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(d), we will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit for such entries of merchandise equal to the amount by which the normal value exceeds the U.S. price as follows: (1) For all Chinese exporters of subject merchandise, the cash deposit rate will be equal to the estimated dumping margin established for the China-wide entity; and (2) for all third country exporters of subject merchandise, the cash deposit rate is also the cash deposit rate applicable to the China-wide entity. These suspension of liquidation instructions will remain in effect until further notice.

If the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) issues a final affirmative injury determination, we intend to issue an antidumping duty order and continue to require a cash deposit of estimated antidumping duties for such entries of subject merchandise in the amounts indicated above, in accordance with section 736(a) of the Act. If the ITC determines that material injury, or threat of material injury, does not exist, this proceeding will be terminated, and all estimated duties deposited as a result of the suspension of liquidation will be refunded or canceled.

In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, we will notify the ITC of our final affirmative determination of sales at LTFV. Because the final determination in this proceeding is affirmative, in accordance with section 735(b) of the Act, the ITC will make its final determination as to whether the domestic industry in the United States is materially injured, or threatened with material injury, by reason of imports of freight rail couplers from China no later than 45 days after our final determination.

If the ITC determines that material injury or threat of material injury does not exist, the proceeding will be terminated and all cash deposits will be refunded or canceled, as Commerce determines to be appropriate. If the ITC determines that such injury does exist, Commerce intends to issue an antidumping duty order directing CBP to assess, upon further instruction by Commerce, antidumping duties on all imports of the subject merchandise that are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the effective date of the suspension of liquidation, as discussed above in the “Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation” section.

In the event that the ITC issues a final negative injury determination, this notice will serve as the only reminder to parties subject to an 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/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.

This determination is issued and published in pursuant to sections 735(d) and 777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.210(c).

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

Authorization for incidental takings shall be granted if NMFS finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or stock(s) and will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or stock(s) for taking for subsistence uses (where relevant). Further, NMFS must prescribe the permissible methods of taking and other “means of effecting the least practicable adverse impact” on the affected species or stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on the availability of the species or stocks for taking for certain subsistence uses (referred to in shorthand as “mitigation”); and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of the takings are set forth. The definitions of all applicable MMPA statutory terms cited above are included in the relevant sections below.

To comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. ) and NOAA Administrative Order (NAO) 216-6A, NMFS must review our proposed action ( i.e., the issuance of an IHA) with respect to potential impacts on the human environment.

This action is consistent with categories of activities identified in Categorical Exclusion B4 (IHAs with no anticipated serious injury or mortality) of the Companion Manual for NOAA Administrative Order 216-6A, which do not individually or cumulatively have the potential for significant impacts on the quality of the human environment and for which we have not identified any extraordinary circumstances that would preclude this categorical exclusion. Accordingly, NMFS has preliminarily determined that the issuance of the proposed IHA qualifies to be categorically excluded from further NEPA review.

NMFS will review all comments submitted in response to this notice prior to concluding our NEPA process or making a final decision on the IHA request.

On December 17, 2021, NMFS received a request from PCW for an IHA to take marine mammals incidental to marine site characterization surveys for Phase 1 of the New England Wind Project located in the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) Lease Area OCS-A0534 (Lease Area) in waters offshore of Massachusetts south through Long Island, New York. Following NMFS' review of the draft application, revised versions were submitted on February 14, 2022 and March 25, 2022. The March 2022 revised version was deemed adequate and complete March 25, 2022. PCW's request is for take of 16 species of marine mammals, by Level B harassment only. Neither PCW nor NMFS expects serious injury or mortality to result from this activity and, therefore, an IHA is appropriate. The proposed IHA would be effective for one year upon issuance.

New England Wind is located in the BOEM Lease Area OCS-A0534 and is comprised of Phase 1 PCW and Phase 2 Commonwealth Wind (CW), along with associated offshore and onshore cabling, onshore substations, and onshore operations and maintenance (O&M) facilities (Figure1). Phase 2 is not part of this application. As part of its overall marine site characterization survey operations, PCW proposes to conduct high-resolution geophysical (HRG) surveys in the Lease Area.

The purpose of the marine site characterization surveys are to obtain an assessment of seabed (geophysical, geotechnical, and geohazard), ecological, and archeological conditions within the footprint of a planned offshore wind facility development area. Underwater sound resulting from PCW's proposed site characterization survey activities, specifically HRG surveys, has the potential to result in incidental take of marine mammals in the form of Level B harassment.

PCW anticipates that HRG survey activities would occur on approximately 636 vessel days, with an assumed daily survey distance of 80 km per vessel. This schedule is based on assumed 24-hour operations. Each day that a vessel surveys approximately 80 km within 24 hours would count as a single survey day, e.g., two survey vessels operating on the same day would count as two survey days. The use of concurrently surveying vessels would facilitate completion of all 636 vessel days within one year. PCW proposes to begin survey activities upon receipt of an IHA and continue for up to one year (though the actual duration will likely be shorter, particularly given the use of multiple vessels). The IHA would be effective for one year from the date of issuance. Site characterization activities within the Potential Survey Area are anticipated to begin May 2022 and will last up to one year with a total of 636 active sound source days. The number of active sound source days was calculated by dividing the total survey trackline (50,880 kilometers (km)) by the approximate survey distance per day (80 km) anticipated to be achieved. Survey operations are proposed to be conducted 24 hours per day to minimize the overall duration of survey activities and the associated period of potential impact on marine species. While the HRG survey activities are estimated to occur over the course of a full year, the actual survey duration will be shorter given the use of multiple vessels.

HRG survey activities are proposed to occur in both Federal offshore waters (including Lease Area OCS-A 0534) and along potential OECCs in both Federal and State nearshore waters of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, and New York. The proposed survey will be acquired within the area illustrated in Figure 1. Water depths in the lease area range from about 35 to 60 meters (m) (115 to 197 feet (ft)). Water depths along the potential OECCs range from 2.5 m to >35 m (8 to >115 ft).

PCW proposes to conduct HRG survey operations, which may include single and multibeam depth sounding, seafloor imaging, and shallow and medium penetration sub-bottom profiling. The HRG surveys may be conducted using any or all of the following equipment types: Side scan sonar, multibeam echosounder, magnetometers and gradiometers, parametric sub-bottom profiler (SBP), compressed high intensity radar pulse (CHIRP) SBP, boomers, or sparkers. Vessels would generally conduct survey effort at a transit speed of approximately 4 knots (kn; 2.1 meters per sec, m/s), which equates to 110 km per 24-hr period. However, based on past survey experience ( i.e., knowledge of typical daily downtime due to weather, system malfunctions, etc.), PCW assumes 80 km as the average distance surveyed per 24 hours. On this basis (and as mentioned previously), a total of 636 survey days are expected.

To facilitate completion of all 636 survey days across the survey area (see Figure 1) within one year, PCW proposes to use multiple vessels to acquire the HRG survey data. Up to three HRG vessels are currently proposed to operate concurrently within the survey area. HRG survey activities will be conducted by vessels that can accomplish the survey goals in specific survey areas. Each vessel will maintain both the required course and a survey speed required to cover approximately 80 km (43 nm) per day during line acquisition, with consideration to weather delays, equipment maintenance, and crew availability. Vessel survey speed is anticipated to be approximately 4 knots (2.1 m/s).

Acoustic sources planned for use during the proposed HRG survey activities include the following (operating frequencies are presented in hertz (Hz) and kilohertz (kHz):

Shallow penetration non-impulsive, non-parametric sub-bottom profilers ( i.e., CHIRP SBPs) are used to map the near-surface stratigraphy (top 0 to 5 m (0 to 16 feet (ft))) of sediment below seabed). A CHIRP system emits sonar pulses that increase in frequency from about 2 to 20 kHz over time. The frequency range can be adjusted to meet project variables. Rather than being towed, these sources are typically mounted on a pole or the hull of the vessel, reducing the likelihood that an animal would be exposed to the signal; and,

Medium penetration, impulsive sources ( i.e., boomers and sparker) are used to map deeper subsurface stratigraphy. A boomer is a broadband source operating in the 3.5 Hz to 10 kHz frequency range. Sparkers create omnidirectional acoustic pulses from 50 Hz to 4 kHz that can penetrate several hundred meters into the seafloor. These sources are typically towed behind the vessel.

Operation of the following survey equipment types is not expected to present reasonable risk of marine mammal take, and will not be discussed further beyond the brief summaries provided below.

• Non-impulsive, parametric SBPs are used for providing high density data in sub-bottom profiles that are typically required for cable routes, very shallow water, and archaeological surveys. These sources generate short, very narrow-beam (1° to 3.5°) signals at high frequencies (generally around 85-100 kHz). The narrow beamwidth significantly reduces the potential that a marine mammal could be exposed to the signal, while the high frequency of operation means that the signal is rapidly attenuated in seawater. These sources are typically mounted on the hull of the vessel or deployed from a side pole rather than towed behind the vessel.

• Ultra-short baseline (USBL) positioning systems are used to provide high accuracy ranges by measuring the time between the acoustic pulses transmitted by the vessel transceiver and a transponder (or beacon) necessary to produce the acoustic profile. It is a two-component system with a pole-mounted transceiver and one or several transponders mounted on other survey equipment. USBLs are expected to produce extremely small acoustic propagation distances in their typical operating configuration.

• Single and Multibeam echosounders (MBESs) are used to determine water depths and general bottom topography. The proposed MBESs all have operating frequencies >180kHz and are therefore outside the general hearing range of marine mammals.

• Side scan sonar (SSS) is used for seabed sediment classification purposes and to identify natural and man-made acoustic targets on the seafloor. The proposed SSSs all have operating frequencies >180 kHz and are therefore outside the general hearing range of marine mammals.

HRG survey activities will occur in discrete segments corresponding to the following general areas:

• Lease Area OCS-A 0534—Inclusive of potential wind turbine generator (WTG) locations, electrical service platform (ESP) location(s), and inter-array cable corridors; and

• OECC route—One or more potential OECC routes through Federal and State waters located within the Potential Survey Area from northern Massachusetts to Long Island as shown in Figure 1.

The maximum survey area has been selected to provide operational flexibility and to cover the possibility of multiple landfall locations associated with the OECC. Track line spacing for HRG survey activities will align with BOEM Guidelines for Providing Archaeological and Historic Property Information pursuant to 30 CFR part 585 (March 2017) and for Providing Geophysical, Geotechnical, and Geohazard Information pursuant to 30 CFR part 585 (July 2015) (BOEM 2015). Surveys are planned to support standard geophysical, geotechnical, and geohazard investigations as well as potential unexploded ordnance (UXO) and benthic habitat studies.

Proposed mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures are described in detail later in this document (please see Proposed Mitigation and Proposed Monitoring and Reporting).

Sections 3 and 4 of the application summarize available information regarding status and trends, distribution and habitat preferences, and behavior and life history, of the potentially affected species. Additional information regarding population trends and threats may be found in NMFS' Stock Assessment Reports (SARs; www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessments ) and more general information about these species ( e.g., physical and behavioral descriptions) may be found on NMFS' website ( www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species ).

Table 2 lists all species or stocks for which take is expected and proposed to be authorized for this action, and summarizes information related to the population or stock, including regulatory status under the MMPA and Endangered Species Act (ESA) and potential biological removal (PBR), where known. For taxonomy, NMFS follows the Committee on Taxonomy (2021). PBR is defined by the MMPA as the maximum number of animals, not including natural mortalities, that may be removed from a marine mammal stock while allowing that stock to reach or maintain its optimum sustainable population (as described in NMFS' SARs). While no mortality is anticipated or would be authorized here, PBR and annual serious injury and mortality from anthropogenic sources are included as gross indicators of the status of the species and other threats.

Marine mammal abundance estimates presented in this document represent the total number of individuals that make up a given stock or the total number estimated within a particular study or survey area. NMFS' stock abundance estimates for most species represent the total estimate of individuals within the geographic area, if known, that comprises that stock. For some species, this geographic area may extend beyond U.S. waters. All managed stocks in this region are assessed in NMFS' U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico SARs. All values presented in Table 2 are the most recent available at the time of publication and are available in the Draft 2021 SARs (Hayes et al., 2021), available at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports.

As indicated above, all 16 species in Table 2 temporally and spatially co-occur with the activity to the degree that take is reasonably likely to occur. In addition to what is included in Sections 3 and 4 of the application, the SARs, and NMFS' website, further detail informing the baseline for select species ( i.e., information regarding current Unusual Mortality Events (UME) and important habitat areas) is provided below.

The North Atlantic right whale (NARW) is considered one of the most critically endangered populations of large whales in the world and has been listed as a Federal endangered species since 1970. The Western Atlantic stock is considered depleted under the MMPA (Hayes et al. 2021). There is a recovery plan (NOAA Fisheries 2017) for the NARW and recently there was a five-year review of the species (NOAA Fisheries 2017). The NARW had a 2.8 percent recovery rate between 1990 and 2011 (Hayes et al. 2021).

Elevated NARW mortalities have occurred since June 7, 2017, along the U.S. and Canadian coast with the leading category for the cause of death for this UME as “human interaction,” specifically from entanglements or vessel strikes. As of April 11, 2022, a total of 34 confirmed dead stranded whales (21 in Canada; 13 in the United States) have been documented. The cumulative total number of animals in the NARW UME has been updated to 50 individuals to include both the confirmed mortalities (dead stranded or floaters) (n=34) and seriously injured free-swimming whales (n=16) to better reflect the confirmed number of whales likely removed from the population during the UME and more accurately reflect the population impacts. More information is available online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2017-2022-north-atlantic-right-whale-unusual-mortality-event.

NMFS' regulations at 50 CFR part 224.105 designated nearshore waters of the Mid-Atlantic Bight as Mid-Atlantic U.S. Seasonal Management Areas (SMAs) for North Atlantic right whales in 2008. SMAs were developed to reduce the threat of collisions between ships and North Atlantic right whales around their migratory route and calving grounds. The survey area overlaps with the Cape Cod Bay (active between January 1 and May 15), Off Race Point (active between March 1 and April 30), Great South Channel (active between April 1 and July 31), and Mid-Atlantic Migratory (active between November 1 and April 30) SMAs.

The proposed survey area also partially overlaps with the North Atlantic right whale feeding Biologically Important Areas (BIAs). One feeding BIA is located north of the HRG Survey Area at Cape Cod Bay and Massachusetts Bay and occurs from February-April, and another is located northeast of the HRG Survey Area in the Great South Channel, from April-June. The proposed survey also overlaps with part of the migratory corridor BIA for North Atlantic right whales (March-April and November-December) that extends from the coast to the continental shelf break, and from Massachusetts to Florida (LeBrecque et al., 2015). A map showing designated BIAs is available at: https://cetsound.noaa.gov/biologically-important-area-map. In addition to currently designated feeding BIAs, Oleson et al. (2020) identified the area south of Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket, referred to as “South of the Islands,” as a newer, year-round, core North Atlantic right whale foraging habitat. The South of the Islands area is also within the bounds of the proposed survey area.

There are two designated critical habitat areas for the NARW, one of which overlaps the project area: The Gulf of Maine/Georges Bank region is located northeast of the HRG survey area, but parts of it overlap the proposed survey area, and the southeast calving grounds from North Carolina to Florida (NMFS 2016a) which does not overlap the survey area. All vessels greater than 19.8 m (65 ft) in overall length must operate at speeds of 10 knots (5.1 meters per second (m/s)) or less within these areas during specific time periods.

NMFS recently evaluated the status of the species, and on September 8, 2016, NMFS divided the species into 14 distinct population segments (DPS), removed the species-level listing, and in its place listed four DPSs as endangered and one DPS as threatened (81 FR 62260; September 8, 2016). The remaining nine DPSs were not listed. The West Indies DPS, which is not listed under the ESA, is the only DPS of humpback whale that is expected to occur in the survey area. Bettridge et al. (2015) estimated the size of this population at 12,312 (95 percent CI 8,688-15,954) whales in 2004-05, which is consistent with previous population estimates of approximately 10,000-11,000 whales (Stevick et al., 2003; Smith et al., 1999) and the increasing trend for the West Indies DPS (Bettridge et al., 2015). Whales occurring in the survey area are considered to be from the West Indies DPS, but are not necessarily from the Gulf of Maine feeding population managed as a stock by NMFS. Barco et al., 2002 estimated that, based on photo-identification, only 39 percent of individual humpback whales observed along the mid- and south Atlantic U.S. coast are from the Gulf of Maine stock. The northern and most eastern portions of the proposed survey area partially overlap with the humpback whale feeding BIA (March through December), which extends throughout the Gulf of Maine, Stellwagen Bank, and Great South Channel (LeBrecque et al., 2015).

Since January 2016, elevated humpback whale mortalities have occurred along the Atlantic coast from Maine to Florida. Partial or full necropsy examinations have been conducted on approximately half of the 158 known cases (as of April 11, 2022). Of the whales examined, about 50 percent had evidence of human interaction, either ship strike or entanglement. While a portion of the whales have shown evidence of pre-mortem vessel strike, this finding is not consistent across all whales examined and more research is needed. NOAA is consulting with researchers that are conducting studies on the humpback whale populations, and these efforts may provide information on changes in whale distribution and habitat use that could provide additional insight into how these vessel interactions occurred. More information is available at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2016-2022-humpback-whale-unusual-mortality-event-along-atlantic-coast.

Since January 2017, elevated minke whale mortalities have occurred along the Atlantic coast from Maine through South Carolina, with a total of 122 strandings (as of April 11, 2022). This event has been declared a UME. Full or partial necropsy examinations were conducted on more than 60 percent of the whales. Preliminary findings in several of the whales have shown evidence of human interactions or infectious disease, but these findings are not consistent across all of the whales examined, so more research is needed. More information is available at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-life-distress/2017-2022-minke-whale-unusual-mortality-event-along-atlantic-coast.

The northern and most eastern portions of the proposed survey area partially overlap with one of the minke whale feeding BIAs (March through November), which includes the southern and southwestern section of the Gulf of Maine, including Georges Bank, the Great South Channel, Cape Cod Bay and Massachusetts Bay, Stellwagen Bank, Cape Anne, and Jeffreys Ledge (LeBrecque et al., 2015).

The survey area is flanked by two BIAs for feeding fin whales, the area to the northeast of Cape Cod is considered a BIA year-round, while the area off the tip of Long Island overlapping with the southwest area of the HRG survey area is a BIA from March to October (LaBrecque et al. 2015). Both of these BIAs are located within the proposed survey area. For sei whales, a BIA for feeding occurs both to the north and to the east of the HRG survey area from May through November (LaBrecque et al. 2015). A portion of the BIA is located within the proposed survey area.

Since July 2018, elevated numbers of harbor seal and gray seal mortalities have occurred across Maine, New Hampshire and Massachusetts. This event was declared a UME. Additionally, stranded seals have shown clinical signs as far south as Virginia, although not in elevated numbers, therefore the UME investigation now encompasses all seal strandings from Maine to Virginia. Ice seals (harp and hooded seals) have also been stranding with clinical signs, again not in elevated numbers, and those two seal species have also been added to the UME investigation. A total of 3,152 reported strandings (of all species) had occurred from July 1, 2018, through March 13, 2020. Full or partial necropsy examinations have been conducted on some of the seals and samples have been collected for testing. Based on tests conducted thus far, the main pathogen found in the seals is phocine distemper virus. NMFS is performing additional testing to identify any other factors that may be involved in this UME. Closure of this UME is pending. Information on this UME is available online at: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/new-england-mid-atlantic/marine-life-distress/2018-2020-pinniped-unusual-mortality-event-along.

