Title: Black Stem Rust; Identification Requirements for Addition of Rust-Resistant Varieties.

OMB Control Number: 0579-0186.

Type of Request: Revision to and extension of approval of an information collection.

Abstract: Under the Plant Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 7701 et seq. ), the Secretary of Agriculture is authorized to prohibit or restrict the importation, entry, or interstate movement of plants, plant products, and other articles to prevent the introduction of plant pests into the United States or their dissemination within the United States.

Black stem rust is one of the most destructive plant diseases of small grains that is known to exist in the United States. The disease is caused by a fungus that reduces the quality and yield of infected wheat, oat, barley, and rye crops by robbing host plants of food and water. In addition to infecting small grains, the fungus lives on a variety of alternate host plants that are species of the genera Berberis, Mahoberberis, and Mahonia. The fungus is spread from host to host by wind-borne spores.

The black stem rust quarantine and regulations, contained in 7 CFR 301.38 through 301.38-8 (referred to below as the regulations), quarantine the conterminous 48 States and the District of Columbia and govern the interstate movement of certain plants of the genera Berberis, Mahoberberis, and Mahonia, known as barberry plants. The species of these plants are categorized as either rust-resistant or rust-susceptible. Rust-resistant plants do not pose a risk of spreading black stem rust or of contributing to the development of new races of rust; rust-susceptible plants do pose such risks.

Paragraph (c) of §  301.38-2 provides the requirements for the submission of a request to the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service to add a variety to the list of rust-resistant barberry varieties in the regulations. A request must include a description of the variety, including a written description and color pictures that can be used by an inspector to clearly identify the variety and distinguish it from other varieties. This requirement helps to ensure that State plant inspectors can clearly determine whether plants moving into or through their States are rust-resistant varieties listed in § 301.38-2. In addition, a compliance agreement is required by the regulations to ship barberry plants to protected areas and to facilitate inspection and certification of the product.

We are asking the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to approve our use of these information collection activities, as described, for an additional 3 years.

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

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

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

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

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

Estimate of burden: The public burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 3.4 hours per response.

Respondents: Nurseries.

Estimated annual number of respondents: 2.

Estimated annual number of responses per respondent: 3.

Estimated annual number of responses: 5.

Estimated total annual burden on respondents: 17 hours. (Due to averaging, the total annual burden hours may not equal the product of the annual number of responses multiplied by the reporting burden per response.)

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

This Notice reflects the June 30, 2023 expiration of the temporary reimbursement rates provided under the Keep Kids Fed Act of 2022 (Pub. L. 117-158), which included an additional 10 cents per meal reimbursement rate and temporary Tier I reimbursement rates for Tier II family day care homes. The reimbursement rates in this Notice reflect an adjustment to the base rates from 2022-2023. 1

While the USDA Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) does not have the authority to adjust reimbursement rates above inflation in the contiguous United States (CONUS), pursuant to section 12 of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1760) USDA may make adjustments to reimbursement rates in the outlying areas to reflect differences between the cost of providing meals and supplements in those areas and the costs of providing meals and supplements in all other States. Therefore, FNS is temporarily increasing the reimbursement rates for the child nutrition programs in Guam, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands  2 to 30 percent above CONUS rates beginning July 1, 2023. This adjusted rate will be applied beginning on July 1, 2023, until further notice.

Pursuant to sections 4, 11, and 17 of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1753, 1759a and 1766), section 4 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773) and 7 CFR 226.4, 226.12 and 226.13 of the Program regulations, notice is hereby given of the new payment rates for institutions participating in the Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP). As provided for under the law, all rates in the CACFP must be revised annually, on July 1, to reflect changes in the Consumer Price Index (CPI), published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the United States Department of Labor, for the most recent 12-month period. These rates are in effect during the period of July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024.

The following national average payment factors and food service payment rates for meals and snacks are in effect from July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024. All amounts are expressed in dollars or fractions thereof. Due to a higher cost of living, the reimbursements for Alaska, Guam, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and Virgin Islands are higher than those for all other States. The District of Columbia uses the figures specified for the contiguous States. These rates do not include the value of USDA Foods or cash-in-lieu of USDA Foods, which institutions receive as additional assistance for each lunch or supper served to participants under the Program. A notice announcing the value of USDA Foods and cash-in-lieu of USDA Foods is published separately in the Federal Register .

Adjustments to the national average payment rates for all meals served under the Child and Adult Care Food Program are rounded down to the nearest whole cent.

The changes in the national average payment rates for centers reflect an 8.27 percent increase during the 12-month period from May 2022 to May 2023 (from 325.952 in May 2022, as previously published in the Federal Register , to 352.892 in May 2023) in the food away from home series of the CPI for All Urban Consumers.

Payments for breakfasts served are: Contiguous States paid rate—38 cents (3 cents increase from the 2022-2023  3 base rate), reduced price rate—1 dollar and 98 cents (17 cents increase), free rate—2 dollars and 28 cents (17 cents increase); Alaska —paid rate—58 cents (4 cents increase), reduced price rate—3 dollars and 36 cents (28 cents increase), free rate—3 dollars and 66 cents (28 cents increase); Guam, Hawaii, Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands paid rate—47 cents (7 cents increase), reduced price rate—2 dollars and 65 cents (49 cents increase), free rate—2 dollars and 95 cents (49 cents increase).

Payments for lunch or supper served are: Contiguous States paid rate—40 cents (3 cents increase), reduced price rate—3 dollars and 85 cents (32 cents increase), free rate—4 dollars and 25 cents (32 cents increase); Alaska paid rate—66 cents (5 cents increase), reduced price rate—6 dollars and 50 cents (53 cents increase), free rate—6 dollars and 90 cents (53 cents increase); Guam, Hawaii, Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands —paid rate—53 cents (9 cents increase), reduced price rate—5 dollars and 14 cents (94 cents increase), free rate—5 dollars and 54 cents (94 cents increase).

Payments for snack served are: Contiguous States —paid rate—10 cents (1 cents increase), reduced price rate—58 cents (4 cents increase), free rate—1 dollar and 17 cents (9 cents increase); Alaska —paid rate—17 cents (1 cent increase), reduced price rate—94 cents (7 cent increase), free rate—1 dollar and 89 cents (14 cents increase); Guam, Hawaii, Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands —paid rate—13 cents (2 cents increase), reduced price rate—76 cents (13 cents increase), free rate—1 dollar and 52 cents (26 cents increase).

The changes in the food service payment rates for day care homes reflect a 5.80 percent increase during the 12-month period from May 2022 to May 2023 (from 285.953 in May 2022, as previously published in the Federal Register , to 302.535 in May 2023) in the food at home series of the CPI for All Urban Consumers.

Payments for breakfast served are: Contiguous States —Tier I—1 dollar and 65 cents (9 cents increase from the 2022-2023 base rate) and Tier II—59 cents (3 cents increase); Alaska —Tier I—2 dollars and 63 cents (14 cents increase) and Tier II—92 cents (5 cents increase); Guam, Hawaii, Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands —Tier I—2 dollar and 12 cents (31 cents increase) and Tier II—75 cents (10 cents increase).

Payments for lunch and supper served are: Contiguous States —Tier I—3 dollars and 12 cents (18 cents increase) and Tier II—1 dollar and 88 cents (10 cents increase); Alaska —Tier I—5 dollars and 5 cents (28 cents increase) and Tier II—3 dollars and 5 cents (17 cents increase); Guam, Hawaii, Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands —Tier I—4 dollars and 5 cents (60 cents increase) and Tier II—2 dollar and 44 cents (36 cents increase).

Payments for snack served are: Contiguous States —Tier I—93 cents (6 cents increase) and Tier II—25 cents (1 cent increase); Alaska —Tier I—1 dollar and 50 cents (8 cents increase) and Tier II—41 cents (2 cents increase); Guam, Hawaii, Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands —Tier I—1 dollar and 20 cents (18 cents increase) and Tier II—33 cents (5 cents increase).

The changes in the administrative reimbursement rates for sponsoring organizations of day care homes reflect a 4.05 percent increase during the 12-month period, May 2022 to May 2023 (from 292.296 in May 2022, as previously published in the Federal Register , to 304.127 in May 2023) in the series for all items of the CPI for All Urban Consumers.

Monthly administrative payments to sponsors for each sponsored day care home are: Contiguous States —Initial 50 homes—142 dollars (5 dollar increase from 2022-2023 annual level), next 150 homes—108 dollars (4 dollar increase), next 800 homes—85 dollars (4 dollar increase), each additional home—75 dollars (3 dollar increase); Alaska —Initial 50 homes—230 dollars (9 dollar increase), next 150 homes—176 dollars (7 dollar increase), next 800 homes—137 dollars (5 dollar increase), each additional home—121 dollars (5 dollar increase); Guam, Hawaii, Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands —Initial 50 homes—185 dollars (25 dollar increase), next 150 homes—141 dollars (19 dollar increase), next 800 homes—110 dollars (15 dollar increase), each additional home—97 dollars (13 dollar increase).

The following chart illustrates the national average payment factors and food service payment rates for meals and snacks in effect from July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024.

This action is not a rule as defined by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612) and thus is exempt from the provisions of that Act. This notice has been determined to be exempt under Executive Order 12866.

CACFP is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance under No. 10.558 and is subject to the provisions of Executive Order 12372, which requires intergovernmental consultation with State and local officials. (See 2 CFR 415.3-415.6).

This notice imposes no new reporting or recordkeeping provisions that are subject to OMB review in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3518).

Authority: Sections 4(b)(2), 11a, 17(c) and 17(f)(3)(B) of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1753(b)(2), 1759a, 1766(f)(3)(B) and section 4(b)(1)(B) of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773(b)(1)(B)).

This Notice reflects the June 30, 2023 expiration of the temporary reimbursement rates provided under the Keep Kids Fed Act of 2022 (Pub. L. 117-158), which included an additional 40 cents per school lunch and 15 cents per school breakfast meal reimbursement. The reimbursement rates in this Notice reflect an adjustment to the base rate from School Year (SY) 2022-2023. 1

While the USDA Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) does not have the authority to adjust reimbursement rates above inflation in the contiguous United States (CONUS), pursuant to section 12 of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1760) USDA may make adjustments to reimbursement rates in the outlying areas to reflect differences between the cost of providing meals and supplements in those areas and the costs of providing meals and supplements in all other States. Therefore, FNS is temporarily increasing the reimbursement rates for the child nutrition programs in Guam, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands to 30 percent above CONUS rates beginning July 1, 2023. This adjusted rate will be applied beginning on July 1, 2023, until further notice.

Special Milk Program for Children —Pursuant to section 3 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1772), the Department announces the rate of reimbursement for a half pint of milk served to non-needy children in a school or institution that participates in the Special Milk Program for Children. This rate is adjusted annually to reflect changes in the Producer Price Index for Fluid Milk Products, published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the Department of Labor.

National School Lunch and School Breakfast Programs —Pursuant to sections 11 and 17A of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act, (42 U.S.C. 1759a and 1766a), and section 4 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773), the Department annually announces the adjustments to the National Average Payment Factors and to the maximum Federal reimbursement rates for lunches and afterschool snacks served to children participating in the National School Lunch Program and breakfasts served to children participating in the School Breakfast Program. Adjustments are prescribed each July 1, based on changes in the Food Away From Home series of the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers, published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the Department of Labor.

Lunch Payment Levels —Section 4 of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1753) provides general cash for food assistance payments to States to assist schools in purchasing food. The Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act provides two different section 4 payment levels for lunches served under the National School Lunch Program. The lower payment level applies to lunches served by school food authorities in which less than 60 percent of the lunches served in the school lunch program during the second preceding school year were served free or at a reduced price. The higher payment level applies to lunches served by school food authorities in which 60 percent or more of the lunches served during the second preceding school year were served free or at a reduced price.

To supplement these section 4 payments, section 11 of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1759 (a)) provides special cash assistance payments to aid schools in providing free and reduced-price lunches. The section 11 National Average Payment Factor for each reduced-price lunch served is set at 40 cents less than the factor for each free lunch.

As authorized under sections 8 and 11 of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1757 and 1759a), maximum reimbursement rates for each type of lunch are prescribed by the Department in this Notice. These maximum rates are to ensure equitable disbursement of Federal funds to school food authorities.

Performance-Based Reimbursement —In addition to the funding mentioned above, school food authorities certified as meeting the meal pattern and nutrition standard requirements set forth in 7 CFR parts 210 and 220 are eligible to receive performance-based cash assistance for each reimbursable lunch served (an additional eight cents per lunch available beginning July 1, 2023, and adjusted annually thereafter).

Afterschool Snack Payments in Afterschool Care Programs —Section 17A of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1766a) establishes National Average Payments for free, reduced price and paid afterschool snacks as part of the National School Lunch Program.

Breakfast Payment Factors —Section 4 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773) establishes National Average Payment Factors for free, reduced price, and paid breakfasts served under the School Breakfast Program and additional payments for free and reduced-price breakfasts served in schools determined to be in “severe need” because they serve a high percentage of needy children.

The following specific section 4, section 11, and section 17A National Average Payment Factors and maximum reimbursement rates for lunch, the afterschool snack rates, and the breakfast rates are in effect from July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024. Due to a higher cost of living, the average payments and maximum reimbursements for Alaska, Guam, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and Virgin Islands are higher than those for all other States. The District of Columbia uses figures specified for the contiguous States. These rates do not include the value of USDA Foods or cash-in-lieu of USDA Foods which schools receive as additional assistance for each meal served to participants under the Program. A notice announcing the value of USDA Foods and cash-in-lieu of USDA Foods is published separately in the Federal Register .

Adjustments to the national average payment rates for all lunches served under the National School Lunch Program, breakfasts served under the School Breakfast Program, and afterschool snacks served under the National School Lunch Program are rounded down to the nearest whole cent.

For the period July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024, the rate of reimbursement for a half pint of milk served to a non-needy child in a school or institution that participates in the Special Milk Program is 26.25 cents. This change is based on the 3.46 percent decrease in the Producer Price Index for Fluid Milk Products from May 2022 to May 2023.

As a reminder, schools or institutions with pricing programs that elect to serve milk free to eligible children continue to receive the average cost of a half pint of milk (the total cost of all milk purchased during the claim period divided by the total number of purchased half pints) for each half pint served to an eligible child.

Overall, payments for the National School Lunch Program and the Afterschool Snack Program saw an 8.27 percent increase in the national average payment rates for schools and residential child care institutions for the period July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers for the Food Away From Home series during the 12-month period May 2022 to May 2023 (from a level of 325.952 in May 2022, as previously published in the Federal Register to 352.892 in May 2023).

These changes are reflected below.

Section 4 National Average Payment Factors —In school food authorities that served less than 60 percent free and reduced-price lunches in School Year (SY) 2021-2022, 2 the payments for meals served are: Contiguous States —paid rate—40 cents (3 cents increase from the 2022-2023 base rate  3 ), free and reduced price rate—40 cents (3 cents increase), maximum rate—48 cents (3 cents increase); Alaska —paid rate—66 cents (5 cents increase), free and reduced price rate—66 cents (5 cents increase), maximum rate—76 cents (5 cents increase); Guam, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and Virgin Islands —paid rate—53 cents (9 cents increase), free and reduced price rate—53 cents (9 cents increase), maximum rate—61 cents (9 cents increase).

In school food authorities that served 60 percent or more free and reduced price lunches in School Year 2021-2022, payments are: Contiguous States —paid rate—42 cents (3 cents increase), free and reduced price rate—42 cents (3 cents increase), maximum rate—48 cents (3 cents increase); Alaska —paid rate—68 cents (5 cents increase), free and reduced price rate—68 cents (5 cents increase), maximum rate—76 cents (5 cents increase); Guam, Hawaii, Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands —paid rate—55 cents (9 cents increase), free and reduced price rate—55 cents (9 cents increase), maximum rate—61 cents (9 cents increase).

School food authorities certified to receive the performance-based cash assistance will receive an additional 8 cents (adjusted annually) added to the above amounts as part of their section 4 payments.

Section 11 National Average Payment Factors — Contiguous States —free lunch—3 dollars and 85 cents (29 cents increase from the SY 2022-2023 base rate), reduced price lunch—3 dollars and 45 cents (29 cents increase); Alaska —free lunch—6 dollars and 24 cents (48 cents increase), reduced price lunch—5 dollars and 84 cents (48 cents increase); Guam, Hawaii, Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands —free lunch—5 dollars and 1 cent (85 cents increase), reduced price lunch—4 dollars and 61 cents (85 cents increase).

Afterschool Snacks in Afterschool Care Programs —The payments are: Contiguous States —free snack—1 dollar and 17 cents (9 cents increase from the SY 2022-2023 base rate), reduced price snack—58 cents (4 cents increase), paid snack—10 cents (1 cent increase); Alaska —free snack-1 dollar and 89 cents (14 cent increase), reduced price snack—94 cents (7 cents increase), paid snack—17 cents (1 cent increase); Guam, Hawaii, Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands —free snack—1 dollar and 52 cents (26 cents increase), reduced price snack—76 cents (13 cents increase), paid snack—13 cents (2 cents increase)

Overall, payments for the National School Breakfast Program saw an 8.27 percent increase in the national average payment rates for schools and residential child care institutions for the period July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2024 in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers in the Food Away from Home series during the 12-month period May 2022 to May 2023 (from a level of 325.952 in May 2022, as previously published in the Federal Register to 352.892 in May 2023).

