Title: Almonds Grown in California, Marketing Order No. 981.

OMB Number: 0581-0242.

Expiration Date of Approval: November 30, 2022.

Type of Request: Extension and revision of a currently approved information collection.

Abstract: The information collection requirements in this request are essential to carry out the intent of the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937 (Act), as amended (7 U.S.C. 601-674), to provide the respondents the type of service they request, and to administer the California almond marketing order (7 CFR part 981), which has been operating since 1950.

The marketing order and its rules and regulations authorize the Almond Board of California (Board), the agency responsible for local administration of the marketing order, to require handlers and other certain entities to submit information.

Since September 2007, the Board has been operating a mandatory program under the marketing order to help reduce the potential for Salmonella in almonds. The Board had developed forms as a means for handlers to file required information with the Board relating to the treatment of almonds. Almond handlers are required to submit annual treatment plans to the Board and inspection agency regarding how they plan to treat their almonds in compliance with the program.

Entities interested in being almond process authorities that validate technologies are required to submit an application to the Board on ABC Form No. 51, “Application for Process Authority for Almonds.” Manufacturers in the United States, Canada, and Mexico interested in being approved to accept untreated almonds, provided they agree to treat the almonds themselves under the Board's Direct Verifiable (DV) program, are required to submit an application to the Board on ABC Form No. 52, “Application for Direct Verifiable (DV) Program for Further Processing of Untreated Almonds.” Entities interested in being approved DV Program user auditors are required to apply to the Board on ABC Form No. 53, “Application for Direct Verifiable (DV) Program Auditors.” To ensure compliance with the mandatory program, entities are required to use either an on-site or audit-based verification program and annually submit a treatment plan to the Board on ABC Form No. 54, “Handler Treatment Plan.”

The information collected is used only by authorized representatives of USDA, including AMS, Specialty Crops Program's regional and headquarters' staff, and authorized employees and agents of the Board. Authorized Board employees, agents, and the industry are the primary users of the information, and AMS is the secondary user.

Estimate of Burden: Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1.7 hours per response.

Respondents: Almond handlers; persons or organizations that would like to qualify to be Board-approved process authorities that validate treatments and technologies; manufacturers who would like to qualify to participate in the Board's DV program; and entities that would like to qualify as auditors under the DV program.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 175.

Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 1.00.

Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 4,200 hours.

Comments are invited on: (1) Whether this collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information has practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for Office of Management and Budget approval. All comments will become a matter of public record, including any personal information provided.

The Commerce Department is focused on solidifying U.S. leadership in emerging technologies, including AI, to drive U.S. innovation and global competitiveness. The United States seeks to promote the development of innovative and trustworthy AI systems that respect human rights, democratic values, and are designed to enhance privacy protections. The Department of Commerce International Trade Administration (ITA) seeks to promote these ideals through stakeholder engagement and with the goal of supporting U.S. economic interests. In support of its mission to create prosperity by strengthening the international competitiveness of U.S. industry, promoting trade and investment, and ensuring fair trade and compliance with trade laws and agreements, the ITA requests information from stakeholders on the global market landscape for AI. This information will be used to inform ITA efforts to promote an international environment that supports U.S. AI research and innovation, opens markets for U.S. AI technologies, and enhance the U.S. technological advantage in AI.

ITA is broadly defining AI as both the goods and services that enable AI systems, such as data, algorithms and computing power, as well as AI-driven products across all industry verticals, such as autonomous vehicles, robotics and automation technology, medical devices and healthcare, security technology, and professional and business services, among others. This notice serves as a general solicitation for public comment as an initial step to enhance ITA's understanding of the current global market landscape for the deployment of AI technologies, including a particular emphasis on rapidly developing AI policy and regulatory landscape in foreign markets and the potential impact on U.S. competitiveness. ITA seeks input from stakeholders regarding any international policies or regulations that impact the ability of U.S. companies to develop, deploy, or export advanced and effective AI technologies and AI-enabled products and services competitively to foreign markets.

Questions for Comment: This notice serves as an initial step in improving ITA's understanding of private sector interests, concerns, and policy needs with respect to the potential for exports of AI technologies. ITA seeks broad input from all interested stakeholders—including U.S. industry, researchers, academia, and civil society—on the potential opportunities for and challenges to increasing U.S. export competitiveness for AI-enabled technologies. Commenters are encouraged to address any and all the following questions that pertain to their experience or expertise with AI technologies or to submit general comments addressing U.S. competitiveness in AI broadly. To the extent commenters choose to respond to the specific questions asked, responses may be formatted as the commenter prefers.

1. What foreign/international AI policies or regulations exist?

2. What trade barriers currently exist in the AI space? What remedies could resolve these trade barriers?

3. What challenges are there when it comes to exporting AI products or services?

4. How could international AI regulations impact future product or service design and development?

5. What trade policies could be helpful in supporting small-to-medium sized enterprises that export AI products and services?

6. Who is involved in standards development activities related to AI? In which fora should standards development for AI take place?

7. What challenges does your organization face with regards to protecting your AI intellectual property (IP), especially during overseas dealings?

8. What can the U.S. government do to best foster and protect IP rights for U.S. AI technologies in overseas dealings?

9. How should trustworthiness and risk management of AI systems be considered by industry and/or policymakers?

10. What role do global innovation hubs and regulatory sandboxes play in U.S. competitiveness in AI? Please describe specific examples of involvement if applicable.

11. How is U.S. competitiveness (talent, research and development, and commercial exports) in AI compared to other countries?

12. What can the International Trade Administration do to create more opportunities for U.S. AI technologies in the global marketplace? What impactful actions can ITA take to reduce or remove challenges, risks, and barriers to help U.S. AI technologies compete in the global marketplace?

13. How can AI be incorporated into existing and future trade agreements to ensure the competitiveness of U.S. industry?

On April 20, 2022, the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) initiated the less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigations of imports of certain preserved mushrooms from the Netherlands, Poland, and Spain. 1 Currently, the preliminary determinations are due no later than September 7, 2022.

Section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires Commerce to issue the preliminary determination in an LTFV investigation within 140 days after the date on which Commerce initiated the investigation. However, section 733(c)(1) of the Act permits Commerce to postpone the preliminary determination until no later than 190 days after the date on which Commerce initiated the investigation if: (A) the petitioner makes a timely request for a postponement; or (B) Commerce concludes that the parties concerned are cooperating, that the investigation is extraordinarily complicated, and that additional time is necessary to make a preliminary determination. Under 19 CFR 351.205(e), the petitioner must submit a request for postponement 25 days or more before the scheduled date of the preliminary determination and must state the reasons for the request. Commerce will grant the request unless it finds compelling reasons to deny the request.

On August 8, 2022, Giorgio Foods, Inc. (the petitioner) submitted a timely request that Commerce postpone the preliminary determinations in the LTFV investigations for the Netherlands, Poland, and Spain. 2 The petitioner stated that it requests postponement due to concerns that Commerce will need more time to issue supplemental questionnaires to address deficiencies in the respondents' initial questionnaire responses. 3

For the reasons stated above, and because there are no compelling reasons to deny the request, Commerce, in accordance with section 733(c)(1)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(e), is postponing the deadline for the preliminary determinations for the Netherlands, Poland, and Spain by 50 days ( i.e., 190 days after the date on which these investigations were initiated). As a result, Commerce will issue its preliminary determinations no later than October 27, 2022. In accordance with section 735(a)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(1), the deadline for the final determinations in these investigations will continue to be 75 days after the date of the preliminary determinations, unless postponed at a later date.

This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 733(c)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(f)(1).

Pursuant to section 304(e)(2) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), 16 U.S.C. 1854(e)(2), NMFS, on behalf of the Secretary, must publish a notice in the Federal Register , whenever it determines that a stock or stock complex is subject to overfishing, overfished, or approaching an overfished condition.

Atlantic bigeye tuna are tropical tuna that are widely distributed throughout the Atlantic Ocean. The International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) Standing Committee on Research and Statistics (SCRS) conducts assessments for Atlantic bigeye tuna and makes stock status determinations consistent with ICCAT stock status criteria. NMFS uses the information from the SCRS assessments to make domestic determinations. NMFS has determined that Atlantic bigeye tuna is still overfished. This determination is based on a 2021 assessment, using data through 2019. Based on the domestic status determination criteria for overfishing and overfished, the stock remains overfished because the spawning stock biomass is less than the minimum stock size threshold. International cooperation is critical to effective management of the stock, given its geographic range and the small contribution of the United States to fishing mortality on the stock. NMFS continues to work with ICCAT to implement an international rebuilding program for this stock.

This is a request for a new collection of information.

The data collection is sponsored by DOC/NOAA/NWS/Space Weather Advisory Group (SWAG). The SWAG is required under 51 U.S. Code 60601(d)(3) to undertake a comprehensive survey of space weather product users to identify the “research, observations, forecasting, prediction, and modeling advances required to improve space weather products.” Specifically, the SWAG will (i) assess the adequacy of current Federal Government goals for lead time, accuracy, coverage, timeliness, data rate, and data quality for space weather observations and forecasting; (ii) identify options and methods to, in consultation with the academic community and the commercial space weather sector, improve upon the advancement of the goals described in clause (i); (iii) identify opportunities for collection of new data to address the needs of the space weather user community; (iv) identify methods to increase coordination of space weather research to operations and operations to research; (v) identify opportunities for new technologies, research, and instrumentation to aid in research, understanding, monitoring, modeling, prediction, forecasting, and warning of space weather; and (vi) identify methods and technologies to improve preparedness for potential space weather phenomena.

This collection identified seven sectors (Aviation, Emergency Management, Global Navigation Satellite System, Human Space Flight, Power Grid, Research, and Space Situational Awareness/Space Traffic Management) that will be consulted as part of this effort. Information will be collected on a one-off basis from each of the sectors. Respondents in each sector include the general public, defined as (adults ages 18+). Members of the SWAG will oversee recruitment of the respondents. Respondents will be asked questions about their current use of space weather observations, information, and forecasts, technological systems, components or elements affected by space weather, current and future risk and resilience activities, future space weather requirements, and unused or new types of measurements or observations that would enhance space weather risk mitigation. This data collection serves many purposes, including gaining a better understanding of the needs of users of space weather products. The SWAG will use the data to identify the space weather research, observations, forecasting, prediction, and modeling advances required to improve space weather products. Specifically, the information will be used to advise the National Science and Technology Council's Space Weather Operations, Research, and Mitigation (SWORM) Subcommittee on improving the ability of the United States to prepare for, mitigate, respond to, and recover from space weather storms.

Information will be collected from seven sectors identified in Section I. Several methods will be used to collect the information including web-based surveys, interviews, and focus groups. Determination of the appropriate method will be based on the sector in question.

OMB Control Number: 0648-XXXX.

Form Number(s): None.

Type of Review: Regular (New information collection).

Affected Public: Individuals or households; Business or other for-profit organizations; Not-for-profit institutions; State, Local, or Tribal government; Federal government.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 515.

Estimated Time per Response:

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

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

This request is for an extension of a currently approved information collection.

The purpose of this information collection is to assist state and federal Natural Resource Trustees in more efficiently carrying out the restoration planning phase of Natural Resource Damage Assessments (NRDA), in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. 4321-4370d; 40 CFR 1500-1500 and other federal and local statutes and regulations as applicable. The NRDA Restoration Project Information Sheet is designed to facilitate the collection of information on existing, planned, or proposed restoration projects. This information will be used by the Natural Resource Trustees to develop potential restoration alternatives for natural resource injuries and service losses requiring restoration, during the restoration planning phase of the NRDA process. This information is provided by the public on a voluntary basis. The information provided benefits the public by informing the NRDA restoration process. However, there are no individual benefits that depend on the submission of information. Individuals can update the information as needed, but there is no required update frequency.

The Restoration Project Information Sheet can be submitted electronically via the internet or email.

OMB Control Number: 0648-0497.

Form Number: None.

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

Affected Public: State, local, or tribal governments; individuals or households; business or other for-profits organizations; not-for-profit institutions; farms; and the federal government.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 300.

Estimated Time per Response: 20 minutes for new submissions, 10 minutes to update submissions.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 100.

Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $0 in recordkeeping/reporting costs.

Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.

Legal Authority: National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.

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

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

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 proposed or, if the taking is limited to harassment, a notice of a proposed IHA is 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.

On April 8, 2022, NMFS received a request from Atlantic Shores Bight for an IHA to take marine mammals incidental to marine site characterization survey activities off New Jersey and New York. The application was deemed adequate and complete on May 23, 2022. Atlantic Shores Bight's request is for take of 15 species of marine mammals by Level B harassment only. Neither Atlantic Shores Bight nor NMFS expect serious injury or mortality to result from this activity and, therefore, an IHA is appropriate.