Hearing is the most important sensory modality for marine mammals underwater, and exposure to anthropogenic sound can have deleterious effects. To appropriately assess the potential effects of exposure to sound, it is necessary to understand the frequency ranges marine mammals are able to hear. Current data indicate that not all marine mammal species have equal hearing capabilities ( e.g., Richardson et al., 1995; Wartzok and Ketten, 1999; Au and Hastings, 2008). To reflect this, Southall et al. (2007) recommended that marine mammals be divided into functional hearing groups based on directly measured or estimated hearing ranges on the basis of available behavioral response data, audiograms derived using auditory evoked potential techniques, anatomical modeling, and other data. Note that no direct measurements of hearing ability have been successfully completed for mysticetes ( i.e., low-frequency cetaceans). Subsequently, NMFS (2018) described generalized hearing ranges for these marine mammal hearing groups. Generalized hearing ranges were chosen based on the approximately 65 decibel (dB) threshold from the normalized composite audiograms, with the exception for lower limits for low-frequency cetaceans where the lower bound was deemed to be biologically implausible and the lower bound from Southall et al. (2007) retained. Marine mammal hearing groups and their associated hearing ranges are provided in Table 3.

The pinniped functional hearing group was modified from Southall et al. (2007) on the basis of data indicating that phocid species have consistently demonstrated an extended frequency range of hearing compared to otariids, especially in the higher frequency range (Hemilä et al., 2006; Kastelein et al., 2009).

For more detail concerning these groups and associated frequency ranges, please see NMFS (2018) for a review of available information. Sixteen marine mammal species (14 cetacean and 2 pinniped (both phocid) species) have the reasonable potential to co-occur with the proposed survey activities. Please refer to Table 2. Of the cetacean species that may be present, six are classified as low-frequency cetaceans ( i.e., all mysticete species), seven are classified as mid-frequency cetaceans ( i.e., all delphinid species and the sperm whale), and one is classified as a high-frequency cetacean ( i.e., harbor porpoise).

This section includes a summary and discussion of the ways that PCW's specified activity may impact marine mammals and their habitat. Detailed descriptions of the potential effects of similar specified activities have been provided in other recent Federal Register notices, including for survey activities using the same methodology, over a similar amount of time, in Atlantic waters. ( e.g., 82 FR 20563, May 3, 2017; 85 FR 36537, June 17, 2020; 85 FR 37848, June 24, 2020; 85 FR 48179, August 10, 2020, 86 FR 11239, February 24, 2021; 86 FR 28061, May 25, 2021). No significant new information is available, and we refer the reader to these documents rather than repeating the details here. The Estimated Take section includes a quantitative analysis of the number of individuals that are expected to be taken by PCW's activity. The Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination section considers the potential effects of the specified activity, the Estimated Take section, and the Proposed Mitigation section, to draw conclusions regarding the likely impacts of these activities on the reproductive success or survivorship of individuals and how those impacts on individuals are likely to impact marine mammal species or stocks.

This subsection contains a brief technical background on sound, on the characteristics of certain sound types, and on metrics used in this proposal inasmuch as the information is relevant to the specified activity and to the summary of the potential effects of the specified activity on marine mammals. For general information on sound and its interaction with the marine environment, please see, e.g., Au and Hastings (2008); Richardson et al. (1995); Urick (1983).

Sound travels in waves, the basic components of which are frequency, wavelength, velocity, and amplitude. Frequency is the number of pressure waves that pass by a reference point per unit of time and is measured in hertz or cycles per second. Wavelength is the distance between two peaks or corresponding points of a sound wave (length of one cycle). Higher frequency sounds have shorter wavelengths than lower frequency sounds, and typically attenuate (decrease) more rapidly, except in certain cases in shallower water. Amplitude is the height of the sound pressure wave or the “loudness” of a sound and is typically described using the relative unit of the decibel. A sound pressure level (SPL) in dB is described as the ratio between a measured pressure and a reference pressure (for underwater sound, this is 1 microPascal (μPa)), and is a logarithmic unit that accounts for large variations in amplitude. Therefore, a relatively small change in dB corresponds to large changes in sound pressure. The source level (SL) represents the SPL referenced at a distance of 1 m from the source (referenced to 1 μPa), while the received level is the SPL at the listener's position (referenced to 1 μPa).

Root mean square (rms) is the quadratic mean sound pressure over the duration of an impulse. Root mean square is calculated by squaring all of the sound amplitudes, averaging the squares, and then taking the square root of the average (Urick, 1983). Root mean square accounts for both positive and negative values; squaring the pressures makes all values positive so that they may be accounted for in the summation of pressure levels (Hastings and Popper, 2005). This measurement is often used in the context of discussing behavioral effects, in part because behavioral effects, which often result from auditory cues, may be better expressed through averaged units than by peak pressures.

Sound exposure level (SEL; represented as dB re 1 μPa 2 -s) represents the total energy in a stated frequency band over a stated time interval or event and considers both intensity and duration of exposure. The per-pulse SEL is calculated over the time window containing the entire pulse ( i.e., 100 percent of the acoustic energy). SEL is a cumulative metric; it can be accumulated over a single pulse, or calculated over periods containing multiple pulses. Cumulative SEL represents the total energy accumulated by a receiver over a defined time window or during an event. Peak sound pressure (also referred to as zero-to-peak sound pressure or 0-pk) is the maximum instantaneous sound pressure measurable in the water at a specified distance from the source and is represented in the same units as the rms sound pressure.

When underwater objects vibrate or activity occurs, sound-pressure waves are created. These waves alternately compress and decompress the water as the sound wave travels. Underwater sound waves radiate in a manner similar to ripples on the surface of a pond and may be either directed in a beam or beams or may radiate in all directions (omnidirectional sources). The compressions and decompressions associated with sound waves are detected as changes in pressure by aquatic life and man-made sound receptors such as hydrophones.

Even in the absence of sound from the specified activity, the underwater environment is typically loud due to ambient sound, which is defined as environmental background sound levels lacking a single source or point (Richardson et al., 1995). The sound level of a region is defined by the total acoustical energy being generated by known and unknown sources. These sources may include physical ( e.g., wind and waves, earthquakes, ice, atmospheric sound), biological ( e.g., sounds produced by marine mammals, fish, and invertebrates), and anthropogenic ( e.g., vessels, dredging, construction) sound. A number of sources contribute to ambient sound, including wind and waves, which are a main source of naturally occurring ambient sound for frequencies between 200 Hz and 50 kHz (Mitson, 1995). In general, ambient sound levels tend to increase with increasing wind speed and wave height. Precipitation can become an important component of total sound at frequencies above 500 Hz, and possibly down to 100 Hz during quiet times. Marine mammals can contribute significantly to ambient sound levels, as can some fish and snapping shrimp. The frequency band for biological contributions is from approximately 12 Hz to over 100 kHz. Sources of ambient sound related to human activity include transportation (surface vessels), dredging and construction, oil and gas drilling and production, geophysical surveys, sonar, and explosions. Vessel noise typically dominates the total ambient sound for frequencies between 20 and 300 Hz. In general, the frequencies of anthropogenic sounds are below 1 kHz and, if higher frequency sound levels are created, they attenuate rapidly.

The sum of the various natural and anthropogenic sound sources that comprise ambient sound at any given location and time depends not only on the source levels (as determined by current weather conditions and levels of biological and human activity) but also on the ability of sound to propagate through the environment. In turn, sound propagation is dependent on the spatially and temporally varying properties of the water column and sea floor, and is frequency-dependent. As a result of the dependence on a large number of varying factors, ambient sound levels can be expected to vary widely over both coarse and fine spatial and temporal scales. Sound levels at a given frequency and location can vary by 10-20 dB from day to day (Richardson et al., 1995). The result is that, depending on the source type and its intensity, sound from the specified activity may be a negligible addition to the local environment or could form a distinctive signal that may affect marine mammals. Details of source types are described in the following text.

Sounds are often considered to fall into one of two general types: Pulsed and non-pulsed (defined in the following). The distinction between these two sound types is important because they have differing potential to cause physical effects, particularly with regard to hearing ( e.g., Ward, 1997 in Southall et al., 2007). Please see Southall et al. (2007) for an in-depth discussion of these concepts. The distinction between these two sound types is not always obvious, as certain signals share properties of both pulsed and non-pulsed sounds. A signal near a source could be categorized as a pulse, but due to propagation effects as it moves farther from the source, the signal duration becomes longer ( e.g., Greene and Richardson, 1988).

Pulsed sound sources ( e.g., airguns, explosions, gunshots, sonic booms, impact pile driving) produce signals that are brief (typically considered to be less than one second), broadband, atonal transients (ANSI, 1986, 2005; Harris, 1998; NIOSH, 1998; ISO, 2003) and occur either as isolated events or repeated in some succession. Pulsed sounds are all characterized by a relatively rapid rise from ambient pressure to a maximal pressure value followed by a rapid decay period that may include a period of diminishing, oscillating maximal and minimal pressures, and generally have an increased capacity to induce physical injury as compared with sounds that lack these features.

Non-pulsed sounds can be tonal, narrowband, or broadband, brief or prolonged, and may be either continuous or intermittent (ANSI, 1995; NIOSH, 1998). Some of these non-pulsed sounds can be transient signals of short duration but without the essential properties of pulses ( e.g., rapid rise time). Examples of non-pulsed sounds include those produced by vessels, aircraft, machinery operations such as drilling or dredging, vibratory pile driving, and active sonar systems. The duration of such sounds, as received at a distance, can be greatly extended in a highly reverberant environment.

Sparkers and boomers produce pulsed signals with energy in the frequency ranges specified in Table 1. The amplitude of the acoustic wave emitted from sparker sources is equal in all directions ( i.e., omnidirectional), while other sources planned for use during the proposed surveys have some degree of directionality to the beam, as specified in Table 1. Other sources planned for use during the proposed survey activity ( e.g., CHIRP SBPs) should be considered non-pulsed, intermittent sources.

Underwater sound from active acoustic sources can include one or more of the following: temporary or permanent hearing impairment, non-auditory physical or physiological effects, behavioral disturbance, stress, and masking. The degree of effect is intrinsically related to the signal characteristics, received level, distance from the source, and duration of the sound exposure. Marine mammals exposed to high-intensity sound, or to lower-intensity sound for prolonged periods, can experience hearing threshold shift (TS), which is the loss of hearing sensitivity at certain frequency ranges (Finneran, 2015). TS can be permanent (PTS), in which case the loss of hearing sensitivity is not fully recoverable, or temporary (TTS), in which case the animal's hearing threshold would recover over time (Southall et al., 2007).

Animals in the vicinity of PCW's proposed HRG survey activity are unlikely to incur even TTS due to the characteristics of the sound sources, which include relatively low source levels (178 to 205 dB re 1 µPa-m) and generally very short pulses and potential duration of exposure. These characteristics mean that instantaneous exposure is unlikely to cause TTS, as it is unlikely that exposure would occur close enough to the vessel for received levels to exceed peak pressure TTS criteria, and that the cumulative duration of exposure would be insufficient to exceed cumulative sound exposure level (SEL) criteria. Even for high-frequency cetacean species ( e.g., harbor porpoises), which have the greatest sensitivity to potential TTS, individuals would have to make a very close approach and also remain very close to vessels operating these sources in order to receive multiple exposures at relatively high levels, as would be necessary to cause TTS. Intermittent exposures—as would occur due to the brief, transient signals produced by these sources—require a higher cumulative SEL to induce TTS than would continuous exposures of the same duration ( i.e., intermittent exposure results in lower levels of TTS). Moreover, most marine mammals would more likely avoid a loud sound source rather than swim in such close proximity as to result in TTS. Kremser et al. (2005) noted that the probability of a cetacean swimming through the area of exposure when a sub-bottom profiler emits a pulse is small—because if the animal was in the area, it would have to pass the transducer at close range in order to be subjected to sound levels that could cause TTS and would likely exhibit avoidance behavior to the area near the transducer rather than swim through at such a close range. Further, the restricted beam shape of many of HRG survey devices planned for use (Table 1) makes it unlikely that an animal would be exposed more than briefly during the passage of the vessel.

Behavioral disturbance may include a variety of effects, including subtle changes in behavior ( e.g., minor or brief avoidance of an area or changes in vocalizations), more conspicuous changes in similar behavioral activities, and more sustained and/or potentially severe reactions, such as displacement from or abandonment of high-quality habitat. Behavioral responses to sound are highly variable and context-specific and any reactions depend on numerous intrinsic and extrinsic factors ( e.g., species, state of maturity, experience, current activity, reproductive state, auditory sensitivity, time of day), as well as the interplay between factors. Available studies show wide variation in response to underwater sound; therefore, it is difficult to predict specifically how any given sound in a particular instance might affect marine mammals perceiving the signal.

In addition, sound can disrupt behavior through masking, or interfering with, an animal's ability to detect, recognize, or discriminate between acoustic signals of interest ( e.g., those used for intraspecific communication and social interactions, prey detection, predator avoidance, navigation). Masking occurs when the receipt of a sound is interfered with by another coincident sound at similar frequencies and at similar or higher intensity, and may occur whether the sound is natural ( e.g., snapping shrimp, wind, waves, precipitation) or anthropogenic ( e.g., shipping, sonar, seismic exploration) in origin. Marine mammal communications would not likely be masked appreciably by the acoustic signals given the directionality of the signals for most HRG survey equipment types proposed for use (Table 1) and the brief period when an individual mammal is likely to be exposed.

Sound may affect marine mammals through impacts on the abundance, behavior, or distribution of prey species ( e.g., crustaceans, cephalopods, fish, zooplankton) ( i.e., effects to marine mammal habitat). Prey species exposed to sound might move away from the sound source, experience TTS, experience masking of biologically relevant sounds, or show no obvious direct effects. The most likely impacts (if any) for most prey species in a given area would be temporary avoidance of the area. Surveys using active acoustic sound sources move through an area relatively quickly, limiting exposure to multiple pulses. In all cases, sound levels would return to ambient once a survey ends and the noise source is shut down and, when exposure to sound ends, behavioral and/or physiological responses are expected to end relatively quickly. Finally, the HRG survey equipment will not have significant impacts to the seafloor and does not represent a source of pollution.

Vessel collisions with marine mammals, or ship strikes, can result in death or serious injury of the animal. These interactions are typically associated with large whales, which are less maneuverable than are smaller cetaceans or pinnipeds in relation to large vessels. Ship strikes generally involve commercial shipping vessels, which are generally larger and of which there is much more traffic in the ocean than geophysical survey vessels. Jensen and Silber (2004) summarized ship strikes of large whales worldwide from 1975-2003 and found that most collisions occurred in the open ocean and involved large vessels ( e.g., commercial shipping). For vessels used in geophysical survey activities, vessel speed while towing gear is typically only 4 knots (4.6 mph). At these speeds, both the possibility of striking a marine mammal and the possibility of a strike resulting in serious injury or mortality are so low as to be discountable. At average transit speed for geophysical survey vessels, the probability of serious injury or mortality resulting from a strike is less than 50 percent. However, the likelihood of a strike actually happening is again low given the smaller size of these vessels and generally slower speeds. Notably in the Jensen and Silber study, no strike incidents were reported for geophysical survey vessels during that time period.

The potential effects of PCW's specified survey activity are expected to be limited to Level B behavioral harassment. No permanent or temporary auditory effects, or significant impacts to marine mammal habitat, including prey, are expected.

This section provides an estimate of the number of incidental takes proposed for authorization through this IHA, which will inform both NMFS' consideration of “small numbers” and the negligible impact determination.

Harassment is the only type of take expected to result from these activities. Except with respect to certain activities not pertinent here, section 3(18) of the MMPA defines “harassment” as any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance, which (i) has the potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild (Level A harassment); or (ii) has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering (Level B harassment).

Authorized takes would be by Level B harassment only, in the form of disruption of behavioral patterns for individual marine mammals resulting from exposure to noise from certain HRG acoustic sources. Based primarily on the characteristics of the signals produced by the acoustic sources planned for use, Level A harassment is neither anticipated (even absent mitigation), nor proposed to be authorized. Consideration of the anticipated effectiveness of the mitigation measures ( i.e., pre-start clearance and shutdown measures), discussed in detail below in the Proposed Mitigation section, further strengthens the conclusion that Level A harassment is not a reasonably anticipated outcome of the survey activity. As described previously, no serious injury or mortality is anticipated or proposed to be authorized for this activity. Below we describe how the take is estimated.

Generally speaking, we estimate take by considering: (1) Acoustic thresholds above which NMFS believes the best available science indicates marine mammals will be behaviorally harassed or incur some degree of permanent hearing impairment; (2) the area or volume of water that will be ensonified above these levels in a day; (3) the density or occurrence of marine mammals within these ensonified areas; and, (4) and the number of days of activities. We note that while these basic factors can contribute to a basic calculation to provide an initial prediction of takes, additional information that can qualitatively inform take estimates is also sometimes available ( e.g., previous monitoring results or average group size). Below, we describe the factors considered here in more detail and present the proposed take estimates.

NMFS uses acoustic thresholds that identify the received level of underwater sound above which exposed marine mammals would be reasonably expected to be behaviorally harassed (equated to Level B harassment) or to incur PTS of some degree (equated to Level A harassment).

Level B Harassment —Though significantly driven by received level, the onset of behavioral disturbance from anthropogenic noise exposure is also informed to varying degrees by other factors related to the source ( e.g., frequency, predictability, duty cycle), the environment ( e.g., bathymetry), and the receiving animals (hearing, motivation, experience, demography, behavioral context) and can be difficult to predict (Southall et al., 2007; Ellison et al., 2012). Based on what the available science indicates and the practical need to use a threshold based on a factor that is both predictable and measurable for most activities, NMFS uses a generalized acoustic threshold based on received level to estimate the onset of behavioral harassment. NMFS predicts that marine mammals may be behaviorally harassed ( i.e., Level B harassment) when exposed to underwater anthropogenic noise above received levels of 160 dB re 1 μPa (rms) for the impulsive sources ( i.e., boomers, sparkers) and non-impulsive, intermittent sources ( e.g., CHIRP SBPs) evaluated here for PCW's proposed activity.

Level A Harassment —NMFS' Technical Guidance for Assessing the Effects of Anthropogenic Sound on Marine Mammal Hearing (Version 2.0) (Technical Guidance, 2018) identifies dual criteria to assess auditory injury (Level A harassment) to five different marine mammal groups (based on hearing sensitivity) as a result of exposure to noise from two different types of sources (impulsive or non-impulsive). For more information, see NMFS' 2018 Technical Guidance, which may be accessed at www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-acoustic-technical-guidance.