These changes are reflected below.

For schools “not in severe need” the payments are: Contiguous States —free breakfast—2 dollars and 28 cents (17 cents increase from the SY 2022-2023 base rate), reduced price breakfast—1 dollar and 98 cents (17 cents increase), paid breakfast—38 cents (3 cents increase); Alaska free breakfast—3 dollars and 66 cents (28 cents increase), reduced price breakfast—3 dollars and 36 cents (28 cents increase), paid breakfast—58 cents (4 cents increase); Guam, Hawaii, Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands —free breakfast—2 dollars and 95 cents (49 cents increase), reduced price breakfast—2 dollars and 65 cents (49 cents increase), paid breakfast—47 cents (7 cents increase).

For schools in “severe need” the payments are: Contiguous States free breakfast—2 dollars and 73 cents (21 cents increase from the SY 2022-2023 base rate), reduced price breakfast—2 dollars and 43 cents (21 cents increase), paid breakfast—38 cents (3 cents increase); Alaska —free breakfast—4 dollars and 39 cents (33 cents increase), reduced price breakfast—4 dollars and 9 cents (33 cents increase), paid breakfast—58 cents (4 cents increase); Guam, Hawaii, Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands —free breakfast—3 dollars and 53 cents (59 cents increase), reduced price breakfast—3 dollars and 23 cents (59 cents increase), paid breakfast—47 cents (7 cents increase).

The following chart illustrates the lunch National Average Payment Factors with the sections 4 and 11 already combined to indicate the per lunch amount; the maximum lunch reimbursement rates; the reimbursement rates for afterschool snacks served in afterschool care programs; the breakfast National Average Payment Factors including severe need schools; and the milk reimbursement rate. All amounts are expressed in dollars or fractions thereof. The payment factors and reimbursement rates used for the District of Columbia are those specified for the contiguous States.

This action is not a rule as defined by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612) and thus is exempt from the provisions of that Act. This notice has been determined to be exempt under Executive Order 12866.

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507), no new recordkeeping or reporting requirements have been included that are subject to approval from the Office of Management and Budget.

National School Lunch, School Breakfast, and Special Milk Programs are listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance under No. 10.555, No. 10.553, and No. 10.556, respectively, and are subject to the provisions of Executive Order 12372, which requires intergovernmental consultation with State and local officials (See 2 CFR 415.3-415.6).

Authority: Sections 4, 8, 11, and 17A of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act, as amended, (42 U.S.C. 1753, 1757, 1759a, 1766a) and sections 3 and 4(b) of the Child Nutrition Act, as amended, (42 U.S.C. 1772 and 42 U.S.C. 1773(b)).

Title: CSB Reactive Hazard Study Survey of Industry Practices.

Type of Request: Approval.

Abstract: The enabling statute of the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB) provides that the CSB is “authorized to conduct research and studies with respect to the potential for accidental releases, whether or not an accidental release has occurred, where there is evidence which indicates the presence of a potential hazard or hazards.” 42 U.S.C. 7412(r)(6)(F).

In August 2000, the CSB initiated a review of reactive hazards nationwide. The purpose of the investigation was to develop recommendations to reduce the number and severity of such incidents. The CSB published Hazard Investigation: Improving Reactive Hazard Management on September 17, 2002. The CSB issued a total of 24 recommendations to 15 organizations. Only two recommendations remain.

This information collection request will assist the CSB in updating its 2002 study, “Hazard Investigation: Improving Reactive Hazard Management.” On behalf of the CSB, the Federal Research Division (FRD) within the Library of Congress is conducting the study to reflect the current research, data, and company safety policies concerning reactive chemical incidents.

For this study, FRD on behalf of CSB will collect survey data from 15 randomly selected small, medium, and large companies that use reactive chemicals. FRD will also conduct interviews with nine stakeholders, who may include industry representatives, regulatory agencies, professional safety organizations, trade associations, trade unions, and/or public advocacy groups.

Type of Respondents: All the respondents will be private sector businesses that use reactive chemicals that voluntarily submit to interviews or the survey.

Estimate Annual Number of Respondents: 24.

Frequency of Use: Once. This survey is part of a study.

Small Businesses or Organizations Affected: No. Although the CSB is contacting small businesses, this survey is voluntary. Additionally, the CSB anticipates a total of 15 companies will respond.

Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 24.

Estimated Average Burden Hours per Response: 3 hours. The survey should take a representative from each of the companies randomly selected two to four hours to complete. The estimated financial burden for one process safety manager to take this survey is $144.45. For 15 surveys, the total cost of process safety managers' time is estimated to be $2,166.75. 1 The interviews will take no longer than 90 minutes each. The estimated financial burden for one chemist to engage in an interview is $64.28. For nine interviews, the total cost of chemists' time is estimated to be $578.48. 2 The combined total cost of this data collection on the American public is estimated to be $2,745.23.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 45 hours.

Need for and Use of Information: This research is vital because safely conducting chemical reactions is essential for the chemical manufacturing industry. Chemical reactive hazards can rapidly release large quantities of heat, energy, and gaseous byproducts. Uncontrolled reactions have led to serious explosions, fires, and toxic emissions. The impacts may be severe in terms of death and injury to people, damage to physical property, and effects on the environment and surrounding communities. Since the publication of the 2002 report, incidents caused by uncontrolled chemical reactions have persisted. This fact suggests the need to continue to evaluate existing standards and improve the management of reactive hazards in response to changes within the chemical manufacturing industry over the past two decades.

Researchers will use quantitative and qualitative mixed methods to analyze the collected industry information. The analysis will identify trends and present insights which will enhance the CSB's capacity to respond to future reactive chemical incidents and to inform industry stakeholders of the best practices in process safety protocols.

Comment is Invited: Comment is invited on: (1) Whether this collection of information is necessary for the stated purposes and the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical or scientific 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 to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including the use of automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. To view the draft protocol, please see: https://www.csb.gov/assets/1/6/csb_frd_reactivessurvey_draft_(002).pdf.

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

On August 9, 2022, Commerce initiated the administrative review of the AD order on chlorinated isocyanurates (chlorinated isos) from China covering the period June 1, 2021, through May 31, 2022. 1 This review covers two producers/exporters: Heze Huayi Chemical Co., Ltd. (Heze Huayi); and Juancheng Kangtai Chemical Co., Ltd. (Kangtai). On February 17, 2023, Commerce extended the deadline for the preliminary results of this administrative review by 120 days, until June 30, 2023. 2

For details regarding the events that occurred subsequent to the initiation of this review, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 3 A list of topics discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is included as the appendix to this notice. The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov . In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at https://access.trade.gov/public/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx .

The products covered by the order are chlorinated isos, which are derivatives of cyanuric acid, described as chlorinated s-triazine triones. Chlorinated isos are currently classifiable under subheadings 2933.69.6015, 2933.69.6021, 2933.69.6050, 3808.40.50, 3808.50.40 and 3808.94.5000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States. For a complete description of the scope of the order, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

Commerce is conducting this administrative review in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Export prices have been calculated in accordance with section 772 of the Act. Because China is a non-market economy within the meaning of section 771(18) of the Act, normal value has been calculated in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act. For a full description of the methodology underlying our conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

Commerce preliminarily determines that Heze Huayi and Kangtai have established their eligibility for a separate rate, and that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist for the period of June 1, 2021, through May 31, 2022:

Commerce intends to disclose the calculations for these preliminary results within five days of the date of publication of this notice, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). Interested parties may submit case briefs within 30 days after the date of publication of these preliminary results of review. 4 Rebuttals to case briefs, which must be limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may be filed not later than seven days after the date for filing case briefs. 5 Parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are requested to submit with each with each argument: (1) a statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities. 6 Case and rebuttal briefs should be filed using ACCESS  7 and must be served on interested parties. 8 Executive summaries should be limited to five pages total, including footnotes. Note that Commerce has temporarily modified certain of its requirements for serving documents containing business proprietary information, until further notice. 9

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

Unless we extend the deadline for the final results of this review, we intend to issue the final results of this administrative review, including the results of our analysis of issues raised by the parties in their briefs, within 120 days of the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register . 10

Upon issuing the final results of this review, Commerce shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review. 11 Commerce intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP no earlier than 35 days after date of publication of the final results of this review in the Federal Register . If a timely summons is filed at the U.S. Court of International Trade, the assessment instructions will direct CBP not to liquidate relevant entries until the time for parties to file a request for a statutory injunction has expired ( i.e., within 90 days of publication). For each individually examined respondent in this review whose weighted-average dumping margin in the final results of review is not zero or de minimis ( i.e., less than 0.5 percent), Commerce intends to calculate importer-specific assessment rates for antidumping duties, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). 12 Where the respondent reported reliable entered values, Commerce intends to calculate importer-specific ad valorem assessment rates by aggregating the amount of dumping calculated for all U.S. sales to the importer and dividing this amount by the total entered value of the merchandise sold to the importer. 13 Where the respondent did not report entered values, Commerce will calculate importer-specific assessment rates by dividing the amount of dumping for reviewed sales to the importer by the total quantity of those sales. Commerce will calculate an estimated ad valorem importer-specific assessment rate to determine whether the per-unit assessment rate is de minimis; however, Commerce will use the per-unit assessment rate where entered values were not reported. 14 Where an importer-specific ad valorem assessment rate is not zero or de minimis, Commerce will instruct CBP to collect the appropriate duties at the time of liquidation. Where either the respondent's weighted average dumping margin is zero or de minimis, or an importer-specific ad valorem assessment rate is zero or de minimis, Commerce will instruct CBP to liquidate appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties. 15 For entries that were not reported in the U.S. sales database submitted by an exporter individually examined during this review, but that entered under the case number of that exporter ( i.e., at the individually-examined exporter's cash deposit rate), Commerce will instruct CBP to liquidate such entries at the China-wide rate. 16

The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this administrative review for all shipments of the subject merchandise from China entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as provided for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) for the exporters listed above that have a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be equal to the weighted-average dumping margin established in the final results of this review (except, if the rate is zero or de minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), then a cash deposit rate of zero will be established for that company); (2) for previously investigated or reviewed Chinese and non-Chinese exporters not listed above that are currently eligible for a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will continue to be equal to the exporter-specific weighted-average dumping margin published for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding; (3) for all Chinese exporters of subject merchandise that have not been found to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be the cash deposit rate established for the China-wide entity, 285.63 percent; and (4) for all exporters of subject merchandise that are not located in China and that are not eligible for a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the Chinese exporter(s) that supplied that non-Chinese exporter. These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

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

We are issuing and publishing these results in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213 and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4).

On June 21, 2019, Commerce published the antidumping duty order on glycine from Japan. 1 On June 3, 2022, Commerce published in the Federal Register a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the Order . 2 On August 9, 2022, Commerce published the notice of initiation of the administrative review of the Order . 3 On February 24, 2023, Commerce extended the time limit for these preliminary results to June 30, 2023, in accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). 4

The merchandise subject to the Order is glycine. For a complete description of the scope of the Order, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 5

Commerce is conducting this review in accordance with section 751(a)(2) of the Act. Export price and constructed export price are calculated in accordance with section 772 of the Act. Normal value is calculated in accordance with section 773 of the Act. For a full description of the methodology underlying our conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is made available to the public via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov . In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be found at https://access.trade.gov/public/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx . A list of the topics discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is attached as an appendix to this notice.

We preliminarily determine that the following estimated weighted-average dumping margin exists for the period June 1, 2021, through May 31, 2022.

We intend to disclose the calculations performed to parties in this administrative review within five days after public announcement of the preliminary results, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c), interested parties may submit case briefs no later than 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may be filed not later than seven days after the date for filing case briefs. 7 Commerce has modified certain of its requirements for serving documents containing business proprietary information until further notice. 8 Parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) a statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities. 9

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, filed electronically via ACCESS. Requests should contain: (1) the party's name, address and telephone number; (2) the number of participants; and (3) a list of issues to be discussed. Issues raised in the hearing will be limited to those raised in the respective case briefs. If a request for a hearing is made, Commerce intends to hold the hearing at a time and date to be determined. An electronically filed hearing request must be received successfully in its entirety by Commerce's electronic records system, ACCESS, by 5 p.m. Eastern Time within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. 10

Commerce intends to issue the final results of this administrative review, including the results of its analysis of the issues raised in any written briefs, no later than 120 days after the date of publication of this notice, unless extended, pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act.

Upon completion of the final results, Commerce shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. 11 If the weighted-average dumping margin for Yuki Gosei Kogyo Co., Ltd./Nagase & Co., Ltd. is not zero or de minimis ( i.e., less than 0.5 percent) in the final results of this review, we will calculate an importer-specific assessment rate. Where the respondent reported reliable entered values, Commerce intends to calculate importer/customer-specific ad valorem assessment rates on the basis of the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for each importer's examined sales and the total entered value of such sales in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). 12 Where the respondent did not report entered values, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), Commerce will calculate importer/customer-specific assessment rates by dividing the amount of dumping for reviewed sales to the importer/customer by the total quantity of those sales. Commerce will calculate an estimated ad valorem importer/customer-specific assessment rate to determine whether the per-unit assessment rate is de minimis; however, Commerce will use the per-unit assessment rate where entered values were not reported. Where an importer/customer-specific ad valorem assessment rate is not zero or de minimis, Commerce will instruct CBP to collect the appropriate duties at the time of liquidation. If Yuki Gosei Kogyo Co., Ltd./Nagase & Co., Ltd.'s weighted-average dumping margin is zero or de minimis in the final results of review, or if an importer-specific assessment rate for one of these companies is zero or de minimis, Commerce will instruct CBP to liquidate appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties. 13 For entries of subject merchandise during the period of review produced by any of these companies for which it did not know its merchandise was destined for the United States, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries. 14

Consistent with its recent notice, 15 Commerce intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP no earlier than 35 days after the date of publication of the final results of this review in the Federal Register . If a timely summons is filed at the U.S. Court of International Trade, the assessment instructions will direct CBP not to liquidate relevant entries until the time for parties to file a request for a statutory injunction has expired ( i.e., within 90 days of publication). The final results of this administrative review shall be the basis for the assessment of antidumping duties on entries of merchandise under review and for future cash deposits of estimated antidumping duties, where applicable.

The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication in the Federal Register of the notice of final results of administrative review for all shipments of glycine from Japan entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication as provided by section 751(a)(2) of the Act: (1) the cash deposit rate for companies subject to this review will be equal to the company-specific weighted-average dumping margin established in the final results of the review; (2) for merchandise exported by a company not covered in this review but covered in a prior segment of the proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published in the completed segment for the most recent period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the original investigation but the producer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established in the completed segment for the most recent period for the producer of the merchandise; (4) the cash deposit rate for all other producers or exporters will be 53.66 percent, the all-others rate established in the less-than-fair-value investigation. 16 These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

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

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

On May 15 and 16, 2023, pursuant to sections 781(a) and 781(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, (the Act) and 19 CFR 351.226(c), the American HFC Coalition filed circumvention inquiry requests alleging that HFC blends from China, which are further processed in the United States, and HFC blends completed in Malaysia or Turkey from Chinese components are circumventing the order  1 and, accordingly, should be included within the scope of the Order. 2 On June 9, 2023, we extended the deadline to initiate these circumvention inquiries, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.226(d)(1). 3 On June 9, 2023, Commerce issued supplemental questionnaires to the American HFC Coalition. 4 On June 14, 2023, the American HFC Coalition responded to our supplemental questionnaires. 5

The products subject to the Order are HFC blends. HFC blends covered by the scope are R-404A, a zeotropic mixture consisting of 52 percent 1,1,1-Trifluoroethane, 44 percent Pentafluoroethane, and 4 percent 1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane; R-407A, a zeotropic mixture of 20 percent Difluoromethane, 40 percent Pentafluoroethane, and 40 percent 1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane; R-407C, a zeotropic mixture of 23 percent Difluoromethane, 25 percent Pentafluoroethane, and 52 percent 1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane; R-410A, a zeotropic mixture of 50 percent Difluoromethane and 50 percent Pentafluoroethane; and R-507A, an azeotropic mixture of 50 percent Pentafluoroethane and 50 percent 1,1,1-Trifluoroethane also known as R-507. The foregoing percentages are nominal percentages by weight. Actual percentages of single component refrigerants by weight may vary by plus or minus two percent points from the nominal percentage identified above. 6

Any blend that includes an HFC component other than R-32, R-125, R-143a, or R-134a is excluded from the scope of the Order.

Excluded from the Order are blends of refrigerant chemicals that include products other than HFCs, such as blends including chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), hydrocarbons (HCs), or hydrofluoroolefins (HFOs).