NMFS previously issued three IHAs to Atlantic Shores, the parent company of Atlantic Shores Bight, for similar work in a comparable geographic region (85 FR 21198, April 16, 2020; 86 FR 21289, April 22, 2021; 87 FR 24103, April 20, 2022). The 2020 monitoring report confirmed that Atlantic Shores had previously implemented the required mitigation and monitoring, and demonstrated that no impacts of a scale or nature not previously analyzed or authorized had occurred as a result of the activities conducted under the 2020 IHA. At the time of developing this IHA for Atlantic Shores Bight, the Atlantic Shores 2021 (Renewal) monitoring report was not available as the renewal IHA expired on April 19, 2022 (86 FR 21289; April 22, 2021). There are no changes from the proposed IHA to the final IHA.

On August 1, 2022, NMFS announced proposed changes to the existing North Atlantic right whale vessel speed regulations to further reduce the likelihood of mortalities and serious injuries to endangered right whales from vessel collisions, which are a leading cause of the species' decline and a primary factor in an ongoing Unusual Mortality Event (87 FR 46921). Should a final vessel speed rule be issued and become effective during the effective period of this IHA (or any other MMPA incidental take authorization), the authorization holder would be required to comply with any and all applicable requirements contained within the final rule. Specifically, where measures in any final vessel speed rule are more protective or restrictive than those in this or any other MMPA authorization, authorization holders would be required to comply with the requirements of the rule. Alternatively, where measures in this or any other MMPA authorization are more restrictive or protective than those in any final vessel speed rule, the measures in the MMPA authorization would remain in place. These changes would become effective immediately upon the effective date of any final vessel speed rule and would not require any further action on NMFS's part.

As part of its overall marine site characterization survey operations, Atlantic Shores Bight will conduct high-resolution geophysical (HRG) surveys in the Lease Area (OCS)-A 0451 and along potential submarine export cable routes (ECR) to a landfall location in either New York or New Jersey. These two areas are collectively referred to as the survey area. The survey area is approximately 1,375,710 acres (5,567.3 km 2 ) and extends from 11 nautical miles (20 km) offshore of New Jersey and New York out to a maximum distance of approximately 40 nautical miles (74 km).

The purpose of the surveys is to support the site characterization, siting, and engineering design of offshore wind project facilities including wind turbine generators, offshore substations, and submarine cables within the Lease Area and along ECRs. A maximum of three survey vessels may operate at any one time during the surveys. Underwater sound resulting from Atlantic Shores Bight's site characterization survey activities, specifically HRG surveys, has the potential to result in incidental take of marine mammals in the form of behavioral harassment. Atlantic Shores Bight will conduct HRG surveys within the lease area and ECR survey areas over a period of up to 12 months.

Table 1 identifies the representative survey equipment that may be used in support of planned geophysical survey activities. Operational parameters presented in Table 1 were obtained from the following sources: Crocker and Fratantonio (2016); manufacturer specifications; personal communication with manufacturers; agency correspondence; and Atlantic Shores/Atlantic Shores Bight. The make and model of the listed geophysical equipment may vary depending on availability and the final equipment choices will vary depending upon the final survey design, vessel availability, and survey contractor selection. Geophysical surveys are expected to use several equipment types concurrently in order to collect multiple aspects of geophysical data along one transect. Selection of equipment combinations is based on specific survey objectives. All categories of representative HRG survey equipment shown in Table 1 work with operating frequencies <180 kiloHertz (kHz).

The deployment of HRG survey equipment, including the equipment planned for use during Atlantic Shores Bight's activities, produces sound in the marine environment that has the potential to result in harassment of marine mammals. Mitigation, monitoring, and reporting measures are described in detail later in this document (please see Mitigation and Monitoring and Reporting).

A detailed description of the planned survey is provided in the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA (87 FR 38067; June 27, 2022). Since that time, no changes have been made to Atlantic Shores Bight's planned survey activities. Therefore, a detailed description is not provided here. Please refer to that Federal Register notice for the description of the specific activity.

A notice of NMFS' proposal to issue an IHA to Atlantic Shores Bight was published in the Federal Register on June 27, 2022 (87 FR 38067). This proposed notice described, in detail, Atlantic Shores Bight's activities, the marine mammal species that may be affected by the activities, and the anticipated effects on marine mammals. In that notice, we requested public input on the request for authorization described therein, our analyses, the proposed authorization, and any other aspect of the notice of proposed IHA, and requested that interested persons submit relevant information, suggestions, and comments. This proposed notice was available for a 30-day public comment period.

During the 30-day public comment period, NMFS received letters from two environmental non-governmental organizations (eNGOs) (Oceana, Inc. and Clean Ocean Action (COA)). All comments, and NMFS' responses, are provided below, and the letters are available online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/incidental-take-authorization-atlantic-shores-offshore-wind-bight-llc-marine-site. Please review the letters for full details regarding the comments and underlying justification.

Comment 1: Oceana objects to NMFS' renewal process regarding the extension of any one-year IHA with a truncated 15-day public comment period, and suggested an additional 30-day public comment period is necessary for any renewal request.

Response: NMFS' IHA renewal process meets all statutory requirements. In prior responses to comments about IHA renewals ( e.g., 84 FR 52464; October 2, 2019 and 85 FR 53342, August 28, 2020), NMFS has explained how the renewal process, as implemented, is consistent with the statutory requirements contained in section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA, and further, promotes NMFS' goals of improving conservation of marine mammals and increasing efficiency in the MMPA compliance process. Therefore, we intend to continue implementing the renewal process.

In particular, we emphasize that any Renewal IHA does have a 30-day public comment period, and in fact, each Renewal IHA is made available for a 45-day public comment period. The notice of the proposed IHA published in the Federal Register on June 27, 2022 (87 FR 38067) made clear that NMFS was seeking comment on the proposed IHA and the potential issuance of a renewal for this survey. As detailed in the Federal Register notice for the proposed IHA and on the agency's website, any renewal is limited to another year of identical or nearly identical activities in the same location or the same activities that were not completed within the 1-year period of the initial IHA. NMFS' analysis of the anticipated impacts on marine mammals caused by the applicant's activities covers both the Initial IHA period and the possibility of a 1 year renewal. Therefore a member of the public considering commenting on a proposed Initial IHA also knows exactly what activities (or subset of activities) would be included in a proposed Renewal IHA, the potential impacts of those activities, the maximum amount and type of take that could be caused by those activities, the mitigation and monitoring measures that would be required, and the basis for the agency's negligible impact determinations, least practicable adverse impact findings, small numbers findings, and (if applicable) the no unmitigable adverse impact on subsistence use finding—all the information needed to provide complete and meaningful comments on a possible renewal at the time of considering the proposed Initial IHA. Reviewers have the information needed to meaningfully comment on both the immediate proposed IHA and a possible 1-year renewal, should the IHA holder choose to request one.

While there would be additional documents submitted with a renewal request, for a qualifying renewal these would be limited to documentation that NMFS would make available and use to verify that the activities are identical to those in the initial IHA, are nearly identical such that the changes would have either no effect on impacts to marine mammals or decrease those impacts, or are a subset of activities already analyzed and authorized but not completed under the initial IHA. NMFS would also need to confirm, among other things, that the activities would occur in the same location; involve the same species and stocks; provide for continuation of the same mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements; and that no new information has been received that would alter the prior analysis. The renewal request would also contain a preliminary monitoring report, in order to verify that effects from the activities do not indicate impacts of a scale or nature not previously analyzed. The additional 15-day public comment period, which includes NMFS' direct notice to anyone who commented on the proposed Initial IHA, provides the public an opportunity to review these few documents, provide any additional pertinent information and comment on whether they think the criteria for a renewal have been met. Between the initial 30-day comment period on these same activities and the additional 15 days, the total comment period for a renewal is 45 days.

In addition to the IHA renewal process being consistent with all requirements under section 101(a)(5)(D), it is also consistent with Congress' intent for issuance of IHAs to the extent reflected in statements in the legislative history of the MMPA. Through the provision for renewals in the regulations, description of the process and express invitation to comment on specific potential renewals in the Request for Public Comments section of each proposed IHA, the description of the process on NMFS' website, further elaboration on the process through responses to comments such as these, posting of substantive documents on the agency's website, and provision of 30 or 45 days for public review and comment on all proposed initial IHAs and Renewals respectively, NMFS has ensured that the public is “invited and encouraged to participate fully in the agency's decision-making process”, as Congress intended.

Comment 2: Oceana stated that NMFS must utilize the best available science, and suggested that NMFS has not done so, specifically referencing information regarding the North Atlantic right whale (NARW) such as updated population estimates, habitat usage in the survey area, and seasonality information. Oceana specifically asserted that NMFS is not using the best available science with regards to the NARW population estimate and state that NMFS should be using the estimate of 336 individuals presented by the New England Aquarium ( https://www.neaq.org/about-us/news-media/press-kit/press-releases/population-of-north-atlantic-right-whales-continues-its-downward-trajectory/?fbclid=IwAR3VJcauSifygKxU4ZICau0Cd_fo2t4KU6RSJIK7WSmkGRLYLGHpjz1_WkY ).

Response: While NMFS agrees that the best available science should be used for assessing NARW abundance estimates, we disagree that the New England Aquarium site represents the most recent and best available estimate for NARW abundance. Rather the revised abundance estimate (368; 95 percent with a confidence interval of 356-378) published by Pace (2021) (and subsequently included in the 2021 Stock Assessment Reports (SARs; https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports )), which was used in the proposed IHA, provides the most recent and best available estimate, and introduced improvements to NMFS' right whale abundance model. Specifically, Pace (2021) looked at a different way of characterizing annual estimates of age-specific survival. NMFS considered all relevant information regarding North Atlantic right whale, including the information cited by the commenters. However, NMFS relies on the SAR. Recently (after publication of the notice of proposed IHA), NMFS updated its species web page to recognize the population estimate for NARW is now below 350 animals ( https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/species/north-atlantic-right-whale ). We anticipate that this information will be presented in the draft 2022 SAR. We note that this change in abundance estimate would not change the estimated take of NARW or authorized take numbers, nor affect our ability to make the required findings under the MMPA for Atlantic Shores Bight's survey activities.

NMFS further notes that Oceana's comment seems to be conflating the phrase “best available data” with “the most recent data.” The MMPA specifies that the “best available data” must be used, which does not always mean the most recent. As is NMFS' prerogative, we referenced the best available NARW abundance estimate of 368 from the 2021 SARs as NMFS' determination of the best available data that we relied on in our analysis. The Pace (2021) results strengthened the case for a change in mean survival rates after 2010-2011, but did not significantly change other current estimates (population size, number of new animals, adult female survival) derived from the model. Furthermore, NMFS notes that the SARs are peer reviewed by other scientific review groups prior to being finalized and published and that the New England Aquarium site referenced by the commenter does not undertake this process.

NMFS considered the best available science regarding both recent habitat usage patterns for the study area and up-to-date seasonality information in the notice of the proposed IHA, including consideration of existing biologically important area (BIAs) and densities provided by Roberts et al. (2021). While the commenter has suggested that NMFS consider best available information for recent habitat usage patterns and seasonality, it has not offered any additional information which it suggests should be considered best available information in place of what NMFS considered in its notice of proposed IHA (87 FR 38067; June 27, 2022).

Lastly, as we stated in the notice of proposed IHA (87 FR 38067; June 27, 2022), any impacts to marine mammals are expected to be temporary and minor and, given the relative size of the survey area compared to the overall migratory route leading to foraging habitat (which is not affected by the specified activity). Comparatively, the survey area is extremely small (approximately 5,567.3 km 2 ) compared to the size of the NARW migratory BIA (269,448 km 2 ). Because of this, and in context of the minor, low-level nature of the impacts expected to result from the planned survey, such impacts are not expected to result in disruption to biologically important behaviors.

Comment 3: Oceana noted that chronic stressors are an emerging concern for NARW conservation and recovery, and stated that chronic stress may result in energetic effects for NARW. Oceana suggested that NMFS has not fully considered both the use of the area and the effects of both acute and chronic stressors on the health and fitness of NARW, as disturbance responses in NARW could lead to chronic stress or habitat displacement, leading to an overall decline in their health and fitness.

Response: NMFS agrees with Oceana that both acute and chronic stressors are of concern for NARW conservation and recovery. We recognize that acute stress from acoustic exposure is one potential impact of these surveys, and that chronic stress can have fitness, reproductive, etc. impacts at the population-level scale. NMFS has carefully reviewed the best available scientific information in assessing impacts to marine mammals, and recognizes that the surveys have the potential to impact marine mammals through behavioral effects, stress responses, and auditory masking. However, NMFS does not expect that the generally short-term, intermittent, and transitory marine site characterization survey activities planned by Atlantic Shores Bight will create conditions of acute or chronic acoustic exposure leading to long-term physiological stress responses in marine mammals. NMFS has also prescribed a robust suite of mitigation measures, including extended distance shutdowns for NARW, that are expected to further reduce the duration and intensity of acoustic exposure, while limiting the potential severity of any possible behavioral disruption. The potential for chronic stress was evaluated in making the determinations presented in NMFS' negligible impact analyses. Because NARW generally use this location in a transitory manner, specifically for migration, any potential impacts from these surveys are lessened for other behaviors due to the brief periods where exposure is possible. In context of these expected low-level impacts, which are not expected to meaningfully affect important behavior, we also refer again to the large size of the migratory corridor compared with the survey area (the overlap between the BIA and the proposed survey area will cover approximately 5,567.3 km 2 of the 269,448 km 2 BIA). Thus, the transitory nature of NARW at this location means it is unlikely for any exposure to cause chronic effects, as Atlantic Shores Bight's planned survey area and ensonified zones are much smaller than the overall migratory corridor. As such, NMFS does not expect acute or cumulative stress to be a detrimental factor to NARW from Atlantic Shores Bight's described survey activities.