PCW's proposed activity includes the use of impulsive ( i.e., sparkers and boomers) and non-impulsive ( e.g., CHIRP SBP) sources. However, as discussed above, NMFS has concluded that Level A harassment is not a reasonably likely outcome for marine mammals exposed to noise through use of the sources proposed for use here, and the potential for Level A harassment is not evaluated further in this document. Please see PCW's application for details of a quantitative exposure analysis exercise, i.e., calculated Level A harassment isopleths and estimated Level A harassment exposures. Maximum estimated Level A harassment isopleths were less than 4 m for all sources and hearing groups with the exception of an estimated 53 m zone calculated for high-frequency cetaceans during use of the Boomer, respectively. PCW did not request authorization of take by Level A harassment, and no take by Level A harassment is proposed for authorization by NMFS.

NMFS has developed a user-friendly methodology for estimating the extent of the Level B harassment isopleths associated with relevant HRG survey equipment (NMFS, 2020). This methodology incorporates frequency and directionality to refine estimated ensonified zones. For acoustic sources that operate with different beamwidths, the maximum beamwidth was used, and the lowest frequency of the source was used when calculating the frequency-dependent absorption coefficient (Table 1).

NMFS considers the data provided by Crocker and Fratantonio (2016) to represent the best available information on source levels associated with HRG equipment and, therefore, recommends that source levels provided by Crocker and Fratantonio (2016) be incorporated in the method described above to estimate isopleth distances to harassment thresholds. In cases when the source level for a specific type of HRG equipment is not provided in Crocker and Fratantonio (2016), NMFS recommends that either the source levels provided by the manufacturer be used, or, in instances where source levels provided by the manufacturer are unavailable or unreliable, a proxy from Crocker and Fratantonio (2016) be used instead. Table 1 shows the HRG equipment types that may be used during the proposed surveys and the source parameters associated with those HRG equipment types.

Results of modeling using the methodology described above indicated that, of the HRG survey equipment planned for use by PCW that has the potential to result in Level B harassment of marine mammals, the Applied Acoustics AA251 Boomer would produce the largest Level B harassment isopleth (178 m). Estimated Level B harassment isopleths for all sources evaluated here are provided in Table 4. Although PCW does not expect to use the AA251 Boomer source on all planned survey days, it proposes to assume, for purposes of analysis, that the boomer sources would be used on all survey days and across all hours within a given survey day. This is a conservative approach, as the actual sources used on individual survey days, or during a portion of a survey day, may produce smaller distances to the Level B harassment isopleth.

In this section, NMFS provides information about the presence, density, or group dynamics of marine mammals that informs the take calculations.

Habitat-based density models produced by the Duke University Marine Geospatial Ecology Laboratory (Roberts et al., 2016, 2017, 2018, 2021) represent the best available information regarding marine mammal densities in the survey area. The density data presented by Roberts et al. (2016, 2017, 2018, 2021) incorporates aerial and shipboard line-transect survey data from NMFS and other organizations and incorporates data from 8 physiographic and 16 dynamic oceanographic and biological covariates, and controls for the influence of sea state, group size, availability bias, and perception bias on the probability of making a sighting. These density models were originally developed for all cetacean taxa in the U.S. Atlantic (Roberts et al., 2016). In subsequent years, certain models have been updated based on additional data as well as certain methodological improvements. More information is available online at seamap.env.duke.edu/models/Duke-EC/.

Marine mammal density estimates in the survey area (animals/km 2 ) were obtained using the most recent model results for all taxa (Roberts et al., 2016, 2017, 2018, 2021). The updated models incorporate additional sighting data, including sightings from NOAA's Atlantic Marine Assessment Program for Protected Species (AMAPPS) surveys. Those data provide abundance estimates for species or species guilds within 10 km x 10 km grid cells (100 km 2 ), or in the case of NARW densities within 5 km x 5 km grid cells, on a monthly or annual basis, depending on the species. Using geographic information system (GIS) (ESRI 2017), the proposed survey area and the NARW SMA polygons were used to select grid cells from the Roberts et al. (2016; 2017; 2018; 2021) data that contain the most recent monthly or annual estimates for each species for the months of May through December. For the months of January through April, only the proposed survey area polygon was used to select density grid cells since it excludes waters within Cape Cod Bay where no surveys will occur from January 1 through May 15. The average monthly abundance for each species was calculated as the mean value of all grid cells within the survey area and then converted to density (individuals/km 2 ) by dividing by 100 km 2 . Finally, an average annual density was calculated by taking the mean across all 12 months for each species (see Table 8 of the application).

The estimated monthly density of seals provided in Roberts et al. (2018) includes all seal species present in the region as a single guild. To split the resulting “seal” density-based exposure estimate by species, the estimate was multiplied by the proportion of the combined abundance attributable to each species. Specifically, the SAR abundance estimates (Hayes et al. 2021) were summed for the two species (gray seal = 27,300, harbor seal = 61,336; total = 88,636) and the total divided by the estimate for each species to get the proportion of the total for each species (gray seal = 0.308; harbor seal = 0.692). The total estimated exposure from the “seal” density provide by Roberts et al. (2018) was then multiplied by these proportions to get the species specific exposure estimates.

Densities from each of the selected density blocks were averaged for each month available to provide monthly density estimates for each species (when available based on the temporal resolution of the model products), along with the average annual density. Please see Tables 8 and 9 of PCW's application for density values used in the exposure estimation process. Additional data regarding average group sizes from survey effort in the region was considered to ensure adequate take estimates are evaluated (see Table 10 of the application).

Here NMFS describes how the information provided above is brought together to produce a quantitative take estimate. In order to estimate the number of marine mammals predicted to be exposed to sound levels that would result in harassment, radial distances to predicted isopleths corresponding to Level B harassment thresholds are calculated, as described above. The maximum distance ( i.e., 178 m distance associated with the boomer) to the Level B harassment criterion and the estimated trackline distance traveled per day by a given survey vessel ( i.e., 80 km) was used to calculate the daily ensonified area, or zone of influence (ZOI) around the survey vessel. This distance was multiplied by two times the average daily survey distance (80 km) and the area of a circle with radius 178 m was added to the result to calculate the daily ZOI (28.6 km 2 ). The daily ZOI was then multiplied by the total number of expected survey days (636) to estimate the total ZOI for the proposed surveys (18,177 km 2 ).

Potential Level B harassment exposures are estimated by multiplying the average annual density of each species within either the Lease Area or potential ECR area by the total ZOI for the planned surveys. Those results are shown in Table 5.

The larger of the two estimates from the approaches described above: Density-based exposure estimates or mean group size was then selected as the requested take as shown in Table 5. In cases where the calculations resulted in a non-integer, the result was rounded up to the nearest whole number since it is not logical to request a partial take. Additionally, based on observational data collected during prior HRG surveys in this area, the density of common dolphins predicted by the Roberts et al. (2018) model does not appear to adequately reflect the number of dolphins that may be encountered during the planned surveys. Data collected by Protected Species Observers (PSOs) on survey vessels operating in 2020-2021 showed an average of approximately 16 common dolphins may be observed within 200 m of a vessel (the approximate Level B harassment distance) per survey day. Multiplying the anticipated 636 survey days by 16 common dolphins per day results in a potential estimated take of 10,176 common dolphins so this has been used as the requested take of common dolphins shown in Table 5.

For the “seal” guild in the Roberts et al. (2018) densities, the exposure estimate was split by species using the relative abundance for the two species to produce the species-specific requested take.

For Bottlenose dolphins, the offshore morphotype inhabits the outer continental slope and shelf edge regions from Georges Bank to the Florida Keys, while the coastal morphotype is continuously distributed along the Atlantic Coast from south of New York to the Florida Peninsula (Hayes et al. 2020)). Offshore common bottlenose dolphin sightings occur from Cape Hatteras to the eastern end of Georges Bank (Kenney 1990). The western North Atlantic offshore stock is distributed primarily along the OCS and continental slope, from Georges Bank to Cape Hatteras during spring and summer (CeTAP 1982). Bottlenose dolphins encountered in the survey area would likely belong to the Western North Atlantic Offshore stock, so all takes are being requested from this stock. However, it is possible that a few animals encountered during the surveys could be from the North Atlantic Northern Migratory Coastal stock, but chance of occurrence is low, and no take from this species is proposed. Similarly, based on the distributions described in Hayes et al. (2020, 2021b), pilot whale sightings in the Lease Area would most likely be long-finned pilot whales, so all pilot whale takes being requested are for long-finned pilot whales.

For NARWs, the implementation of a 500 m acoustic shutdown zone and the 500 m vessel separation distance identified in the vessel strike avoidance measures means that the likelihood of an exposure to received sound levels greater than 160 dB SPLrms is very low. As a precautionary measure, takes by Level B harassment are requested for the proposed survey.

Species considered to be rare or not expected to occur in the area were not included in the previous exposure estimates because the densities would be too low to provide meaningful density-based exposures. Nonetheless, species considered to be rare are occasionally encountered. For example, white-beaked dolphins were recorded in both 2019 and 2020 during HRG surveys in this area (Vineyard-Wind 2019, 2020) with the sighting of White-beaked dolphins in 2019 consisting of 30 animals. Other rare species encountered in the survey area during previous HRG surveys include false killer whale in 2019 (five individuals) and 2021 (one individual) (Vineyard-Wind 2019, 2021) and orca (killer whale) in 2022 (two individuals; data not yet submitted). When species not listed in an IHA are encountered and may be taken, it is necessary to cease survey operations to avoid unauthorized take. To avoid this potential disruption to survey operations, PCW is requesting and NMFS is proposing take by Level B harassment for these three rare species based on the largest number of individuals observed within one year: 30 white-beaked dolphins, 5 false killer whales, and 2 killer whales.

The take numbers shown in Table 5 are those requested by PCW. NMFS concurs with the requested take numbers and proposes to authorize them. Previous monitoring data compiled by PCW (available online at: www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/incidental-take-authorization-ocean-wind-marine-site-characterization-surveys-offshore-new ) suggests that the proposed take numbers for authorization are sufficient.

In order to issue an IHA under section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, NMFS must set forth the permissible methods of taking pursuant to the activity, and other means of effecting the least practicable impact on the species or stock and its habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance, and on the availability of the species or stock for taking for certain subsistence uses (latter not applicable for this action). NMFS regulations require applicants for incidental take authorizations to include information about the availability and feasibility (economic and technological) of equipment, methods, and manner of conducting the activity or other means of effecting the least practicable adverse impact upon the affected species or stocks and their habitat (50 CFR 216.104(a)(11)).

In evaluating how mitigation may or may not be appropriate to ensure the least practicable adverse impact on species or stocks and their habitat, as well as subsistence uses where applicable, we carefully consider two primary factors:

(1) The manner in which, and the degree to which, the successful implementation of the measure(s) is expected to reduce impacts to marine mammals, marine mammal species or stocks, and their habitat. This considers the nature of the potential adverse impact being mitigated (likelihood, scope, range). It further considers the likelihood that the measure will be effective if implemented (probability of accomplishing the mitigating result if implemented as planned), the likelihood of effective implementation (probability implemented as planned); and

(2) The practicability of the measures for applicant implementation, which may consider such things as cost and impact on operations.

NMFS proposes the following mitigation measures be implemented during PCW's proposed marine site characterization surveys. Pursuant to section 7 of the ESA, PCW would also be required to adhere to relevant Project Design Criteria (PDC) of the NMFS' Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office (GARFO) programmatic consultation (specifically PDCs 4, 5, and 7) regarding geophysical surveys along the U.S. Atlantic coast ( https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/new-england-mid-atlantic/consultations/section-7-take-reporting-programmatics-greater-atlantic#offshore-wind-site-assessment-and-site-characterization-activities-programmatic-consultation ).

Marine mammal shutdown zones (SZs) would be established around the HRG survey equipment and monitored by PSOs:

• 500-m SZ for North Atlantic right whales

• 100-m SZ for all other marine mammals

If a marine mammal is detected approaching or entering the SZs during the HRG survey, the vessel operator would adhere to the shutdown procedures described below to minimize noise impacts on the animals. These stated requirements will be included in the site-specific training provided to the survey team.

Marine mammal clearance zones (CZs) would be established around the HRG survey equipment and monitored by PSOs:

• 500-m CZ for all ESA-listed marine mammals; and

• 100-m CZ for all other marine mammals

Vineyard Northeast would implement a 30-minute pre-start clearance period prior to initiation of ramp-up of specified HRG equipment. During this period, CZs would be monitored by PSOs, using the appropriate visual technology. Ramp-up may not be initiated if any marine mammal(s) is within its respective CZ. If a marine mammal is observed within its CZ during the pre-start clearance period, ramp-up may not begin until the animal(s) has been observed exiting its respective CZ or until an additional time has elapsed with no further sighting ( i.e., 15 minutes for small odontocetes and seals, and 30 minutes for all other species).

When technically feasible, a ramp-up procedure would be used for HRG survey equipment capable of adjustment of energy levels at the start or restart of survey activities. The ramp-up procedure would be used at the beginning of HRG survey activities to provide additional protection to marine mammals in or near the Survey Area by allowing them to vacate the area prior to the commencement of survey equipment operation at full power. A ramp-up would begin with the powering up of the smallest acoustic HRG equipment at its lowest practical power output appropriate for the survey. When technically feasible, the power would then be gradually turned up and other acoustic sources would be added.

Ramp-up activities will be delayed if a marine mammal(s) enters its respective CZ. Ramp-up will continue if the animal has been observed exiting its respective CZ or until an additional period has elapsed with no additional sightings ( i.e., 15 minutes for small odontocetes and seals, and 30 minutes for all other species).

Activation of survey equipment through ramp-up procedures may not occur when visual observation of the pre-start clearance/shutdown zone is not expected to be effective using the appropriate visual technology ( i.e., during inclement conditions such as heavy rain or fog).

An immediate shutdown of the specified HRG survey equipment would be required if a marine mammal is sighted entering or within its respective SZ. The vessel operator must comply immediately with any call for shutdown by the PSO. Any disagreement between the PSO and vessel operator should be discussed only after shutdown has occurred. Subsequent restart of the survey equipment can be initiated if the animal has been observed exiting its respective SZ or until an additional time has elapsed (i.e., 15 minutes for harbor porpoise, 30 minutes for all other species).

If a species for which authorization has not been granted, or a species for which authorization has been granted but the authorized number of takes have been met, approaches or is observed within the applicable Level B harassment zone (Table 4), shutdown would occur.

If the acoustic source is shut down for reasons other than mitigation ( e.g., mechanical difficulty) for less than 30 minutes, it may be activated again without ramp-up if PSOs have maintained constant observation and no detections of any marine mammal have occurred within the respective SZs. If the acoustic source is shut down for a period longer than 30 minutes, then pre-start clearance and ramp-up procedures will be initiated as described in the previous section.

The shutdown requirement would be waived for pinnipeds and for small delphinids of the following genera: Delphinus, Lagenorhynchus, Stenella, and Tursiops. Specifically, if a delphinid from the specified genera or a pinniped is visually detected approaching the vessel ( i.e., to bow ride) or towed equipment, shutdown is not required. Furthermore, if there is uncertainty regarding identification of a marine mammal species ( i.e., whether the observed marine mammal(s) belongs to one of the delphinid genera for which shutdown is waived), PSOs must use best professional judgement in making the decision to call for a shutdown. Additionally, shutdown is required if a delphinid or pinniped detected in the shutdown zone and belongs to a genus other than those specified.

Shutdown, pre-start clearance, and ramp-up procedures would not be required during HRG survey operations using only non-impulsive sources ( e.g., echosounders), other than non-parametric sub-bottom profilers ( e.g., CHIRP SBPs).

Vineyard Northeast must ensure that vessel operators and crew maintain a vigilant watch for cetaceans and pinnipeds and slow down or stop their vessels to avoid striking these species. Survey vessel crew members responsible for navigation duties will receive site-specific training on marine mammals sighting/reporting and vessel strike avoidance measures. Vessel strike avoidance measures include the following, except under circumstances when complying with these requirements would put the safety of the vessel or crew at risk:

• Vessel operators and crews must maintain a vigilant watch for all protected species and slow down, stop their vessel(s), or alter course, as appropriate and regardless of vessel size, to avoid striking any protected species. A visual observer aboard the vessel must monitor a vessel strike avoidance zone based on the appropriate separation distance around the vessel (distances stated below). Visual observers monitoring the vessel strike avoidance zone may be third-party observers ( i.e., PSOs) or crew members, but crew members responsible for these duties must be provided sufficient training to (1) distinguish protected species from other phenomena and (2) broadly to identify a marine mammal as a North Atlantic right whale, other whale (defined in this context as sperm whales or baleen whales other than North Atlantic right whales), or other marine mammal.

• Members of the monitoring team will consult NMFS North Atlantic right whale reporting system and Whale Alert at the start of every PSO shift, for situational awareness regarding the presence of North Atlantic right whales throughout the Survey Area, and for the establishment of Slow Zones (including visual-detection-triggered dynamic management areas (DMAs) and acoustically-triggered slow zones) within or near the Survey Area.

• All survey vessels, regardless of size, must observe a 10-knot speed restriction in specific areas designated by NMFS for the protection of North Atlantic right whales from vessel strikes, including SMAs and DMAs when in effect;

• All vessels greater than or equal to 19.8 m in overall length operating from November 1 through April 30 will operate at speeds of 10 knots or less at all times;

• All vessels must reduce their speed to 10 knots or less when mother/calf pairs, pods, or large assemblages of cetaceans are observed near a vessel;

• All vessels must maintain a minimum separation distance of 500 m from North Atlantic right whales and other ESA-listed species. If an ESA-listed species is sighted within the relevant separation distance, the vessel must steer a course away at 10 knots or less until the 500-m separation distance has been established. If a whale is observed but cannot be confirmed as a species that is not ESA-listed, the vessel operator must assume that it is an ESA-listed species and take appropriate action.

• All vessels must, to the maximum extent practicable, attempt to maintain a minimum separation distance of 100 m from all non-ESA listed whales,

• All vessels must, to the maximum extent practicable, attempt to maintain a minimum separation distance of 50 m from all other marine mammals, with an understanding that at times this may not be possible ( e.g., for animals that approach the vessel).

• When marine mammals are sighted while a vessel is underway, the vessel must take action as necessary to avoid violating the relevant separation distance ( e.g., attempt to remain parallel to the animal's course, avoid excessive speed or abrupt changes in direction until the animal has left the area). If marine mammals are sighted within the relevant separation distance, the vessel must reduce speed and shift the engine to neutral, not engaging the engines until animals are clear of the area. This does not apply to any vessel towing gear or any vessel that is navigationally constrained.

Vineyard Northeast proposes to refrain from conducting survey activities using HRG equipment operating at or below 180 kHz from January 1 through May 15 within the North Atlantic right whale SMA in Cape Cod Bay.

Project-specific training will be conducted for all vessel crew prior to the start of a survey and during any changes in crew such that all survey personnel are fully aware and understand the mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements. Prior to implementation with vessel crews, the training program will be provided to NMFS for review and approval. Confirmation of the training and understanding of the requirements will be documented on a training course log sheet. Signing the log sheet will certify that the crew member understands and will comply with the necessary requirements throughout the survey activities.