Also excluded from the Order are patented HFC blends, including, but not limited to, ISCEON® blends, including MO99 TM (R-438A), MO79 (R-422A), MO59 (R-417A), MO49Plus TM (R-437A) and MO29 TM (R-4 22D), Genetron® Performax TM LT (R-407F), Choice® R-421A, and Choice® R-421B.

HFC blends covered by the scope of the Order are currently classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) at subheadings 3827.61.0000, 3827.63.0000, 3827.64.0000, 3827.65.0000, 3827.68.0000, 3827.69.0000. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope is dispositive. 7

Commerce published the preliminary results of this review on March 2, 2023. 1 We invited interested parties to comment on the Preliminary Results. On April 3, 2023, Impol and the petitioner filed case briefs. 2 For a complete description of the events that occurred after the Preliminary Results, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum. 3 Commerce conducted this review in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).

The product covered by this Order is CAAS from Croatia. A full description of the scope of the Order is contained in the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

The issues raised in the parties' case briefs are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum and are listed in the appendix to this notice. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on-file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at https://access.trade.gov/public/FRNNoticesListLayout.aspx.

Based on the comments received from interested parties and our examination of record information, we made changes to our preliminary dumping margin calculation for Impol. For a discussion of these changes, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

As a result of this review, we determine the following weighted-average dumping margin exists for the POR:

Commerce intends to disclose the calculations performed for these final results of review within five days of the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register , in accordance with section 751(a) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.224(b).

Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), Commerce has determined, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of subject merchandise in accordance with the final results of this review.

Impol's weighted-average dumping margin is not de minimis ( i.e., less than 0.50 percent). Therefore, Commerce has calculated importer-specific assessment rates on the basis of the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for each importer's examined sales to the total entered value of those sales. 6 Where we did not have entered values for all U.S. sales to a particular importer, we have calculated an importer-specific, per-unit assessment rate on the basis of the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for the importer's examined sales to the total quantity of those sales. To determine whether an importer-specific, per-unit assessment rate is de minimis, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), we have calculated an importer-specific ad valorem ratio based on estimated entered values. Where an importer-specific ad valorem assessment rate is zero or de minimis, we will instruct CBP to liquidate appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties. 7

Commerce's “reseller policy” will apply to entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by the company included in these final results of review for which the reviewed company did not know that the merchandise it sold to the intermediary ( e.g., a reseller, trading company, or exporter) was destined for the United States. In such instance, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the all-others rate if there is no rate for the intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction. 8

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

The following deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the final results of this administrative review, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) the cash deposit rate for Impol will be equal to the weighted-average dumping margin established in the final results of this review; (2) for producers or exporters not covered in this review but covered in a prior segment of the proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recently-completed segment of this proceeding in which they were reviewed; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review or a prior segment of the proceeding but the producer is, then the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recently-completed segment of this proceeding for the producer of the merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other producers or exporters will continue to be 3.19 percent, the all-others rate established in the less-than-fair-value investigation. 9 These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

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

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

We are issuing and publishing this notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5).

On June 11, 2018, Commerce published the AD order on cold-drawn mechanical tubing from Italy. 1 On August 9, 2022, Commerce initiated an administrative review of the Order, in accordance with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). 2 This administrative review covers one producer/exporter of the subject merchandise, Dalmine S.p.A. (Dalmine). 3

On February 2, 2023, Commerce extended the deadline for the preliminary results until June 30, 2023. 4 For a complete description of the events that followed the initiation of this review, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 5

The products covered by this Order are certain cold-drawn mechanical tubing of carbon and alloy steel from Italy. For a full description of the scope, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

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

For a full description of the methodology underlying these preliminary results, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. A list of topics included in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is included as an appendix to this notice. The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is made available to the public via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is available at https://access.trade.gov/public/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx.

We preliminarily determine that the following weighted-average dumping margin exists for the period June 1, 2021, through May 31, 2022:

Upon completion of the final results, Commerce shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), if Dalmine's weighted-average dumping margin is not zero or de minimis ( i.e., less than 0.5 percent) in the final results of this review, we will calculate importer-specific assessment rates based on the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for the importer's examined sales to the total entered value of those same sales. If Dalmine's weighted-average dumping margin is zero or de minimis, or if an importer-specific assessment rate is zero or de minimis, we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties. The final results of this review shall be the basis for the assessment of antidumping duties on entries of merchandise covered by this review and for future deposits of estimated duties, where applicable. 6

In accordance with Commerce's “automatic assessment” practice, for entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by Dalmine for which it did not know that the merchandise was destined for the United States, we will instruct CBP to liquidate those entries at the all-others rate established in the original less-than-fair value (LTFV) investigation ( i.e., 47.87 percent)  7 if there is no rate for the intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction. 8

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

The following cash deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the final results of this administrative review, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) the cash deposit rate for Dalmine in the final results of review will be equal to the weighted-average dumping margin established in the final results of this administrative review except if the rate is less than 0.50 percent and, therefore, de minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), in which case the cash deposit rate will be zero; (2) for merchandise exported by a company not covered in this review but covered in a prior segment of the proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recently-completed segment in which it was reviewed; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review or the original LTFV investigation, but the producer is, then the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recently-completed segment of this proceeding for the producer of the merchandise; (4) the cash deposit rate for all other producers or exporters will continue to be 47.87 percent, 9 the all-others rate established in the LTFV investigation. These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

We intend to disclose the calculations performed to parties within five days after public announcement of the preliminary results or, if there is no public announcement, within five days of the date of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). Case briefs or other written comments may be submitted to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance no later than seven days after the date on which the last verification report is issued in this review. Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may be filed not later than seven days after the date for filing case briefs. 10 Parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) a statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities. 11 Case and rebuttal briefs should be filed using ACCESS  12 and must be served on interested parties. 13 Executive summaries should be limited to five pages total, including footnotes. Note that Commerce has temporarily modified certain of its requirements for serving documents containing business proprietary information, until further notice. 14

Interested parties who wish to request a hearing must do so within 30 days of publication of these preliminary results by submitting a written request to the Assistant Secretary, filed electronically via ACCESS. 15 Requests should contain the party's name, address, and telephone number, the number of participants, whether any participant is a foreign national, and a list of the issues to be discussed. Issues raised in the hearing will be limited to those raised in the respective case and rebuttal briefs. 16 If a request for a hearing is made, Commerce intends to hold the hearing at a time and date to be determined. Parties should confirm the date and time of the hearing two days before the scheduled date. Parties are reminded that all briefs and hearing requests must be filed electronically using ACCESS and received successfully in their entirety by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date.

As provided in section 782(i)(3) of the Act, on June 8-9, 2023, Commerce verified the information reported by Dalmine's U.S. affiliate, Tenaris Global Services USA, at its offices in Houston, TX. 17 Commerce intends to verify Dalmine's remaining U.S. and home market sales information in Italy prior to the final results of this review.

Unless otherwise extended, Commerce intends to issue the final results of this administrative review, including the results of its analysis of the issues raised in any written briefs, not later than 120 days after the date of publication of this notice, pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(1).

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

This administrative review and notice are issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4).

In accordance with 19 CFR 351.225(d)(3), we are notifying the public of the following scope ruling applications related to AD and CVD orders and findings filed in or around the month of May 2023. This notification includes, for each scope application: (1) identification of the AD and/or CVD orders at issue (19 CFR 351.225(c)(1)); (2) concise public descriptions of the products at issue, including the physical characteristics (including chemical, dimensional and technical characteristics) of the products (19 CFR 351.225(c)(2)(ii)); (3) the countries where the products are produced and the countries from where the products are exported (19 CFR 351.225(c)(2)(i)(B)); (4) the full names of the applicants; and (5) the dates that the scope applications were filed with Commerce and the name of the ACCESS scope segment where the scope applications can be found. 1 This notice does not include applications which have been rejected and not properly resubmitted. The scope ruling applications listed below are available on Commerce's online e-filing and document management system, Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Electronic Service System (ACCESS), at https://access.trade.gov .

Certain Vertical Shaft Engines Between 99cc and Up to 225cc and Parts Thereof from the People's Republic of China (China) (A-570-124/C-570-125); Ducar DVO 150 Engine;  2 produced in and exported from China; submitted by Seago, Inc.; May 10, 2023; ACCESS scope segment “Ducar DVO150.”

Certain Quartz Surface Products from China (A-570-084/C-570-085); Mineral Based Surface Products;  3 produced in and exported from China; submitted by Vanguard Trading Company; May 12, 2023; ACCESS scope segment “Mineral-based surface products.”

Certain Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products from India (A-533-865/C-570-866); End Module Side Cover and Cable Tray Connection Bracket;  4 produced in and exported from India; submitted by SIGMA Corp.; May 19, 2023; ACCESS scope segment “Side Cover & Cable Tray Bracket.”

Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from China (A-570-865); Front Foot and Front Foot Caster Assembly for Exercise Equipment;  5 produced in and exported from China; submitted by Concept2, Inc. (Concept2); May 25, 2023; ACCESS scope segment “Concept2 Front Foot and Caster Assembly.”

Fresh Garlic from China (A-570-831); whole garlic cloves in brine;  6 produced in and exported from China; submitted by Marcatus QED, Inc.; May 26, 2023; ACCESS scope segment “Marcatus.”

This list of scope ruling applications is not an identification of scope inquiries that have been initiated. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.225(d)(1), if Commerce has not rejected a scope ruling application nor initiated the scope inquiry within 30 days after the filing of the application, the application will be deemed accepted and a scope inquiry will be deemed initiated the following day—day 31. 7 Commerce's practice generally dictates that where a deadline falls on a weekend, Federal holiday, or other non-business day, the appropriate deadline is the next business day. 8 Accordingly, if the 30th day after the filing of the application falls on a non-business day, the next business day will be considered the “updated” 30th day, and if the application is not rejected or a scope inquiry initiated by or on that particular business day, the application will be deemed accepted and a scope inquiry will be deemed initiated on the next business day which follows the “updated” 30th day. 9

In accordance with 19 CFR 351.225(m)(2), if there are companion AD and CVD orders covering the same merchandise from the same country of origin, the scope inquiry will be conducted on the record of the AD proceeding. Further, please note that pursuant to 19 CFR 351.225(m)(1), Commerce may either apply a scope ruling to all products from the same country with the same relevant physical characteristics, (including chemical, dimensional, and technical characteristics) as the product at issue, on a country-wide basis, regardless of the producer, exporter, or importer of those products, or on a company-specific basis.

For further information on procedures for filing information with Commerce through ACCESS and participating in scope inquiries, please refer to the Filing Instructions section of the Scope Ruling Application Guide, at https://access.trade.gov/help/Scope_Ruling_Guidance.pdf . Interested parties, apart from the scope ruling applicant, who wish to participate in a scope inquiry and be added to the public service list for that segment of the proceeding must file an entry of appearance in accordance with 19 CFR 351.103(d)(1) and 19 CFR 351.225(n)(4). Interested parties are advised to refer to the case segment in ACCESS as well as 19 CFR 351.225(f) for further information on the scope inquiry procedures, including the timelines for the submission of comments.

Please note that this notice of scope ruling applications filed in AD and CVD proceedings may be published before any potential initiation, or after the initiation, of a given scope inquiry based on a scope ruling application identified in this notice. Therefore, please refer to the case segment on ACCESS to determine whether a scope ruling application has been accepted or rejected and whether a scope inquiry has been initiated.

Interested parties who wish to be served scope ruling applications for a particular AD or CVD order may file a request to be included on the annual inquiry service list during the anniversary month of the publication of the AD or CVD order in accordance with 19 CFR 351.225(n) and Commerce's procedures. 10

Interested parties are invited to comment on the completeness of this monthly list of scope ruling applications received by Commerce. Any comments should be submitted to James Maeder, Deputy Assistant Secretary for AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, via email to CommerceCLU@trade.gov .

This notice of scope ruling applications filed in AD and CVD proceedings is published in accordance with 19 CFR 351.225(d)(3).

On June 4, 2021, Commerce published in the Federal Register an antidumping duty order on PC strand from Malaysia. 1 On June 3, 2022, we published in the Federal Register a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the Order. 2 On August 9, 2022, based on timely requests for an administrative review, Commerce initiated an administrative review with respect to four companies. 3 On August 26, 2022, Commerce selected Kiswire Sdn. Bhd. (Kiswire) and Wei Dat Steel Wire Sdn. Bhd. (Wei Dat) as mandatory respondents for individual examination. 4

On February 17, 2023, Commerce extended the time limit for completing the preliminary results of this review until June 30, 2023. 5 For a complete description of the events between the initiation of this review and these preliminary results, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum

CS launched this review of the services it provides to ensure services are designed to meet the needs of the U.S. exporters and the business community in the future. These services are intended to provide the resources and assistance that U.S. businesses need to successfully research, evaluate, and expand into global markets. Public feedback will help ITA to better understand what assistance is most helpful and to identify opportunities to innovate and enhance the types of services and delivery methods offered by CS ( e.g., virtual versus in-person). The service review includes:

• Resources that equip U.S. businesses with the knowledge to achieve their export objectives, such as market research by industry or country.

• Fee-based services that provide businesses with standardized or customized assistance for attracting and connecting with foreign buyers. Fee-based services include business-to-business matchmaking, promotional events and campaigns, and individualized market research.

• Trade events such as trade missions and educational seminars; additional services offered at trade events and trade shows include business-to-business matchmaking and export counseling. CS Staff also recruit international buyer delegations to attend U.S. trade shows, and help businesses expand global sales at trade events.

• Other direct or indirect support provided by the CS.

Please visit Export Solutions for a better understanding of all the services and assistance the CS provides to the U.S. business and export community.

To submit feedback, complete the following questions (OMB Control Number 0625-0275, expiration date 31 December 2024) and submit them to carlos.ortiz@trade.gov :

1. What assistance would be most useful or important to your business?

2. What assistance is most difficult to obtain?

3. What assistance do you think we (the ITA/CS) need to provide?

4. If you are a U.S. based company, what is your zip code?

5. How would you describe your level of exporting experience?

6. Is your company . . . (check all that apply)

For additional information about current CS services and assistance, please see the following resources.

a. https://www.trade.gov/all-services: This site provides a listing of the export and investment services available from the CS.

b. https://trade.gov/attend-event: This site allows visitors to search all CS events by type of event, industry, or location.

c. https://www.trade.gov/us-commercial-service-user-fees: This site provides a full listing of the CS user fee schedule for export and investment promotion services.

d. https://trade.gov/export-solutions: This site provides practical advice and business tools to help U.S. companies expand in global markets.

For reference, CS currently provides the following fee-based export assistance and services:

e. Business Service Provider: The Business Service Provider is an online program to help U.S. exporters identify professional export service providers to support them in the assessment, financing, or completion of an export transaction.

f. Certified Trade Mission: The Certified Trade Mission program offers services to support overseas events that are planned, organized, recruited, and led by private and public sector export-oriented groups outside of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

g. Conference: Conferences are events organized by CS to provide U.S. firms with export knowledge and/or market intelligence from experts located around the globe or to advertise the opportunities for investment promotion to foreign companies.

h. Contact List: The Contact List service provides U.S. firms with a contact list of five (5) to ten (10) potential agents, distributors, and partners in a foreign market.

i. Customized Market Research: The Customized Market Research service provides answers beyond general counseling/market research to client questions specific to their products/services in a market.

j. Featured U.S. Exporter: The Featured U.S. Exporters Listing service provides U.S. companies with an opportunity to enhance their international marketing efforts through improved search engine optimization.

k. Foreign Buyer Delegation: The Foreign Buyer Delegation service offers resources to foreign buyer delegates to U.S. trade events seeking U.S. suppliers of goods/services.

l. Gold Key Service: The Gold Key Service provides U.S. firms traveling to a foreign market with appointments to establish relationships with pre-screened potential overseas agents, distributors, sales representatives, business partners, and other local entities in-country.

m. Initial Market Check: The Initial Market Check service is an initial assessment of the market potential of a client's product or service in a targeted market.

n. International Company Profile: The International Company Profile service provides U.S. companies with in-depth background check information on a specific foreign company to help determine its suitability as a potential business partner.

o. International Partner Search: The International Partner Search service provides U.S. companies with a list of up to five (5) potential agents, partners, or distributors that have expressed an interest in the client's product or service.

p. International Partner Search + Virtual Introductions: The International Partner Search + Virtual Introductions service provides the same as the International Partner Search service listed above, but also includes virtual introductions via conference calls with up to five of the contacts identified.

q. Official Letter: The Official Letter service issues official letters to U.S. businesses when necessary for businesses to comply with local regulatory requirements to conduct business in these local markets.

r. Other Services/Events: The Other Service and Event offering provides clients with export or investment promotion assistance within the scope of CS authorities that is not within the scope of one of the CS standard service offerings.

s. Seminar: Seminars are events organized by CS offices to provide U.S. firms with export knowledge and/or market intelligence from experts located around the globe or to advertise the opportunities for investment promotion to foreign companies.

t. Single Company Promotion: The Single Company Promotion service provides U.S. companies with promotional services to help increase the awareness of their product/service in a specific market.

u. Trade Event: Trade events are events organized by CS offices to help U.S. businesses navigate the increasingly complex global marketplace.

v. Trade Show Representation: The Trade Show Representation service provides U.S. companies and economic development organizations with the ability to increase their marketing exposure at an overseas trade show when they are unable to attend in person.

w. Virtual Introduction: The Virtual Introduction service provides U.S. companies with a virtual introduction via conference call or email to a foreign buyer/partner that they have pre-identified.

x. Virtual Fair: The Virtual Fair service provides a group of U.S. entities with an opportunity to promote their products/services to potential partners in a foreign market live via a webinar platform.

y. Webinar: Webinars are events organized by CS offices to provide U.S. firms with export knowledge and/or market intelligence from experts located around the globe or to advertise the opportunities for investment promotion to foreign companies.

z. Website Globalization: The website Globalization Review Gap Analysis service provides technical and strategic assessment of a business's eCommerce sales channel efforts.