Lastly, NMFS disagrees that the effects of Atlantic Shores Bight's survey may contribute to stunted growth rates as suggested by Oceana's comments. The activities associated with Atlantic Shores Bight's survey are outside the scope of activities described in the Stewart et al. (2022) paper and NMFS does not expect impacts such as these to result from Atlantic Shores Bight's described survey activities.

Comment 4: Oceana and COA asserted that NMFS must fully consider the discrete effects of each activity and the cumulative effects of the suite of approved, proposed and potential activities on marine mammals and NARW in particular and ensure that the cumulative effects are not excessive before issuing or renewing an IHA.

Response: Neither the MMPA nor NMFS' codified implementing regulations call for consideration of other unrelated activities and their impacts on populations. The preamble for NMFS' implementing regulations (54 FR 40338; September 29, 1989) states in response to comments that the impacts from other past and ongoing anthropogenic activities are to be incorporated into the negligible impact analysis via their impacts on the baseline. Consistent with that direction, NMFS has factored into its negligible impact analysis the impacts of other past and ongoing anthropogenic activities via their impacts on the baseline, e.g., as reflected in the density/distribution and status of the species, population size and growth rate, and other relevant stressors. The 1989 final rule for the MMPA implementing regulations also addressed public comments regarding cumulative effects from future, unrelated activities. There NMFS stated that such effects are not considered in making findings under section 101(a)(5) concerning negligible impact. In this case, this IHA, as well as other IHAs currently in effect or proposed within the specified geographic region, are appropriately considered an unrelated activity relative to the others. The IHAs are unrelated in the sense that they are discrete actions under section 101(a)(5)(D), issued to discrete applicants.

Section 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA requires NMFS to make a determination that the take incidental to a “specified activity” will have a negligible impact on the affected species or stocks of marine mammals. NMFS' implementing regulations require applicants to include in their request a detailed description of the specified activity or class of activities that can be expected to result in incidental taking of marine mammals. 50 CFR 216.104(a)(1). Thus, the “specified activity” for which incidental take coverage is being sought under section 101(a)(5)(D) is generally defined and described by the applicant. Here, Atlantic Shores Bight was the applicant for the IHA, and we are responding to the specified activity as described in that application (and making the necessary findings on that basis).

Through the response to public comments in the 1989 implementing regulations, NMFS also indicated (1) that we would consider cumulative effects that are reasonably foreseeable when preparing a NEPA analysis, and (2) that reasonably foreseeable cumulative effects would also be considered under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) for ESA-listed species, as appropriate. Accordingly, NMFS has written Environmental Assessments (EA) that addressed cumulative impacts related to substantially similar activities, in similar locations, e.g., the 2017 Ocean Wind, LLC EA for site characterization surveys off New Jersey. Cumulative impacts regarding issuance of IHAs for site characterization survey activities such as those planned by Atlantic Shores Bight have been adequately addressed under NEPA in prior environmental analyses that support NMFS' determination that this action is appropriately categorically excluded from further NEPA analysis. NMFS independently evaluated the use of a categorical exclusion (CE) for issuance of Atlantic Shores Bight's IHA, which included consideration of extraordinary circumstances.

Separately, the cumulative effects of substantially similar activities in the northwest Atlantic Ocean have been analyzed in the past under section 7 of the ESA when NMFS has engaged in formal intra-agency consultation, such as the 2013 programmatic Biological Opinion for BOEM Lease and Site Assessment Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New York, and New Jersey Wind Energy Areas ( https://repository.library.noaa.gov/view/noaa/29291 ). Analyzed activities include those for which NMFS issued previous IHAs (82 FR 31562; July 7, 2017, 85 FR 21198; April 16, 2020, and 86 FR 26465; May 10, 2021), which are similar to those planned by Atlantic Shores Bight under this current IHA request. This Biological Opinion determined that NMFS' issuance of IHAs for site characterization survey activities associated with leasing, individually and cumulatively, are not likely to adversely affect listed marine mammals. NMFS notes that, while issuance of this IHA is covered under a different consultation, this Biological Opinion remains valid.

Comment 5: Oceana states that NMFS must make an assessment of which activities, technologies and strategies are truly necessary to achieve site characterization to inform development of the offshore wind projects and which are not critical, asserting that NMFS should prescribe the appropriate survey techniques. In general, Oceana stated that NMFS must require that all IHA applicants minimize the impacts of underwater noise to the fullest extent feasible, including through the use of best available technology and methods to minimize sound levels from geophysical surveys such as through the use of technically and commercially feasible and effective noise reduction and attenuation measures.

Response: The MMPA requires that an IHA include measures that will effect the least practicable adverse impact on the affected species and stocks and, in practice, NMFS agrees that the IHA should include conditions for the survey activities that will first avoid adverse effects on NARW in and around the survey site, where practicable, and then minimize the effects that cannot be avoided. NMFS has determined that the IHA meets this requirement to effect the least practicable adverse impact. As part of the analysis for all marine site characterization survey IHAs, NMFS evaluated the effects expected as a result of the specified activity, made the necessary findings, and prescribed mitigation requirements sufficient to achieve the least practicable adverse impact on the affected species and stocks of marine mammals. It is not within NMFS' purview to make judgments regarding what may be appropriate techniques or technologies for an operator's survey objectives.

Comment 6: Oceana suggests that Protected Species Observer (PSOs) complement their survey efforts using additional technologies, such as infrared detection devices when in low-light conditions.

Response: NMFS agrees with Oceana regarding this suggestion and a requirement to utilize a thermal (infrared) device during low-light conditions was included in the proposed Federal Register notice. That requirement is included as a requirement of the issued IHA.

Comment 7: Oceana recommended that NMFS restrict all vessels of all sizes associated with the proposed survey activities to speeds less than 10 knots (kn) at all times due to the risk of vessel strikes to NARW and other large whales.

Response: While NMFS acknowledges that vessel strikes can result in injury or mortality, we have analyzed the potential for vessel strike resulting from Atlantic Shores Bight's activity and have determined that based on the nature of the activity and the required mitigation measures specific to vessel strike avoidance included in the IHA, potential for vessel strike is so low as to be discountable. The required mitigation measures, all of which were included in the proposed IHA and are now required in the final IHA, include: A requirement that all vessel operators comply with 10 knots (kn) (18.5 kilometer/hour (km/hour)) or less speed restrictions in any Seasonal Management Areas (SMA), Dynamic Management Areas (DMA) or Slow Zone while underway, and check daily for information regarding the establishment of mandatory or voluntary vessel strike avoidance areas (SMAs, DMAs, Slow Zones) and information regarding NARW sighting locations; a requirement that all vessels greater than or equal to 19.8 m in overall length operating from November 1 through April 30 operate at speeds of 10 kn (18.5 km/hour) or less; a requirement that all vessel operators reduce vessel speed to 10 kn (18.5 km/hour) or less when any large whale, any mother/calf pairs, pods, or large assemblages of non-delphinid cetaceans are observed near the vessel; a requirement that all survey vessels maintain a separation distance of 500 m or greater from any ESA-listed whales or other unidentified large marine mammals visible at the surface while underway; a requirement that, if underway, vessels must steer a course away from any sighted ESA-listed whale at 10 kn (18.5 km/hr) or less until the 500 m minimum separation distance has been established; a requirement that, if an ESA-listed whale is sighted in a vessel's path, or within 500 m of an underway vessel, the underway vessel must reduce speed and shift the engine to neutral; a requirement that all vessels underway must maintain a minimum separation distance of 100 m from all non-ESA-listed baleen whales; and a requirement that all vessels underway 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). We have determined that the vessel strike avoidance measures in the IHA are sufficient to ensure the least practicable adverse impact on species or stocks and their habitat. Furthermore, no documented vessel strikes have occurred for any marine site characterization surveys which were issued IHAs from NMFS during the survey activities themselves or while transiting to and from survey sites.

Comment 8: Oceana suggests that NMFS require vessels maintain a separation distance of at least 500 m from NARW at all times.

Response: NMFS agrees with Oceana regarding this suggestion and a requirement to maintain a separation distance of at least 500 m from NARW at all times was included in the proposed Federal Register notice and was included as a requirement in the issued IHA.

Comment 9: Oceana recommended that the IHA should require all vessels supporting site characterization to be equipped with and using Class A Automatic Identification System (AIS) devices at all times while on the water. Oceana suggested this requirement should apply to all vessels, regardless of size, associated with the survey.

Response: NMFS is generally supportive of the idea that vessels involved with survey activities be equipped with and using Class A Automatic Identification System (devices) at all times while on the water. Indeed, there is a precedent for NMFS requiring such a stipulation for geophysical surveys in the Atlantic Ocean (38 FR 63268, December 7, 2018); however, these activities carried the potential for much more significant impacts than the marine site characterization surveys to be carried out by Atlantic Shores Bight, with the potential for both Level A and Level B harassment take. Given the small isopleths and small numbers of take authorized by this IHA, NMFS does not agree that the benefits of requiring AIS on all vessels associated with the survey activities outweighs and warrants the cost and practicability issues associated with this requirement.

Comment 10: Oceana asserts that the IHA must include requirements to hold all vessels associated with site characterization surveys accountable to the IHA requirements, including vessels owned by the developer, contractors, employees, and others regardless of ownership, operator, and contract. They state that exceptions and exemptions will create enforcement uncertainty and incentives to evade regulations through reclassification and re-designation. They recommend that NMFS simplify this by requiring all vessels to abide by the same requirements, regardless of size, ownership, function, contract or other specifics.

Response: NMFS agrees with Oceana and required these measures in the proposed IHA and final IHA. The IHA requires that a copy of the IHA must be in the possession of Atlantic Shores Bight, the vessel operators, the lead PSO, and any other relevant designees of Atlantic Shores Bight operating under the authority of this IHA. The IHA also states that Atlantic Shores Bight must ensure that the vessel operator and other relevant vessel personnel, including the PSO team, are briefed on all responsibilities, communication procedures, marine mammal monitoring protocols, operational procedures, and IHA requirements prior to the start of survey activity, and when relevant new personnel join the survey operations.

Comment 11: Oceana stated that the IHA must include a requirement for all phases of the site characterization to subscribe to the highest level of transparency, including frequent reporting to Federal agencies. Oceana recommends requirements to report all visual and acoustic detections of NARW and any dead, injured, or entangled marine mammals to NMFS or the Coast Guard as soon as possible and no later than the end of the PSO shift. Oceana states that to foster stakeholder relationships and allow public engagement and oversight of the permitting, the IHA should require all reports and data to be accessible on a publicly available website.

Response: NMFS agrees with the need for reporting and indeed, the MMPA calls for IHAs to incorporate reporting requirements. As included in the proposed IHA, the final IHA includes requirements for reporting that supports Oceana's recommendations.

Further, the draft IHA and final IHA stipulate that if a NARW is observed at any time by any survey vessels, during surveys or during vessel transit, Atlantic Shores Bight must immediately report sighting information to the NMFS NARW Sighting Advisory System within two hours of occurrence, when practicable, or no later than 24 hours after occurrence. Atlantic Shores Bight may also report the sighting to the U.S. Coast Guard. Additionally, Atlantic Shores Bight must report any discoveries of injured or dead marine mammals to the Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, and to the New England/Mid-Atlantic Regional Stranding Coordinator as soon as feasible. This includes entangled animals. All reports and associated data submitted to NMFS are included on the website for public inspection.

Daily visual and acoustic detections of NARW and other large whale species along the Eastern Seaboard, as well as Slow Zone locations, are publicly available on WhaleMap ( https://whalemap.org/WhaleMap/ ). Further, recent acoustic detections of NARW and other large whale species are available to the public on NOAA's Passive Acoustic Cetacean Map website https://apps-nefsc.fisheries.noaa.gov/pacm/#/narw.

Comment 12: Oceana recommends a shutdown requirement if a NARW or other ESA-listed species is detected in the clearance zone as well as a publicly available explanation of any exemptions as to why the applicant would not be able to shut down in these situations.