Based on our evaluation of the applicant's proposed measures, as well as other measures considered by NMFS, NMFS has preliminarily determined that the proposed mitigation measures provide the means of effecting the least practicable impact on marine mammal species or stocks and their habitat, paying particular attention to rookeries, mating grounds, and areas of similar significance.

In order to issue an IHA for an activity, section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA states that NMFS must set forth requirements pertaining to the monitoring and reporting of such taking. The MMPA implementing regulations at 50 CFR 216.104 (a)(13) indicate that requests for authorizations must include the suggested means of accomplishing the necessary monitoring and reporting that will result in increased knowledge of the species and of the level of taking or impacts on populations of marine mammals that are expected to be present in the proposed action area. Effective reporting is critical both to compliance as well as ensuring that the most value is obtained from the required monitoring.

Monitoring and reporting requirements prescribed by NMFS should contribute to improved understanding of one or more of the following:

• Occurrence of marine mammal species or stocks in the area in which take is anticipated ( e.g., presence, abundance, distribution, density);

• Nature, scope, or context of likely marine mammal exposure to potential stressors/impacts (individual or cumulative, acute or chronic), through better understanding of: (1) Action or environment ( e.g., source characterization, propagation, ambient noise); (2) affected species ( e.g., life history, dive patterns); (3) co-occurrence of marine mammal species with the action; or (4) biological or behavioral context of exposure ( e.g., age, calving or feeding areas);

• Individual marine mammal responses (behavioral or physiological) to acoustic stressors (acute, chronic, or cumulative), other stressors, or cumulative impacts from multiple stressors;

• How anticipated responses to stressors impact either: (1) Long-term fitness and survival of individual marine mammals; or (2) populations, species, or stocks;

• Effects on marine mammal habitat ( e.g., marine mammal prey species, acoustic habitat, or other important physical components of marine mammal habitat); and

• Mitigation and monitoring effectiveness.

Visual monitoring will be performed by qualified, NMFS-approved PSOs, the resumes of whom will be provided to NMFS for review and approval prior to the start of survey activities. PCW would employ independent, dedicated, trained PSOs, meaning that the PSOs must (1) be employed by a third-party observer provider, (2) have no tasks other than to conduct observational effort, collect data, and communicate with and instruct relevant vessel crew with regard to the presence of marine mammals and mitigation requirements (including brief alerts regarding maritime hazards), and (3) have successfully completed an approved PSO training course appropriate for their designated task. On a case-by-case basis, non-independent observers may be approved by NMFS for limited, specific duties in support of approved, independent PSOs on smaller vessels with limited crew capacity operating in nearshore waters. Section 5 of the draft IHA contains further details regarding PSO approval.

The PSOs will be responsible for monitoring the waters surrounding each survey vessel to the farthest extent permitted by sighting conditions, including shutdown zones, during all HRG survey operations. PSOs will visually monitor and identify marine mammals, including those approaching or entering the established shutdown zones during survey activities. It will be the responsibility of the Lead PSO on duty to communicate the presence of marine mammals as well as to communicate the action(s) that are necessary to ensure mitigation and monitoring requirements are implemented as appropriate.

During all HRG survey operations ( e.g., any day on which use of an HRG source is planned to occur), a minimum of one PSO must be on duty during daylight operations on each survey vessel, conducting visual observations at all times on all active survey vessels during daylight hours ( i.e., from 30 minutes prior to sunrise through 30 minutes following sunset). Two PSOs will be on watch during nighttime operations and during periods of poor visibility. The PSO(s) would ensure 360° visual coverage around the vessel from the most appropriate observation posts and would conduct visual observations using binoculars and/or night vision goggles, infared cameras and the naked eye while free from distractions and in a consistent, systematic, and diligent manner. PSOs may be on watch for a maximum of 4 consecutive hours followed by a break of at least 2 hours between watches and may conduct a maximum of 12 hours of observation per 24-hr period. In cases where multiple vessels are surveying concurrently, any observations of marine mammals would be communicated to PSOs on all nearby survey vessels.

PSOs must be equipped with binoculars and have the ability to estimate distance and bearing to detect marine mammals, particularly in proximity to shutdown zones. Reticulated binoculars must also be available to PSOs for use as appropriate based on conditions and visibility to support the sighting and monitoring of marine mammals. During nighttime operations, night-vision goggles with thermal clip-ons and infrared technology would be used. Position data would be recorded using hand-held or vessel GPS units for each sighting.

During good conditions ( e.g., daylight hours; Beaufort sea state (BSS) 3 or less), to the maximum extent practicable, PSOs would also conduct observations when the acoustic source is not operating for comparison of sighting rates and behavior with and without use of the active acoustic sources. Any observations of marine mammals by crew members aboard any vessel associated with the survey would be relayed to the PSO team. Data on all PSO observations would be recorded based on standard PSO collection requirements. This would include dates, times, and locations of survey operations; dates and times of observations, location and weather; details of marine mammal sightings ( e.g., species, numbers, behavior); and details of any observed marine mammal behavior that occurs ( e.g., noted behavioral disturbances).

Within 90 days after completion of survey activities or expiration of this IHA, whichever comes sooner, a final technical report will be provided to NMFS that fully documents the methods and monitoring protocols, summarizes the data recorded during monitoring, summarizes the number of marine mammals observed during survey activities (by species, when known), summarizes the mitigation actions taken during surveys (including what type of mitigation and the species and number of animals that prompted the mitigation action, when known), and provides an interpretation of the results and effectiveness of all mitigation and monitoring. A final report must be submitted within 30 days following resolution of any comments on the draft report. All draft and final marine mammal and acoustic monitoring reports must be submitted to PR.ITP.MonitoringReports@noaa.gov, nmfs.gar.incidental-take@noaa.gov, and ITP.Potlock@noaa.gov. The report must contain at minimum, the following:

• PSO names and affiliations;

• Dates of departures and returns to port with port name;

• Dates and times (Greenwich Mean Time) of survey effort and times corresponding with PSO effort;

• Vessel location (latitude/longitude) when survey effort begins and ends; vessel location at beginning and end of visual PSO duty shifts;

• Vessel heading and speed at beginning and end of visual PSO duty shifts and upon any line change;

• Environmental conditions while on visual survey (at beginning and end of PSO shift and whenever conditions change significantly), including wind speed and direction, Beaufort sea state, Beaufort wind force, swell height, weather conditions, cloud cover, sun glare, and overall visibility to the horizon;

• Factors that may be contributing to impaired observations during each PSO shift change or as needed as environmental conditions change ( e.g., vessel traffic, equipment malfunctions); and

• Survey activity information, such as type of survey equipment in operation, acoustic source power output while in operation, and any other notes of significance ( i.e., pre-start clearance survey, ramp-up, shutdown, end of operations, etc.).

If a marine mammal is sighted, the following information should be recorded:

• Watch status (sighting made by PSO on/off effort, opportunistic, crew, alternate vessel/platform);

• PSO who sighted the animal;

• Time of sighting;

• Vessel location at time of sighting;

• Water depth;

• Direction of vessel's travel (compass direction);

• Direction of animal's travel relative to the vessel;

• Pace of the animal;

• Estimated distance to the animal and its heading relative to vessel at initial sighting;

• Identification of the animal ( e.g., genus/species, lowest possible taxonomic level, or unidentified); also note the composition of the group if there is a mix of species;

• Estimated number of animals (high/low/best);

• Estimated number of animals by cohort (adults, yearlings, juveniles, calves, group composition, etc.);

• Description (as many distinguishing features as possible of each individual seen, including length, shape, color, pattern, scars or markings, shape and size of dorsal fin, shape of head, and blow characteristics);

• Detailed behavior observations ( e.g., number of blows, number of surfaces, breaching, spyhopping, diving, feeding, traveling; as explicit and detailed as possible; note any observed changes in behavior);

• Animal's closest point of approach and/or closest distance from the center point of the acoustic source;

• Platform activity at time of sighting ( e.g., deploying, recovering, testing, data acquisition, other); and

• Description of any actions implemented in response to the sighting ( e.g., delays, shutdown, ramp-up, speed or course alteration, etc.) and time and location of the action.

If a NARW is observed at any time by PSOs or personnel on any project vessels, during surveys or during vessel transit, PCW must immediately report sighting information to the NMFS NARW Sighting Advisory System: (866) 755-6622. NARW sightings in any location may also be reported to the U.S. Coast Guard via channel 16.

In the event that PCW personnel discover an injured or dead marine mammal, PCW will report the incident to the NMFS Office of Protected Resources (OPR) and the NMFS New England/Mid-Atlantic Stranding Coordinator as soon as feasible. The report would include the following information:

• Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the first discovery (and updated location information if known and applicable);

• Species identification (if known) or description of the animal(s) involved;

• Condition of the animal(s) (including carcass condition if the animal is dead);

• Observed behaviors of the animal(s), if alive;

• If available, photographs or video footage of the animal(s); and

• General circumstances under which the animal was discovered.

In the unanticipated event of a ship strike of a marine mammal by any vessel involved in the activities covered by the IHA, PCW would report the incident to the NMFS OPR and the NMFS New England/Mid-Atlantic Stranding Coordinator as soon as feasible. The report would include the following information:

• Time, date, and location (latitude/longitude) of the incident;

• Species identification (if known) or description of the animal(s) involved;

• Vessel's speed during and leading up to the incident;

• Vessel's course/heading and what operations were being conducted (if applicable);

• Status of all sound sources in use;

• Description of avoidance measures/requirements that were in place at the time of the strike and what additional measures were taken, if any, to avoid strike;

• Environmental conditions ( e.g., wind speed and direction, Beaufort sea state, cloud cover, visibility) immediately preceding the strike;

• Estimated size and length of animal that was struck;

• Description of the behavior of the marine mammal immediately preceding and following the strike;

• If available, description of the presence and behavior of any other marine mammals immediately preceding the strike;

• Estimated fate of the animal ( e.g., dead, injured but alive, injured and moving, blood or tissue observed in the water, status unknown, disappeared); and

• To the extent practicable, photographs or video footage of the animal(s).

NMFS has defined negligible impact as an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival (50 CFR 216.103). A negligible impact finding is based on the lack of likely adverse effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival ( i.e., population-level effects). An estimate of the number of takes alone is not enough information on which to base an impact determination. In addition to considering estimates of the number of marine mammals that might be “taken” through harassment, NMFS considers other factors, such as the likely nature of any responses ( e.g., intensity, duration), the context of any responses ( e.g., critical reproductive time or location, migration), as well as effects on habitat, and the likely effectiveness of the mitigation. NMFS also assesses the number, intensity, and context of estimated takes by evaluating this information relative to population status. Consistent with the 1989 preamble for NMFS's implementing regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29, 1989), the impacts from other past and ongoing anthropogenic activities are incorporated into this analysis via their impacts on the environmental baseline ( e.g., as reflected in the regulatory status of the species, population size and growth rate where known, ongoing sources of human-caused mortality, or ambient noise levels).

To avoid repetition, our analysis applies to all the species listed in Table 5 given that NMFS expects the anticipated effects of the proposed survey to be similar in nature. Where there are meaningful differences between species or stocks—as is the case of the NARW—they are included as separate subsections below. NMFS does not anticipate that serious injury or mortality would occur as a result from HRG surveys, even in the absence of mitigation, and no serious injury or mortality is proposed to be authorized. As discussed in the Potential Effects of Specified Activities on Marine Mammals and their Habitat section, non-auditory physical effects and vessel strike are not expected to occur. NMFS expects that all potential takes would be in the form of short-term Level B behavioral harassment in the form of temporary avoidance of the area or decreased foraging (if such activity was occurring), reactions that are considered to be of low severity and with no lasting biological consequences ( e.g., Southall et al., 2007). Even repeated Level B harassment of some small subset of an overall stock is unlikely to result in any significant realized decrease in viability for the affected individuals, and thus would not result in any adverse impact to the stock as a whole. As described above, Level A harassment is not expected to occur given the nature of the operations and the estimated size of the Level A harassment zones.

In addition to being temporary, the maximum expected harassment zone around a survey vessel is 178 m. Although this distance is assumed for all survey activity in estimating take numbers proposed for authorization and evaluated here, other survey activity would involve use of acoustic sources with a reduced acoustic harassment zone producing expected effects of particularly low(er) severity. Therefore, the ensonified area surrounding each vessel is relatively small compared to the overall distribution of the animals in the area and their use of the habitat. Feeding behavior is not likely to be significantly impacted as prey species are mobile and are broadly distributed throughout the survey area; therefore, marine mammals that may be temporarily displaced during survey activities are expected to be able to resume foraging once they have moved away from areas with disturbing levels of underwater noise. Because of the temporary nature of the disturbance and the availability of similar habitat and resources in the surrounding area, the impacts to marine mammals and the food sources that they utilize are not expected to cause significant or long-term consequences for individual marine mammals or their populations.

There are no rookeries, mating or calving grounds known to be biologically important to marine mammals within the proposed survey area. However, there are BIAs for large whales, which overlap with the survey area. As discussed earlier in this document, there are two BIAs for feeding fin whales that flank the survey area, a BIA for feeding humpback whales northeast of the survey area, and a portion of the minke and sei whale feeding BIAs within the survey area. Migration and feeding BIAs for NARW are present in the survey area, but are discussed in the NARW subsection below.

Due to the fact that the proposed survey activities are temporary and the spatial extent of sound produced by the survey would be very small relative to the spatial extent of the available feeding habitat in the BIAs for large whales (as previously discussed), feeding for large whales is not expected to be impacted by the proposed survey. Given the relatively small size of the ensonified area, it is unlikely that prey availability would be adversely affected by HRG survey operations.

The status of the NARW population is of heightened concern and, therefore, merits additional analysis. As noted previously, elevated NARW mortalities began in June 2017 and there is an active UME. Overall, preliminary findings support human interactions, specifically vessel strikes and entanglements, as the cause of death for the majority of NARWs. As noted previously, the proposed survey area overlaps migratory and feeding BIAs and critical habitat for NARW. Because the proposed survey activities are temporary and the spatial extent of sound produced by the survey would be very small relative to the spatial extent of the available migratory and feeding habitats in the BIAs and critical habitat, NARW migration is not expected to be impacted by the proposed survey. Given the relatively small size of the ensonified area, it is unlikely that prey availability for NARW would be adversely affected by HRG survey operations. Required vessel strike avoidance measures will also decrease risk of ship strike during migration; no ship strike is expected to occur during PCW's proposed activities. Additionally, only very limited take by Level B harassment of NARW has been requested and is being proposed for authorization by NMFS as HRG survey operations are required to maintain a 500 m EZ and shutdown if a NARW is sighted at or within the EZ. The 500 m shutdown zone for NARWs is conservative, considering the Level B harassment isopleth for the most impactful acoustic source ( i.e., boomer) is estimated to be 178 m, and thereby minimizes the potential for behavioral harassment of this species. As noted previously, Level A harassment is not expected due to the small PTS zones associated with HRG equipment types proposed for use. NMFS does not anticipate NARWs takes that would result from PCW's proposed activities would impact annual rates of recruitment or survival. Thus, any takes that occur would not result in population level impacts.

As noted previously, there are several active UMEs occurring in the vicinity of PCW's proposed survey area. Elevated humpback whale mortalities have occurred along the Atlantic coast from Maine through Florida since January 2016. Of the cases examined, approximately half had evidence of human interaction (ship strike or entanglement). The UME does not yet provide cause for concern regarding population-level impacts. Despite the UME, the relevant population of humpback whales (the West Indies breeding population, or DPS) remains stable at approximately 12,000 individuals.

Beginning in January 2017, elevated minke whale strandings have occurred along the Atlantic coast from Maine through South Carolina, with highest numbers in Massachusetts, Maine, and New York. This event does not provide cause for concern regarding population level impacts, as the likely population abundance is greater than 20,000 whales.

The required mitigation measures are expected to reduce the number and/or severity of proposed takes for all species listed in Table 5, including those with active UMEs, to the level of least practicable adverse impact. In particular, they would provide animals the opportunity to move away from the sound source throughout the survey area before HRG survey equipment reaches full energy, thus preventing them from being exposed to sound levels that have the potential to cause injury (Level A harassment) or more severe Level B harassment. No Level A harassment is anticipated, even in the absence of mitigation measures, or proposed for authorization.

NMFS expects that takes would be in the form of short-term Level B behavioral harassment by way of brief startling reactions and/or temporary vacating of the area, or decreased foraging (if such activity was occurring)—reactions that (at the scale and intensity anticipated here) are considered to be of low severity, with no lasting biological consequences. Since both the sources and marine mammals are mobile, animals would only be exposed briefly to a small ensonified area that might result in take. Additionally, required mitigation measures would further reduce exposure to sound that could result in more severe behavioral harassment.

In summary and as described above, the following factors primarily support our preliminary determination that the impacts resulting from this activity are not expected to adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival:

• No mortality or serious injury is anticipated or proposed for authorization;

• No Level A harassment (PTS) is anticipated, even in the absence of mitigation measures, or proposed for authorization;

• Foraging success is not likely to be significantly impacted as effects on species that serve as prey species for marine mammals from the survey are expected to be minimal;

• The availability of alternate areas of similar habitat value for marine mammals to temporarily vacate the survey area during the planned survey to avoid exposure to sounds from the activity;

• Take is anticipated to be primarily Level B behavioral harassment consisting of brief startling reactions and/or temporary avoidance of the survey area;

• While the survey area is within areas noted as migratory and feeding area BIAs and designated critical habitat for NARWs, the activities would occur in such a comparatively small area such that any avoidance of the survey area due to activities would not affect migration or feeding. In addition, mitigation measures to shut down at 500 m to minimize potential for Level B behavioral harassment would limit the severity of any take that occurs;

• While the survey area is within areas noted as feeding area BIAs for large whales, the activities would occur in such a comparatively small area such that any avoidance of the survey area due to activities would not affect prey availability or foraging activities.

• The proposed mitigation measures, including visual monitoring and shutdowns, are expected to minimize potential impacts to marine mammals.

Based on the analysis contained herein of the likely effects of the specified activity on marine mammals and their habitat, and taking into consideration the implementation of the proposed monitoring and mitigation measures, NMFS preliminarily finds that the total marine mammal take from the proposed activity will have a negligible impact on all affected marine mammal species or stocks.

As noted above, only small numbers of incidental take may be authorized under sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the MMPA for specified activities other than military readiness activities. The MMPA does not define small numbers and so, in practice, where estimated numbers are available, NMFS compares the number of individuals taken to the most appropriate estimation of abundance of the relevant species or stock in our determination of whether an authorization is limited to small numbers of marine mammals. When the predicted number of individuals to be taken is fewer than one third of the species or stock abundance, the take is considered to be of small numbers. Additionally, other qualitative factors may be considered in the analysis, such as the temporal or spatial scale of the activities.

NMFS proposes to authorize incidental take of 16 marine mammal species. The total amount of takes proposed for authorization relative to the best available population abundance is less than 9 percent for NARW, less than 6 percent for common dolphin, less than 4 percent for humpback whales, and less than 2 percent for all other species and stocks, which NMFS preliminarily finds are small numbers of marine mammals relative to the estimated overall population abundances for those stocks. Please see Table 5.