The Department of Commerce will utilize the input received to determine opportunities for updating ITA/CS's export promotion service and assistance. Once finalized, proposed updates to ITA/CS's export promotion services and assistance will be shared with the public through the Federal Register Portal and on www.trade.gov .

OMB Number: 0625-0275.

Expiration Date: 12/31/2024.

A Federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with an information collection subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 unless the information collection has a currently valid OMB Control Number. The approved OMB Control Number for this information collection is 0625-0275. Without this approval, we could not conduct this survey. Public reporting for this information collection is estimated to be approximately five minutes per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the information collection. All responses to this information collection are voluntary. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this information collection, including suggestions for reducing this burden to the ITA Paperwork Reduction Act Program at pra@trade.gov if desired.

On July 20, 2020, Commerce published the countervailing duty (CVD) order on collated staples from China. 1 On August 1, 2022, we received a timely request for an administrative review from Kyocera Senco Industrial Tools, Inc. (the petitioner), Tianjin Hweschun Fasteners Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (Tianjin Hweschun), and Tianjin Jinyifeng Hardware Co., Ltd. (Tianjin Jinyifeng). 2 On September 6, 2022, Commerce published in the Federal Register a notice of initiation of an administrative review of the Order on 84 producers/exporters. 3 For a description of the events that occurred since the initiation of this review, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 4

The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at https://access.trade.gov/public/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx. A list of topics discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is included as Appendix I to this notice.

The product covered by the Order is collated staples from China. For a complete description of the scope of the Order, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

Based on our analysis of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) information, we determine that 79 companies had no entries of subject merchandise during the POR. 5 On May 25, 2023, we notified parties that we intended to rescind this administrative review with respect to the 79 companies because there are no reviewable suspended entries. 6 No parties commented on the notification of intent to rescind the review, in part. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), we are rescinding the administrative review of these companies. We have included a list of these 79 companies in Appendix II of this notice. For additional information regarding this determination, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 7

Commerce is conducting this review in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). For each of the subsidy programs found countervailable, we preliminarily determine that there is a subsidy, i.e., a financial contribution by an “authority” that confers a benefit to the recipient, and that the subsidy is specific. 8 For a full description of the methodology underlying our preliminary conclusions, including our reliance, in part, on adverse facts available pursuant to sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 9

As discussed above, Commerce initiated this administrative review on 84 producers/exporters and is rescinding this administrative review, in part, with respect to 79 producers/exporters. In addition, Commerce selected Tianjin Hweschun Fasteners Mfg. Co. Ltd. (Tianjin Hweschun) for individual examination. For the remaining four companies subject to this review, because the preliminary subsidy rate calculated for Tianjin Hweschun is above de minimis and not based entirely on facts available, we are preliminarily applying to the four non-selected companies, identified below, Tianjin Hweschun's subsidy rate. This methodology to establish the rate for the non-selected companies is applied pursuant to section 705(c)(5)(A) of the Act, which governs the calculation of the “all-others” rate in an investigation, as guidance. For additional information, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 10

In accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(b)(4)(i), we calculated a countervailable subsidy rate for the mandatory respondent Tianjin Hweschun. As this rate is not zero, de minimis, or based entirely on facts otherwise available, as discussed above, we applied it to all other producers/exporters subject to this review but not selected for individual examination ( i.e., non-selected companies).

We preliminarily find the countervailable subsidy rates for the mandatory and non-selected respondents under review for the period of January 1, 2021, through December 31, 2021, to be as follows:

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

Case briefs or other written comments may be submitted to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. A timeline for the submission of case briefs and written comments will be provided to interested parties at a later date. 11 Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in case briefs, may be submitted no later than seven days after the deadline date for case briefs. 12 Note that Commerce has temporarily modified certain of its requirements for serving documents containing business proprietary information until further notice. 13

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2), parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this review are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) a statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities. Case and rebuttal briefs must be filed using ACCESS. 14 An electronically filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by ACCESS by 5 p.m. Eastern Time on the established deadline.

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing, limited to issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs, must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. Requests should contain the party's name, address, and telephone number, the number of participants, and a list of the issues to be discussed. If a request for a hearing is made, Commerce intends to hold the hearing at a time and date to be determined. 15 Parties should confirm by telephone the date and time of the hearing two days before the scheduled date.

Unless the deadline is extended, we intend to issue the final results of this administrative review, which will include the results of our analysis of the issues raised in the case briefs, within 120 days of publication of these preliminary results in the Federal Register , pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h).

Upon completion of the administrative review, consistent with section 751(a)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b)(2), Commerce shall determine, and CBP shall assess, countervailing duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review. For the companies for which this review is rescinded, Commerce will instruct CBP to assess countervailing duties on all appropriate entries at a rate equal to the cash deposit of estimated countervailing duties required at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption, during the period January 1, 2021, through December 31, 2021, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(c)(l)(i). For the companies for which this review is rescinded, we intend to issue appropriate assessment instructions to CBP no earlier than 35 days after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register .

For the companies remaining in the review, Commerce will instruct CBP to assess countervailing duties on all appropriate entries at the subsidy rates calculated in the final results of this review. For the companies remaining in the review, we intend to issue assessment instructions to CBP no earlier than 35 days after the date of publication of the final results of this review in the Federal Register . If a timely summons is filed at the U.S. Court of International Trade, the assessment instructions will direct CBP not to liquidate relevant entries until the time for parties to file a request for a statutory injunction has expired ( i.e., within 90 days of publication).

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

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

On August 9, 2022, Commerce published a notice of initiation of an administrative review of the antidumping duty (AD) order on TRBs from China covering the POR with respect to seven companies. 1 On February 22, 2023, we extended the preliminary results of this review to no later than June 30, 2023. 2

For a complete description of the events that followed the initiation of this administrative review, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 3 A list of topics discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is included in the appendix to this notice. The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at https://access.trade.gov/public/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx.

The products covered by the Order are shipments of tapered roller bearings and parts thereof, finished and unfinished, from China; flange, take up cartridge, and hanger units incorporating tapered roller bearings; and tapered roller housings (except pillow blocks) incorporating tapered rollers, with or without spindles, whether or not for automotive use. For a full description of the scope of the Order, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

Commerce is conducting this review in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). For a full description of the methodology underlying our preliminary results, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 5

C&U Group Shanghai Bearing Co., Ltd. (C&U Group), Hangzhou C&U Automotive Bearing Co., Ltd. (C&U Automotive), Hangzhou C&U Metallurgy Bearing Co., Ltd. (C&U Metallurgy), Huangshi C&U Bearing Co., Ltd. (Huangshi C&U), and Sichuan C&U Bearing Co., Ltd. (Sichuan C&U) did not submit separate rate applications or recertify their eligibility for a separate rate; therefore, Commerce preliminarily determines that these companies are not eligible for a separate rate and, as such, are a part of the China-wide entity.

Under Commerce's policy regarding the conditional review of the China-wide entity, the China-wide entity will not be under review unless a party specifically requests, or Commerce self-initiates, a review of the China-wide entity. Because no party requested a review of the China-wide entity and no review was initiated for the China-wide entity, the China-wide entity is not under review. Thus, the weighted-average dumping margin determined for the China-wide entity is not subject to change and continues to be 92.84 percent. 6

Commerce calculated an individual weighted-average dumping margin for Shanghai Tainai Bearing Co., Ltd. (Tainai), the only company individually examined in this administrative review. Because the only individually calculated weighted-average dumping margin is not zero, de minimis, or based entirely on facts otherwise available, the weighted-average dumping margin calculated for Tainai is the basis to determine the weighted-average dumping margin for the separate rate, non-examined companies, consistent with section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act, which provides for the determination of the estimated weighted-average dumping margin for all other producers and exporters in an investigation.

As indicated in the “Preliminary Results of Review” section below, we preliminarily determine that a weighted-average dumping margin of 27.02 percent applies to Zhejiang Jingli Bearing Technology Co., Ltd. (Jingli), the only company not selected for individual examination that is eligible for a separate rate. For further information, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum at “Weighted-Average Dumping Margin for the Separate Rate Companies.”

Commerce preliminarily determines that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist for the period June 1, 2021, through May 31, 2022:

Commerce intends to disclose the calculations performed in connection with these preliminary results to interested parties within five days after the date of publication of this notice. 7 Case briefs or other written comments may be submitted to Commerce no later than 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. 8 Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may be filed no later than seven days after the time limit for filing case briefs. 9 Parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) a statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities. 10 Case and rebuttal briefs should be filed using ACCESS. 11 Note that Commerce has temporarily modified certain of its requirements for serving documents containing business proprietary information, until further notice. 12

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, filed electronically via ACCESS within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. 13 Hearing requests should contain: (1) the party's name, address, and telephone number; (2) the number of participants; and (3) a list of issues to be discussed. Issues raised in the hearing will be limited to issues raised in the briefs. If a request for a hearing is made, Commerce intends to hold the hearing at a date and time to be determined. 14 Parties should confirm by telephone the date and time of the hearing two days before the scheduled date. An electronically filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by ACCESS by 5 p.m. Eastern Time on the established deadline.

Commerce intends to issue the final results of this administrative review, including the results of its analysis of issues raised in any written briefs, not later than 120 days after the date of publication of this notice, unless otherwise extended. 15

Upon completion of the final results, Commerce shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. 16

For each individually examined respondent in this review whose weighted-average dumping margin in the final results of review is not zero or de minimis ( i.e., less than 0.5 percent), Commerce intends to calculate importer-specific assessment rates for antidumping duties, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). 17 Where the respondent reported reliable entered values, Commerce intends to calculate importer-specific ad valorem assessment rates by aggregating the amount of dumping calculated for all U.S. sales to the importer and dividing this amount by the total entered value of the merchandise sold to the importer. 18 Where the respondent did not report entered values, Commerce will calculate importer-specific per-unit assessment rates by dividing the amount of dumping for reviewed sales to the importer by the total quantity of those sales. In addition, Commerce will calculate an estimated importer-specific ad valorem assessment rate to determine whether the per-unit assessment rate is de minimis; however, Commerce will use the per-unit assessment rate where entered values were not reported. 19 Where an importer-specific ad valorem assessment rate is not zero or de minimis, Commerce will instruct CBP to collect the appropriate duties at the time of liquidation. Where either the respondent's weighted average dumping margin is zero or de minimis, or an importer-specific ad valorem assessment rate is zero or de minimis, Commerce will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties. 20

For the final results, if we continue to treat the C&U Group, C&U Automotive, C&U Metallurgy, Huangshi C&U, and Sichuan C&U as part of China-wide entity, we will instruct CBP to apply an ad valorem assessment rate of 92.84 percent to all entries of subject merchandise during the POR that were exported by these companies.

For Jingli, the company that is receiving a separate rate and was not individually examined, its assessment rate will be equal to the weighted-average dumping margin determined in the final results of this review.

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

The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this administrative review for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as provided for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) for the exporters listed above that have a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be equal to the weighted-average dumping margin established in the final results of this review (except, if the rate is zero or de minimis, then a cash deposit rate of zero will be established for that company); (2) for previously investigated or reviewed Chinese and non-Chinese exporters not listed above that are currently eligible for a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will continue to be equal to the exporter-specific weighted-average dumping margin published for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding; (3) for all Chinese exporters of subject merchandise that have not been found to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be the cash deposit rate established for the China-wide entity, 92.84 percent; and (4) for all exporters of subject merchandise that are not located in China and that are not eligible for a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the Chinese exporter(s) that supplied that non-Chinese exporter.

These deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

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

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

On June 22, 2020, Commerce published the antidumping duty order on quartz surface products from India in the Federal Register . 1 On August 9, 2022, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i), Commerce published a notice of initiation for this administrative review. 2 Commerce amended this initiation to include two companies inadvertently omitted from its August 9, 2022, Initiation Notice. 3 On February 13, 2023, we extended the deadline for the preliminary results to June 30, 2023. 4 For a complete description of the events that followed the initiation of this administrative review, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 5

The products covered by the Order are quartz surface products from India. For a complete description of the scope, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), Commerce will rescind an administrative review, in whole or in part, if a party who requested the review withdraws the request within 90 days of the date of publication of notice of initiation of the requested review. Six companies upon which we initiated a review timely withdrew their review requests and no other interested party requested a review of their entries during the POR. As a result, Commerce is rescinding this review with respect to these six companies (ASI Industries Limited, Divine Surfaces Private Limited, Evetis Stone India Pvt. Ltd., Imperiaal Granimarmo Pvt Ltd., PM Quartz Surfaces Pvt. Ltd., and Shanmukha Exports) in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1).

Commerce is conducting this review in accordance with section 751(a)(2) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). We calculated export price in accordance with section 772 of the Act. We calculated normal value in accordance with section 773 of the Act. For a full description of the methodology underlying these preliminary results, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. A list of topics discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is included as Appendix I to this notice. The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at https://access.trade.gov/public/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx.

Commerce preliminarily determines the following weighted-average dumping margins exist for the POR:

Commerce intends to disclose the calculations performed in connection with these preliminary results to interested parties within five days after the date of publication of this notice. 8 Interested parties may submit case briefs no later than 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. 9 Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may be filed no later than seven days after the time limit for filing case briefs. 10 Parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) a statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities. 11 Executive summaries should be limited to five pages total, including footnotes. Case and rebuttal briefs should be filed using ACCESS. 12 Note that Commerce has temporarily modified certain of its requirements for serving documents containing business proprietary information, until further notice. 13

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, filed electronically via ACCESS. An electronically filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by Commerce's electronic records system, ACCESS, by 5 p.m. Eastern Time within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. Requests should contain: (1) the party's name, address and telephone number; (2) the number of participants; and (3) a list of issues parties intend to discuss. Issues raised in the hearing will be limited to those raised in the respective case and rebuttal briefs. 14 If a request for a hearing is made, Commerce intends to hold the hearing at a time and date to be determined. Parties should confirm by telephone the date, time, and location of the hearing two days before the scheduled date.

Unless otherwise extended, Commerce intends to issue the final results of this administrative review, which will include the results of its analysis of issues raised in any briefs, no later than 120 days after the date of publication of these preliminary results of review, pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act.

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

If the weighted-average dumping margin for PESL or Marudhar Rocks is not zero or de minimis ( i.e., less than 0.5 percent) in the final results of this review, we will calculate importer-specific ad valorem assessment rates for the merchandise based on the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for the examined sales made during the POR to each importer and the total entered value of those same sales, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). Where an importer-specific ad valorem assessment rate is zero or de minimis in the final results of review, we will instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2). If a respondent's weighted-average dumping margin is zero or de minimis in the final results of review, we will instruct CBP not to assess duties on any of its entries in accordance with the Final Modification for Reviews, i.e., “{w}here the weighted-average margin of dumping for the exporter is determined to be zero or de minimis, no antidumping duties will be assessed.”  15 For entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by PESL or Marudhar Rocks for which the producer did not know its merchandise was destined for the United States, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the all-others rate if there is no rate for the intermediate company (or companies) involved in the transaction. 16

For the companies which were not selected for individual examination, we will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties at an ad valorem assessment rate equal to the company-specific weighted-average dumping margin determined in these final results. For the companies for which the administrative review is rescinded, antidumping duties shall be assessed at a rate equal to the cash deposit of estimated antidumping duties required at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(c)(1)(i).

The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this administrative review for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the final results of this administrative review, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) the cash deposit rate for each company listed above will be that established in the final results of this administrative review, except if the rate is less than 0.50 percent, and therefore, de minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), in which case the cash deposit rate will be zero; (2) for previously reviewed or investigated companies not listed above, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding in which the company participated; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or in the investigation but the producer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding for the producer of the merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other producers or exporters will continue to be the all-others rate of 1.02 percent, the rate established in the investigation of this proceeding, as adjusted for subsidy offsets. 17 These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

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

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

On May 17, 2023, the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) initiated a countervailing duty (CVD) investigation of imports of certain non-refillable steel cylinders (cylinders) from India. 1 Currently, the preliminary determination is due no later than July 21, 2023.