NMFS reiterates that use of the planned sources is not expected to have any potential to cause injury of any species, including North Atlantic right whale, even in the absence of mitigation. Consideration of the anticipated effectiveness of the mitigation measures ( i.e., exclusion zones and shutdown measures) discussed below and in the Mitigation section of this notice further strengthens the conclusion that injury is not a reasonably anticipated outcome of the survey activity. Nevertheless, there are several shutdown requirements described in the Federal Register notice of the proposed IHA (87 FR 38067; July 27, 2022), and which are included in the final IHA, including the stipulation that geophysical survey equipment must be immediately shut down if any marine mammal is observed within or entering the relevant shutdown zone while geophysical survey equipment is operational. There is no exemption for the shutdown requirement for NARW and ESA-listed species.

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

Comment 13: Oceana recommended increasing the clearance zone to 1,000 m for NARW with requirements for HRG survey vessels to use PSOs and Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM) to establish and monitor these zones.

Response: NMFS notes that the 500 m Exclusion Zone for NARW exceeds the modeled distance to the largest 160 dB Level B harassment isopleth (141 m during sparker use) by a conservative margin to be extra cautious. Commenters do not provide a compelling rationale for why the clearance zone should be even larger. Given that these surveys are relatively low impact and that, regardless, NMFS has prescribed a precautionary NARW Exclusion Zone that is larger (500 m) than the conservatively estimated largest harassment zone (141 m), NMFS has determined that the clearance zone is appropriate.

Regarding the use of acoustic monitoring to implement the clearance zones, NMFS does not anticipate that acoustic monitoring would be effective for a variety of reasons discussed below and therefore has not required it in this IHA. As described in the Mitigation section, NMFS has determined that the prescribed mitigation requirements are sufficient to effect the least practicable adverse impact on all affected species or stocks.

The commenters do not explain why they expect that PAM would be effective in detecting vocalizing mysticetes, nor does NMFS agree that this measure is warranted, as it is not expected to be effective for use in detecting the species of concern. It is generally accepted that, even in the absence of additional acoustic sources, using a towed passive acoustic sensor to detect baleen whales (including NARW) is not typically effective because the noise from the vessel, the flow noise, and the cable noise are in the same frequency band and will mask the vast majority of baleen whale calls. Vessels produce low-frequency noise, primarily through propeller cavitation, with main energy in the 5-300 Hertz (Hz) frequency range. Source levels range from about 140 to 195 decibel (dB) re 1 μPa (micropascal) at 1 m (NRC, 2003; Hildebrand, 2009), depending on factors such as ship type, load, and speed, and ship hull and propeller design. Studies of vessel noise show that it appears to increase background noise levels in the 71-224 Hz range by 10-13 dB (Hatch et al. 2012; McKenna et al. 2012; Rolland et al. 2012). PAM systems employ hydrophones towed in streamer cables approximately 500 m behind a vessel. Noise from water flow around the cables and from strumming of the cables themselves is also low frequency and typically masks signals in the same range. Experienced PAM operators participating in a recent workshop (Thode et al. 2017) emphasized that a PAM operation could easily report no acoustic encounters, depending on species present, simply because background noise levels rendered any acoustic detection impossible. The same workshop report stated that a typical eight-element array towed 500 m behind a vessel could be expected to detect delphinids, sperm whales, and beaked whales at the required range, but not baleen whales, due to expected background noise levels (including seismic noise, vessel noise, and flow noise).

There are several additional reasons why we do not agree that use of PAM is warranted for 24-hour HRG surveys. While NMFS agrees that PAM can be an important tool for augmenting detection capabilities in certain circumstances, its utility in further reducing impact during HRG survey activities is limited. First, for this activity, the area expected to be ensonified above the Level B harassment threshold is relatively small (a maximum of 141 m); this reflects the fact that, to start with, the source level is comparatively low and the intensity of any resulting impacts would be lower level and, further, it means that inasmuch as PAM will only detect a portion of any animals exposed within a zone, the overall probability of PAM detecting an animal in the harassment zone is low. Together these factors support the limited value of PAM for use in reducing take with smaller zones. PAM is only capable of detecting animals that are actively vocalizing, while many marine mammal species vocalize infrequently or during certain activities, which means that only a subset of the animals within the range of the PAM would be detected (and potentially have reduced impacts). Additionally, localization and range detection can be challenging under certain scenarios. For example, odontocetes are fast moving and often travel in large or dispersed groups which makes localization difficult.

Given that the effects to marine mammals from the types of surveys authorized in this IHA are expected to be limited to low level behavioral harassment even in the absence of mitigation, the limited additional benefit anticipated by adding this detection method (especially for NARW and other low frequency cetaceans, species for which PAM has limited efficacy), and the cost and impracticability of implementing a full-time PAM program, we have determined the current requirements for visual monitoring are sufficient to ensure the least practicable adverse impact on the affected species or stocks and their habitat. NMFS has previously provided discussions on why PAM isn't a required monitoring measure during HRG survey IHAs in past Federal Register notices (see 86 FR 21289, April 22, 2021 and 87 FR 13975, March 11, 2022 for examples).

Comment 14: Oceana recommended that when HRG surveys are allowed to resume after a shutdown event, the surveys should be required to use a ramp-up procedure to encourage any nearby marine life to leave the area.

Response: NMFS agrees with this recommendation and included in the Federal Register notice of the proposed IHA (87 FR 38067; June 27, 2022) and this final IHA a stipulation that when technically feasible, survey equipment must be ramped up at the start or restart of survey activities. A ramp-up procedure, involving a gradual increase in source level output, is required at all times as part of the activation of the acoustic source when technically feasible. Operators should ramp up sources to half power for 5 minutes and then proceed to full power. A 30-minute pre-start clearance observation period must occur prior to the start of ramp-up (or initiation of source use if ramp-up is not technically feasible). NMFS notes that ramp-up is not required for short periods where acoustic sources were shut down ( i.e., less than 30 minutes) if PSOs have maintained constant visual observation and no detections of marine mammals occurred within the applicable clearance zones.

Comment 15: COA does not agree with NMFS' negligible impact determination for NARW and states that NMFS provides an inaccurate characterization of impacts to NARW.

Response: NMFS disagrees with the COA's position regarding the negligible impact analysis, and they do not provide a reasoned basis for finding that the effects of the specified activity would be greater than negligible on NARW. The Negligible Impact Analysis and Determination section of the proposed IHA (87 FR 38067; June 27, 2022) provides a detailed qualitative discussion supporting NMFS' determination that any anticipated impacts from this action would be negligible. The section contains a number of factors that were considered by NMFS based on the best available scientific data and why we concluded that impacts resulting from the specified activity are not reasonably expected to, or reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival.

With specific regard to NARW, we note that take is authorized for only a very small percentage of the right whale population (see Table 9). However, the numbers of potential incidents of take or animals taken are only part of an assessment and are not, alone, decisively indicative of the degree of impact. In order to adequately evaluate the effects of noise exposure at the population level, the total number of take incidents must be further interpreted in context of relevant biological and population parameters and other biological, environmental, and anthropogenic factors and in a spatially and temporally explicit manner. The effects to individuals of a “take” are not necessarily equal. Some take events represent exposures that only just exceed a Level B harassment threshold, which would be expected to result in lower-level impacts, while other exposures occur at higher received levels and would typically be expected to have comparatively greater potential impacts on an individual. Further, responses to similar received levels may result in significantly different impacts on an individual dependent upon the context of the exposure or the status of the individuals ( e.g., if it occurred in an area and time where concentrated feeding was occurring, or to individuals weakened by other effects). In this case, NMFS reiterates that no such higher level takes are expected to occur. The maximum anticipated Level B harassment zone is 141 m, a distance smaller than the precautionary shutdown zone of 500 m. To the extent that any exposure of NARW does occur, it would be expected to result in lower-level impacts that are unlikely to result in significant or long-lasting impacts to the exposed individual and, given the relatively small amount of exposures expected to occur, it is unlikely that these exposures would result in population-level impacts. NMFS acknowledges that impacts of a similar degree on a proportion of the individuals in a stock may have differing impacts to the stock based on its status, i.e., smaller stocks may be less able to absorb deaths or reproductive suppression and maintain similar growth rates as larger stocks. However, even given the precarious status of the NARW, the low-level nature of the impacts expected to occur from this action and the small number of individuals affected supports NMFS' determination that population-level impacts will not occur. The commenters provide no substantive reasoning to contradict this finding, and do not support their assertions of effects greater than NMFS has assumed may occur.

Comment 16: COA is concerned that habitat displacement could significantly increase the risk of ship-strike to NARW from outside the survey area.

Response: NMFS does not anticipate that NARW would be displaced from the area where Atlantic Shores Bight's marine site characterization surveys would occur, and COA does not provide evidence that this effect should be a reasonably anticipated outcome of the specified activity. Similarly, NMFS is not aware of any scientific information suggesting that the survey activity would drive marine mammals into shipping lanes, and disagrees that this would be a reasonably anticipated effect of the specified activities. The take by Level B harassment authorized by NMFS is precautionary but considered unlikely, as NMFS' take estimation process does not account for the use of extremely precautionary mitigation measures, e.g., the requirement for Atlantic Shores Bight to implement a shutdown zone that is more than three times as large as the estimated harassment zone. These requirements are expected to largely eliminate the actual occurrence of Level B harassment events and, to the extent that harassment does occur, would minimize the duration and severity of any such events. Therefore, even if a NARW was in the area of the cable corridor surveys, a displacement impact is not anticipated.

Although the primary stressor to marine mammals from the specified activities is acoustic exposure to the sound source, NMFS takes seriously the risk of vessel strike and has prescribed measures sufficient to avoid the potential for ship strike to the extent practicable. NMFS has required these measures despite a very low likelihood of vessel strike; vessels associated with the survey activity will add a discountable amount of vessel traffic to the specific geographic region and, furthermore, vessels towing survey gear travel at very slow speeds ( i.e., roughly 4-5 kn; 7.4-9.3 km/h).

Comment 17: COA asserted that NMFS is overestimating the population abundance for NARW.

Response: NMFS agrees that the most up to date population estimate should be used for assessing NARW abundance estimates. The revised abundance estimate (368; 95 percent with a confidence interval of 356-378) published by Pace (2021) (and subsequently included in the 2021 Stock Assessment Reports (SARs; https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports )), which was used in the proposed IHA, provides the most recent and best available estimate, and introduced improvements to NMFS' right whale abundance model. Specifically, Pace (2021) looked at a different way of characterizing annual estimates of age-specific survival. NMFS considered all relevant information regarding NARW, including the information cited by the commenters. However, NMFS relies on the SAR. Recently, NMFS updated its species web page to recognize the population estimate for NARW is now below 350 animals ( https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/species/north-atlantic-right-whale ), as COA mentioned. We anticipate that this information will be presented in the draft 2022 SAR. We note that this change in abundance estimate would not change the estimated take of NARW or authorized take numbers, nor affect our ability to make the required findings under the MMPA for Atlantic Shores Bight's survey activities.

As stated above, NMFS notes that the MMPA specifies that the “best available data” must be used, which does not always mean the most recent. As is NMFS' prerogative, we referenced the best available NARW abundance estimate of 368 from the 2021 SARs as NMFS' determination of the best available data that we relied on in our analysis. The Pace (2021) results strengthened the case for a change in mean survival rates after 2010-2011, but did not significantly change other current estimates (population size, number of new animals, adult female survival) derived from the model.

Lastly, as we stated previously and in the notice of proposed IHA (87 FR 38067; June 27, 2022), any impacts to marine mammals are expected to be temporary and minor and, given the relative size of the survey area compared to the overall migratory route and foraging habitat (which is not affected by the specified activity). The survey area is small (approximately 5,567.3 km 2 total area) compared to the size of the NARW migratory BIA (269,448 km 2 ). Because of this, and in context of the minor, low-level nature of the impacts expected to result from the planned survey, such impacts are not expected to result in disruption to biologically important behaviors.

Comment 18: Oceana states that Atlantic Shores Bight's activities will increase vessel traffic in and around the project area and that the IHA must include a vessel traffic plan to minimize the effects of increased vessel traffic.

Response: NMFS disagrees with Oceana's statement that the IHA must require a vessel traffic plan. During HRG surveys there are no service vessels required. NMFS agrees that a vessel plan may be potentially appropriate for project construction, but it is not needed for marine site characterization surveys.

Comment 19: COA is concerned regarding the number of harbor seals that could be impacted by the activities, as well as a lack of baseline data being available for harbor seals off New Jersey.

Response: We appreciate the concern expressed by COA. NMFS utilizes the best available science when analyzing which species may be impacted by an applicant's proposed activities. Based on information found in the scientific literature, as well as based on density models developed by Duke University, all marine mammal species included in the proposed Federal Register notice have some likelihood of occurring in Atlantic Shores Bight's survey area. Furthermore, the MMPA requires us to evaluate the effects of the specified activities in consideration of the best scientific evidence available and, if the necessary findings are made, to issue the requested take authorization. The MMPA does not allow us to delay decision making in hopes that additional information may become available in the future.