Based on the analysis contained herein of the proposed activity (including the proposed mitigation and monitoring measures) and the anticipated take of marine mammals, NMFS preliminarily finds that small numbers of marine mammals will be taken relative to the population size of the affected species or stocks.

There are no relevant subsistence uses of the affected marine mammal stocks or species implicated by this action. Therefore, NMFS has determined that the total taking of affected species or stocks would not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of such species or stocks for taking for subsistence purposes.

Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. ) requires that each Federal agency insure that any action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat. To ensure ESA compliance for the issuance of IHAs, NMFS Office of Protected Resources (OPR) consults internally whenever we propose to authorize take for endangered or threatened species, in this case with NMFS Greater Atlantic Regional Fisheries Office (GARFO).

NMFS is proposing to authorize the incidental take of five species of marine mammals which are listed under the ESA, including the North Atlantic right, fin, sei, and sperm whale, and has determined that these activities fall within the scope of activities analyzed in GARFO's programmatic consultation regarding geophysical surveys along the U.S. Atlantic coast in the three Atlantic Renewable Energy Regions (completed June 29, 2021; revised September 2021). The consultation concluded that NMFS' issuance of incidental take authorization related to these activities are not likely to adversely affect ESA-listed marine mammals.

As a result of these preliminary determinations, NMFS proposes to issue an IHA to PCW for conducting marine site characterization surveys off the coast of Massachusetts south to Long Island, New York for one year from the date of issuance, provided the previously mentioned mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements are incorporated. A draft of the proposed IHA can be found at www.fisheries.noaa.gov/permit/incidental-take-authorizations-under-marine-mammal-protection-act.

We request comment on our analyses, the proposed authorization, and any other aspect of this notice of proposed IHA for the proposed marine site characterization surveys. We also request at this time comment on the potential renewal of this proposed IHA as described in the paragraph below. Please include with your comments any supporting data or literature citations to help inform decisions on the request for this IHA or a subsequent Renewal IHA.

On a case-by-case basis, NMFS may issue a one-time, one-year Renewal IHA following notice to the public providing an additional 15 days for public comments when (1) up to another year of identical or nearly identical, or nearly identical, activities as described in the Description of Proposed Activity section of this notice is planned or (2) the activities as described in the Description of Proposed Activity section of this notice would not be completed by the time the IHA expires and a renewal would allow for completion of the activities beyond that described in the Dates and Duration section of this notice, provided all of the following conditions are met:

• A request for renewal is received no later than 60 days prior to the needed Renewal IHA effective date (recognizing that the Renewal IHA expiration date cannot extend beyond one year from expiration of the initial IHA).

• The request for renewal must include the following:

(1) An explanation that the activities to be conducted under the requested Renewal IHA are identical to the activities analyzed under the initial IHA, are a subset of the activities, or include changes so minor ( e.g., reduction in pile size) that the changes do not affect the previous analyses, mitigation and monitoring requirements, or take estimates (with the exception of reducing the type or amount of take).

(2) A preliminary monitoring report showing the results of the required monitoring to date and an explanation showing that the monitoring results do not indicate impacts of a scale or nature not previously analyzed or authorized.

Upon review of the request for renewal, the status of the affected species or stocks, and any other pertinent information, NMFS determines that there are no more than minor changes in the activities, the mitigation and monitoring measures will remain the same and appropriate, and the findings in the initial IHA remain valid.

All times shown are in Hawaii Standard Time. The Pelagic and International Standing Committee meeting will be held between 1 p.m. and 3 p.m. on June 13, 2022. The 144th SSC meeting will be held between 11 a.m. and 5 p.m. on June 14-15, 2022, and between 11 a.m. and 1 p.m. on June 16, 2022. The FDCRC meeting will be held between 2 p.m. and 4 p.m. on June 16, 2022. The Executive and Budget Standing Committee meeting will be held between 1 p.m. and 3 p.m. on June 20, 2022. The 191st Council meeting will be held between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. on June 21-22, 2022, and between 8 a.m. and 12 p.m. on June 23, 2022.

Please note that the evolving public health situation regarding COVID-19 may affect the conduct of the June Council and its associated meetings. At the time this notice was submitted for publication, the Council anticipated convening the meetings as a hybrid format for members and by web conference for public attendance. If public participation options will be modified, the Council will post notice on its website at www.wpcouncil.org by, to the extent practicable, 5 calendar days before each meeting.

Agenda items noted as “Final Action” refer to actions that may result in Council transmittal of a proposed fishery management plan, proposed plan amendment, or proposed regulations to the U.S. Secretary of Commerce, under Sections 304 or 305 of the MSA. In addition to the agenda items listed here, the Council and its advisory bodies will hear recommendations from Council advisors. An opportunity to submit public comment will be provided throughout the agendas. The order in which agenda items are addressed may change and will be announced in advance at the Council meeting. The meetings will run as late as necessary to complete scheduled business.

Background documents for the 191st Council meeting will be available at www.wpcouncil.org. Written public comments on final action items at the 191st Council meeting should be received at the Council office by 5 p.m. HST, June 17, 2022, and should be sent to Kitty M. Simonds, Executive Director; Western Pacific Fishery Management Council, 1164 Bishop Street, Suite 1400, Honolulu, HI 96813, phone: (808) 522-8220 or fax: (808) 522-8226; or email: info@wpcouncil.org. Written public comments on all other agenda items may be submitted for the record by email throughout the duration of the meeting. Instructions for providing oral public comments during the meeting will be posted on the Council website. This meeting will be recorded (audio only) for the purposes of generating the minutes of the meeting.

Non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before the Council for discussion and formal Council action during its 191st meeting. However, Council action on regulatory issues will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this document and any regulatory issue arising after publication of this document that requires emergency action under section 305(c) of the MSA, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take action to address the emergency.

These meetings are accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Kitty M. Simonds, (808) 522-8220 (voice) or (808) 522-8226 (fax), at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

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

The Committee will review 2023/24 Scallop Research Set-Aside (RSA) and develop research recommendations for the notice of funding announcement. They also plan to discuss scallop specifications with an update on the timeline and possible measures. This action will be initiated at the June 2022 Council meeting. Also on the agenda is an update on 2022 work priorities and other scallop related issues, including the Nantucket Lightship South. Other business will be discussed, if necessary.

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

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

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

The Groundfish Committee will discuss development of draft specifications and measures: Status determination criteria, rebuilding plans for Gulf of Maine (GOM) cod and Southern New England/Mid-Atlantic (SNE/MA) winter flounder, FY2023-FY2024 US/CA total allowable catches, FY2023-FY2024 specifications: Georges Bank (GB) yellowtail flounder and GB cod (including a catch target for the recreational fishery), FY2023-FY2025 specifications for 14 stocks, additional measures to promote stock rebuilding for GOM cod and SNE/MA winter flounder, and revised acceptable biological catch control rules, in consultation with the Scientific and Statistical Committee. They will discuss Amendment 23 progress on development of metrics. The Committee will discuss a Council priority to develop a transition plan for Atlantic cod management from the current two management unit to up to five management units (multi-year priority). As a part of the transition plan, there will be a white paper on potential approaches to allocate “Georges Bank cod” to the recreational fishery delivered in 2022 to inform the 2023 priorities discussion. They will also review the current list of Council research priorities and suggest changes or additions to the list as well recommendations from the Recreational Advisory Panel, Groundfish Advisory Panel, and Groundfish Plan Development Team. Other business will be discussed if necessary.

Although non-emergency issues not contained on this agenda may come before this Council for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Council action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency.

This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. This meeting will be recorded. Consistent with 16 U.S.C. 1852, a copy of the recording is available upon request. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Thomas A. Nies, Executive Director, at (978) 465-0492, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

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

The Advisory Panel will review 2023/24 Scallop Research Set-Aside (RSA) and develop research recommendations for the notice of funding announcement. They also plan to discuss scallop specifications with an update on the timeline and possible measures. This action will be initiated at the June 2022 Council meeting. Also on the agenda is an update on 2022 work priorities and other scallop related issues, including the Nantucket Lightship South. Other business will be discussed, if necessary.

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

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

This notice is published pursuant to 41 U.S.C. 8503 (a)(2) and 41 CFR 51-2.3. Its purpose is to provide interested persons an opportunity to submit comments on the proposed actions.

If the Committee approves the proposed additions, the entities of the Federal Government identified in this notice will be required to procure the product(s) and service(s) listed below from nonprofit agencies employing persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities.

The following product(s) are proposed for addition to the Procurement List for production by the nonprofit agencies listed:

The Defense Manpower Data Base system of records is used to collect and maintain records for the purpose of providing a single central facility within the DoD to assess manpower trends, support personnel and readiness functions, to perform longitudinal statistical analyses, identify current and former DoD civilian and Armed Forces personnel for purposes of detecting fraud and abuse of pay and benefit programs, to register current and former DoD civilian and Armed Forces personnel and their authorized dependents for purposes of obtaining medical examination, treatment or other benefits for which they are qualified. Subject to public comment, the DoD is updating this SORN to add the standard DoD routine uses (routine uses A through J) and to allow for a change to an existing disclosure outside DoD related to the purpose of this system of records. Additionally, the following sections of this SORN are being modified as follows: (1) To the Authority for Maintenance of the System section to add additional authorities; (2) to the Categories of Individuals Covered by the System, to expand the individuals covered with the addition of Space Force and deployed contract personnel, and to the Categories of Records to clarify how the records relate to the revised Categories of Individuals; (3) to the Administrative, Technical, and Physical Safeguards to update the individual safeguards protecting the personal information; (4) to the Record Access Procedures section to reflect the need for individuals to identify the appropriate DoD office or component to which their request should be directed; (5) to the Contesting Records Procedures section to update the appropriate citation for contesting records; and (6) to the System Manager and System Location sections to update the addresses and office names. Furthermore, this notice includes non-substantive changes to simplify the formatting and text of the previously published notice.

DoD SORNs have been published in the Federal Register and are available from the address in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT or at the Defense Privacy, Civil Liberties, and Freedom of Information Directorate website at https://dpcld.defense.gov.

Under the Privacy Act, a “system of records” is a group of records under the control of an agency from which information is retrieved by the name of an individual or by some identifying number, symbol, or other identifying particular assigned to the individual. In the Privacy Act, an individual is defined as a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident.

In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552a(r) and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular No. A-108, the DoD has provided a report of this system of records to the OMB and to Congress.

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

Title of Collection: Application for Client Assistance Program.

OMB Control Number: 1820-0520.

Type of Review: An extension without change of a currently approved collection.

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

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 57.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 9.

Abstract: The purpose of Client Assistance Program (CAP) is to advise and inform applicants and individuals eligible for services and benefits available under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act), as amended by the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA), and title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), including students with disabilities under section 113 and individuals with disabilities employed at subminimum wage under section 511 of the Rehabilitation Act. In addition, applicants and eligible individuals may be provided advocacy and representation to ensure their rights in their relationship with projects, programs, and services to protect their rights provided under the Rehabilitation Act. In addition to providing assistance and advocacy under the Rehabilitation Act, a CAP agency may provide information on the assistance and benefits on title I of the ADA, especially those who have traditionally been unserved or underserved by the vocational rehabilitation program, with respect to services that are directly related to facilitating the employment for applicants or eligible individuals.

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; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

This information collection request contains:

(1) OMB No.: New;

(2) Information Collection Request Titled: Customer Request Services;

(3) Type of Review: New;

(4) Purpose: This information collection will be used to allow customers to make requests, specifically for power interruption or to upgrade wireless sites collocated on BPA facilities: BPA F 6500.15e—Transmission Operator Provider (TOP) Outage Request—Customers/USBR/COE, BPA F 6530.16e—Application for a Wireless Site Upgrade Co-Located on BPA Facilities;

(5) Annual Estimated Number of Respondents: 131;

(6) Annual Estimated Number of Total Responses: 6,325;

(7) Annual Estimated Number of Burden Hours: 738;

(8) Annual Estimated Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost Burden: $29,169.

Statutory Authority: The Bonneville Project Act of 1937, 16 U.S.C. ch. 12B; 16 U.S.C. 832a(b); and the Federal Columbia River Transmission System Act of 1974, 16 U.S.C. ch. 12G; 16 U.S.C. 838b.

This document of the Department of Energy was signed on May 16, 2022, by Candice D. Palen, Information Collection Clearance Manager, Bonneville Power Administration, pursuant to delegated authority from the Secretary of Energy. That document with the original signature and date is maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes only, and in compliance with requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the undersigned DOE Federal Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to sign and submit the document in electronic format for publication, as an official document of the Department of Energy. This administrative process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon publication in the Federal Register .

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

Abstract: The Emission Guidelines and Compliance Times for Small Municipal Waste Combustion Units Constructed on or Before August 30, 1999 were originally promulgated in December 1995, but were vacated by the Federal Court in March 1997. Subsequently, the Emission Guidelines were re-proposed on August 30, 1999; and promulgated on December 6, 2000. The Emission Guidelines regulate organics (dioxin/furans), metals (cadmium, lead, mercury), particulate matter, and acid gases (hydrogen chloride, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen oxides) for small Municipal Waste Combustion (MWC) units. Small MWC units are MWC units with capacities to combust greater than 35 tons per day (tpd) and less than 250 tons per day (tpd) of municipal solid waste. The Emission Guidelines contain monitoring, reporting, and record-keeping requirements that are to be included in state plans. If a State/Local Agency does not develop, adopt, and submit an approvable State plan, then facilities in that state are subject to the Federal Plan (Federal Plan Requirements for Small Municipal Waste Combustion Units Constructed On or Before August 30, 1999 (40 CFR part 62, subpart JJJ)), adopted on January 31, 2003. The Federal Plan implements the emission guidelines in jurisdictions that have not developed an approved State Plan. These regulations do not directly apply to small MWC unit owners and operators. However, MWC unit owners and operators must comply with either the State or Federal plans to implement the emission guidelines contained in this Subpart. This ICR identifies the burden to both respondents (owners or operators of small MWC units) and the Designated Administrator (either state/local agencies or the Federal government) to implement the emission guidelines imposed by the State plans. This information is being collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR part 60, subpart BBBB.

Form Numbers: None.

Respondents/affected entities: Owners or operators of existing small MWC units.

Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR 60, subpart BBBB).

Estimated number of respondents: 22 (total).

Frequency of response: Semiannually, annually.

Total estimated burden: Respondent burden is 86,500 hours (per year). State/local agency burden for administering the rule is 770 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

Total estimated cost: Respondent cost is $6,130,000 (per year). This includes $422,000 in annualized capital/startup and/or operation & maintenance costs. State/local agency cost is $39,000 per year.

Changes in the Estimates: There is a decrease in burden from the most-recently approved ICR as currently identified in the OMB Inventory of Approved Burdens due to an adjustment in the number of respondents subject to the requirements of Subpart BBBB, which have decreased. This ICR also adjusts the burden to reflect those requirements of Subpart BBBB that are implemented under State plans or a Federal Plan, to incorporate the burden associated with the Federal Plan. The Federal Plan was finalized at 40 CFR part 62, subpart JJJ on January 31, 2003 (68 FR 5158). As of August 20, 2021, EPA data and the listing of approved State plans in the e-CFR indicates that 7 State and local agencies enforce the State plans or have requested and received delegation of enforcement of the Federal Plan. The remainder of the small MWC units will be covered by the Federal Plan, where EPA is the implementing agency. The burden on State and local agencies is included in respondent burden in this ICR, and is similar to the Agency burden in the previous ICR.

The BOSC is a chartered Federal Advisory Committee established by the EPA to provide independent scientific and technical peer review, advice, consultation, and recommendations about ORD. As a Federal Advisory Committee, the BOSC conducts business in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) (5 U.S.C. app. 2) and related regulations.

The BOSC is comprised of an Executive Committee and two supporting subcommittee(s): Social and Community Science, and Climate Change. Please visit https://www.epa.gov/aboutepa/about-office-research-and-development-ord to learn more about ORD's research programs.

Members of the BOSC constitute a distinguished body of non-EPA scientists, engineers, and economists who are experts in their respective fields. We are seeking SGEs to serve as special experts to assist the BOSC in the review of the New Chemicals Collaborative Research Program in the Fall of 2022.

The BOSC will be evaluating the Office of Research and Development (ORD)'s draft Strategic Research Action Plans Fiscal Years 2023-2026 in Fall 2022. The Fall 2022 meeting will provide a more in-depth evaluation of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) New Chemicals Collaborative Research Program (See Output CSS.8.4: Innovative science to support new chemicals evaluation in the draft StRAP for Chemical Safety and Sustainability) and associated research plan ( https://www.regulations.gov/document/EPA-HQ-OPPT-2022-0218-0004 ). An additional draft document will be provided that summarizes technical details of the research plan. ORD in partnership with the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP) are proposing to develop and implement a multi-year collaborative research program focused on approaches for performing risk assessments on new chemical substances under TSCA. The results of the effort are expected to bring innovative science to new chemical reviews, modernize the approaches used, and increase the transparency of the information underpinning the human health and ecological risk assessment process. Key areas proposed in the TSCA New Chemicals Collaborative Research Program include:

• Updating OCSPP's category and read-across approach which uses data from structurally similar chemicals to determine potential risks from new chemicals when data for those chemicals are lacking. This research effort will increase the efficiency of new chemical reviews by identifying appropriate analogues for read across and promoting the use of the best available data to protect human health and the environment. The existing category approach in use dates to 2010 and is available here: https://www.epa.gov/reviewing-new-chemicals-under-toxic-substances-control-act-tsca/chemical-categories-used-review-new .

• Digitizing and consolidating information on chemicals to include data and studies that currently only exist in hard copy or in disparate TSCA databases. The information will be combined with publicly available sources to expand the amount of information available, enhancing chemical reviews and enabling efficient sharing of chemical information across EPA. Safeguards for TSCA confidential business information will be maintained as appropriate in this process. Data curation in public databases will proceed and where possible these databases will be made interchangeable with International Uniform Chemical Information Database (IUCLID) formats.

• Updating and augmenting the models used for predicting a chemical's physical-chemical properties and environmental fate/transport, hazard, exposure (including functional use predictions), and toxicokinetics to provide a suite of models to be used for new chemicals assessments. The goal of this effort is to update the models to reflect the best available science, increase transparency, and establish a process for updating these models as science evolves. The predictive models currently in use by OCSPP for new chemical evaluation are available here: https://www.epa.gov/tsca-screening-tools .

• Exploring ways to integrate and apply new approach methods (NAMs) in new chemicals assessments, thereby reducing the use of animal testing. As this effort evolves, the goal is to develop a suite of accepted, fit-for-purpose NAMs that could be used by external stakeholders for data submissions under TSCA as well as informing and expanding new chemical categories.

• Developing a decision support tool that integrates the various information streams specifically used for new chemical risk assessments. The decision support tool will more efficiently integrate all the data streams ( e.g., chemistry, fate, exposures, hazards) into a final risk assessment and transparently document the decisions and assumptions made. Simply put, this will facilitate the tracking of the new chemicals program decisions and provide consistency within and across chemistries.