Section 703(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires Commerce to issue the preliminary determination in a CVD investigation within 65 days after the date on which Commerce initiated the investigation. However, section 703(c)(1) of the Act permits Commerce to postpone the preliminary determination until no later than 130 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 June 26, 2023, the petitioner in this CVD investigation  2 submitted a timely request that Commerce postpone the preliminary determination. 3 The petitioner stated that Commerce needs additional time to collect and analyze questionnaire responses from the Government of India (GOI) and the mandatory respondents in this investigation. 4 Additionally, the petitioner stated that the additional time will: (1) permit the petitioner to review data submitted by the GOI and the respondents; and (2) allow Commerce to request additional or clarifying information as necessary, as well as determine the extent to which countervailable subsidies have benefited the respondents. 5

In accordance with 19 CFR 351.205(e), the petitioner has stated the reasons for requesting a postponement of the preliminary determination, and Commerce finds no compelling reason to deny the request. Therefore, in accordance with section 703(c)(1)(A) of the Act, Commerce is postponing the deadline for the preliminary determination to no later than 130 days after the date on which this investigation was initiated, i.e., September 25, 2023. 6 Pursuant to section 705(a)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(1), the deadline for the final determination of this investigation will continue to be 75 days after the date of the preliminary determination.

This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 703(c)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(f)(1).

On June 11, 2018, Commerce published the antidumping duty (AD) order on cold-drawn mechanical tubing from India. 1 On August 9, 2022, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i), Commerce initiated an administrative review of the Order, covering two producers/exporters, Goodluck India Limited (Goodluck) and Tube Products of India, Ltd., a unit of Tube Investments of India Limited (collectively, TII). 2

Pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), on January 17, 2023, Commerce determined that it was not practicable to complete the preliminary results of this review within 245 days and extended the deadline for the preliminary results of this review until June 30, 2023. 3

For a detailed description of the events that followed the initiation of this review, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 4 The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is available via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed at https://access.trade.gov/public/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx.

The merchandise covered by the Order is cold-drawn mechanical tubing from India. For a complete description of the scope of the Order, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

Commerce is conducting this administrative review in accordance with section 751(a) of the Act. For a full description of the methodology underlying these preliminary results, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. A list of topics discussed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is attached as an appendix to this notice.

We preliminarily determine the following weighted-average dumping margins for the period June 1, 2021, through May 31, 2022:

On November 8, 2022, the petitioners, ArcelorMittal Tubular Products LLC, Michigan Seamless Tube, LLC, PTC Alliance Corp., Webco Industries, Inc., and Zekelman Industries, timely requested that Commerce conduct verification of Goodluck's responses. 5 Moreover, no verification was conducted during the two immediately preceding reviews of Goodluck. Therefore, Commerce intends to verify the information that Commerce relies upon for the final results with respect to Goodluck, as provided in section 782(i)(3) of the Act.

We intend to disclose the calculations performed for these preliminary results of review to interested parties with an Administrative Protective Order within five days of the date of publication of these preliminary results in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

Case briefs or other written comments may be submitted to Commerce. A timeline for the submission of case briefs and written comments will be provided to interested parties at a later date. Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may be filed no later than seven days after the date for filing case briefs. 6 Parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) a statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities. 7 Case and rebuttal briefs should be filed using ACCESS. 8

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, filed electronically via ACCESS, within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. Requests should contain: (1) the party's name, address, and telephone number; (2) the number of participants; and (3) a list of issues parties intend to discuss. Issues raised in the hearing will be limited to those raised in the respective case and rebuttal briefs. If a request for a hearing is made, Commerce intends to hold a hearing at a time and date to be determined. 9 Parties should confirm the date, time, and location of the hearing two days before the scheduled date.

An electronically filed document must be received successfully in its entirety by Commerce's electronic records system, ACCESS, by 5 p.m. Eastern Time on the date that the document is due. Commerce has modified certain of its requirements for serving documents containing business proprietary information until further notice. 10

Commerce intends to issue the final results of this administrative review, including the results of its analysis of the issues raised in any case or rebuttal briefs, no later than 120 days after the date of publication of this notice, unless this deadline is extended. 11

Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), Commerce shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of subject merchandise covered by this review. Commerce intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP no earlier than 35 days after the date of publication of the final results of this administrative review in the Federal Register . If a timely summons is filed at the U.S. Court of International Trade, the assessment instructions will direct CBP not to liquidate relevant entries until the time for parties to file a request for a statutory injunction has expired ( i.e., within 90 days of publication).

For an individually examined respondent whose weighted-average dumping margin is not zero or de minimis ( i.e., less than 0.5 percent) in the final results of this review, Commerce intends to calculate an importer-specific assessment rate based on the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for each importer's examined sales to the total entered value of those sales, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1). Where we do not have entered values for all U.S. sales to a particular importer/customer, we will calculate a per-unit assessment rate by aggregating the antidumping duties due for all U.S. sales to that importer (or customer) and dividing this amount by the total quantity sold to that importer (or customer). 12 We intend to instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review when the importer-specific assessment rate calculated in the final results of this review is above de minimis ( i.e., 0.50 percent). To determine whether the duty assessment rates are de minimis, in accordance with the requirement set forth in 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), we calculate importer- (or customer-) specific ad valorem ratios based on the estimated entered value. Where either a respondent's weighted-average dumping margin is zero or de minimis, or an importer- (or customer-) specific ad valorem rate is zero or de minimis in the final results of review, we intend to instruct CBP to liquidate the appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties. 13

In accordance with Commerce's “automatic assessment” practice, for entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by the respondents for which they did not know that the merchandise was destined for the United States, we intend to instruct CBP to liquidate those entries at the all-others rate in the original less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigation. 14 if there is no rate for the intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction. 15

The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the notice of final results of this administrative review for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) the cash deposit rate for the companies listed above will be that established in the final results of this administrative review, except if the rate is less than 0.50 percent, and, therefore, de minimis within the meaning of 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), in which case the cash deposit rate will be zero; (2) for previously reviewed or investigated companies not covered in this review, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific cash deposit rate published for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding in which the company participated; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the underlying investigation, but the producer is, then the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recently completed segment of this proceeding for the producer of the merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other producers or exporters will continue to be 5.87 percent, the all-others rate established in the LTFV investigation. 16 These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

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

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

The Following Conditions for Participation Will Be Used for the Mission

Applicants must submit a completed and signed mission application and supplemental application materials, including adequate information on their products and/or services, primary market objectives, and goals for participation that is adequate to allow the Department of Commerce to evaluate their application. If the Department of Commerce receives an incomplete application, the Department of Commerce may either: reject the application, request additional information/clarification, or take the lack of information into account when evaluating the application. If the requisite minimum number of participants is not selected for a particular mission by the recruitment deadline, the mission may be cancelled.

Each applicant must also certify that the products and services it seeks to export through the mission are either produced in the United States, or, if not, are marketed under the name of a U.S. firm and have at least fifty-one percent U.S. content by value. In the case of a trade association or organization, the applicant must certify that, for each firm or service provider to be represented by the association/organization, the products and/or services the represented firm or service provider seeks to export are either produced in the United States or, if not, marketed under the name of a U.S. firm and have at least 51% U.S. content.

A trade association/organization applicant must certify and agree to the above for every company it seeks to represent on the mission. In addition, each applicant must:

• Certify that the products and services that it wishes to market through the mission would be in compliance with U.S. export controls and regulations;

• Certify that it has identified any matter pending before any bureau or office in the Department of Commerce;

• Certify that it has identified any pending litigation (including any administrative proceedings) to which it is a party that involves the Department of Commerce; and

• Sign and submit an agreement that it and its affiliates (1) have not and will not engage in the bribery of foreign officials in connection with a company's/participant's involvement in this mission, and (2) maintain and enforce a policy that prohibits the bribery of foreign officials.

In the case of a trade association/organization, the applicant must certify that each firm or service provider to be represented by the association/organization can make the above certifications.

Targeted mission participants are U.S. firms, services providers and trade associations/organizations providing or promoting U.S. products and services that have an interest in entering or expanding their business in the mission's destination country. The following criteria will be evaluated in selecting participants:

• Suitability of the applicant's (or in the case of a trade association/organization, represented firm's or service provider's) products or services to these markets;

• The applicant's (or in the case of a trade association/organization, represented firm's or service provider's) potential for business in the markets, including likelihood of exports resulting from the mission; and

• Consistency of the applicant's (or in the case of a trade association/organization, represented firm's or service provider's) goals and objectives with the stated scope of the mission. Balance of company size and location may also be considered during the review process.

Referrals from a political party or partisan political group or any information, including on the application, containing references to political contributions or other partisan political activities will be excluded from the application and will not be considered during the selection process. The sender will be notified of these exclusions. The Department of Commerce will evaluate applications and inform applicants of selection decisions on a rolling basis until the maximum number of participants has been selected.

If and when an applicant is selected to participate on a particular mission, a payment to the Department of Commerce in the amount of the designated participation fee below is required. Upon notification of acceptance to participate, those selected have 5 business days to submit payment or the acceptance may be revoked.

Participants selected for a trade mission will be expected to pay for the cost of personal expenses, including, but not limited to, international travel, lodging, meals, transportation, communication, and incidentals, unless otherwise noted. Participants will, however, be able to take advantage of U.S. Government rates for hotel rooms. In the event that a mission is cancelled, no personal expenses paid in anticipation of a mission will be reimbursed. However, participation fees for a cancelled mission will be reimbursed to the extent they have not already been expended in anticipation of the mission.

Trade mission members participate in trade missions and undertake mission-related travel at their own risk. The nature of the security situation in a given foreign market at a given time cannot be guaranteed. The U.S. Government does not make any representations or guarantees as to the safety or security of participants. The U.S. Department of State issues U.S. Government international travel alerts and warnings for U.S. citizens available at https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/traveladvisories/traveladvisories.html/. Any question regarding insurance coverage must be resolved by the participant and its insurer of choice.

For purposes of assessing participation fees, an applicant is a small or medium-sized enterprise (SME) if it qualifies as a “small business” under the Small Business Administration's (SBA) size standards ( https://www.sba.gov/document/support--table-size-standards ), which vary by North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code. The SBA Size Standards Tool ( https://www.sba.gov/size-standards ) can help you determine the qualifications that apply to your company.

Travel and in-person activities are contingent upon the safety and health conditions in the United States and the mission countries. Should safety or health conditions not be appropriate for travel and/or in-person activities, the Department will consider postponing the event or offering a virtual program in lieu of an in-person agenda. In the event of a postponement, the Department will notify the public and applicants previously selected to participate in this mission will need to confirm their availability but need not reapply. Should the decision be made to organize a virtual program, the Department will adjust fees, accordingly, prepare an agenda for virtual activities, and notify the previously selected applicants with the option to opt-in to the new virtual program.

Mission List: (additional information about trade missions can be found at https://www.trade.gov/trade-missions ).

The United States Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration (ITA) is organizing a financial technologies business development mission to Singapore and Tokyo, Japan, with an optional stop in Seoul, South Korea from November 13 to 20, 2023.

The purpose of the mission is to expand opportunities for U.S. companies in the Indo-Pacific region at the intersection of financial services, financial technology, payments, reg fintech, and sustainable financial technology. This mission will also be part of delivering and advancing U.S. technology, standards, and commercial interests in this vital region of the world.

The objective is to identify, where appropriate and in line with U.S. policy objectives, trade promotion opportunities that will help cement U.S. financial technology organizations as global leaders in this emerging industry, while also creating new commercial opportunities and encouraging strong regulation and supervision worldwide.

The mission is designed for U.S. firms and organizations who play a part in the financial technology industry, especially those with products in the following categories:

This list is not intended to be exhaustive of all opportunities but shows best prospect sectors. Applications from companies selling products or services within the scope of this mission, but not specifically identified, will be considered, and evaluated by the International Trade Administration on a case-by-case basis.

This trade mission will showcase U.S. financial technology services and products and help ensure the Indo-Pacific region will look at U.S. financial services and technology standards and approaches for their own financial services industry. The mission will provide curated visits to key governmental agencies, non-governmental organizations, and other local industry organizations in the market. Trade mission partners include high level government representatives as well as directors from leading incubators and business associations.

Delegations will also be visiting key private sector companies and organizations in the local market that are challenging to set-up meetings with, such as possible visits to the Tokyo Stock Exchange, Singapore Big 4 local banks, leading asset management companies in Japan and Singapore, and local investment organizations.

In May 2022, the United States launched the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF) with 13 other countries, including Singapore, Japan, and the Republic of Korea. The goal of IPEF is to advance sustainability, inclusiveness, economic growth, and competitiveness to benefit each of the participating economies, with which the U.S. financial technology industry can participate and support.

In 2023, the United States is hosting the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) meetings. As part of its 2023 APEC Host Year, the United States continues to focus on sustainable economic growth. This mission will serve as one means to further U.S. and APEC economy private sector collaborations to establish responsible and sustainable financial technology industry standards and practices.

Commerce published the Preliminary Results on March 2, 2023. 1 We invited interested parties to comment on the Preliminary Results. On April 3, 2023, Impol filed a case brief. 2 For a complete description of the events that occurred after the Preliminary Results, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum. 3 Commerce conducted this review in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).

The product covered by this Order is CAAS from Slovenia. A full description of the scope of the Order is contained in the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

The issue raised in the Impol's case brief is addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum and is listed in the appendix to this notice. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on-file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the internet at https://access.trade.gov/public/FRNNoticesListLayout.aspx.

Based on our further examination of the record information, we made changes to our preliminary dumping margin calculation for Impol. For a discussion of these changes, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

As a result of this review, we determine the following weighted-average dumping margin exists for the POR:

Commerce intends to disclose the calculations performed for these final results of review within five days of the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register , in accordance with section 751(a) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.224(b).

Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.212(b)(1), Commerce has determined, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries of subject merchandise in accordance with the final results of this review.

Impol's weighted-average dumping margin is not de minimis ( i.e., less than 0.50 percent). Therefore, Commerce has calculated importer-specific assessment rates on the basis of the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for each importer's examined sales to the total entered value of those sales. 6 Where we did not have entered values for all U.S. sales to a particular importer, we have calculated an importer-specific, per-unit assessment rate on the basis of the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for the importer's examined sales to the total quantity of those sales. To determine whether an importer-specific, per-unit assessment rate is de minimis, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1), we have calculated an importer-specific ad valorem ratio based on estimated entered values. Where an importer-specific ad valorem assessment rate is zero or de minimis, we will instruct CBP to liquidate appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties. 7

Commerce's “reseller policy” will apply to entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by the company included in these final results of review for which the reviewed company did not know that the merchandise it sold to the intermediary ( e.g., a reseller, trading company, or exporter) was destined for the United States. In such instance, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the all-others rate if there is no rate for the intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction. 8

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

The following deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date of the final results of this administrative review, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) the cash deposit rate for Impol will be equal to the weighted-average dumping margin established in the final results of this review; (2) for producers or exporters not covered in this review but covered in a prior segment of the proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recently-completed segment of this proceeding in which they were reviewed; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review or a prior segment of the proceeding but the producer is, then the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recently-completed segment of this proceeding for the producer of the merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other producers or exporters will continue to be 13.43 percent, the all-others rate established in the less-than-fair-value investigation. 9 These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

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

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

We are issuing and publishing this notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.221(b)(5).

On January 6, 2023, Commerce published the Preliminary Results of this review in the Federal Register . 1 For details regarding the events that occurred since the Preliminary Results, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum. 2 Commerce conducted this administrative review in accordance with section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).

The merchandise covered by the Order is crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, and modules, laminates, and panels, consisting of crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells, whether or not partially or fully assembled into other products, including, but not limited to, modules, laminates, panels and building integrated materials. 4 Merchandise covered by this order is currently classified under subheadings 8501.71.0000, 8501.72.1000, 8501.72.2000, 8501.72.3000, 8501.72.9000, 8501.80.1000, 8501.80.2000, 8501.80.3000, 8501.80.9000, 8507.20.8010, 8507.20.8031, 8507.20.8041, 8507.20.8061, 8507.20.8091, 8541.42.0010, and 8541.43.0010 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). 5 Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, our written description of the scope of the Order is dispositive.

We addressed all issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs filed in this administrative review in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues raised in parties' briefs is included in the appendix to this notice. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov. In addition, the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at https://access.trade.gov/public/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx.

Based on our analysis of the comments received, and for the reasons explained in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, we made certain changes to the Preliminary Results. Specifically, we changed (1) the calculations of the weighted-average dumping margins for Chint Solar  6 and Shenzhen Glory Industries Co., Ltd. (Shenzhen Glory) (the mandatory respondents), including changing certain surrogate values used in those calculations; (2) granted Shenzhen Sungold Solar Co., Ltd. a separate rate; and (3) updated the dumping margin assigned to the non-individually examined companies that demonstrated their eligibility for a separate rate.

In the Preliminary Results, Commerce determined that nine companies/company groupings did not export or sell subject merchandise, nor did they have knowledge that their subject merchandise was entered into the United States during the POR. 7 No parties commented on Commerce's preliminary no shipments determination. For these final results of review, we have continued to determine that these nine companies/company groupings  8 did not export or sell subject merchandise, nor did they have knowledge that their subject merchandise was entered into the United States, during the POR.