Regarding the lack of baseline information cited by COA, with specific concern pointed out for harbor seals, NMFS points towards two sources of information for marine mammal baseline information: the Ocean/Wind Power Ecological Baseline Studies, January 2008—December 2009 completed by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection in July 2010 ( https://dspace.njstatelib.org/xmlui/handle/10929/68435 ) and the Atlantic Marine Assessment Program for Protected Species (AMAPPS; https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/new-england-mid-atlantic/population-assessments/atlantic-marine-assessment-program-protected ) with annual reports available from 2010 to 2020 ( https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/resource/publication-database/atlantic-marine-assessment-program-protected-species ) that cover the areas across the Atlantic Ocean. NMFS has duly considered this and all available information.

Based on the information presented, NMFS has determined that no new information has become available, nor do the commenters present additional information, that would change our determinations since the publication of the proposed notice.

NMFS considered all public comments received and determined that no changes to the final IHA were necessary.

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. NMFS fully considered all of this information, and we refer the reader to these descriptions, incorporated here by reference, instead of reprinting the information. 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 ( https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/find-species) .

Table 2 lists all species or stocks for which take is expected and 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. 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 serious injury or mortality is anticipated or authorized, PBR and annual serious injury and mortality from anthropogenic sources are included here as gross indicators of the status of the species or stocks 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. 2021 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 2021 SARs (available online at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/marine-mammal-protection/draft-marine-mammal-stock-assessment-reports ).

ICCAT was established to provide an effective program of international cooperation in research and conservation in recognition of the unique problems related to the highly migratory nature of tunas and tuna-like species. The International Convention for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (Convention), which established the ICCAT Commission (ICCAT), entered into force in 1969 after receiving the required number of ratifications. ICCAT usually holds an Annual Meeting in November of each year, and convenes meetings of its working groups and other subsidiary bodies between annual meetings as needed. Under ATCA (see 16 U.S.C. 971a), the United States is represented at ICCAT by not more than three U.S. Commissioners. Additional information about ICCAT is available at www.iccat.int .

ATCA (see 16 U.S.C. 971 et seq. ) establishes an advisory committee comprised of: (1) Not less than five nor more than 20 individuals appointed by the U.S. Commissioners to ICCAT who shall select such individuals from the various groups concerned with the fisheries covered by the ICCAT Convention; and (2) the chairs (or their designees) of the New England, Mid-Atlantic, South Atlantic, Caribbean, and Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Councils. Each member of the Advisory Committee shall serve for a term of 2 years and be eligible for reappointment. The Committee meets at least twice a year during which members receive information and provide advice on ICCAT-related matters. All members of the Advisory Committee are appointed in their individual professional capacity and undergo a background screening. Any individual appointed to the Committee who is unable to attend all or part of an Advisory Committee meeting may not appoint another person to attend such meetings as his or her proxy. Nominees should be able to fulfill the time and travel commitments required to participate in the Committee's annual spring and fall meetings, in addition to ad hoc meetings as necessary throughout the year. The annual spring and fall meetings are normally two days long and are usually held in Silver Spring, Maryland, or Miami, Florida.

Members of the Advisory Committee receive no compensation for their services. The Secretary of Commerce and the Secretary of State may pay the necessary travel expenses of members of the Advisory Committee. The terms of all currently appointed Advisory Committee members expire on December 31, 2022. NMFS is soliciting nominees to serve as members of the Advisory Committee for a term of 2 years that will begin January 1, 2023, and expire December 31, 2024.

ATCA specifies that the U.S. Commissioners may establish species working groups for the purpose of providing advice and recommendations to the U.S. Commissioners and to the Advisory Committee on matters relating to the conservation and management of any highly migratory species covered by the ICCAT Convention (see 16 U.S.C. 971b-1). Any species working group shall consist of no more than seven members of the Advisory Committee and no more than four scientific or technical personnel, as considered necessary by the Commissioners. Currently, there are four species working groups advising the Committee and the U.S. Commissioners: a Bluefin Tuna Working Group, a Swordfish/Sharks Working Group, a Billfish Working Group, and a Bigeye, Albacore, Yellowfin, and Skipjack Tunas Working Group. Scientific or technical personnel (known as Technical Advisors) appointed to species working groups serve at the pleasure of the Commissioners; therefore, the Commissioners can choose to alter these appointments at any time. As with Committee Members, Technical Advisors may not be represented by a proxy during meetings of the Advisory Committee. Nominees should be able to fulfill the time and travel commitments required to participate in the annual spring meeting of the Advisory Committee, when the species working groups are convened, in addition to ad hoc meetings throughout the year, as appropriate.

Nominations to either the Advisory Committee or a species working group should include a letter of interest and a resume or curriculum vitae that describes the individual's knowledge and experience in a field related to the highly migratory species covered by the ICCAT Convention. Self-nominations are acceptable. Letters of recommendation are useful but not required. When making a nomination, please specify which appointment (Advisory Committee member or Technical Advisor to a species working group) is being sought. Nominees are also encouraged to indicate which of the four species working groups is preferred, although placement on the requested group is not guaranteed.

NMFS encourages nominations for women and for individuals from underserved communities that meet the knowledge, experience, and other requirements of the positions described in this notice. See Executive Order (E.O.) 13985 (Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government) section 2 (defining “underserved communities” as “populations sharing a particular characteristic, as well as geographic communities, that have been systematically denied a full opportunity to participate in aspects of economic, social, and civic life,” “such as Black, Latino, and Indigenous and Native American persons, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders and other persons of color; members of religious minorities; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) persons; persons with disabilities; persons who live in rural areas; and persons otherwise adversely affected by persistent poverty or inequality.”). E.O. 13985 is available at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/25/2021-01753/advancing-racial-equity-and-support-for-underserved-communities-through-the-federal-government .

Central California Coast (CCC) Evolutionary Significant Unit (ESU) of coho salmon ( Oncorhynchus kisutch ), threatened Northern California (NC) Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of steelhead ( O. mykiss ), and threatened CCC DPS of steelhead ( O.mykiss ).

Scientific research and enhancement permits are issued in accordance with section 10(a)(1)(A) of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 et. seq ) and regulations governing listed fish and wildlife permits (50 CFR 222-227). NMFS issues permits based on findings that such permits (1) are applied for in good faith, (2) would not operate to the disadvantage of the listed species which are the subject of the permits, and (3) are consistent with the purposes and policies set forth in section 2 of the ESA. The authority to take listed species is subject to conditions set forth in the permits.

This notice is provided pursuant to section 10(c) of the ESA. NMFS will evaluate the application, associated documents, and any comment submitted to determine whether the application meets the requirements of section 10(a) of the ESA and Federal regulations. The final permit decisions will not be made until after the end of the 30-day comment period and consideration of any comment submitted therein. NMFS will publish notice of its final action in the Federal Register .

Those individuals requesting a hearing on the application listed in this notice should provide the specific reasons why a hearing on the application would be appropriate (see ADDRESSES ). Such a hearing is held at the discretion of the Assistant Administrator for NOAA Fisheries.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife in Santa Rosa, California applied for a section 10(a)(1)(A) scientific enhancement permit (permit 26568). This application involves enhancing the survival of endangered CCC coho salmon ESU, threatened NC steelhead DPS, and CCC steelhead DPS in Mendocino, Sonoma and Marin coastal streams through rescue and relocation of these species from drying streams. This application also includes research and monitoring elements. To assess the efficacy of these rescue activities, a subset of the juvenile salmonids may receive a Passive Integrated Transponder tag (PIT-tag) prior to release. The tagged fish will be tracked by fixed antennas positioned in multiple regional watersheds which will provide information on their movements and survival in the freshwater environment. Otoliths and tissue samples will be collected opportunistically from spawned adult carcasses encountered to learn about the individual's life history. Tissue samples (fin clips and scales) will be collected from carcasses and a subset of live fish for genetic information (fin clips) and age-structure and growth patterns (scales). Activities associated with rescue and relocation could occur anywhere within the Mendocino, Sonoma and Marin coastal watersheds within CCC coho salmon's ESU boundaries. This includes streams from Punta Gorda, CA through, Redwood Creek (Marin County, CA). A summary of these components is provided as follows.

This component involves rescuing and relocating coho salmon and steelhead from stream sections experiencing dewatering during the dry season or prolonged periods of below average rainfall. Specific staff listed on the application from both California Department of Fish and Wildlife and co-investigators will follow a predetermined communication and documentation protocol outlined in the application and permit while implementing these relocation efforts. Standard scientific methods and equipment ( e.g., backpack-electrofishing, nets, seines, portable air pumps, transport containers, water chillers, etc.) will be used during the capture and relocation of coho salmon and steelhead. Captured coho salmon and steelhead will be transported for release into habitats within the same watershed (when possible) that are likely to maintain adequate water and habitat quality through the remainder of the dry season. Because these are endangered and threatened populations with low abundance, relocating coho salmon and steelhead from sections of stream where they will likely perish is expected to benefit the survival of these individual fish and enhance the population. The proposed tagging and tissue collection are intended to provide information on the survival and early life history of rescued fish, contributions of rescued fish to subsequent adult returns, and information on the genetic diversity within basins, particularly where natural origin fish are present.

Field activities for the various proposed enhancement components can occur year-round starting in September 2022 through December 31, 2032. The annual sum of take requested across the various components of this effort is as follows: (1) non-lethal capture and release of up to 20,000 juvenile natural origin coho salmon, 9,000 hatchery origin juvenile coho salmon, 6,000 natural origin juvenile NC steelhead and 10,000 natural origin juvenile CCC steelhead, while electrofishing, seining, or dip-netting, (2) non-lethal capture and release of up to 1500 juvenile natural origin coho salmon for the purpose of applying Passive Integrated Transponder-tags (PIT-tags) and collecting tissue samples, (3) non-lethal capture and release of up to 200 adult natural origin coho salmon, 200 adult hatchery origin coho salmon, 300 adult natural origin NC steelhead, and 300 CCC steelhead by beach seine, (4) tissue collection from up to 1000 adult natural origin coho salmon, 1000 hatchery origin coho salmon, 500 adult natural origin NC steelhead, and 500 adult natural origin CCC steelhead carcasses. The potential annual unintentional lethal coho salmon and steelhead take expected to result from the proposed enhancement activities is up to 2,000 juvenile natural origin coho salmon, 900 juvenile hatchery origin coho salmon, 600 juvenile natural origin NC steelhead, 1000 juvenile natural origin CCC steelhead, 20 adult natural origin coho salmon, 20 adult hatchery origin coho salmon, 30 adult natural origin NC steelhead, and 30 adult natural origin CCC steelhead. These estimates assume up to 10 percent indirect mortality rate. For research and monitoring, indirect mortality rates for capture and handling are generally less than or equal to 2 percent. However, in many cases fish targeted for rescue and relocation are located in isolated habitats and declining habitats with stressful environmental conditions, and therefore it is reasonable to assume a higher potential indirect mortality rate from capture and handling. Absent these rescue efforts, salmonids left in these declining environmental conditions are expected to die.

This proposed scientific enhancement effort is expected to enhance survival and support coho salmon and steelhead recovery within the CCC coho salmon ESU, NC steelhead DPS, and CCC steelhead DPS and is consistent with recommendations and objectives outlined in NMFS' Central California Coast ESU Coho Salmon Recovery Plan and Coastal Multispecies Recovery Plan. See the Permit 26568 application for greater details on the various components of this scientific enhancement effort including the specific scientific methods proposed and take allotments requested for each.

On July 1, 2022, NMFS issued a Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement (SDEIS) regarding the Makah Tribe's request to resume ceremonial and subsistence harvest of eastern North Pacific gray whales, and announced a 45-day comment period on the SDEIS. During the comment period, we received a request to extend the public comment period. We considered the request and agree to extend the public comment period by 60 days. We are therefore extending the close of the public comment period from August 15, 2022, to October 14, 2022.

The SDEIS is available in electronic form on the internet at the following address: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/west-coast/marine-mammal-protection/makah-tribal-whale-hunt. In addition, copies of the SDEIS are available on CD by contacting Grace Ferrara (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT ).

Title: Improving Customer Experience (OMB Circular A-11, Section 280 Implementation).

Abstract: A modern, streamlined and responsive customer experience means: raising government-wide customer experience to the average of the private sector service industry; developing indicators for high-impact Federal programs to monitor progress towards excellent customer experience and mature digital services; and providing the structure (including increasing transparency) and resources to ensure customer experience is a focal point for agency leadership.

This proposed information collection activity provides a means to garner customer and stakeholder feedback in an efficient, timely manner in accordance with the Administration's commitment to improving customer service delivery as discussed in Section 280 of OMB Circular A-11 at https://www.performance.gov/cx/a11-280.pdf.

As discussed in OMB guidance, agencies should identify their highest-impact customer journeys (using customer volume, annual program cost, and/or knowledge of customer priority as weighting factors) and select touchpoints/transactions within those journeys to collect feedback.

These results will be used to improve the delivery of Federal services and programs. It will also provide government-wide data on customer experience that can be displayed on www.performance.gov to help build transparency and accountability of Federal programs to the customers they serve.