EPA will consider nominees from industry, business, public and private research institutes or organizations, academia, government (federal, state, local, and tribal) and non-government organizations, and other relevant interest areas. EPA values and welcomes diversity. All qualified candidates are encouraged to apply regardless of gender, race, disability, or ethnicity.

The EPA invites nominations of individuals to serve as SGEs with expertise or extensive experience in the following scientific disciplines and topic areas as they relate to human health and the environment:

Exposure modeling and/or assessment, including near-field and far-field sources

Nominations will be evaluated on the basis of several criteria including: (a) Demonstrated scientific and/or technical credentials and disciplinary expertise, knowledge, and experience in relevant fields; (b) availability to serve and willingness to commit time to the committee (approximately one to three meetings per year both by teleconferences and possibly face-to-face meetings); (c) absence of financial conflicts of interest; (d) absence of an appearance of a lack of impartiality; (e) demonstrated ability to work constructively and effectively on committees; and (f) background and experiences that would contribute to the diversity of viewpoints including workforce sector, geographical location, social, cultural, and educational backgrounds, and professional affiliations.

Any interested person or organization may nominate qualified persons to be considered for appointment. Nominations should be submitted via the BOSC website at: https://www.epa.gov/bosc. Nominations should be submitted no later than June 30, 2022. To receive full consideration, nominations should include all the information requested. EPA's nomination form requests: Contact information about the person making the nomination; contact information about the nominee; the disciplinary and specific areas of expertise of the nominee; the nominee's curriculum vita and/or resume; and additional information that would be useful for considering the nomination such as background and qualifications ( e.g., current position, educational background, expertise, research areas), experience relevant to the areas mentioned above, service on other advisory committees and professional societies, and availability to participate as an SGE. Persons having questions about the nomination procedures, or who are unable to submit nominations through the BOSC website, should contact Mr. Tom Tracy, as indicated above under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this notice.

Title and Form Number: EIB 92-30 Report of Premiums Payable for Financial Institutions Only.

OMB Number: 3048-0021.

Type of Review: Renewal.

Need and Use: This collection of information is necessary to determine eligibility of the applicant for EXIM assistance. The information collected enables EXIM to determine the eligibility of the shipment(s) for insurance and to calculate the premium due to EXIM for its support of the shipment(s) under its insurance program.

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

Annual Number of Respondents: 215.

Estimated Time per Respondent: 30 minutes.

Annual Burden Hours: 1,290 hours.

Frequency of Reporting of Use: Monthly.

Government Expenses:

Reviewing Time per Year: 860 hours.

Average Wages per Hour: $42.50.

Average Cost per Year: $36,550 (time * wages).

Benefits and Overhead: 20%.

Total Government Cost: $43,860.

On June 15, 1984, OMB delegated to the Board authority under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) to approve and assign OMB control numbers to collections of information conducted or sponsored by the Board. In exercising this delegated authority, the Board is directed to take every reasonable step to solicit comment. In determining whether to approve a collection of information, the Board will consider all comments received from the public and other agencies.

During the comment period for this proposal, a copy of the proposed PRA OMB submission, including the draft reporting form and instructions, supporting statement, and other documentation, will be made available on the Board's public website at https://www.federalreserve.gov/apps/reportforms/review.aspx or may be requested from the agency clearance officer, whose name appears above. Final versions of these documents will be made available at https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain, if approved.

The Board invites public comment on the following information collections, which are being reviewed under authority delegated by the OMB under the PRA. Comments are invited on the following:

a. Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the Board's functions, including whether the information has practical utility;

b. The accuracy of the Board's estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection, 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 information collection on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and

e. Estimates of capital or startup costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information.

At the end of the comment period, the comments and recommendations received will be analyzed to determine the extent to which the Board should modify the proposal.

Collection title: Reports of Foreign Banking Organizations.

Collection identifiers: FR Y-7N, FR Y-7NS, and FR Y-7Q.

OMB control number: 7100-0125.

Frequency: Quarterly, annually.

Respondents: Non-functionally regulated U.S. nonbank subsidiaries held by foreign banking organizations (FBOs) other than through a U.S. bank holding company (BHC), financial holding company (FHC), or U.S. bank.

Estimated number of respondents: FR Y-7N (quarterly): 28; FR Y-7N (annual): 14; FR Y-7NS: 18; FR Y-7Q (quarterly): 120; FR Y-7Q (annual): 30.

Estimated average hours per response: FR Y-7N (quarterly): 7.6; FR Y-7N (annual): 7.6; FR Y-7NS: 1; FR Y-7Q (quarterly): 3.25; FR Y-7Q (annual): 2.5.

Estimated annual burden hours: FR Y-7N (quarterly): 851; FR Y-7N (annual): 106; FR Y-7NS: 18; FR Y-7Q (quarterly): 1,560; FR Y-7Q (annual): 75.

General description of collection: The FR Y-7N consists of an income statement and a balance sheet; schedules that collect information on changes in equity capital, changes in the allowance for loan and lease losses, off-balance-sheet data items, and loans; and a memoranda section. All FBOs file the FR Y-7N quarterly for their significant nonbank subsidiaries that do not have a primary U.S. regulator other than the Federal Reserve System. Subsidiaries are defined as significant if they have total assets of at least $1 billion or off-balance-sheet activities (including commitments to purchase foreign currencies and U.S. dollar exchange, all other futures and forwards contracts, option contracts, and the notional value of interest rate swaps, exchange swaps and other swaps) of $5 billion or more, as of the end of a quarter. FBOs must commence quarterly reporting for a subsidiary at the end of the quarter in which the subsidiary meets the significance threshold, and must continue to file quarterly for the remainder of a calendar year even if the subsidiary no longer satisfies the size requirement for quarterly filing of the FR Y-7N.

The FR Y-7N is filed annually, as of December 31, for each individual nonbank subsidiary that does not meet the criteria for filing quarterly and that has total assets of at least $500 million.

The FR Y-7NS is an abbreviated reporting form that collects net income, total assets, equity capital, and total off-balance-sheet data items. The FR Y-7NS is filed annually, as of December 31, by top-tier FBOs for each individual nonbank subsidiary that does not have a primary U.S. regulator other than the Federal Reserve System (and does not meet the filing criteria for filing the FR Y-7N) with total assets greater than or equal to $250 million.

The FR Y-7Q collects consolidated capital and asset information from all FBOs. Part 1 of the reporting form currently collects the following information: Tier 1 capital; total risk-based capital; risk-weighted assets; total consolidated assets; total combined assets of U.S. operations; net of intercompany balances and transactions between U.S. domiciled affiliates, branches, and agencies; and total U.S. non-branch assets. In addition, an FBO that files the FR Y 7Q because it has made an effective election to be treated as an FHC also must provide separate capital schedules on Part 2 of the FR Y-7Q quarterly for each lower-tier FBO operating a branch, agency, Edge or agreement corporation, or commercial lending company in the United States. Part 1A of the FR Y-7Q is filed quarterly by FBOs if the top-tier FBO or any FBO in its tiered structure has made an effective election to be treated as an FHC and by FBOs with total consolidated assets of $50 billion or more, regardless of FHC status. Part 1B of the FR Y-7Q is filed quarterly by FBOs with combined U.S. assets of $100 billion or more, or combined U.S. assets of less than $100 billion but total consolidated assets of $250 billion or more. The FR Y-7Q is filed annually if the FBO or any FBO in its tiered structure has not effectively elected to be an FHC and the FBO has total consolidated assets of less than $50 billion.

Proposed revisions: For the FR Y-7Q, the Board proposes to add an additional line item on Part 1A., Capital and Asset Information for the Top-tier Foreign Banking Organization, to collect the total combined U.S. assets net of intercompany balances and transactions on a quarterly average basis. This line item would be used for analytical purposes to track the growth of FBOs in the U.S. and to make reporting more consistent with the reporting of total combined assets of U.S. operations, net of intercompany balances and transactions in the Systemic Risk Report (FR Y-15; OMB No. 7100-0352), which is filed by some FBOs.

The Board also proposes to revise the FR Y-7Q report to remove the option of filing on a fiscal year basis and to instead require the respondent to file on a calendar period basis. As of December 31, 2020, only approximately five percent of respondents submitted the FR Y-7Q on a fiscal year basis. The elimination of the fiscal filing basis would be consistent with other Federal Reserve regulatory reports. The change also would enhance the Board's ability to monitor FBOs that may be approaching the asset threshold to file the FR Y-15, as well as to provide data on the same filing frequency basis as with the U.S. legal entity regulatory report forms ( i.e., Consolidated Financial Statements for Holding Companies (FR Y-9C; OMB No. 7100-0128), Consolidated Reports of Condition of Income (FFIEC 031/041/051; OMB No. 7100-0036)). In addition, the change would enable calculations for Regulation TT assessments to be made at the same speed and efficiency as for domestic-only holding companies, which file the FR Y-9C.

Additionally, the Board proposes to change the filing deadline from 90 days after quarter-end to 30 days after quarter-end for quarterly filers and from 90 days after quarter-end to 45 days after quarter-end for annual filers. Shortening the reporting deadline will allow for more timely analysis needed for effective FBO supervision; the efficiency gain will also allow for a more expedient process for Supervision staff to have a full picture of the FBO's financial structure from parent company global and US assets, consistent with the FBO's legal entities. The instructions were modified, effective December 31, 2021, to note that respondents would also have the option to submit the FR Y-7Q report electronically via Reporting Central. Electronic filing provides respondents with a more efficient option to submit the FR Y-7Q report.

Finally, the Board proposes to remove line item 8, as-of financial date, in Part 1A and line item 6, as-of financial date, in Part 2, as the elimination of the fiscal year basis reporting makes these items unnecessary. The Board also proposes to make other minor clarifications and conforming edits to the form and instructions.

The proposed changes would be effective with the FR Y-7Q submission for the December 31, 2022, as-of date.

Legal authorization and confidentiality: The FR Y-7N, Y-7NS, and Y-7Q are authorized by the Bank Holding Company Act (BHC Act) and International Banking Act. The FR Y-7N, Y-7NS, and Y-7Q are additionally authorized by section 165 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. The FR Y-7N, Y-7NS, and Y-7Q are mandatory.

The information contained on the FR Y-7N, Y-7NS, and Y-7Q is generally not considered confidential unless an applicant requests confidential treatment in accordance with the Board's Rules Regarding Availability of Information. Requests for confidential treatment of information are reviewed on a case-by-case basis. Information provided on the FR Y-7N, Y-7NS, and Y-7Q may be exempt from disclosure pursuant to exemption 4 of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) if it is nonpublic commercial or financial information, which is both customarily and actually treated as private by the respondent. Submissions of the FR Y-7N, Y-7NS, and Y-7Q may also contain personnel and medical files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy, which are protected under exemption 6 of the FOIA; or information contained in or related to examination, operating, or condition reports prepared by, on behalf of, or for the use of an agency responsible for the regulation or supervision of financial institutions, which are protected under exemption 8 of the FOIA.

A. OMB Control Number, Title, and Any Associated Form(s) 9000-0073, Certain Federal Acquisition Regulation Part 32 Requirements B. Needs and Uses

DoD, GSA, and NASA are combining OMB Control Nos. for the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) by FAR part. This consolidation is expected to improve industry's ability to easily and efficiently identify burdens associated with a given FAR part. The review of the information collections by FAR part allows improved oversight to ensure there is no redundant or unaccounted for burden placed on industry. Lastly, combining information collections in a given FAR part is also expected to reduce the administrative burden associated with processing multiple information collections.

This justification supports the revision of OMB Control No. 9000-0073 and combines it with the previously approved information collections under OMB Control Nos. 9000-0070, 9000-0074, 9000-0102, and 9000-0144, with the new title “Certain Federal Acquisition Regulation Part 32 Requirements”. Upon approval of this consolidated information collection, OMB Control Nos. 9000-0070, 9000-0074, 9000-0102, and 9000-0144 will be discontinued. The burden requirements previously approved under the discontinued numbers will be covered under OMB Control No. 9000-0073.

This clearance covers the information that offerors, contractors, or both must submit to comply with the following FAR requirements:

FAR 32.408, Application for Advance Payments. In accordance with FAR 32.408(b), contractors requesting advance payments must submit their request in writing to the contracting officer and provide the following information:

○ A reference to the contract if the request concerns an existing contract, or a reference to the solicitation if the request concerns a proposed contract.

○ A cash flow forecast showing estimated disbursements and receipts for the period of contract performance.

○ The proposed total amount of advance payments.

○ The name and address of the financial institution at which the contractor expects to establish a special account as depository for the advance payments.

○ A description of the contractor's efforts to obtain unguaranteed private financing or a V-loan under eligible contracts.

○ Other information appropriate to an understanding of

the contractor's financial condition and need,

the contractor's ability to perform the contract without loss to the Government, and

financial safeguards needed to protect the Government's interest.

The information is used to determine if advance payments should be provided to the contractor.

FAR 52.232-1 through 52.232-4, 52.232-6, 52.232-7, and 52.232-10—Payments. The following FAR clauses require the contractor to (as appropriate to the payment terms specified in the contract) provide a proper invoice or voucher. The information is used to determine the proper amount of payments to Federal contractors.

○ 52.232-1, Payments.

○ 52.232-2, Payments under Fixed-Price Research and Development Contracts.

○ 52.232-3, Payments under Personal Services Contracts.

○ 52.232-4, Payments under Transportation Contracts and Transportation-Related Services Contracts.

○ 52.232-6, Payment under Communication Service Contracts with Common Carriers.

○ 52.232-7, Payments under Time-and-Materials and Labor-Hour Contracts.

○ 52.232-10, Payments under Fixed-Price Architect-Engineer Contracts.

“Proper invoice” is defined in FAR part 2 as an invoice that meets the minimum standards specified in FAR 32.905(b), which include the following items:

○ Name and address of the contractor.

○ Invoice date and invoice number.

○ Contract number or other authorization for supplies delivered or services performed (including order number and line item number).

○ Description, quantity, unit of measure, unit price, and extended price of supplies delivered or services performed.

○ Shipping and payment terms.

○ Name and address of contractor official to whom payment is to be sent.

○ Name (where practicable), title, phone number, and mailing address of person to notify in the event of a defective invoice.

○ Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN) if required by agency procedures.

○ Electronic funds transfer (EFT) banking information if required by agency procedures.

○ Any other information or documentation required by the contract ( e.g., evidence of shipment).

FAR 52.232-5, Payments under Fixed-Price Construction Contracts. This clause requires the contractor's request for progress payments to include the following substantiation:

○ An itemization of the amounts requested, related to the various elements of work required by the contract covered by the payment requested.

○ A listing of the amount included for work performed by each subcontractor under the contract.

○ A listing of the total amount of each subcontract under the contract.

○ A listing of the amounts previously paid to each such subcontractor under the contract.

○ Additional supporting data in a form and detail required by the contracting officer.

Paragraph (c) of FAR clause 52.232-5 requires contractors to provide a certification with each request for progress payment certifying that—

○ The amounts requested are only for performance in accordance with the specifications, terms, and conditions of the contract;

○ All payments due to subcontractors and suppliers from previous payments received under the contract have been made, and timely payments will be made from the proceeds of the payment covered by the certification;

○ The request for progress payment does not include any amounts which the prime contractor intends to withhold or retain from a subcontractor or supplier in accordance with the terms and conditions of the subcontract; and

○ The certification is not to be construed as final acceptance of a subcontractor's performance.

Paragraph (d) of FAR clause 52.232-5 requires contractors to notify contracting officers, if the contractor, after making a certified request for progress payments, discovers that a portion or all of the request constitutes a payment for performance by the contractor that fails to conform to the specifications, terms, and conditions of the contract. Contractors must notify the contracting officer that the performance deficiency has been corrected.

The information is used to determine the proper amount of payments to Federal contractors for construction contracts.

FAR 52.232-12, Advance Payments. If advance payments are authorized, this clause requires contractors to submit the following:

○ Per paragraph (g)—The financial institution agreement, in the form prescribed by the administering office, establishing the special account, and clearly setting forth the special character of the account and the responsibilities of the financial institution under the account.

○ Per paragraph (i)(3)—Notification of a lien in favor of the Government to a third person receiving any items or materials on which the Government has a lien, and a receipt from that third person acknowledging the existence of the lien. Contractors are also required to provide a copy of each receipt to the contracting officer.

○ Per paragraph (m)—(1) Monthly, signed or certified balance sheets and profit and loss statements together with a report on the operation of the special account in the form prescribed by the administering office; and (2) If requested, other information concerning the operation of the contractor's business. (This same requirement is at paragraph (j) of the clause with its Alternate V.)

If advance payments are authorized, the information is used to ensure proper procedures are followed to protect the Government's interest.

FAR 52.232-20 and 52.232-22—Limitation of Costs or Funds. FAR clause 52.232-20, Limitation of Cost, requires the contractor to notify the contracting officer in writing whenever it has reason to believe that—

○ The costs the contractors expect to incur under the contract in the next 60 days, when added to all costs previously incurred, will exceed 75 percent of the estimated cost of the contracts; or

○ The total cost for the performance of the contract will be greater or substantially less than estimated.

As part of the notification, the contractor must provide a revised estimate of the total cost of performing the contract.

FAR clause 52.232-22, Limitation of Funds, requires the contractor to notify the contracting officer in writing whenever it has reason to believe that the costs it expects to incur under the contract in the next 60 days, when added to all costs previously incurred, will exceed 75 percent of (1) the total amount so far allotted to the contract by the Government or, (2) if this is a cost-sharing contract, the amount then allotted to the contract by the Government plus the contractor's corresponding share. The notice must state the estimated amount of additional funds required to continue performance for the contract period. Sixty days before the end of the contract period, the contractor must notify the contracting officer in writing of the estimated amount of additional funds, if any, required to continue performance under the contract, and when the funds will be required.

The information is used to avoid cost overruns and to ensure that funding is available to complete work under Federal contracts.

FAR 52.232-27, Prompt Payment for Construction Contracts. Paragraph (a)(6)(ii) of FAR clause 52.232-27 requires contractors making a written demand to the designated payment office for additional penalty payment to support their demand with the following data:

• Specifically assert that late payment interest is due under a specific invoice, and request payment of all overdue late payment interest penalty and such additional penalty as may be required;

• Attach a copy of the invoice on which the unpaid late payment interest was due; and

• State that payment of the principal has been received, including the date of receipt.

Paragraph (e)(5) of FAR clause 52.232-27 requires contractors to notify contracting officers upon—

• Reduction of the amount of any subsequent certified application for payment; or

• Payment to the subcontractor of any withheld amounts of a progress payment, specifying: The amounts withheld; and the dates that the withholding began and ended.

Paragraph (g) of FAR clause 52.232-27 requires contractors to issue a written notice of any withholding to a subcontractor (with copy to the contracting officer), specifying—

• The amount to be withheld;

• The specific causes for the withholding under the terms of the subcontract; and

• The remedial actions to be taken by the subcontractor in order to receive payment of the amounts withheld.