We have continued to grant the companies listed in the table in the “Final Results of Review” section below, a separate rate because they demonstrated that they are entitled to separate rate status. We have continued to find that the companies listed in Appendix II have not demonstrated their entitlement to a separate rate because they did not file a separate rate application or certification. Consequently, we are treating the companies listed in Appendix II as part of the China-wide entity. Because no party requested a review of the China-wide entity, the entity is not under review and the entity's rate ( i.e., 238.95 percent  9 ) is not subject to change. 10

The statute and Commerce's regulations do not address what dumping margin to apply to respondents not selected for individual examination when Commerce limits its examination in an administrative review pursuant to section 777A(c)(2) of the Act. Generally, Commerce looks to section 735(c)(5) of the Act, which provides instructions for calculating the all-others rate in an investigation, for guidance when calculating the dumping margin for non-selected respondents that are not individually examined in an administrative review. Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act provides that the all-others rate should be calculated by averaging the weighted-average dumping margins calculated for individually-examined respondents, excluding dumping margins that are zero, de minimis, or based entirely on facts available. Because we calculated a dumping margin of zero or de minimis for Shenzhen Glory, and a dumping margin that is not zero, de minimis, or based entirely on facts available for Chint Solar, we assigned the separate rate recipients that we did not individually examine a dumping margin equal to Chint Solar's dumping margin consistent with Commerce's practice and section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act.

We are assigning the following dumping margin to the firms listed below for the period December 1, 2020, through November 30, 2021:1.

Based on a timely request for review, and in accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i), Commerce initiated this administrative review of the antidumping duty order on chlorinated isos from Spain covering three companies, Ercros S.A. (Ercros), Industrias Quimicas Tamar S.L. (Industrias Quimicas Tamar), and Electroquimic de Hernani, S.A. (EHER). 1 On September 16, 2022, we limited the number of respondents for individual examination in this administrative review to Ercros. 2 We did not select Industrias Quimicas Tamar or EHER for individual examination, and these companies remain subject to this administrative review. For a complete description of the events that followed the initiation of this review, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 3 On February 16, 2023, we extended the deadline for these preliminary results until no later than June 30, 2023. 4

The products covered by the Order are chlorinated isos, which are derivatives of cyanuric acid, described as chlorinated s-triazine triones. Chlorinated isos are currently classifiable under subheadings 2933.69.6015, 2933.69.6021, 2933.69.6050, 3808.40.50, 3808.50.40 and 3808.94.5000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). The HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes only; the written product description of the scope of the Order is dispositive. For a full description of the scope of the order, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

Commerce is conducting this review in accordance with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Export price is calculated in accordance with section 772 of the Act. Normal value is calculated in accordance with section 773 of the Act.

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

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

As a result of our review, we preliminarily determine the following weighted-average dumping margins for the period June 1, 2021, through May 31, 2022:

Commerce intends to disclose the calculations used in our analysis to parties in this review within five days of the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register , in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). Interested parties are invited to comment on the preliminary results of this review. Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(ii), interested parties may submit case briefs not later than 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may be filed no later than seven days after the date for filing case briefs. 6 Parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this review are requested to submit with each brief: (1) a statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities. 7 Case and rebuttal briefs should be filed using ACCESS and must be served on interested parties. 8 Note that Commerce has temporarily modified certain of its requirements for serving documents containing business proprietary information, until further notice. 9

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), any interested party may request a hearing within 30 days of the publication of this notice in the Federal Register . If a hearing is requested, Commerce will notify interested parties of the hearing schedule. Interested parties who wish to request a hearing, or to participate if one is requested, must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, filed electronically via ACCESS within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. Requests should contain: (1) the party's name, address, and telephone number; (2) the number of participants; and (3) a list of the issues to be discussed. Issues raised in the hearing will be limited to those raised in the respective case briefs.

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

In accordance with Commerce's “automatic assessment” practice, for entries of subject merchandise that entered the United States during the POR that were produced by Ercros for which Ercros did not know that its merchandise was destined to the United States, Commerce will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the all-others rate, if there is no rate for the intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction. 11 The final results of this review shall be the basis for the assessment of antidumping duties on entries of subject merchandise covered by the final results of this review, where applicable.

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

The following deposit requirements will be effective for all shipments of chlorinated isos from Spain entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of the final results of this administrative review, as provided for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) the cash deposit rate for the companies under review will be the rate established in the final results of this review (except, if the rate is zero or de minimis, no cash deposit will be required); (2) for previously reviewed or investigated companies not listed above, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recent period; (3) if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a prior review, or the less-than-fair-value investigation, but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and (4) the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 24.83 percent, the all-others rate established in the investigation. 12 These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

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

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

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

On August 9, 2022, based on timely requests for review, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i), Commerce initiated an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on flanges from Spain. 1 This review covers eight producers and/or exporters of the subject merchandise: (1) Aleaciones De Metales Sinterizados S.A.; (2) Central Y Almacenes; (3) Farina Group Spain; (4) Friedrich Geldbach Gmbh; (5) Grupo Cunado; (6) Transglory S.A.; (7) Tubacero, S.L.; and (8) ULMA Forja, S.Coop (ULMA). 2 On September 23, 2022, we identified ULMA as the sole mandatory respondent in this review. 3 On February 22, 2023, we extended the deadline for the preliminary results by 120 days, until June 30, 2023. 4

For a complete description of the events that followed the initiation of this administrative review, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 5 A list of topics included in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is included as the appendix to this notice. The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at https://access.trade.gov/public/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx/.

The scope of the Order covers finished carbon steel flanges. Finished carbon steel flanges are currently classified under subheadings 7307.91.5010 and 7307.91.5050 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). They may also be entered under HTSUS subheadings 7307.91.5030 and 7307.91.5070. The HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes; the written description of the scope is dispositive. For a complete description of the scope of the Order, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

Commerce is conducting this review in accordance with section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Export price is calculated in accordance with section 772 of the Act. Normal value is calculated in accordance with section 773 of the Act. For a full description of the methodology underlying these preliminary results, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

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

We preliminarily determine that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist for the period June 1, 2021, through May 31, 2022:

As provided in section 782(i)(3) of the Act, Commerce intends to verify the information relied upon for its final results.

We intend to disclose the calculations performed for these preliminary results to the parties within five days after public announcement of the preliminary results in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). Interested parties may submit case briefs no later than seven days after the date on which the verification report is issued, unless Commerce alters the time limit. Rebuttal briefs may be filed no later than seven days after case briefs are due and may respond only to arguments raised in the case briefs. 7 Parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this proceeding are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) a statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities. 8 Note that Commerce has temporarily modified certain of its requirements for serving documents containing business proprietary information, until further notice. 9

Section 4(c)(2)(A) of the ESA requires that we conduct a review of listed species at least once every 5 years. The regulations in 50 CFR 424.21 require that we publish a notice in the Federal Register announcing species currently under active review. On the basis of such reviews, under section 4(c)(2)(B) of the ESA we determine whether a listed species should be delisted or reclassified from endangered to threatened or from threatened to endangered. As described by the regulations in 50 CFR 424.11(e), the Secretary shall delist a species if the Secretary finds that, after conducting a status review based on the best scientific and commercial data available: (1) The species is extinct; (2) the species does not meet the definition of an endangered species or a threatened species; or (3) the listed entity does not meet the statutory definition of a species. Any change in Federal classification would require a separate rulemaking process.

The white abalone was listed as endangered under the ESA on May 29, 2001 (66 FR 29046), and the black abalone was listed as endangered under the ESA on January 14, 2009 (74 FR 1937). Background information on white abalone is available on the NMFS website at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/species/white-abalone. Background information on black abalone is available on the NMFS website at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/species/black-abalone.

Section 4(a)(1) of the ESA requires that we determine whether a species is endangered or threatened based on one or more of the five following factors: (1) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range; (2) overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes; (3) disease or predation; (4) the inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or (5) other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence. Section 4(b) also requires that our determination be made on the basis of the best scientific and commercial data available after conducting a review of the status of the species and after taking into account those efforts, if any, being made by any State or foreign nation, to protect such species.

To ensure that the 5-year reviews are complete and based on the best scientific and commercial data available, we are soliciting new information from the public, governmental agencies, Tribes, the scientific community, industry, environmental entities, and any other interested parties concerning the status of white abalone and/or black abalone. Categories of requested information include: (1) species biology including, but not limited to, population trends, distribution, abundance, demographics, and genetics; (2) habitat conditions including, but not limited to, amount, distribution, and important features for conservation; (3) status and trends of threats to the species and its habitats; (4) conservation measures that have been implemented that benefit the species, including monitoring data demonstrating effectiveness of such measures; (5) need for additional conservation measures; and (6) other new information, data, or corrections including, but not limited to, taxonomic or nomenclatural changes and improved analytical methods for evaluating extinction risk.

If you wish to provide information for the 5-year reviews, you may submit your information and materials electronically (see ADDRESSES section). We request that all information be accompanied by supporting documentation such as maps, bibliographic references, or reprints of pertinent publications. We also would appreciate the submitter's name, address, and any association, institution, or business that the person represents; however, we will also accept anonymous submissions.

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.

The revised Handbook is intended to assist NOAA, including its regional and field staff, in conducting effective government-to-government consultations and fulfill NOAA's obligations under E.O. 13175 and associated Presidential memorandums, the Department Administrative Order 218-8 on Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, and the Department of Commerce Tribal Consultation and Coordination Policy. The IK guidance will facilitate inclusion of IK into the line offices' environmental science, policy and decision making process, and build partnerships with Indigenous peoples.

On January 26, 2021, the White House issued a Presidential Memorandum on Tribal Consultation and Strengthening Nation-to-Nation Relationships. The Memorandum requires the Secretary of Commerce to submit to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), a detailed plan of actions the agency will take to implement the policies and directives of E.O. 13175 (2000) and the Presidential Memorandum on Tribal Consultation issued in November 2009.

NOAA's mission is to understand and predict changes in climate, weather, oceans, and coasts, to share that knowledge and information with others, and to conserve and manage coastal and marine ecosystems and resources. NOAA has established policies and guidance to provide for meaningful and timely input from federally recognized Indian tribes into NOAA's decision-making process on policy matters that have tribal implications. In addition, NOAA offers its employees training and other guidance to support a consistent, effective, and proactive approach to conducting government-to-government consultations with federally recognized Indian tribes under E.O. 13175, the Department of Commerce (DOC) Department Administrative Order 218-8 Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments (2014), and the DOC Tribal Consultation and Coordination Policy (78 FR 33331, June 4, 2013).

While much of NOAA's existing policy and guidance has been developed in consultation with federally recognized Indian tribes, NOAA recognized that these documents could benefit from a review and update. As part of its effort to implement the January 26, 2021 Presidential Memorandum, NOAA requested comments from Tribal Nations, tribal officials, members of the public, and other interested parties to help identify appropriate updates or revisions to the following existing NOAA policies and guidance documents, which facilitate NOAA's implementation of E.O. 13175: (1) Tribal Consultation Handbook titled NOAA Procedures for Government-to-Government Consultation With Federally Recognized Indian Tribes and Alaska Native Corporations (2013); (2) NOAA Administrative Order 218-8 titled Policy on Government-to-Government Consultation with Federally Recognized Indian Tribes and Alaska Native Corporations (Reaffirmed in 2018); and (3) a traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) guidance currently titled NOAA Fisheries and National Ocean Service Guidance and Best Practices for Engaging and Incorporating Traditional Ecological Knowledge in Decision-Making (2019). NOAA proposed revisions to its Tribal Consultation Handbook reflect lessons learned and improved practices to better facilitate meaningful and effective tribal consultations. NOAA also proposed minor revisions to Administrative Order 218-8 to reflect necessary updates since its issuance in 2014. We also sought comments on the existing TEK Guidance, which had not been previously made available for public comment. Though the TEK Guidance was originally only implemented by NOAA Fisheries and the National Ocean Service, NOAA is now extending the applicability of the TEK Guidance to all NOAA Offices and renaming it the IK guidance. Based on written and oral comments received, NOAA revised its Tribal Consultation Handbook, Administrative Order, and IK guidance. All three documents can be found on the NOAA website https://www.noaa.gov/legislative-and-intergovernmental-affairs/noaa-tribal-resources-updates.

NOAA's revised Handbook and NAO also reflect the recent Presidential Memorandum on Uniform Standards for Tribal Consultation (November 30, 2022), which among things, commits agencies to conducting government-to-government consultation in a manner that recognizes and respects Tribal self-government and sovereignty; identifies and considers Tribal treaty rights, reserved rights, and other rights; respects and elevates IK, including cultural norms and practices relevant to such consultations; and meets the responsibilities that arise from the unique legal relationship between the Federal Government and Tribal governments.

NOAA is also releasing guidance on the recognition and application of IK to improve decision making for our partners and within NOAA. Through the IK guidance, NOAA encourages the inclusion of IK, as appropriate and to the extent practicable and permitted by law, in the line offices' environmental science, policy and decision making process, to better facilitate consultations, fulfill Federal trust responsibilities, respect treaty rights, understand environmental justice concerns as directed by E.O. 12898, inform agency decision making, and to build partnerships with indigenous peoples.

The consultation policy and procedures are intended only for NOAA internal management purposes and does not create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable against the United States, its agencies, entities, or instrumentalities, its officers or employees, or any other person.

On November 24, 2021, NOAA published a notice and request for information on NOAA's Tribal consultation draft policy and procedures in the Federal Register (86 FR 67036). In response, NOAA received 18 written comments on the revised Tribal Consultation Handbook and the updated IK guidance. A summary of comments received and NOAA's responses to those comments are presented below.

Comments received, and responses thereto, from two national consultation webinars held on January 10, 2022, and January 11, 2022, are also included.

Comment 1: The definition of consultation should include “with a goal of reaching consensus.”

Response: NOAA's Handbook is designed to ensure that NOAA implements a consistent and accountable process for meaningful and timely consultation on policies with tribal implications. The Handbook notes the Agency's commitment to working with the federally recognized Indian tribe(s) to reach agreement during the consultation process on a path forward or course of action to the extent practicable. NOAA has determined, however, that in some circumstances, it may not be possible to reach consensus on actions subject to consultation. In such circumstances, and as consistent with the Handbook, NOAA will provide the consulted tribe(s) with notice of the course of action adopted by the Agency and the rationale for that decision. This approach is consistent with NOAA's long-standing implementation of E.O. 13175 and the general approach to government-to-government consultation across the Federal Government. See, e.g., Presidential Memorandum on Uniform Standards for Tribal Consultation (November 30, 2022).

Comment 2: Delete “Consultation is not necessarily a format for consensus decision-making” as it falls short of trust obligations.

Response: Partially accepted. As discussed in NOAA's Handbook, consultation supports NOAA's efforts to fulfill its trust responsibility to Indian tribes. There may, however, be situations where reaching consensus on policies that have tribal implications is not possible as discussed in the response to Comment 1 above. In such situations, NOAA will comply with the policies described in the Handbook to provide an explanation as to why NOAA will not or cannot address the concern(s) raised by the tribe.

Comment 3: Explicitly state in policies and procedures that meaningful consultation's goal should always be obtaining tribal informed consent when a project would impact tribal land or resources on or off a reservation.

Response: NOAA's Handbook describes the Agency's commitment to working with the federally recognized Indian tribe(s) to reach agreement during the consultation process on a path forward or course of action to the extent practicable.

Comment 4: The current language in the Handbook indicates that the goal of consultation is simply the exchange of information—essentially that the goal is the process itself. We recommend that NOAA update this section to align more closely with the Makah Ocean Policy: “The goal of early engagement and formal consultation is to enhance governing and management efficiencies by avoiding, minimizing, or mitigating adverse impacts a federal, state, or local decision may have on [Tribal] treaty rights, resources, or interests. The ultimate goal is to engage [Tribal] interests at the earliest development of scoping or planning activities by identifying possible solutions that avoid any adverse impact to the [delete tribe name] Tribe's treaty rights, resources, or governing interests.” The goal of consultation should go beyond the process itself and include the protection of treaty rights, resources, and interests.

Response: Accepted and modified slightly to include all tribes and focus on Federal rule making. The following was added to the Handbook “The goal of early engagement and formal consultation is to enhance governing and management efficiencies by avoiding, minimizing, or mitigating adverse impacts a federal decision may have on tribal treaty rights, resources, or interests. The ultimate goal is to engage tribal interests at the earliest stage of scoping or planning activities by identifying possible solutions that avoid adverse impacts to the tribe's treaty rights, resources, or governing interests.”

Comment 5: Ensure decisions are not made when consultation occurs.

Response: Accepted. Text added to pages 6-7 of the Handbook: “Regardless of whether it is an informal engagement or a consultation, such discussions should happen prior to a decision being made.” In addition, on page 12 the Handbook states “it should always occur at the earliest time practicable, well before a final policy or regulatory decision with tribal implications is made.”