As a general matter, these information collections will not result in any new system of records containing privacy information and will not ask questions of a sensitive nature, such as sexual behavior and attitudes, religious beliefs, and other matters that are commonly considered private.

USPTO will only submit collections if they meet the following criteria.

• The collections are voluntary;

• The collections are low-burden for respondents (based on considerations of total burden hours or burden-hours per respondent) and are low-cost for both the respondents and the Federal Government;

• The collections are non-controversial and do not raise issues of concern to other Federal agencies;

• Any collection is targeted to the solicitation of opinions from respondents who have experience with the program or may have experience with the program in the near future;

• Personally identifiable information (PII) is collected only to the extent necessary and is not retained;

• Information gathered is intended to be used for general service improvement and program management purposes;

• Upon agreement between OMB and the agency all or a subset of information may be released as part of A-11, Section 280 requirements only on performance.gov. Summaries of customer research and user testing activities may be included in public-facing customer journey maps or summaries.

• Additional release of data must be done coordinated with OMB.

These collections will allow for ongoing, collaborative and actionable communications between the Agency, its customers and stakeholders, and OMB as it monitors agency compliance on Section 280. These responses will inform efforts to improve or maintain the quality of service offered to the public. If this information is not collected, vital feedback from customers and stakeholders on services will be unavailable.

Current Action: New Collection of Information.

Type of Review: New.

Affected Public: Individuals and Households, Businesses and Organizations, State, Local or Tribal Government.

Estimated Number of Respondents: Below is a preliminary estimate of the aggregate burden hours for this new collection. USPTO will provide refined estimates of burden in subsequent notices.

Average Expected Annual Number of Activities: Approximately five types of customer experience activities such as feedback surveys, focus groups, user testing, and interviews.

Average Number of Respondents per Activity: 1 response per respondent per activity.

Annual Responses: 2,001,550.

Average Minutes per Response: 3 minutes-60 minutes, dependent upon activity.

Burden Hours: USPTO requests approximately 101,125 burden hours.

Request for Comments: Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the 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 collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and (e) estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information.

Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; to develop, acquire, install and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; to train personnel and to be able to respond to a collection of information, to search data sources, to complete and review the collection of information; and to transmit or otherwise disclose the information.

All written comments will be available for public inspection Regulations.gov .

Direct Subsidized Loans, Direct Unsubsidized Loans, Direct PLUS Loans, and Direct Consolidation Loans (collectively referred to as “Direct Loans”) may have either fixed or variable interest rates, depending on when the loan was first disbursed or, in the case of a Direct Consolidation Loan, when the application for the loan was received. Direct Subsidized Loans, Direct Unsubsidized Loans, and Direct PLUS Loans first disbursed before July 1, 2006, and Direct Consolidation Loans for which the application was received before February 1, 1999, have variable interest rates. For these loans, a new rate is determined annually and is in effect during the period from July 1 of one year through June 30 of the following year.

Direct Subsidized Loans, Direct Unsubsidized Loans, and Direct PLUS Loans first disbursed on or after July 1, 2006, and Direct Consolidation Loans for which the application was received on or after February 1, 1999, have fixed interest rates that apply for the life of the loan.

This notice announces the interest rates for variable-rate Direct Loans that will apply during the period from July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2023. Interest rate information for fixed-rate Direct Loans is announced in a separate notice published in the Federal Register .

Interest rates for variable-rate Direct Loans are determined in accordance with formulas specified in section 455(b) of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA) (20 U.S.C. 1087e(b)). The formulas vary depending on loan type and when the loan was first disbursed or, for certain Direct Consolidation Loans, when the application for the loan was received. The HEA specifies a maximum interest rate for these loan types. If the interest rate formula results in a rate that exceeds the statutory maximum rate, the rate is the statutory maximum rate.

For Direct Subsidized Loans and Direct Unsubsidized Loans with first disbursement dates before July 1, 2006, and for Direct PLUS Loans with first disbursement dates on or after July 1, 1998, and before July 1, 2006, the interest rate is equal to the lesser of—

(1) The bond equivalent rate of 91-day Treasury bills auctioned at the final auction held before the June 1 immediately preceding the 12-month period to which the interest rate applies, plus a statutory add-on percentage; or

(2) 8.25 percent (for Direct Subsidized Loans and Direct Unsubsidized Loans) or 9.00 percent (for Direct PLUS Loans).

For Direct Subsidized Loans and Direct Unsubsidized Loans with first disbursement dates on or after July 1, 1995, and before July 1, 2006, the statutory add-on percentage varies depending on whether the loan is in an in-school, grace, or deferment status, or in any other status. For all other loans, the statutory add-on percentage is the same during any status.

The bond equivalent rate of 91-day Treasury bills auctioned on May 31, 2022, is 1.139 percent, rounded to 1.14 percent.

For Direct PLUS Loans with first disbursement dates before July 1, 1998, the interest rate is equal to the lesser of—

(1) The weekly average 1-year constant maturity Treasury yield, as published by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, for the last calendar week ending on or before the June 26 preceding the 12-month period to which the interest rate applies, plus a statutory add-on percentage; or

(2) 9.00 percent.

The weekly average of the one-year constant maturity Treasury yield, as published by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, for the last calendar week ending on or before June 26, 2022, is 2.83 percent.

A Direct Consolidation Loan may have up to three components, depending on the types of loans that were repaid by the consolidation loan and when the application for the consolidation loan was received. The three components are called Direct Subsidized Consolidation Loans, Direct Unsubsidized Consolidation Loans, and (only for Direct Consolidation Loans made based on applications received before July 1, 2006) Direct PLUS Consolidation Loans. In most cases the interest rates for variable-rate Direct Subsidized Consolidation Loans, Direct Unsubsidized Consolidation Loans, and Direct PLUS Consolidation Loans are determined in accordance with the same formulas that apply to Direct Subsidized Loans, Direct Unsubsidized Loans, and Direct PLUS Loans, respectively.

Charts 1 and 2 show the interest rate formulas used to determine the interest rates for all variable-rate Direct Loans and the rates that are in effect during the 12-month period from July 1, 2022, through June 30, 2023.

Chart 1 shows the interest rates for loans with rates based on the 91-day Treasury bill rate. Chart 2 shows the interest rates for loans with rates based on the weekly average of the one-year constant maturity Treasury yield.

Section 427A of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA) (20 U.S.C. 1077a), provides formulas for determining the interest rates charged to borrowers on loans made under the FFEL Program, including Federal Subsidized and Unsubsidized Stafford Loans (Stafford Loans), Federal PLUS Loans (PLUS Loans), Federal Consolidation Loans (Consolidation Loans), and Federal Supplemental Loans for Students (SLS Loans). No new loans have been made under the FFEL Program since June 30, 2010.

The FFEL Program includes loans with variable interest rates that change each year and loans with fixed interest rates that remain the same for the life of the loan. For loans with a variable interest rate, the specific interest rate formula that applies to a particular loan depends on the date of the first disbursement of the loan or, in the case of a Consolidation Loan, the date the application for the loan was received. If a loan has a variable interest rate, a new rate is determined annually and is in effect during the period from July 1 of one year through June 30 of the following year.

This notice announces the interest rates for variable-rate FFEL Program loans that will be in effect during the period from July 1, 2022, through June 30, 2023. Interest rates for fixed-rate FFEL Program loans may be found in a Federal Register notice published on September 15, 2015 (80 FR 55342).

For the majority of variable-rate FFEL Program loans, the annual interest rate is equal to the lesser of—

(1) The bond equivalent rate of the 91-day Treasury bills auctioned at the final auction held before June 1 of each year, plus a statutory add-on percentage; or

(2) A statutorily established maximum interest rate.

The bond equivalent rate of the 91-day Treasury bills auctioned on May 31, 2022, is 1.139 percent, rounded to 1.14 percent.

For PLUS Loans first disbursed before July 1, 1998, and for all SLS Loans, the annual interest rate is equal to the lesser of—

(1) The weekly average of the one-year constant maturity Treasury yield, as published by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, for the last calendar week ending on or before June 26 of each year, plus a statutory add-on percentage; or

(2) A statutorily established maximum interest rate.

The weekly average of the one-year constant maturity Treasury yield, as published by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, for the last calendar week ending on or before June 26, 2022, is 2.83 percent.

For Consolidation Loans that have a variable interest rate, the annual interest rate for the portion of a Consolidation Loan that repaid loans other than loans made under the Health Education Assistance Loans (HEAL) Program is equal to—

(1) The bond equivalent rate of the 91-day Treasury bill auctioned at the final auction held before June 1 of each year, plus a statutory add-on percentage; or

(2) A statutorily established maximum interest rate.

If a Consolidation Loan (whether a variable-rate loan or a fixed-rate loan) repaid loans made under the HEAL Program, the interest rate on the portion of the Consolidation Loan that repaid HEAL loans is a variable rate that is equal to the average of the bond equivalent rates of the 91-day Treasury bills auctioned for the quarter ending June 30, plus a statutory add-on percentage. For the portion of a Consolidation Loan that repaid HEAL loans, there is no maximum interest rate.

The average of the bond equivalent rates of the 91-day Treasury bills auctioned for the quarter ending on June 30, 2022, is 1.14 percent.

The statutory add-on percentages and maximum interest rates vary depending on loan type and when the loan was first disbursed. In addition, the add-on percentage for certain Stafford Loans is different depending on whether the loan is in an in-school, grace, or deferment status, or in any other status. If the interest rate calculated in accordance with the applicable formula exceeds the statutory maximum interest rate, the statutory maximum rate applies.

Charts 1 through 4 show the interest rate formulas that are used to determine the interest rates for all variable-rate FFEL Program loans and the interest rates that are in effect during the 12-month period from July 1, 2022, through June 30, 2023. Unless otherwise indicated, the cohorts shown in each chart include all borrowers, regardless of prior borrowing.

Chart 1 shows the interest rates for loans with rates based on the 91-day Treasury bill, with the exception of “converted” variable-rate Federal Stafford Loans and certain Federal Consolidation Loans.

Chart 2 shows the interest rates for loans with rates based on the weekly average of the one-year constant maturity Treasury yield.

Chart 3 shows the interest rates for “converted” variable-rate Federal Stafford Loans. These are loans that originally had varying fixed interest rates.

Finally, Chart 4 shows the interest rates for variable-rate Federal Consolidation Loans, and for the portion of any Federal Consolidation Loan that repaid loans made under the HEAL Program.

The Department, 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 ICR that is described below. The Department is especially interested in public comments 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 record.

Title of Collection: National Center for Information and Technical Support for Postsecondary Students with Disabilities (NCITSPSD) Program Database.

OMB Control Number: 1840-0841.

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

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

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 4,583.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 13,749.

Abstract: In 2021, a federal discretionary grant was awarded via the National Center for Information and Technical Support for Postsecondary Students with Disabilities Program (NCITSPSD) to the National Center for College Students with Disabilities (NCCSD) at the University of Minnesota and is authorized by Congress in the Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008 (777.4). The NCITSPSD program grant was originally awarded in 2015 to the Association on Higher Education and Disability (AHEAD). The NCCSD College Disability Resource Database (CeDar) is designed to address a gap in information about services and accessibility for college students with disabilities, who make up 11% of the undergraduate population. Existing general information about colleges is available in the U.S. Department of Education's on-line College Navigator and College Affordability and Transparency Center, but the only information about students with disabilities in these databases is the percentage of students registered with campus disability services office. At this time, this is the only database that provides systemic collection of information about campus-level, disability-related services, access, and activities at colleges and universities in the United States. The NCCSD survey asks all U.S. campuses to provide basic information about disability services, accessibility of campuses, and disability-related activities that may affect inclusion and the campus climate. The data is available to the public in an accessible and searchable database to assist prospective college students and their families in making informed decisions during the college search process. Because the database is public, researchers and policy makers are able to utilize the data to gather information about disability and higher education in systemic ways.

Direct Subsidized Loans, Direct Unsubsidized Loans, Direct PLUS Loans, and Direct Consolidation Loans (collectively referred to as “Direct Loans”) may have either fixed or variable interest rates, depending on when the loan was first disbursed or, in the case of a Direct Consolidation Loan, when the application for the loan was received. Direct Subsidized Loans, Direct Unsubsidized Loans, and Direct PLUS Loans first disbursed on or after July 1, 2006, and Direct Consolidation Loans for which the application was received on or after February 1, 1999, have fixed interest rates that apply for the life of the loan. Direct Subsidized Loans, Direct Unsubsidized Loans, and Direct PLUS Loans first disbursed before July 1, 2006, and Direct Consolidation Loans for which the application was received before February 1, 1999, have variable interest rates that are determined annually and are in effect during the period from July 1 of one year through June 30 of the following year.