Paragraph (l) of FAR clause 52.232-27 requires contractors to remit overpayments to the payment office cited in the contract along with a description that includes the following:

• Circumstances of the overpayment ( e.g., duplicate payment, erroneous payment, liquidation errors, date(s) of overpayment);

• Affected contract number and delivery order number if applicable;

• Affected line item or subline item, if applicable; and

• Contractor point of contact.

Contractors are required to provide a copy of the remittance and supporting documentation to the contracting officer.

The information is used to understand when the contractor withholds amounts from subcontractors and suppliers after the Government has already paid the contractor the amounts withheld.

FAR 52.232-34, Payment by Electronic Funds Transfer—Other than System for Award Management. This clause requires contractors to provide the following information to enable the Government to make payments under the contract by EFT:

○ The contract number (or other procurement identification number).

○ The contractor's name and remittance address.

○ The signature, title, and telephone number of the contractor official authorized to provide this information.

○ The name, address, and 9-digit Routing Transit Number of the contractor's financial agent.

○ The contractor's account number and the type of account.

○ If applicable, the Fedwire Transfer System telegraphic abbreviation of the contractor's financial agent.

○ If applicable, the contractor must provide the name, address, telegraphic abbreviation, and 9-digit Routing Transit Number of the correspondent financial institution receiving the wire transfer payment if the contractor's financial agent is not directly on-line to the Fedwire Transfer System.

The burden to provide the information required by the FAR clause at 52.232-33, Payment by Electronic Funds Transfer—System for Award Management, is covered by OMB Control Number 9000-0189, Certain Federal Acquisition Regulation Part 4 Requirements. OMB Control Number 9000-0189 accounts for new registrations and renewals in the System for Award Management, which includes providing the EFT information.

The information is used to enable the Government to make contract payments by EFT.

Respondents: 275,319.

Total Annual Responses: 1,817,432.

Total Burden Hours: 471,947.

A 60-day notice was published in the Federal Register at 87 FR 1599, on March 21, 2022. Two comments were received; however, they did not change the estimate of the burden.

Comments: One of the comments is not related to the information collection. The other comment is a vendor's presentation of their products and services regarding payment solutions.

Response: The commenters did not express an opinion on whether the estimated number of burden hours is accurate; or ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information. The information collection revision does not reflect any changes to the FAR requirements. Adjustments are made to the public and Government burden estimates based on the most recent data available.

Obtaining Copies: Requesters may obtain a copy of the information collection documents from the GSA Regulatory Secretariat Division, by calling 202-501-4755 or emailing GSARegSec@gsa.gov. Please cite OMB Control No. 9000-0073, Certain Federal Acquisition Regulation Part 32 Requirements.

Description: ORR reimburses, to the extent of available appropriations, certain non-federal costs for the provision of cash and medical assistance (CMA) to refugees, along with allowable expenses for the administration of the refugee resettlement program at the state level. States and Replacement Designees currently submit the ORR-2 Quarterly Report on Expenditures and Obligations, which provides aggregate expenditure and obligation data. The ORR-2 collects expenditures and obligations data separately for each of the four following CMA program components: Refugee cash assistance, refugee medical assistance, CMA administration, and services for unaccompanied minors. This breakdown of financial status data allows ORR to track program expenditures in greater detail to anticipate any funding issues and to meet the requirements of ORR regulations at CFR 400.211 to collect these data for use in estimating future costs of the refugee resettlement program. ORR must implement the methodology at CFR 400.211 each year after receipt of its annual appropriation to ensure that appropriated funds will be adequate for reimbursement to states of the costs for assistance provided to entering refugees. The estimating methodology prescribed in the regulations requires the use of actual past costs by program component. If the methodology indicates that appropriated funds are inadequate, ORR must take steps to reduce federal expenses, such as by limiting the number of months of eligibility for Refugee Cash Assistance and Refugee Medical Assistance. The ORR-2 is a single-page financial report that allows ORR to collect the necessary data to ensure that funds are adequate for the projected need and thereby meet the requirements of both the Refugee Act and ORR regulations.

Respondents: State governments and Replacement Designees.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 396.

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

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1522 Sec. 412 and 8 U.S.C. 524 (Title IV), Sec. 414.

Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521), Federal Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. “Collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection of information set forth in this document.

With respect to the following collection of information, FDA invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques, when appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

Section 522 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 360l) authorizes FDA to require a manufacturer to conduct postmarket surveillance (PS) of any device that meets the criteria set forth in the statute. The PS regulation establishes procedures that FDA uses to approve and disapprove PS plans. The regulation provides instructions to manufacturers, so they know what information is required in a PS plan submission. FDA reviews PS plan submissions in accordance with 21 CFR 822.15 through 822.19 of the regulation, which describe the grounds for approving or disapproving a PS plan. In addition, the PS regulation provides instructions to manufacturers to submit interim and final reports in accordance with 21 CFR 822.38. Respondents to this collection of information are those manufacturers that require PS of their products.

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

Explanation of Reporting Burden Estimate: The burden captured in table 1 is based on the data from FDA's internal tracking system. 21 CFR 822.26, 822.27, and 822.34 do not constitute information collection subject to review under the PRA because it entails no burden other than that necessary to identify the respondent, the date, the respondent's address, and the nature of the instrument (see 5 CFR 1320.3(h)(1)).

Explanation of Recordkeeping Burden Estimate: FDA expects that at least some of the manufacturers will be able to satisfy the PS requirement using information or data they already have. For purposes of calculating burden, however, FDA has assumed that each PS order can only be satisfied by a 3-year clinically based surveillance plan, using three investigators. These estimates are based on FDA's knowledge and experience with PS.

We have adjusted our burden estimate, which has resulted in a decrease to the currently approved burden. Our estimated burden for the information collection reflects an overall decrease of 4,780 hours and a corresponding decrease of 13 responses. We believe these adjustments more accurately reflect the current number of requests associated with postmarket surveillance of medical devices.

I. Background

FDA is announcing the availability of a guidance for industry entitled “Advanced Prostate Cancer: Developing Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Analogues.” This guidance describes FDA's current recommendations regarding the overall development program and clinical trial designs for developing GnRH analogues to treat advanced prostate cancer.

This guidance finalizes the draft guidance of the same title issued on July 18, 2019 (84 FR 34400). FDA considered comments received on the draft guidance as the guidance was finalized. Changes from the draft to the final guidance included clarifying the scope of the guidance in the introduction section, adding recommendations on safety monitoring, and broadening recommendations on the appropriate trial population to include metastatic as well as biochemically recurrent disease rather than only metastatic.

This guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The guidance represents the current thinking of FDA on “Advanced Prostate Cancer: Developing Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Analogues.” It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations.

While this guidance contains no collection of information, it does refer to previously approved FDA collections of information. Therefore, clearance by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521) is not required for this guidance. The previously approved collections of information are subject to review by the OMB under the PRA. The collections of information in 21 CFR part 210 and 211, 21 CFR part 314, and 21 CFR part 601 have been approved under OMB control numbers 0910-0139, 0910-0001, and 0910-0338, respectively. The collections of information in 21 CFR part 312 have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0014. The collections of information in 21 CFR 201.56 and 201.57 for the content and format of labeling for human prescription drug and biological products have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0572. The collections of information in 21 CFR part 58 for good laboratory practice have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0119.

Persons with access to the internet may obtain the guidance at either https://www.fda.gov/drugs/guidance-compliance-regulatory-information/guidances-drugs, https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents, or https://www.regulations.gov.

Agenda: On July 28, 2022, the committee will discuss the topic of skin lesion analyzer technology and its application to detecting skin cancers in various patient care settings. The skin lesion analyzer devices on which the discussion is focused at this meeting are algorithm-based devices for adjunctive detection of various skin lesions, including skin cancers. We will refer to these computer algorithm-aided devices for adjunctive detection of lesions suspicious for skin cancers as Skin Lesion Analyzers (SLAs). In recent years, FDA has seen an increased interest in the development of skin lesion analyzers that employ artificial intelligence and machine learning. These devices include a range of technologies and intended user populations. FDA is interested in the committee members' perspectives on approaches for evaluating the performance of SLA devices given the heterogeneity of technologies and indications.

FDA is convening this committee to promote an open public discussion of, and seek expert opinion on, currently available scientific and clinical data pertaining to the diagnosing standard also known as ground truth, performance criteria, and patient population in future studies assisting medical providers in properly identifying skin lesions by a computer algorithm-aided device. The committee will be asked to discuss and provide recommendations regarding:

• The diagnosing standard, or ground truth, based on factual data that should be used as a comparison for the performance of diagnostic devices including, but not limited to, histology, consensus opinion of a panel of dermatologists, opinion of a single dermatologist, or other means.

• Acceptable thresholds for sensitivity and specificity based on the target diagnosis (melanoma, basal cell carcinoma (BCC), squamous cell carcinoma (SCC)), or on the intended user (dermatologist, primary care physician, lay user) if assessed for standalone performance.

• Patient characteristics, including lower or higher incidence populations, that should be tested before marketing.

• Balance of increased access with risk mitigation measures that are appropriate when the devices are used by lay people, by populations with very high or very low incidence of melanoma, by populations with low incidence, but high mortality associated with melanoma, or by the target diagnosis/lesion type (melanoma, BCC, SCC)

On July 29, 2022, the committee will discuss the possible reclassification of approved computer-aided melanoma detection class III devices: (1) MelaFind, a device that uses multispectral imaging and was approved in 2012 (P090012; https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfpma/pma.cfm?id=p090012 ), and (2) Nevisense, a device that measures impedance and was approved in 2017 (P150046; https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfpma/pma.cfm?id=P150046 ). Both Melafind and Nevisense devices are intended for use on cutaneous lesions suspicious for melanoma when a dermatologist chooses to obtain additional information when considering biopsy. The committee will discuss if there is sufficient information to reclassify computer-aided devices for adjunctive diagnostic information of lesions suspicious for melanoma from class III to class II, and what special controls may be appropriate to provide reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness for these devices if they are reclassified as class II devices.

FDA intends to make background material available to the public no later than 2 business days before the meeting. If FDA is unable to post the background material on its website prior to the meeting, the background material will be made publicly available on FDA's website after the meeting. Background material is available at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/Calendar/default.htm . Scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee meeting link. The meeting will include slide presentations with audio components to allow the presentation of materials in a manner that most closely resembles an in-person advisory committee meeting.

Procedure: Interested persons may present data, information, or views, orally or in writing, on issues pending before the committee. All electronic and written submissions submitted to the Docket (see ADDRESSES ) on or before July 11, 2022, will be provided to the panel. Oral presentations from the public will be scheduled on July 28, 2022, between approximately 1 p.m. and 2 p.m. Eastern Time, and on July 29, 2022, between approximately 1 p.m. and 2 p.m. Eastern Time. Those individuals interested in making formal oral presentations should notify the contact person and submit a brief statement of the general nature of the evidence or arguments they wish to present, the names and addresses of proposed participants, and an indication of the approximate time requested to make their presentation on or before June 28, 2022. Time allotted for each presentation may be limited. If the number of registrants requesting to speak is greater than can be reasonably accommodated during the scheduled open public hearing session, FDA may conduct a lottery to determine the speakers for the scheduled open public hearing session. The contact person will notify interested persons regarding their request to speak by June 29, 2022.

For press inquiries, please contact the Office of Media Affairs at fdaoma@fda.hhs.gov or 301-796-4540.

FDA welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with disabilities. If you require accommodations due to a disability, please contact Artair Mallett, at Artair.Mallett@fda.hhs.gov or 301-796-9638, at least 7 days in advance of the meeting.

FDA is committed to the orderly conduct of its advisory committee meetings. Please visit our website at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/ucm111462.htm for procedures on public conduct during advisory committee meetings.

Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2).

Part N, National Institutes of Health, of the Statement of Organization, Functions, and Delegations of Authority for the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) (May 27, 1975 at 40 FR 22859, as amended most recently on November 3, 2004 at 69 FR 64081, and redesignated from Part HN as Part N on November 9, 1995 at 60 FR 56605, is amended as set forth below to implement ARPA-H.

Section N, Organization and Functions is amended as follows:

(1) Under Grants Management Branch (NW83, formerly HNW83) insert the following:

Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (NY, formerly HNY). (1) Provides leadership for high-risk, high-reward biomedical and health research to speed application and implementation of health breakthroughs equitably. (2) Creates, supports, and manages programs to catalyze the development of transformative, evidenced-based, use-driven capabilities, platforms, and technologies in a range of biomedical and health research areas. (3) Facilitates partnerships and collaboration among government, academia, industry, and other sectors to accelerate the translation of innovation into meaningful and measurable benefits for the nation. (4) Converts use-driven research into tangible, sustainable solutions for patients.

Acquisition and Contracting Office (NY2, formerly HNY2). (1) Advises the ARPA-H Director and staff on acquisition and contract and grant financial advisory services. (2) Develops/implements ARPA-H policies, provides oversight, and manages the operational components in the areas of acquisition and contracts management, including other transactions. (3) Manages and conducts a comprehensive program of all research and development contracting, non-research and development contracting, ARPA-H support contracting, and commercial item acquisitions using simplified acquisition procedures, GSA Federal Supply Schedule acquisitions and simplified acquisitions. (4) Provides advice and assistance regarding all phases of the acquisition cycle from planning to closeout with the purpose of accomplishing all acquisitions needed for the scientific mission and all related acquisitions required by its customers.

Comptroller's Office (NY3, formerly HNY3). (1) Directs ARPA-H-wide budget policy, planning, analysis, formulation, and presentation, in collaboration with HHS Office of the Assistant Secretary for Financial Resources and NIH Office of Budget. (2) Manages the ARPA-H appropriated budget, including reprogramming and coordination of the use of the Director's Discretionary Fund and transfer authority. (3) Advises the ARPA-H Director and staff and provides leadership and direction for budgetary matters and financial management activities. (4) Develops policies and instructions for central services budget preparation and presentation. (5) Administers allocation of funds and manages a system of fund and budgetary controls. (6) Provides an ARPA-H manpower resource control system designed to allocate resources. (7) Provides, develops, and maintains an ARPA-H Management Account Structure. (8) Directs planning and implementation of ARPA-H fiscal systems and procedures, in coordination with NIH and/or HHS fiscal systems and procedures, and provides accounting services to all ARPA-H components. (9) Supports the Office of Acquisition and Contracting (OAC) in the development of policies and procedures pertaining to grants and contracts.

Engagement and Communications Office (NY4, formerly HNY4). (1) Plans and directs activities to communicate information about ARPA-H programs and accomplishments to the general public, scientific community, patients and patient groups, professional societies and organizations, and public advocacy groups. (2) Advises the Director of ARPA-H on effective communications strategies. (3) Represents the Director of ARPA-H in relations with media, scientific publications, and other public stakeholder groups. (4) Coordinates communications policy, strategy, and activities, including Freedom of Information Act requests, with the NIH Office of Communications and Public Liaison. (5) Leads internal and external engagement activities and outreach efforts to develop, build, and improve ARPA-H relationships with stakeholders. (6) Develops and implements initiatives to collect feedback and gain support of ARPA-H research initiatives. (7) Collaborates with the ARPA-H Office of Legislative and Congressional Affairs on a range of external advocacy initiatives in furtherance of ARPA-H's mission. (8) Creates and publishes public and agency information resources including regular publications in a variety of formats. (9) Fosters participation in and promotion of ARPA-H activities. (10) Maintains resources for ARPA-H special events, recruitment initiatives and other public-facing activities.

Legislative and Governmental Affairs Office (NY5, formerly HNY5). (1) Advises the ARPA-H Director and staff on the full range of legislative and intragovernmental issues, and provides leadership and direction for ARPA-H legislative analysis, development, and liaison. (2) Identifies, analyzes, and reports on legislative developments relevant to ARPA-H programs and activities and the national biomedical and health research effort. (3) Monitors new legislative proposals and their progress through the legislative process, including changes in the statutory base of ARPA-H activities, and develops and coordinates technical assistance. (4) Assesses, monitors, and manages the ARPA-H relationship with the ARPA-H Congressional Authorizing and Appropriations Committees, as well as other agencies across the federal government, and takes necessary action to facilitate improvements in these relationships. (5) Provides coordination on ARPA-H legislative matters with the NIH, HHS, Congress, Federal Agencies, and other non-Federal national and international organizations. (6) Coordinates the preparation of testimony or statements for ARPA-H leadership before congressional committees or other groups. (7) Develops responses to Congressional requests, develops responses to report language, and special reports, staff documents, or other materials concerning ARPA-H interests, activities, and relationships.

Strategic Resources Office (NY6, formerly HNY6). (1) Advises the ARPA-H Director and staff on all phases of ARPA-H-wide administration and management. (2) Provides leadership and direction to all aspects of ARPA-H management. (3) Oversees the management of functions in the areas of personnel management, management policy, management assessment, and logistics management, IT support, safety, space and facility management, property, support services, and security operations. (4) Coordinates with and serves as a liaison to the relevant NIH offices to provide a high-level of service to ARPA-H staff.

Treatment Innovation Office (NY7, formerly HNY7). (1) Furthers development of novel and innovative therapeutics or other interventions to manage, treat, or cure diseases and conditions. (2) Advises the ARPA-H Director on matters concerning ARPA-H-sponsored research activities related to disease or condition management therapies. (3) Responds to requests for information on highly technical matters and matters of public policy related to therapeutics and treatment interventions.

Health Equity, Dissemination, and Implementation Office (NY8, formerly HNY8). (1) Advances programs that concentrate on promoting health equity, access to care, and ethical aspects of science and technology development. (2) Undertakes projects and initiatives to address and lessen health disparities and inequities in biomedical and health research within the United States and abroad. (3) Advises the ARPA-H Director on matters concerning ARPA-H-sponsored research activities related to health equity, inclusion, recruitment, enrollment, and retention, access to care, and ethical aspects of science and technology development, as well dissemination and implementation of those research advances into real-world settings and clinical practice. (4) Responds to requests for information on highly technical matters and matters of scientific and public policy related to health equity, inclusion, recruitment, enrollment, and retention, access to care, and ethical aspects of science and technology development, as well dissemination and implementation of those research advances into real-world settings and clinical practice.

Health Data Office (NY9, formerly HNY9). (1) Focuses on thoughtful approaches to revolutionizing how scientific and health data and information technology are collected, organized, integrated, and used. (2) Develops strategies to assemble interdisciplinary teams to fuse mathematical approaches and biomedical research creating massive datasets that are carefully annotated, made widely available, allow for integration across programs, and are sensitive to issues of subject consent, personal privacy, and unintended biases that are crucial for addressing the most significant biomedical problems faced by society. (3) Advises the ARPA-H Director on matters concerning ARPA-H-sponsored research activities related to health data and information technology. (4) Responds to requests for information on highly technical matters and matters of scientific and public policy related to health data and information technology.

Health Promotion and Disease Detection Office (NYA, formerly HNYA). (1) Advances approaches, interventions, and technologies that further the overall health and wellness of Americans and prevent diseases. (2) Promotes innovation in tools, technologies, processes, or other approaches that enhance early detection of diseases. (3) Advises the ARPA-H Director on matters concerning ARPA-H-sponsored research activities related to health promotion and disease detection. (4) Responds to requests for information on highly technical matters and matters of public policy related to health promotion and disease detection.