Comment 6: Training should also include training from tribes. In addition, strike “as financial resources allow” as it is critically important that all employees of Federal departments and agencies receive comprehensive training on working with and communicating effectively with Tribal Nations. Federal actions impact Tribal Nations and our citizens.

Response: NOAA agrees that effective employee training is an important component of successful implementation of the Handbook and meeting NOAA's Tribal Trust Responsibilities. NOAA has established a team of Tribal Liaisons within each Line Office to help facilitate employee training. In addition, online and regional trainings are available to staff. However, there are currently no specific funds appropriated for tribal consultation training in NOAA's budget. Therefore, we have retained “as financial resources allow”.

Comment 7: NOAA personnel in the role of liaison need clear guidance that their role is facilitation of communication. The position of liaison should have guidance that articulates the breadth of the role: “Information exchange” to “Request to initiate Government-to-Government.”

Response: The Position Description for the Senior NOAA Tribal Liaison describes the responsibilities of this position, including communications responsibilities. NOAA does not agree this information is necessary to include in the Consultation Handbook.

Comment 8: Edit sentence as follows “If a NOAA line office or staff office deems necessary, or by request from a Tribal government, they also may consider establishing a tribal liaison within a program or region.”

Response: Accepted. Added “or by request from a Tribal government. . . .” See Handbook Section IV.D.

Comment 9: NOAA line offices, staff offices, and Regional Teams should designate more than one staff person in each department as a tribal liaison. These liaison positions should be separate positions from existing staff positions. Communicating, coordinating, and consulting with tribes in culturally appropriate and meaningful ways is year-round, full time work. Moreover, it is not possible for one regional tribal liaison to adequately engage with all the tribes in their region; for instance, consider that the NOAA Alaska Region has 229 federally recognized Indian Tribes with whom NOAA is directed to consult.

Response: NOAA line offices, staff offices, and Regional Teams have the ability to designate a Tribal Liaison and other staff to support consultation efforts where there is a need and funding is available.

Comment 10: Include involvement of Tribes in the hiring process for Tribal Liaisons wherever possible to ensure that they have the appropriate experience and relationships. Given the important role of Headquarters and Regional Tribal Liaisons in consultation processes, engaging tribes in selecting and building relationships with these important staff people will help facilitate effective consultation.

Response: No changes. Comments regarding Federal hiring processes are beyond the scope of this Handbook.

Comment 11: NOAA's consultation policy should require an office of tribal liaison be created. NOAA should have high level staff with expertise in Indian law and policy. NOAA's institutional structure should have Indian law and policy built into it.

Response: NOAA has a number of senior positions with responsibility for tribal matters. These include a Senior Advisor to the Under Secretary on Fisheries and Tribal Engagement, a Senior NOAA Tribal Liaison, and each line office and relevant staff office has a Headquarters Tribal Liaison which forms the NOAA Headquarters Tribal Team. The NOAA Office of the General Counsel also maintains a Tribal Team of Indian law practitioners. In addition, many line offices have additional Tribal Liaisons. For example, every NOAA Fisheries Science Center and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Regional Offices and Science Centers have a Tribal Liaison, one of which is a full time position ( i.e., the NMFS West Coast Tribal Liaison).

Comment 12: We recommend that Tribal Liaison positions be independent positions ( i.e., not duties assigned to staff already fulfilling other duties, such as fishery analysts) that are filled by highly-qualified individuals with the specific training, expertise and skillsets related to the tasks such a position is assigned to. Tribes and Tribal organizations in Alaska have requested positions like these be established at the NMFS Alaska Region and at Alaska Fisheries Science Center (AFSC) for many years.

Response: As noted in response to Comment 11, NOAA employs a number of staff with a specific focus on the Agency's work with tribes and tribal organizations. These staff include a Senior Advisor to the Under Secretary on Fisheries and Tribal Engagement, a NOAA Senior Tribal Liaison, and a full time NMFS West Coast Tribal Liaison.

Comment 13: Provide more information on Tribal Tracker.

Response: The Tribal Tracker is an internal tracking system that allows NOAA to collect summary information on consultations conducted by the Agency. This system is used, in part, to support NOAA's tribal engagement reporting obligations.

Comment 14: Strengthen the statement “NOAA should provide available information to the tribes in advance of the consultation to allow the tribes to prepare: by changing it to “NOAA must provide all necessary and available information.”

Response: Accepted. Edit made: “In order to have a meaningful consultation, NOAA will provide available information to the tribes in advance of the consultation to allow the tribes to prepare. NOAA will work with tribes in an effort to ensure that the information is provided to tribes in a format that tribes can access and use.” See Handbook Section V.A. In addition, NOAA added language that NOAA will work with tribes to ensure that the information is provided to tribes in a format that tribes can access and use. NOAA has received comments previously that there are some constraints that might limit the ability to access and use information, such as lack of internet access or sufficient bandwidth to access or download materials, such as lengthy PDFs. In light of these constraints, NOAA will endeavor to work with tribes to make sure tribes can access and use the materials. For example, in some cases, NOAA may mail materials in advance.

Comment 15: NOAA must make the utmost effort to protect TEK and other sensitive cultural information from public disclosure and ensure Tribal Nations have the ability to control what is shared by the Agency, including through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests.

Response: While information shared between NOAA and a tribe may be beneficial for the consultation process, it is generally not protected from disclosure under FOIA, especially if this information is used in the decision-making process and becomes part of the administrative record. As such, the Handbook notes the importance of advance notification to tribes of the limited capacity of NOAA to protect the confidentiality of information provided by the tribe consistent with the requirements of FOIA or litigation.

Comment 16: Language should be added to the FOIA section to protect information shared by tribal religious and cultural leaders as well as tribal government officials such as Tribal Historic Preservation Officers and environmental, cultural, and natural resource managers.

Response: While information shared between NOAA and a tribe may be beneficial for the consultation process, it is generally not protected from disclosure under FOIA, especially if this information is used in the decision-making process and becomes part of the administrative record. As such, the Handbook notes the importance of advance notification to tribes of the limited capacity of NOAA to protect the confidentiality of information provided by the tribe consistent with the requirements of FOIA or litigation. The applicable requirements for disclosure of information subject to FOIA are not modified by the internal procedures identified in this Handbook. While NOAA does make efforts to safeguard sensitive information submitted by tribes, it must comply with applicable Federal information disclosure requirements.

Comment 17: Make this sentence stronger “NOAA will make reasonable efforts to provide adequate information about its actions and policies at the earliest practical time,” by changing it to “NOAA will provide adequate information about its actions and policies at the earliest practical time in advance of consultation to provide the tribe adequate time to review and reflect on it.”

Response: Accepted in part. Edit made: NOAA will provide available information about its actions and policies at the earliest practical time. See Handbook Section V.A.

Comment 18: NOAA recommends that line offices and regions establish consultation protocols with tribal governments consistent with this Handbook as necessary. Consultation protocols should not just be made when NOAA deems necessary.

Response: No changes made. The Handbook provides that “it may be useful and expeditious for those tribes and NOAA offices to develop protocols reflecting their mutually preferred timeline for and means of communication and exchange of information” and authorizes such protocols consistent with the Handbook.

Comment 19: The Federal Government must also recognize that it has become the norm in recent years that tribes and other community organizations are faced with having to engage with multiple agencies regarding multiple major projects almost continuously. NOAA must acknowledge, and actively work to reduce, this extraordinary burden on our people.

Response: The Handbook acknowledges this issue and includes a new Section V.C., which directs staff to coordinate and cooperate with interested Federal agencies to ensure the most efficient and expeditious manner of consultation with tribes on a particular matter.

Comment 20: Our experience and observations, consultations are usually scheduled for certain dates and times that prioritize the needs of the Federal regulatory process over those of Native communities, and those appointments rarely consider or appreciate the often competing, conflicting, and overriding obligations associated with sustaining our communities.

Response: Accepted. Added the following sentence “Timelines should reflect that tribal members often have competing, conflicting and overriding obligations associated with sustaining tribal communities.” See Handbook Section VI.D.

Comment 21: Document is missing the direct recognition of the unique role, and often multiple roles, that tribal officials and other local leaders play in their communities, and how that reality can significantly impact engagement with Federal agencies and others. It is critical to understand that often for these leaders, and particularly for Alaskan Tribal leaders, their leadership activities are not their primary employment. Beyond that employment, virtually all of them also contribute significant time and energy to the demands inherent to a subsistence lifestyle.

Response: Accepted. Added the following sentence: “Timelines should reflect that tribal members often have competing, conflicting and overriding obligations associated with sustaining tribal communities.” See Handbook Section VI.D.

Comment 22: Better recognize the difference and mandates of Treaty Tribes in documents including case law.

Response: As noted above, NOAA has added additional content to explain the need to account for tribal treaty rights, reserved rights, and similar rights when considering actions that may have tribal implications. See Handbook Section VI.A. Discussion has also been added to note the importance of NOAA staff becoming familiar with relevant treaties and other sources of reserved and similar rights. The new discussion also includes a resource for assisting with the identification of relevant treaties. See Handbook Section VI.A.

Comment 23: We recommend that NOAA construe the consultation mandate broadly. If NOAA is unsure whether an action may have tribal implications, the appropriate approach would be for NOAA to communicate with the tribe and determine, based on an informed exchange of views with the tribe, whether the action affects the tribe.

Response: The Handbook provides that an invitation to consult on a proposed policy should be sent to the appropriate representative of the governing body of the tribe for NOAA actions “that may have tribal implications.” See Handbook at Section VII.A. NOAA believes this directive provides adequate direction for NOAA staff to invite consultation on actions for which there may be tribal implications.

Comment 24: In the list of examples of policies where consultation with tribes is appropriate, NOAA should amend the first bullet point to include the text: “A policy or action that will have effects within or near a reservation or Alaska Native Village.”

Response: Accepted in part. However, this statement should be broader than AK Natives. The third bullet was changed to read “[a] policy or action affecting a tribal entity, or facility, land, or resources owned or operated by a tribal government, or held in trust for a federally recognized tribe.” See Handbook Section VII.A.

Comment 25: Move this sentence “While books and other documents may serve as useful secondary references for understanding the political and cultural history of an indigenous people, agency staff should remember that the tribal members themselves are the best source of knowledge about their particular tribe” to the beginning of the consultation section and emphasize the importance of reaching out to a tribe for this information first.

Response: Accepted. Text moved to the beginning of the consultation section.

Comment 26: Make clear that consultation should be early and often.

Response: The Handbook states that consultation “should always occur at the earliest time practicable, well before a final policy or regulatory decision with tribal implications is made.” See Handbook Section VII.

Comment 27: Not enough detail on the consultation process to ensure it is not a “check the box” effort. For example the Handbook does not provide guidance or elaboration on how NOAA offices should address and incorporate the substantive elements of consultation in order to inform Federal policy and regulatory development. Instead, the Handbook identifies a range of factors that can either enhance or inhibit effective consultation, and provides detailed guidance on the procedural elements of consultation.

Response: The Handbook is a process document designed to provide—per E.O. 13175—an accountable process to ensure meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications. The Handbook is designed to address procedural aspects of this obligation and not necessarily the substantive points suggested by the commenter.

Comment 28: There may be two phases in a consultation: Tribal Consultation and Tribal G2G Consultation. Tribal Consultation is viewed as a process of sharing information, coordination, dialogue, and considering the tribal viewpoint. This occurs before an agency commits to a path of action and provides for a tribe to identify if an action will affect tribal rights, lands, governance, resources, or interests. Often the completion of a Tribal Consultation can ensure that should a Tribal G2G Consultation between decision makers be necessary, it is meaningful and productive. We encourage NOAA to review: “Guidance and Responsibilities for Effective Tribal Consultation, Communication, and Engagement”: A guide for Agencies Working with West Coast Tribes on Ocean & Coastal Issues developed by members of the West Coast Tribal Caucus of the West Coast Ocean Alliance.

Response: In the Handbook we have distinguished the first phase as “engagement” and the second and formal phase as “consultation”.

Comment 29: Timeline: Often tribal decisions are two and sometimes three tiered in structure, this allows for our leadership access to available expertise both within staff and within its community. To provide for multiple discussions could easily occupy a 90 days or more timeline.

Response: Agree. NOAA believes the Handbook addresses this concern. The Handbook provides that NOAA staff should be knowledgeable and respectful of the decision-making practices of the tribe. This may require a departure from highly-structured agendas and timeframes. It further provides that consultation should be initiated at the earliest practicable time and that an explanation of any time constraints known to the Agency, such as statutory deadlines, should be disclosed at the initiation of the consultation. See Handbook at Section VII.

Comment 30: Should include an appeals process if NOAA determines that a formal consultation is not needed due to an action not having tribal implications.

Response: Section VI.H. added to address dispute resolution procedures.

Comment 31: If the scope changes, consultation is required. “Although consultation need not occur at every step of the Federal decision-making process, it should always occur at the earliest time practicable, well before a final policy or regulatory decision with tribal implications is made.”

Response: The following sentence was added: “If the scope of action changes, that change should be addressed as part of the ongoing consultation.” See Handbook Section VII.A.

Comment 32: Revise bullet in Section VII.A., to read: “A policy or action affecting a facility or entity land or resources owned or operated by a tribal government” to account for those areas that may affect lands that are tribal lands.

Response: Accepted. Added “land or resources” to the bullet.

Comment 33: Under “[e]xamples of policies where consultation with tribes is appropriate include but are not limited to”, there should be an inclusion of “a policy or action that impacts Treaty areas” under the bullet points listed.

Response: Accepted. A new paragraph was added to this section on treaty rights.

Comment 34: Page 14, Section B mentions instances and factors NOAA takes into consideration when responding to a request for consultation. NOAA should amend the second sentence to include “change in tribal government” as a factor to be considered.

Response: Accepted. Added “change in tribal government” to the second sentence. See Section VII.B.

Comment 35: We request that NOAA clarify what circumstances would lead NOAA to make the determination to decline to consult.

Response: Accepted in part. Added the following sentence “NOAA may only decline a consultation if it is determined that an issue of interest does not have tribal implications.” Given the unique aspects of each determination, providing an exhaustive list in the Handbook is not feasible.

Comment 36: NOAA should invite inter-tribal bodies to consultation along with the tribes they represent. Excluding tribal bodies only hinders NOAA's attempts to meaningfully include tribal participation and promote environmental justice in its work, as directed by Executive Order 13175.

Response: Information regarding the permissible role of tribal organizations in consultations can be found on page 14 at Section VII.E., of the Handbook. NOAA notes that, where expressly authorized by a tribe, such an organization may represent or conduct consultation on behalf of an authorizing tribe.

Comment 37: If a Tribe does not respond to an initiation of Tribal Consultation within the requested time frame, NOAA should consider reaching out to the tribe at least once more and extending the response time period. It is likely that the tribe has many pressing matters to attend to within their community and/or is participating in subsistence fishing, hunting, and gathering seasons. This underscores the need for NOAA to reach out to tribes regularly and well before any deadlines to include tribal input in policy decisions.

Response: Accepted. The following sentence was added “[i]t may be that the tribe has pressing matters to attend to within their community and/or is participating in subsistence fishing, hunting, and gathering seasons. This underscores the importance for NOAA to reach out to tribes regularly and well before any deadlines to include tribal input in policy decisions.”

Comment 38: Include a vetting process for Tribal Organizations that includes reaching out to affective tribes.

Response: The Handbook includes the following statement “If a tribe wants to authorize a tribal organization to represent it or conduct consultation on its behalf, NOAA should confirm that in writing with the appropriate tribal officials and with the tribal organization. NOAA should also confirm in writing the scope of that representation ( e.g., which tribes are represented by the tribal organization) and the role that the tribal organization will fulfill during the consultation process.” See Handbook Section VII.E.

Comment 39: This requirement should be mandatory “if NOAA believes its action will have substantial direct effects on that tribe, NOAA staff should consider following the written invitation with a phone call, site visit, and/or an email/fax (assuming those forms of communication are available to the tribal points of contact).”

Response: Accepted. Replaced “should consider” with “will”.

Comment 40: Ensure adequate funding for consultations ( e.g., travel for tribes).

Response: NOAA does not have a standing appropriation available for tribal consultations. Where appropriate, and consistent with federal law, individual NOAA program offices may consider requests for funding activities associated with consultations.

Comment 41: “If it becomes clear that NOAA and the tribe have divergent views about the issues and topics appropriate for the consultation, effort should be made by both parties to agree upon a single statement of the issues. If the parties cannot reach an agreement, the record of the consultation should reflect the different view” and reiterate we should aim for consensus and differing views should be last resort.

Response: Agree. As previously noted, the NOAA 13175 Handbook describes the Agency's commitment to working with the federally recognized Indian tribe(s) to reach agreement during the consultation process on a path forward or course of action to the extent practicable and consistent with NOAA's legal requirements. There may, however, be situations where reaching consensus on policies that have tribal implications is not possible. In such situations, NOAA will comply with the policies described in the Handbook to provide an explanation as to why NOAA will not or cannot address the concern(s) raised by the tribe.