This notice announces the fixed interest rates for Direct Subsidized Loans, Direct Unsubsidized Loans, and Direct PLUS Loans with first disbursement dates on or after July 1, 2022, and before July 1, 2023, and provides interest rate information for other fixed-rate Direct Loans. Interest rate information for variable-rate Direct Loans is announced in a separate Federal Register notice.

Section 455(b) of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA) (20 U.S.C. 1087e(b)), includes formulas for determining the interest rates for all Direct Subsidized Loans, Direct Unsubsidized Loans, and Direct PLUS Loans first disbursed on or after July 1, 2013. The interest rate for these loans is a fixed rate that is determined annually for all loans first disbursed during any 12-month period beginning on July 1 and ending on June 30. The rate is equal to the high yield of the 10-year Treasury notes auctioned at the final auction held before June 1 of that 12-month period, plus a statutory add-on percentage that varies depending on the loan type and, for Direct Unsubsidized Loans, whether the loan was made to an undergraduate or graduate student. The calculated interest rate may not exceed a maximum rate specified in the HEA. If the interest rate formula results in a rate that exceeds the statutory maximum rate, the rate is the statutory maximum rate. Loans first disbursed during different 12-month periods that begin on July 1 and end on June 30 may have different interest rates, but the rate determined for any loan is a fixed interest rate for the life of the loan.

On May 11, 2022, the United States Treasury Department held a 10-year Treasury note auction that resulted in a high yield of 2.943 percent.

Chart 1 shows the fixed interest rates for Direct Subsidized Loans, Direct Unsubsidized Loans, and Direct PLUS Loans first disbursed on or after July 1, 2022, and before July 1, 2023.

For reference, Chart 2 compares the fixed interest rates for Direct Subsidized Loans, Direct Unsubsidized Loans, and Direct PLUS Loans first disbursed during the period July 1, 2022, through June 30, 2023, with the fixed interest rates for loans first disbursed during each previous 12-month period from July 1, 2013, through June 30, 2022.

The NACIQI is established under Section 114 of the HEA. The NACIQI meets at least twice a year and advises the Secretary of Education with respect to: the establishment and enforcement of the standards of accrediting agencies or associations under subpart 2 of part H of Title IV, HEA; the recognition of specific accrediting agencies or associations; the preparation and publication of the list of nationally recognized accrediting agencies and associations; the eligibility and certification process for institutions of higher education under Title IV of the HEA, together with recommendations for improvements in such process; the relationship between (1) accreditation of institutions of higher education and the certification and eligibility of such institutions, and (2) State licensing responsibilities with respect to such institutions; and other advisory functions relating to accreditation and institutional eligibility that the Secretary may prescribe by regulation.

NACIQI is composed of 18 members, of which: six members shall be appointed by the Secretary of Education; six members shall be appointed by the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, three of whom shall be appointed on the recommendation of the majority leader of the U.S. House of Representatives and three of whom shall be appointed on the recommendation of the minority leader of the U.S. House of Representatives; and six members shall be appointed by the President Pro Tempore of the U.S. Senate, three of whom shall be appointed on the recommendation of the majority leader of the U.S. Senate and three of whom shall be appointed on the recommendation of the minority leader of the U.S. Senate. Per 20 U.S.C. 1011d, at least one member of the Committee must be a student who at the time of appointment by the Secretary of Education, is attending an institution of higher education. Members are appointed: (A) on the basis of the individuals' experience, integrity, impartiality, and good judgment; (B) from among individuals who are representatives of, or knowledgeable concerning, education and training beyond secondary education, representing all sectors and types of institutions of higher education; and (C) on the basis of the individuals' technical qualifications, professional standing, and demonstrated knowledge in the fields of accreditation and administration in higher education.

Per the authorizing legislation for NACIQI, the term of office of each member of the Committee shall be for six years, except for vacancies. Any member appointed to fill a vacancy occurring prior to the expiration of the term for which the member's predecessor was appointed shall be appointed for the remainder of such term. A vacancy on the Committee shall be filled in the same manner as the original appointment was made not later than 90 days after the vacancy occurs. If a vacancy occurs in a position to be filled by the Secretary of Education, the Secretary shall publish a Federal Register notice soliciting nominations for the position not later than 30 days after being notified of the vacancy. Members of the Committee will serve as Special Government Employees (SGEs), as defined in 18 U.S.C. 202(a). As SGEs, members are selected for their individual experience, integrity, impartiality, and good judgment.

Nomination Process: Interested persons, stakeholders, or organizations may nominate a qualified individual(s). To nominate an individual(s) or self-nominate for appointment to serve on the NACIQI, please submit via the email address cmtemgmtoffice@ed.gov the following information to the U.S. Department of Education:

(1) A cover letter addressed to the Secretary of Education as follows: Honorable Miguel Cardona, Ed.D., Secretary of Education, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20202. In the letter, please note your reason(s) for submitting the nomination; (2) A copy of the nominee's current resume/cv; and (3) Contact information for the nominee (name, address, contact phone number, and email address).

In addition, the cover letter must include a statement affirming that the nominee (if you are nominating someone other than yourself) has agreed to be nominated and is willing to serve on the NACIQI if appointed by the Secretary of Education.

For questions, please contact Karen Akins, Committee Management Officer, U. S. Department of Education, Telephone: (202) 401-3677 Email: Karen.Akins@ed.gov

Electronic Access to this Document: The official version of this document is published in the Federal Register . Free internet access to the official version of this notice in the Federal Register and the applicable Code of Federal Regulations is available via the Federal Digital System at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site, you can view this document, as well as all other documents of the Department published in the Federal Register , in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF, you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the site. You may also access documents of the Department published in the Federal Register by using the article search feature at: www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published by the Department.

Purpose: In accordance with the Government in the Sunshine Act (Sunshine Act), Public Law 94-409, as amended (5 U.S.C. 552b), the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) will hold an open meeting to discuss the advances made in election administration since the signing of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA) and the future of elections.

Agenda: In recognition of the 20th Anniversary of the signing of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA) and the 25th anniversary of Pepperdine's School of Public Policy, the U.S. Election Assistance Commission and Pepperdine University will host a public meeting, “HAVA at 20: Building Confidence in Elections” featuring discussions with election officials and subject matter experts on confidence in elections, security and technology in elections, current issues in election administration, and the future of elections.

The panels will begin with “Confidence in Elections” to discuss data identifying trends and ways to address the challenges of mis- and dis-information, and approaches to improve confidence. The “Security and Technology in Elections” panel will discuss how technology has transformed American elections over the last two decades, the role of election officials as IT managers, the increased coordination between government and private sector partners to keep elections secure, and how election officials are handling the physical and cyber threats. “Current Issues in Election Administration (Clearinghouse/HAVA Grants)” will discuss election funding through HAVA and the impact those grants have had on supporting elections during critical moments over the last 20 years. The panel will also address the importance of exchanging information on election practices and procedures and what additional challenges lie ahead. The final panel, “Future of Elections—HAVA 20 Years From Now,” will discuss how HAVA is still relevant, how elections will evolve in the future, and what can be done to continue confidence in our elections. The full agenda will be posted in advance on the EAC website: https://www.eac.gov .

The event will be livestreamed and recorded. The recording will be made available on the EAC website at a later date.

As space is limited, attendees are encouraged to register. Registration instructions and additional event information will be posted on the EAC event web page: https://www.eac.gov/events/2022/09/01/eac-and-pepperdine-university-hava-20-building-trust-elections .

Schedule:

Background: As part of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA) efforts to improve voting processes, the EAC was established as an independent and bipartisan commission to develop guidance to meet the various HAVA requirements. These responsibilities include a national clearinghouse of resources, adopting voluntary voting system guidelines, certifying voting systems, auditing the use of HAVA funds, and more. This event is being held because 2022 is the 20th anniversary of HAVA. This year also marks the 25th anniversary of Pepperdine University School of Public Policy.

Status: This roundtable discussion will be open to the public.

PCAST is an advisory group of the nation's leading scientists and engineers, appointed by the President to augment the science and technology advice available to him from the White House, cabinet departments, and other Federal agencies. See the Executive Order at whitehouse.gov . PCAST is consulted on and provides analyses and recommendations concerning a wide range of issues where understanding of science, technology, and innovation may bear on the policy choices before the President. The Designated Federal Officer is Dr. Sarah Domnitz. Information about PCAST can be found at: www.whitehouse.gov/PCAST .

Tentative Agenda: PCAST will discuss and consider for approval a report with recommendations for implementing the CHIPS and Science Act funds that are specifically appropriated for semiconductor research and development. Additional information and the meeting agenda, including any changes that arise, will be posted on the PCAST website at: www.whitehouse.gov/PCAST/meetings .

Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. It is the policy of the PCAST to accept written public comments no longer than 10 pages and to accommodate oral public comments whenever possible. The PCAST expects that public statements presented at its meetings will not be repetitive of previously submitted oral or written statements.

The public comment period for this meeting will take place on September 7, 2022, at a time specified in the meeting agenda. This public comment period is designed only for substantive commentary on PCAST's work, not for business marketing purposes.

Oral Comments: To be considered for the public speaker list at the meeting, interested parties should register to speak at PCAST@ostp.eop.gov , no later than 12:00 p.m. Eastern Time on August 31, 2022. To accommodate as many speakers as possible, the time for public comments will be limited to two (2) minutes per person, with a total public comment period of up to 10 minutes. If more speakers register than there is space available on the agenda, PCAST will select speakers on a first-come, first-served basis from those who registered. Those not able to present oral comments may file written comments with the council.

Written Comments: Although written comments are accepted continuously, written comments should be submitted to PCAST@ostp.eop.gov no later than 12:00 p.m. Eastern Time on August 31, 2022, so that the comments can be made available to the PCAST members for their consideration prior to this meeting.

PCAST operates under the provisions of FACA, all public comments and/or presentations will be treated as public documents and will be made available for public inspection, including being posted on the PCAST website at: www.whitehouse.gov/PCAST/meetings .

Minutes: Minutes will be available within 45 days at: www.whitehouse.gov/PCAST/meetings .

Purpose of the Board: The purpose of the Board is to make recommendations to DOE-EM and site management in the areas of environmental restoration, waste management, and related activities.

Public Participation: As a COVID-19 precaution, the meeting will be open to the public virtually only. Attendees should register for attendance by sending an email to Alyssa.Petit@em.doe.gov no later than 5 p.m. ET on Wednesday, August 31, 2022. The EM SSAB welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with physical disabilities or special needs. If you require special accommodations due to a disability, please note this when registering. Public comments will be accepted via email for virtual participants prior to and after the meeting. Comments received in writing no later than 5 p.m. EDT on Wednesday, August 31, 2022 will be read aloud during the meeting. Comments will also be accepted after the meeting by no later than 5 p.m. EDT on Wednesday, September 14, 2022 to be included in the official meeting record. Please send comments to Alyssa Petit at Alyssa.Petit@em.doe.gov. The Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business.

Minutes: Minutes will also be available at the following website: https://energy.gov/em/listings/chairs-meetings.

Background: The DPAC provides advice and recommendations to the Deputy Administrator for Defense Programs on topics related to Defense Programs mission areas and those of the National Nuclear Security Administration.

Purpose of the Meeting: The Quarterly meeting of the Defense Programs Advisory Committee (DPAC) will cover the current status of Committee activities as well as additional charges and is expected to contain discussions of a sensitive nature.

Type of Meeting: In the interest of national security, the meeting will be closed to the public. The Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. 2, section 10(d), and the Federal Advisory Committee Management Regulation, 41 CFR 102-3.155, incorporate by reference the Government in the Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 552b, which, at 552b(c)(1) and (c)(3) permits closure of meetings where restricted data or other classified matters will be discussed.

Tentative Agenda: Welcome; Headquarters and DPAC Updates; discussion of reports and current actions; discussion of next charges; conclusion.

Public Participation: There will be no public participation in this closed meeting. Those wishing to provide written comments or statements to the Committee are invited to send them to Ms. Watti Hill at the address listed above.

Minutes: The minutes of the meeting will not be available.

Pursuant to its Procedure for “Public Participation in Formulation of Marketing Policy”, published a “Notice of Issuance of Final Power Marketing Policy, Georgia-Alabama-South Carolina System of Projects” in the Federal Register on December 28, 1994, 59 FR 66957. The policy establishes the marketing area for system power and addresses the utilization of area utility systems for essential purposes. The policy also addresses wholesale rates, resale rates, and conservation measures, but does not address RECs. Under Section 5 of the Flood Control Act of 1944 (16 U.S.C. 825s), Southeastern is responsible for the transmission disposition of electric power and energy from reservoir projects operated by the Department of the Army. Furthermore, Southeastern must transmit and dispose of such power and energy in such manner as to encourage the most widespread use at the lowest possible rates consistent with sound business principles. Rate schedules are drawn to recover all costs associated with producing and transmitting the power in accordance with repayment criteria.