Health Resources and Policies Office (NYB, formerly HNYB). (1) Advances progress in confronting challenges to the overall ecosystem of biomedical and health research, whether they be processes, policies, or models, to enable acceleration of advances. (2) Applies scientific and engineering principles to solve challenges that delay the delivery of technologies, interventions, or other approaches to the patient. (3) Advises the ARPA-H Director on matters concerning ARPA-H-sponsored research activities related to health resources and policy. (4) Responds to requests for information on highly technical matters and matters of scientific and public policy related to health resources and policy.

Systems Technology Office (NYC, formerly HNYC). (1) Focuses on those systems that impact health—from physiologic systems ( e.g., immune) to the healthcare system and everything in between. (2) Speeds progress in the integration of systems, including and especially technological approaches to doing so. (3) Advises the ARPA-H Director on matters concerning ARPA-H-sponsored research activities related to health systems technology. (4) Responds to requests for information on highly technical matters and matters of scientific and public policy related to health systems technology.

Equity and Inclusion Office (NYD, formerly HNYD). (1) Coordinates, facilitates, and supports programs to ensure equity, diversity, and inclusion in all aspects of ARPA-H's work. (2) Provides strategic and programmatic leadership for ARPA-H's efforts to reduce health disparities and foster health equity in biomedical research. (3) Evaluates ARPA-H's progress towards achieving greater diversity and health equity in biomedical and health research. (4) Promotes ARPA-H efforts to build a diverse cohort of collaborators, staff, performers, and others.

Strategic Planning, Evaluation, and Analytics Office (NYE, formerly HNYE). (1) Oversees ARPA-H-wide planning, evaluation, and analysis/analytic activities. (2) Advises ARPA-H leadership and staff on all aspects of strategic planning, reporting, and operational effectiveness for ARPA-H activities. (3) Provides leadership and guidance to ARPA-H's business community in the development and oversight of a strategic administrative management plan, goals, organizational effectiveness and business analytics. (4) Oversees the development of analytic and evaluation strategies to drive greater efficiency and effectiveness in administrative and programmatic operations.

Innovation and Entrepreneurship Office (NYF, formerly HNYF). (1) Inspires innovation and creativity throughout ARPA-H, including stimulating the culture of innovation, ideation, and dynamic thinking and leveraging design research and design thinking. (2) Promotes practical strategies to provide resources for programs and projects to incorporate and implement transition principles to inform innovation in overall ARPA-H commercialization strategies. (3) Serves as the ARPA-H focal point for the management of all Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) Program activities, and implementation of pertinent legislation, rules and regulations and associated matters related to the SBIR/STTR Program. (4) Proposes and implements innovative strategies to promote the commercialization of innovative high impact technologies including research tools, medical devices, and therapeutics throughout the program development and management lifecycle. (5) Assesses the commercial potential of ARPA-H technology priorities and provides guidance on how best to structure programs, projects, and goals for successful transition.

Delegations of Authority: All delegations and redelegations of authority to officers and employees of NIH that were in effect immediately prior to the effective date of this amendment and are consistent with this amendment shall continue in effect, pending further redelegation.

The CISA Cybersecurity Advisory Committee was established under the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Pub.L. 116-283). Notice of this meeting is given under FACA, 5 U.S.C. Appendix (Pub. L. 92-463). The CISA Cybersecurity Advisory Committee advises the CISA Director on matters related to the development, refinement, and implementation of policies, programs, planning, and training pertaining to the cybersecurity mission of the Agency.

Agenda: The CISA Cybersecurity Advisory Committee will meet in an open session on Wednesday, June 22, 2022 from 12 p.m. to 2:30 p.m. CT to discuss CISA Cybersecurity Advisory Committee activities. The open session will include: (1) A period for public comment, and (2) updates from the six subcommittees, to including deliberation and voting on recommendations from the CISA Cybersecurity Advisory Committee to CISA.

The committee will also meet in a closed session from 8:30 a.m. to 12 p.m. CT to participate in an operational discussion that will address areas of critical cybersecurity vulnerabilities and priorities for CISA. Government officials will share sensitive information with CSAC members on initiatives and future security requirements for assessing cyber risks to critical infrastructure.

Basis for Closure: In accordance with section 10(d) of FACA and 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(9)(B), The Government in the Sunshine Act, it has been determined that one agenda item requires closure, as the disclosure of the information that will be discussed would not be in the public interest.

This agenda item addresses areas of CISA's operations that include critical cybersecurity vulnerabilities and priorities for CISA. Government officials will share sensitive information with CSAC members on initiatives and future security requirements for assessing cyber risks to critical infrastructure. The premature disclosure of this information to the public would be likely to significantly frustrate implementation of proposed agency actions.

Due to the sensitive nature of this discussion, this portion of the meeting is required to be closed pursuant to section 10(d) of FACA and 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(9)(B).

The HCV Mobility Demonstration Evaluation Data Files will be a data system established to store the information that is needed to evaluate the impact of the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) Mobility Demonstration. The evaluation will assess the implementation and impact of the pairing of mobility services with HUD housing assistance on a broad range of participant outcomes for both adults and children. In addition to assessing the impact of the program on participating households, the evaluation will also seek to understand the perspective of the public housing agencies that implement the program, the perspective of the mobility service providers that offer mobility services to participating households, and the perspective of landlords in the communities where the demonstration is implemented. This System of Records will contain all information that will be analyzed the evaluate the impact of the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) Mobility Demonstration.

This notice informs the public that HUD has submitted to OMB a request for approval of the information collection described in Section A. The Federal Register notice that solicited public comment on the information collection for a period of 60 days was published on March 11, 2022, at 87 FR 14028.

Title of Information Collection: Manufactured Housing Survey.

OMB Approval Number: 2528-0029.

Type of Request: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Form Number: C-MH-9A.

Description of the need for the information and proposed use: The Manufactured Housing Survey collects data monthly on the characteristics of newly manufactured homes placed for residential use. Key data collected includes sales price and the number of units placed and sold. A letter is sent to the dealer—4 months after the—shipment date. Other selected housing characteristics collected include size, location, and titling. HUD uses the statistics to respond to a Congressional mandate in the Housing and Community Development Act of 1980, 42 U.S.C. 5424 note, which authorizes HUD to use its discretion to take actions necessary ensure that the public is fully aware of the distinctions between the various types of manufactured housing. Accordingly, HUD collects, and reports manufactured home sales and price information for the nation, census regions, states, and selected metropolitan areas and monitors whether new manufactured homes are being placed on owned rather than rented lots. HUD also used these data to monitor total housing production and its affordability.

Furthermore, the Manufactured Housing Survey serves as the basis for HUD's mandated indexing of loan limits. Section 2145(b) of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (HERA), Public Law 110-289, 122 Stat. § 2844-2845, requires HUD to develop a method of indexing to annually adjust Title I manufactured home loan limits. This index is based on manufactured housing price data collected by—the United States Census Bureau using this survey. Section 2145(b) of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (HERA), Public Law 110-289, 122 Stat. § 2844-2845 also amends the maximum loan limits for manufactured home loans insured under Title I.

In Title I Letter TI-480, HUD implemented the revised loan limits, as shown below, for all manufactured home loans for which applications are received on or after March 3, 2009.

The methodology for collecting information on new manufactured homes involves contacting dealers from a monthly sample of new manufactured homes shipped by manufacturers. The units are sampled from lists obtained from the Institute for Building Technology and Safety. A file of all manufactured homes sections shipped during the month is provided to the Census Bureau by the Institute for Building Technology and Safety (IBTS) on a monthly basis. Dealers that take shipment of the selected homes are mailed a survey form four months after shipment for recording the status of the manufactured home.

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

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

(2) If the information will be processed and used in a timely manner;

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

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

(5) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond; including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of esponses. HUD encourages interested parties to submit comment in response to these questions.

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

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

Title of Information Collection: Application for FHA Insured Mortgages.

OMB Approval Number: 2502-0059.

Type of Request: Revision of currently approved collection.

Form Number: HUD-92900-A, HUD-92900-B, HUD-92900-LT, HUD-92561, Model Notice for Informed Consumer Choice Disclosure, Model Pre-Insurance Review/Checklist, Settlement Certification (previously known as Addendum to HUD-1) and HUD-92544.

Description of the need for the information and proposed use: Specific forms and related documents are needed to determine the eligibility of the borrower and proposed mortgage transaction for FHA's mortgage insurance endorsement. Additional documentation requirements for refinances with partial claims. Lenders seeking FHA's insurance prepare certain forms to collect data.

Respondents ( i.e., affected public): Individuals (loan applicants) and Business or other for-profit (lenders).

Estimated Number of Respondents: 1,912.

Estimated Number of Responses: 6,212.229.

Frequency of Response: One for each FHA-insured mortgage.

Average Hours per Response: 1.35 hour (0.74) (varies per form and type of loan).

Total Estimated Burdens: 737,367.

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

(1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond; including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

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

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

The plat, in one sheet, incorporating the field notes of the dependent resurvey of a portion of the south boundary and subdivisional lines and the subdivision of sections 27 and 34, Township 15 South, Range 13 East, Boise Meridian, Idaho, was accepted December 22, 2021.

The plat, in one sheet, incorporating the field notes of the dependent resurvey of portions of the east boundary and subdivisional lines and the subdivision of section 25, Township 1 North, Range 12 East, Boise Meridian, Idaho, was accepted January 12, 2022.

The plat, in one sheet, incorporating the field notes of the dependent resurvey of a portion of the north boundary and subdivisional lines and the subdivision of section 4, Township 16 South, Range 11 East, Boise Meridian, Idaho, was accepted January 13, 2022.

The plat, in 3 sheets, incorporating the field notes of the corrective dependent resurvey of portions of the east boundary and subdivisional lines, and the dependent resurvey of portions of the 1875 south boundary, subdivisional lines and subdivision of sections 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 32, 33, 34, and 35, and the survey of tracts 37 through 41, Township 5 South, Range 35 East, Boise Meridian, Idaho, was accepted February 28, 2022.

The plat, in one sheet, incorporating the field notes of the corrective dependent resurvey of portions of the 1892 south boundary, and the dependent resurvey of a portion of the 1892 south boundary, and the survey of tracts 37 through 40, Township 5 1/2 South, Range 35 East, Boise Meridian, Idaho, was accepted February 28, 2022.

The plat, in two sheets, incorporating the field notes of the dependent resurvey of portions of the south boundary, east boundary, subdivisional lines and subdivision of sections 25, 26 and 35, Township 8 South, Range 40 East, Boise Meridian, Idaho, was accepted March 21, 2022.

The plat, in two sheets, incorporating the field notes of the dependent resurvey of portions of the east boundary, subdivisional lines and the 1892 meanders of the Clearwater River in section 28, and subdivision of sections 25 and 28, Township 37 North, Range 2 West, Boise Meridian, Idaho, was accepted March 29, 2022.

The plat, in three sheets, incorporating the field notes of the dependent resurvey of portions of the subdivisional lines, the 1915 segregation survey of the Big Four Lode Mining Claim, the original 1897 meanders of the Clearwater River in sections 17 and 28, and subdivision of sections 8, 14, 17, and 28, Township 34 North, Range 3 East, Boise Meridian, Idaho, was accepted May 17, 2022.

A person or party who wishes to protest one or more plats of survey identified above must file a written notice of protest with the Chief Cadastral Surveyor for Idaho, Bureau of Land Management within 30 calendar days from the date of this publication at the address listed in the ADDRESSES section of this notice. The protest must identify the plat(s) of survey that the person or party wishes to protest and contain all reasons and evidence in support of the protest. The protest must be filed before the scheduled date of official filing for the plat(s) of survey being protested. Any protest filed after the scheduled date of official filing will be untimely and will not be considered. A protest is considered filed on the date it is received by the Chief Cadastral Surveyor for Idaho during regular business hours; if received after regular business hours, a protest will be considered filed the next business day. If a protest against a plat of survey is received prior to the scheduled date of official filing, the official filing of the plat of survey identified in the protest will be stayed pending consideration of the protest. A plat of survey will not be officially filed until the next business day following dismissal or resolution of all protests of the plat.

Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in a protest, you should be aware that the documents you submit, including your personal identifying information, may be made publicly available in their entirety at any time. While you can ask us to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

The Commission instituted this investigation on October 19, 2020, based on a complaint, as supplemented, filed by DivX, LLC (“DivX”) of San Diego, California. 85 FR 66355 (Oct. 19, 2020). The complaint alleges a violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, from the importation, sale for importation, or sale in the United States after importation of certain video processing devices, components thereof, and digital smart televisions containing the same by reason of infringement of one or more asserted claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,832,297; 10,212,486; 10,412,141; and 10,484,749. Id. The complaint further alleges the existence of a domestic industry. Id.

The Commission's notice of investigation names the following respondents: Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. of Gyeonggi-do, Korea; Samsung Electronics America, Inc. of Ridgefield Park, New Jersey; Samsung Electronics HCMC CE Complex Co., Ltd. of Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam (collectively, “Samsung”); LG Electronics Inc. of Seoul, Korea; LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc. of Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey (collectively “LG”); MediaTek, Inc. of Hsinchu City, Taiwan; MediaTek USA Inc. of San Jose, California; MStar Semiconductor, Inc. of Hsinchu Hsien, Taiwan (collectively, “MediaTek”); Realtek Semiconductor Corp. of Hsinchu, Taiwan (“Realtek”); TCL Corporation of Huizhou, Guangdong, China; TCL Technology Corporation of Huizhoug, Guangdong, China; TCL Electronics Holdings Ltd. of Shenzhen, Guangdong, China; TTE Technology, Inc. of Corona, California; Shenzhen TCL New Technologies Co. of Shenzhen, Guangdong, China; TCL King Electrical Appliances (Huizhou) Co. Ltd. of Huizhou, Guangdong, China; TCL MOKA International Ltd. of Sha Tin, New Territories, Hong Kong; and TCL Smart Device (Vietnam) Co., Ltd. of Bac Tan Uyen District, Binh Duong Province, Vietnam (collectively, “TCL”). Id. at 66356. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations was not named as a party to this investigation. Id.

The Commission has partially terminated the investigation with respect to certain patents and patent claims. Order No. 25 (Jan. 15, 2021), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Feb. 1, 2021); Order No. 34 (Feb. 19, 2021), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (March 15, 2021); Order No. 49 (April 21, 2021), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (May 10, 2021); Order No. 65 (June 28, 2021), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (July 28, 2021).

The Commission has also partially terminated the investigation with respect to certain respondents due to settlement agreements. See Order No. 37 (terminating MediaTek), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (March 12, 2021); Order No. 67 (July 16, 2021) (terminating RealTek), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Aug. 4, 2021); Order No. 69 (Aug. 12, 2021) (terminating LG, Samsung), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Sept. 15, 2021).

On April 19, 2022, DivX and TCL jointly moved to terminate the investigation based on a settlement agreement that resolves the dispute between the parties.

On April 22, 2022, the presiding ALJ issued the subject ID (Order No. 76) granting the joint motion to terminate the investigation based on the settlement agreement. The ID finds that, pursuant to Commission Rules 210.21(a)(1), (b)(1) (19 CFR 210.21(a)(1), (b)(1)), DivX and TCL have represented that there are no other agreements, express or implied, oral or written, between them regarding the subject matter of this investigation. The ID further finds that termination is proper because it would not be contrary to the public health and welfare, competitive conditions in the U.S. economy, the production of like or directly competitive conditions in the United States, or U.S. consumers. The ID further finds that termination is in the public interest, and it will conserve public and private resources.

No party filed a petition for review of the subject ID.

On October 4, 2021, former respondent RealTek filed a motion for sanctions against DivX, pursuant to Commission Rules 210.4 and 210.25 (19 CFR 210.4, 210.25), for alleged misrepresentations and misconduct during the investigation. DivX filed its opposition to RealTek's motion on October 14, 2021.

On April 22, 2022, the presiding ALJ issued Order No. 75, denying RealTek's motion for sanctions. Order No. 75 (April 22, 2022).

The Commission has determined not to review Order No. 76. This investigation is hereby terminated.

The Commission has set the following schedule in connection with Order No. 75. Any petition for review of Order No. 75 must be filed by June 1, 2022. Responses to a petition for review, if any, must be filed by June 8, 2022.

The Commission voted to approve this determination on May 24, 2022.

The authority for the Commission's determinations is contained in Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in part 210 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR part 210).

The Commission has received a complaint and a submission pursuant to § 210.8(b) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure filed on behalf of Honeywell International Inc. and Hand Held Products, Inc. on May 23, 2022. The complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337) in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain barcode scanners, scan engines, mobile computers with barcode scanning functionalities, products containing the same, and components thereof II. The complainant names as respondents: Zebra Technologies Corporation of Lincolnshire, IL; and Symbol Technologies, Inc. of Holtsville. The complainant requests that the Commission issue a limited exclusion order, cease and desist orders, and impose a bond upon respondents alleged infringing articles during the 60-day Presidential review period pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1337(j).

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

In particular, the Commission is interested in comments that:

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

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

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

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

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

Written submissions on the public interest must be filed no later than by close of business, eight calendar days after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register . There will be further opportunities for comment on the public interest after the issuance of any final initial determination in this investigation. Any written submissions on other issues must also be filed by no later than the close of business, eight calendar days after publication of this notice in the Federal Register . Complainant may file replies to any written submissions no later than three calendar days after the date on which any initial submissions were due. No other submissions will be accepted, unless requested by the Commission. Any submissions and replies filed in response to this Notice are limited to five (5) pages in length, inclusive of attachments. Persons filing written submissions must file the original document electronically on or before the deadlines stated above. Submissions should refer to the docket number (“Docket No. 3623”) in a prominent place on the cover page and/or the first page. ( See Handbook for Electronic Filing Procedures, Electronic Filing Procedures  1 ). Please note the Secretary's Office will accept only electronic filings during this time. Filings must be made through the Commission's Electronic Document Information System (EDIS, https://edis.usitc.gov. ) No in-person paper-based filings or paper copies of any electronic filings will be accepted until further notice. Persons with questions regarding filing should contact the Secretary at EDIS3Help@usitc.gov. Any person desiring to submit a document to the Commission in confidence must request confidential treatment. All such requests should be directed to the Secretary to the Commission and must include a full statement of the reasons why the Commission should grant such treatment. See 19 CFR 201.6. Documents for which confidential treatment by the Commission is properly sought will be treated accordingly. All information, including confidential business information and documents for which confidential treatment is properly sought, submitted to the Commission for purposes of this Investigation may be disclosed to and used: (i) By the Commission, its employees and Offices, and contract personnel (a) for developing or maintaining the records of this or a related proceeding, or (b) in internal investigations, audits, reviews, and evaluations relating to the programs, personnel, and operations of the Commission including under 5 U.S.C. Appendix 3; or (ii) by U.S. government employees and contract personnel, 2 solely for cybersecurity purposes. All nonconfidential written submissions will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Secretary and on EDIS. 3 This action is taken under the authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and of §§ 201.10 and 210.8(c) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 201.10, 210.8(c)).