Southeastern began the development of a REC distribution process at the request of customers in the Kerr-Philpott System. To expand the REC distribution to additional customers, Southeastern has begun to develop a process for REC distribution in the Georgia-Alabama-South Carolina System (System). The purpose of the distributions is to provide customers with a product that the customers have asked to receive, which will add value to the green, renewable hydropower already delivered. The revisions will not change the Administrator's prior determinations regarding power allocation within the System marketing area.

All documents introduced at the public information and comment forum, and all comments, questions and answers will be available for inspection and copying in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552).

On January 14, 2022, Southeastern published in the Federal Register , 87 FR 2429, a “Notice of Intention to begin a public process” to revise its marketing policy by including provisions regarding RECs from the System. The notice requested that written comments and proposals be submitted on or before March 15, 2022. Southeastern received no public comments.

The System consists of ten projects in or on the border of the states of Georgia, Alabama, and South Carolina. The projects are Hartwell, Richard B. Russell, J. Strom Thurmond, Carters, Buford, Allatoona, Jones Bluff, Millers Ferry, West Point and Walter F. George. The power generated at these projects is purchased by and benefits 192 preference customers in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, South Carolina, and North Carolina. The System provides 2,184,257 kilowatts of capacity and about 3,383,000 MWh of average annual energy from stream-flow based on modeling for the period of record.

Southeastern proposes to revise the Power Marketing Policy for the System to include the following additional provisions for RECs associated with hydroelectric generation:

Renewable Energy Certificates: The M-RETS Tracking System creates and tracks certificates reporting generation attributes, by generating unit, for each megawatt-hour (MWh) of energy produced by registered generators. The System projects are registered generators within M-RETS. The RECs potentially satisfy Renewable Portfolio Standards, state policies, and other regulatory or voluntary clean energy standards in a number of states. Southeastern has subscribed to M-RETS and has an account in which RECs are collected and tracked for each MWh of energy produced from the System. Within M-RETS, certificates can be transferred to other M-RETS subscribers or to a third-party tracking system.

M-RETS creates a REC for every MWh of renewable energy produced in the region, tracks the life cycle of each REC created, and ensures against any double-counting or double-use of each REC. These RECs may be used by electricity suppliers and other energy market participants to comply with relevant state policies and regulatory programs and to support voluntary “green” electricity markets.

Southeastern proposes distribution of M-RETS-created RECs to Preference Customers with allocations of power from the System.

REC Distribution: M-RETS (or a successor application) will be the transfer mechanism for all RECs related to the System. Southeastern shall maintain an account with M-RETS and collect RECs from the generation at the System projects. Southeastern will verify the total amount of RECs each month. Preference Customers with an allocation of power from the System are eligible to receive RECs by transfer from Southeastern's M-RETS account to their M-RETS account or that of their agent. Transfers to each customer will be based on the customer's monthly invoices during the same three-month period (quarter). Where applicable, RECs will be project-specific based on the customer's contractual arrangements.

All RECs distributed by Southeastern shall be transferred within forty-five days of the end of a quarter. Each customer must submit to Southeastern, by the tenth business day after the quarter, any notice of change to M-RETS account or agent. Any REC transfers that were not claimed or if a transfer account was not provided to Southeastern will be forfeited if they become nontransferable as described in the M-RETS terms of service, procedures, policies, or definitions of reporting and trading periods, or any subsequent rules and procedures for transfers as established.

The initial transfer process in M-RETS will be accomplished by the sixtieth day after the end of the first completed quarter subsequent to publication of the final policy revision. Any balance of RECs that exist in Southeastern's M-RETS account, other than the first quarter after policy revision publication, may also be transferred to Preference Customers according to the customer's invoiced energy at the time of the REC creation.

Rates: No rates shall be established by Southeastern for RECs transferred to Preference Customers. Any cost to Southeastern, such as the M-RETS subscription, will be incorporated into marketing costs and included in recovery through the energy and capacity rates of the System.

This Department of Energy document was signed on August 10, 2022 by Virgil G. Hobbs III, Administrator, Southeastern 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 .

I. Background Information

In accordance with Section 122 (i) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, as amended (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. 9622 (i), notice is hereby given of a proposed CERCLA ATP Settlement with PRP Joan D. Pecina/Trust 2000 pertaining to the Bautsch Gray Mine Superfund Site, Blackjack Road, Jo Daviess County, Illinois. PRP Pecina/Trust 2000 will not pay a cash amount due to a proven inability to pay, but has agreed to comply with specified property requirements. PRP Pecina/Trust 2000 will fill out and submit for approval an Illinois Environmental Covenant form and attachments, give Notice to any Successors to ownership of the property and secure the remediated portion of the property against disturbance. These actions will reduce the threat of direct contact with lead and hazardous metals contaminated soil. These actions will also reduce the threat of exposure to hazardous wastes and substances at the property.

The Settlement includes an EPA covenant not to sue the settling party pursuant to sections 106 and 107 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9606 and 9607.

For thirty (30) days following the date of publication of this notice, the Agency will receive written comments relating to the Settlement. The Agency will consider all comments received, and may modify or withdraw its consent to the Settlement if comments received disclose facts or considerations which indicate that the Settlement is inappropriate, improper, or inadequate.

Your comments should be mailed to Janet Pope, Public Affairs Specialist (mail code: R-19J), U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, or pope.janet@epa.gov. The Agency's response to any comments received will be available for public inspection at the Superfund Records Center.

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

2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments, remember to:

• Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying information (site name, Federal Register date and page number).

• Follow directions—the agency may ask you to respond to specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.

• Explain why you agree or disagree with the terms of the Settlement; suggest alternatives and substitute language for your requested changes.

• Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information and/or data that you used.

• If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be reproduced.

• Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and suggest alternatives.

• Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of profanity or personal threats.

• Make sure to submit your comments by the identified comment period deadline.

Background: The Advisory Board was established under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000 to advise the President on a variety of policy and technical functions required to implement and effectively manage the new compensation program. Key functions of the Advisory Board include providing advice on the development of probability of causation guidelines that have been promulgated by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) as a final rule; advice on methods of dose reconstruction, which have also been promulgated by HHS as a final rule; advice on the scientific validity and quality of dose estimation and reconstruction efforts being performed for purposes of the compensation program; and advice on petitions to add classes of workers to the Special Exposure Cohort (SEC). In December 2000, the President delegated responsibility for funding, staffing, and operating the Advisory Board to HHS, which subsequently delegated this authority to CDC. NIOSH implements this responsibility for CDC.

The charter was issued on August 3, 2001, renewed at appropriate intervals, and rechartered under Executive Order 13889 on March 22, 2022, and will terminate on March 22, 2024.

Purpose: The Advisory Board is charged with (a) providing advice to the Secretary, HHS, on the development of guidelines under Executive Order 13179; (b) providing advice to the Secretary, HHS, on the scientific validity and quality of dose reconstruction efforts performed for this program; and (c) upon request by the Secretary, HHS, advise the Secretary on whether there is a class of employees at any Department of Energy facility who were exposed to radiation but for whom it is not feasible to estimate their radiation dose, and on whether there is reasonable likelihood that such radiation doses may have endangered the health of members of this class. SPR is responsible for overseeing, tracking, and participating in the reviews of all procedures used in the dose reconstruction process by the NIOSH Division of Compensation Analysis and Support (DCAS) and its dose reconstruction contractor (Oak Ridge Associated Universities—ORAU).

Matters To Be Considered: The agenda will include discussions on the following: a) Discussions of technical guidance documents related to: Texas City Chemicals, Weldon Spring Plant, Birdsboro Steel and Foundry Company, Grand Junction Facilities, Peek Street Facility, dose reconstruction default assumptions and methods, and template dose reconstruction methodologies (b) Preparation for December 2022 Full ABRWH meeting, and (c) Newly Issued Guidance Documents and Supplemental topics. Agenda items are subject to change as priorities dictate. For additional information, please contact Toll Free 1(800) 232-4636.

The Director, Strategic Business Initiatives Unit, Office of the Chief Operating Officer, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has been delegated the authority to sign Federal Register notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, for both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.

The applicants listed in the table have informed FDA that these drug products are no longer marketed and have requested that FDA withdraw approval of the applications under the process in § 314.150(c) (21 CFR 314.150(c)). The applicants have also, by their requests, waived their opportunity for a hearing. Withdrawal of approval of an application or abbreviated application under § 314.150(c) is without prejudice to refiling.

Therefore, approval of the applications listed in the table, and all amendments and supplements thereto, is hereby withdrawn as of September 15, 2022. Approval of each entire application is withdrawn, including any strengths and dosage forms included in the application but inadvertently missing from the table. Introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate commerce of products without approved new drug applications violates section 301(a) and (d) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 331(a) and (d)). Drug products that are listed in the table that are in inventory on September 15, 2022 may continue to be dispensed until the inventories have been depleted or the drug products have reached their expiration dates or otherwise become violative, whichever occurs first.

Interested persons are invited to send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including any of the following subjects: (1) The necessity and utility of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of the agency's functions; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to minimize the information collection burden.

Title of Collection: Performance Data System (PDS).

Type of Collection: Extension.

OMB No.: 0990-0275.

Abstract: This request for clearance is to extend data collection activities for a currently approved collection using the OMB approved Performance Data System (PDS) (OMB No. 0990-0275), the tool used by the Office of Minority Health (OMH) to collect program management and performance data for all OMH-funded projects. The revised data collection instrument keeps all the same data elements, but includes additional formatting to clarify data elements. Additionally, a few columns were reordered in order to make the form more intuitive. Grantee data collection via the UDS (original data collection system) was first approved by OMB on June 7, 2004 (OMB No. 0990-275).

Need and Proposed Use of the Information: The clearance is needed to continue data collection using the PDS, a system that enables OMH to comply with Federal reporting requirements and monitor and evaluate performance by enabling the efficient collection of performance-oriented data tied to OMH-wide performance reporting needs. The ability to monitor and evaluate performance in this manner, and to work towards continuous program improvement are basic functions that OMH must be able to accomplish to carry out its mandate with the most effective and appropriate use of resources.

Likely Respondents: Respondents for this data collection include the project directors for OMH-funded projects and/or the date entry persons for each OMH-funded project. Affected public includes non-profit institutions, State, Local, or Tribal Governments.

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

Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 requires: written comments and/or suggestions from the public and affected agencies are invited to address one or more of the following points: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the function of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) The accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) Ways to minimizes the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

Proposed Collection Title: A Generic Submission for Formative Research, Pretesting and Customer Satisfaction of NCI's Communication and Education Resources (NCI), 0925-0046, Expiration Date 11/30/2022, EXTENSION, National Cancer Institute (NCI), National Institutes of Health (NIH).

Need and Use of Information Collection: This information collection request is to approve the Generic Submission for Formative Research, Pretesting and Customer Satisfaction of NCI's Communication and Education Resources (NCI) for three years. As part of NCI's mandate from Congress to disseminate information on cancer research, detection, prevention, and treatment, the Institute develops a wide variety of messages and materials. Testing these messages and materials assesses their potential effectiveness in reaching and communicating with their intended audience while they are still in the developmental stage and can be revised. The formative research and pretesting process thus contributes to maximizing NCI's limited dollar resources for information dissemination and education. NCI also must ensure the relevance, utility, and appropriateness of the many educational programs and products that the Institute produces. Customer satisfaction studies help NCI identify modifications necessary to meet the needs of NCI's various target audiences. Since the previous submission, there have been 6 approved sub-studies with an approved request of 13,473 burden hours over 2.5 years. Approval is requested for the conduct of multiple studies annually using such methods as interviews, focus groups, and various types of surveys. The content, timing, and number of respondents to be included in each sub-study will vary, depending on the nature of the message/material/program being assessed, the methodology selected, and the target audiences.

OMB approval is requested for 3 years. There are no costs to respondents other than their time. The total estimated annualized burden hours are 13,500.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, David R. Gervino, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

This action terminates the appointment of Toney L. Raines as Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Notice is hereby given that the incident for this disaster has been expanded to include flooding, mudflows, and debris flows directly related to the wildfires. Only those damages within the designated areas specifically determined by the Federal Coordinating Officer to be damaged or adversely affected as a direct result of the compromised watershed conditions and fire-generated debris caused by the wildfires will be considered eligible for assistance on a case-by-case basis.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidential Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidential Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidential Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Notice is hereby given that, in a letter dated October 30, 2021, the President issued a major disaster declaration under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the “Stafford Act”), as follows:

The time period prescribed for the implementation of section 310(a), Priority to Certain Applications for Public Facility and Public Housing Assistance, 42 U.S.C. 5153, shall be for a period not to exceed six months after the date of this declaration.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, Robert V. Fogel, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major disaster.

The following areas of the State of Connecticut have been designated as adversely affected by this major disaster:

Notice is hereby given that the incident period for this disaster is closed effective July 23, 2022.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

The notice of a major disaster declaration for the State of Montana is hereby amended to include the following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the event declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of June 16, 2022.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Notice is hereby given that the incident period for this disaster is closed effective July 5, 2022.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, David R. Gervino, of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

This action terminates the appointment of Toney L. Raines as Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households—Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.