Comment 42: We strongly disagree that a tribe's choice of participants necessarily indicates how important the issues and consultation are to the tribe, as many other considerations (capacity, expertise, availability, etc. ) all may play into the decision as to who participates. If a tribe has decided to engage in Consultation on an issue, NOAA should consider the issue of utmost importance unless the tribe states otherwise.

Response: Accepted. Deleted: “will indicate how important the issues and consultation are to the tribe.”

Comment 43: True consultation should occur at a Leader-to-Leader level. Duly elected or appointed Tribal Leaders must be afforded the respect and opportunity to directly voice Tribal Nation concerns to those Federal officials with actual decision-making authority. In addition, the Federal Government must not delegate its consultation obligation to third party ( e.g., non-profit organizations, industries/corporations, hired consultants and contractors); the Federal Government must exercise appropriate oversight in ensuring tribal interests are not adversely impacted.

Response: Accepted in part. In response to this comment, NOAA updated Handbook Section VII.F.2., to provide that: “if the tribe designates its leader or members of the tribal council as representatives in the consultation, it is important that a NOAA official with decision-making authority participate in the consultation. The Handbook further provides that NOAA should “identify and prepare consultation participants who are able to fully address the concerns and issues articulated for discussion through government-to-government consultation.” Handbook at Section VII.F.2.

Comment 44: In the sentence that states NOAA “should acknowledge and discuss the limited capacity of NOAA to protect the confidentiality of information provided by the tribe consistent with the requirements of [FOIA] or litigation[,]” the use of the term “limited” should be struck from this section since it could be interpreted by NOAA staff that the Agency will not make the utmost effort to protect the confidentiality of sensitive Tribal government and cultural information. Upon removal of the term 'limited', this language should also be referenced under Section IV(A).

Response: Accepted. Sentence revised to: “NOAA should, however, in advance notify tribes of the information disclosure requirements that may apply to information shared by tribes with the Federal Government (examples include FOIA and litigation discovery). Although NOAA will endeavor to comply with a tribe's request that information be kept confidential, there may be applicable Federal disclosure requirements that compel its release.”

Comment 45: Modify sentence to read “5) reach agreement with tribes on the method of recordkeeping and documentation of the consultation. . . .”

Response: Accepted. Added “and reach agreement on” to Handbook Section VII.F.5.

Comment 46: The draft consultation handbook provides one way of closing a consultation with a one-way-response letter that does not meet a trust responsibility. Edit to read “written notice from NOAA and consent from affected tribes or the absence of any tribal objections by a predetermined time.”

Response: NOAA agrees that transparency is an important aspect of government-to-government consultation. In response to this comment, NOAA added the following sentence Handbook Section VII.G.: “As a best practice, NOAA should share a draft of the closing record for review and comment with the tribe before it is finalized.”

Comment 47: Add “6) Prior to beginning consultation inform the Tribe of NOAA's obligations under FOIA.”

Response: Accepted. Added the following: “NOAA and tribes should not create or share recorded information, such as summaries, transcripts or recordings, without first discussing the government's obligations under applicable law, including the Federal Records Act, FOIA and the Privacy Act, as well as in response to litigation obligations or as required by court order. This discussion should occur prior to beginning consultation.”

Comment 48: NOAA agencies do not abide by the close out guidance which is disrespectful to the tribe.

Response: NOAA appreciates the comment. The Handbook Section VII.G., describes the process for closing out government-to-government consultations. It states that government-to-government consultation is closed through a formal, written communication from the lead NOAA official to the most senior tribal official.

Comment 49: This title should be amended to state: “Completing and recording the government-to-government consultation.” Consultation process should include a follow-up phase. Consultation is an on-going process, and “closing” carries a connotation that prompts the consultation process to come to an end once formal, written communication has recounted the agreed-upon issues. Follow-up and follow-through are key components for a healthy government-to-government relationship. Follow-up and follow-though will also provide validation for the record that the consultation was engaging and meaningful.

Response: Accepted. NOAA changed the title of Section VII.G., to include the term “completing.”

Comment 50: Recognize the unique status of Native land tenure in Alaska and the value of the unique and diverse systems of Native governance in Alaska.

Response: Accepted in part. NOAA included additional language requested concerning the unique system of Native governance and Native land tenure in Alaska. The following paragraph was added to the Handbook Section: There is a unique system of Native governance in Alaska, and a variety of entities represent the interests of Alaska Native communities, including Alaska Tribes and governments, Alaska Native corporations, Alaska Native non-profits, and Alaska Native organizations. The purpose and structure of some of these entities is dictated in part by Federal law, such as the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) and the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). Moreover, the status of land ownership in Alaska is similarly defined in part by Federal law, including ANCSA. Pursuant to ANCSA, Alaska native corporations hold title to land in Alaska; as such, ANCSA lands are not held in trust by the United States and do not qualify as Indian Country. There is one reservation located in Alaska, the Annette Islands Reserve of the Metlakatla Indian Community. However, the lands and reservation defined under Federal law may not represent the traditional homelands of Alaska Native tribes.

In response to this comment, NOAA added clarification to the following existing sentence: “NOAA recognizes the distinct and individual cultural traditions and values of Alaska native peoples and their representative tribal governments” Handbook Section IV.B. (Emphasis added). Commenter requested that NOAA include additional information about ANCSA. We added an explanation of how ANCSA altered land ownership in Alaska, with corporations holding land, and we added a reference to the statute and a website with more information about ANCSA; however, additional details about ANSCA are beyond the scope of this Handbook. Handbook Section IX.D.

Comment 51: Tribal Consultation should not occur after a Fishery Management Council has taken Action. Tribes should inform recommendations. Previsions in the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA) do not supersede tribal trust responsibilities.

Response: Accepted. Handbook Section IX.F., was revised to include: “NOAA and the tribes should continue to work together to develop specific, proactive, and effective processes and procedures to better integrate the outcomes from tribal consultation between NOAA Fisheries and tribes with the appropriate Council process(es), with the goal that consultation outcomes would be shared with the appropriate Council before the Council takes action. Consultation should always occur at the earliest time practicable, well before a final policy or regulatory decision with tribal implications is made.”

Comment 52: Agencies have increasingly moved to the electronic distribution of documents. With internet connectivity often a challenge in small remote Alaskan communities, the digital transfer of documents, and particularly large complex documents featuring many maps, is impossible. Zoom and comparable virtual meetings are also often not an option given the extremely limited availability of broadband in rural Alaska. Accommodations must be made, and appropriate time must be allowed, for the distribution and review of all materials necessary for meaningful consultation to occur.

Response: NOAA appreciates the concerns expressed in this comment. There are a number of flexibilities in the Handbook for this reason. Specifically, the Handbook states “[t[he Department and operating units' consultation processes may include one or more of the following: meetings, letters, conference calls, webinars, on-site visits, or participation in regional and national events.” In addition, NOAA added language that NOAA will work with tribes to ensure that the information is provided to tribes in a format that tribes can access and use. As this comment reflects, there are some constraints that might limit the ability to access and use information, such as lack of internet access or sufficient internet bandwidth to access or download materials, such as lengthy PDFs.

In light of these constraints, NOAA will endeavor to work with tribes to make sure tribes can access and use the materials. For example, in some cases, NOAA may mail materials in advance. In response to this comment, NOAA made the following edits to the Handbook at Section V.A.: In order to have a meaningful consultation, NOAA will provide available information to the tribes in advance of the consultation to allow the tribes to prepare. NOAA will work with tribes in an effort to ensure that the information is provided to tribes in a format that tribes can access and use.

Comment 53: Add The United Nations Declaration on Rights of Indigenous Peoples to Appendix to emphasize consent in consultation.

Response: This is outside the scope of NOAA's consultation procedures. As noted in the “Announcement of U.S. Support for the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples,” the United States recognizes the significance of the Declaration's provisions on free, prior and informed consent, which the United States “understands to call for a process of meaningful consultation with tribal leaders, but not necessarily the agreement of those leaders, before the actions addressed in those consultations are taken.” NOAA's 13175 Handbook reflects this view, and as such, the Agency does not believe inclusion of the Declaration as an appendix to the Handbook is necessary or appropriate.

Comment 54: NOAA Fisheries and National Ocean Service (NOS) are obligated, among other things, to follow Federal statutes regarding tribal resources, lands, and waters. This includes the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) of 1980; specifically, NOAA must adhere to Title VIII of ANILCA, which designates that subsistence fish, wildlife, and other resources used by Alaska Natives and non-Natives must be federally protected and prioritized when experiencing a conservation threat. The subsistence uses of these resources are prioritized during conservation closures and shortages means NOAA Fisheries and NOS management bodies must prioritize Alaska Native and non-Native subsistence users before commercial interests when multi-use fisheries are in decline, such as Western Alaska salmon populations.

Response: No edits made. This comment is beyond the scope of the Handbook.

Comment 55: Add Religious Freedom Act.

Response: This comment is outside the scope of the Handbook. Although relevant to Tribal Rights, NOAA does not believe inclusion of the Religious Freedom Act as an appendix to the Handbook is necessary or appropriate.

Comment 56: Mass Dear Tribal letters are not ideal for consultations.

Response: Noted for implementation. NOAA values direct correspondence. Frequently in regional consultations individual letters are sent, however, for National Policies that may have tribal implications for hundreds of federally recognized Indian tribes, direct correspondence is not always feasible.

Comment 57: NOAA must recognize the authority of Tribal Nations to designate cultural resources and landscapes for protection similar to those guaranteed by treaty, statute, judicial decisions, and executive orders.

Response: This comment is outside the scope of the Handbook.

Comment 58: NOAA's consultation policy should explicitly affirm and differentiate treaty rights issues and the government-to-government process from the public and administrative process.

Response: NOAA has added additional language to the Handbook to highlight the need to account for tribal treaty rights, reserved rights, and similar rights when considering actions that may have tribal implications. See Handbook Section VI.A. In addition, the Handbook notes that “Consultation recognizes and distinguishes the views and policies of tribes from those of the general public and considers those views in the context of the responsibilities of federally recognized tribes to their people and tribal members.” Consultation Handbook Section VI.

Comment 59: Provide a redline of document in the future.

Response: Accepted. A redline version of the revisions included with the final version of the Handbook is available at: https://www.noaa.gov/legislative-and-intergovernmental-affairs/noaa-tribal-resources-updates.

Comment 60: Policy was not provided for review.

Response: The NOAA Policy on Government-to-Government Consultations with Federally Recognized Indian Tribes and Alaska Native Corporations is included as Appendix F to the Consultation Handbook.

Comment 61: This request should have been put in the Federal Register .

Response: The request was published in the Federal Register on November 24, 2021, at 86 FR 67036 and the comment period extended in a notice published on January 21, 2022, at 87 FR 3280.

Comment 62: Please capitalize Alaska Native throughout.

Response: Capitalization is based on Federal style guides. Including: https://www.archives.gov/files/federalregister/write/handbook/ddh.pdf.

Comment 63: It may be useful to add a section on threats ( e.g., plastics, dead zones, climate change) to the documents.

Response: This suggested addition is outside the scope of the Handbook.

Comment 64: Federal Government should standardize and codify consultation requirements. For far too long, Tribal Nations have experienced inconsistencies in consultation policies, the violation of consultation policies, and mere notification of Federal action as opposed to a solicitation of input.

Response: NOAA's goal for the Handbook, consistent with the requirements of E.O. 13175, is to develop an accountable process to ensure meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications. The revisions to the Handbook are designed to further enhance NOAA's consultation process.

Comment 65: Because the U.S. is engaged in a diplomatic relationship with each federally recognized Tribal Nation, greater effort must be made to consult with Tribal Nations on an individual basis.

Response: See response to Comment 57 above.

Comment 66: Do not use the number of tribes to consult with as a reason not to consult. Many tribes are willing to meet as a group or by video.

Response: Noted, NOAA will endeavor to engage and consult tribes using methods that work best for each party.

Comment 67: E.O. 13175, Section 3 lays out a set of policy making criteria that have been implemented unevenly over the last two decades. In particular, this includes directives to extend “maximum administrative discretion” to Tribal Nations by encouraging Tribal Nations to develop our own policies and standards to achieve objectives as well as consult with those Tribal Nations on the necessity of any Federal standards. Commenter urges NOAA and the Biden Administration to consider how this section can be better operationalized and consistently applied throughout the Federal Government.

Response: The aspects of this comment related to the consultation processes occurring outside of NOAA are beyond the scope of the Handbook. NOAA appreciates commenter's suggestions regarding better operationalization of the consultation process.

Comment 68: E.O. 13175, Section 6 encourages the Federal Government to facilitate and streamline tribal applications for waivers of statutory and regulatory requirements. With some notable exceptions, this section does not appear to be actively implemented across the Federal Government.

Response: This comment regarding the implementation of E.O. 13175 across the Federal Government is beyond the scope of the Handbook. NOAA considers any tribal application for a waiver or statutory and regulatory requirements on a case-by-case basis, and as such, we do not believe it is necessary or appropriate to address waivers within the Handbook.

Comment 69: NOAA does not correctly quote the consultation provision. In both NOAA Administrative Order 218-8 and the Handbook, NOAA states that “[a]s defined in Section 5 of E.O. 13175, [consultation] refers to an accountable process ensuring meaningful and timely input from tribal officials on NOAA policies that have tribal implications.” E.O. 13175 states that “[e]ach agency shall have an accountable process to ensure meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications.” By omitting the phrase “in the development of,” NOAA appears to be discounting both the role and substance of consultation with respect to the Federal decision-making process.

Response: NOAA's Handbook notes the Agency's commitment to having an accountable process with the federally recognized Indian tribe(s) for development of policies and guidance. It is not NOAA's intent to discount the role or substance of consultation for the Federal decision-making process.

Comment 70: There is a need for a robust communication strategy with tribes.

Response: Noted, however the need for a robust communication strategy is beyond the scope of the Handbook.

Comment 71: NOAA should form a permanent Tribal Advisory Committee to advise on decision-making, policy development, and effective consultation; and support the institutionalization of education about tribes and treaty rights at the Federal level. The Tribal Advisory Committee would represent a permanent investment in NOAA's commitment to tribes that would persist beyond administration changes.

Response: Noted, however the recommendation to form a Tribal Advisory Committee is beyond the scope of the Handbook.

Comment 72: The “NOAA Tribal Team” on NOAA's website should include Regional roles to provide context, email and phone information would be most useful.

Response: This comment regarding the context of NOAA's website is beyond the scope of the Handbook. However, NOAA is updating its tribal website and will consider this comment through that process.

Comment 1: It is the sole authority of Tribal Nations and cultural and religious leaders to determine how TEK can and should be used to inform these processes and NOAA must make every effort to protect the confidentiality of this sensitive cultural and religious information. Commenter requested that the recommendations provided in these comments on the 2021 draft Tribal Consultation Handbook regarding FOIA requests also be referenced in the TEK Guidance to ensure that NOAA staff understand that these documents are inextricably connected.

Response: The current Guidance references the Handbook and vice versa, establishing the connections between these two documents. While information shared between NOAA and a tribe may be beneficial for the consultation process, it is generally not exempt from disclosure under FOIA, especially if this information is used in the decision-making process and becomes part of the administrative record. As such, the Guidance notes the importance of advance notification to tribes of the limited capacity of NOAA to protect the confidentiality of information provided by the tribe consistent with the requirements of FOIA or other applicable legal obligations.

Comment 2: We also support expanding the TEK Guidance to be implemented agency-wide at NOAA.

Response: NOAA agrees that the Guidance should be implemented agency-wide. This change is reflected in the finalized TEK Guidance.

Comment 3: Commenter recommends the inclusion of language in the TEK Guidance to require NOAA offices to promote the incorporation and use of TEK to inform policy and decision-making processes when collaborating with other Federal departments and agencies on projects that may have direct or indirect implications for Tribal Nations.

Response: NOAA agrees that a discussion of interagency coordination should be included in the TEK Guidance. A new section on Interagency Coordination was added to TEK Guidance on page 13.

Comment 4: TEK must be respected and protected as Tribal proprietary knowledge, as Tribal Nations and cultures carry the responsibility of its application for the well-being of our communities, homelands, and seascapes. NOAA must make the utmost effort to protect TEK and other sensitive cultural information from public disclosure and ensure Tribal Nations have the ability to control what is shared by the Agency, including through FOIA requests.

Response: Accepted in part. NOAA added in the “Guidance” section, 1st paragraph: “IK should be respected as belonging to the IK holder(s).” Under Data Confidentiality, first paragraph, added, “NOAA employees should not begin collecting IK without establishing mutual trust, respect, and recognition of knowledge sovereignty.” NOAA acknowledges that IK holders may not support public disclosure of this information, however, the Agency has limited ability under existing public disclosure obligations to prevent disclosure of information shared with NOAA. For this reason, the IK Guidance describes the need to clearly disclose any constraints or limitations regarding the ability to protect sensitive or confidential information before NOAA seeks access to IK.

Comment 5: Currently NOAA is largely unequipped to collect and engage TEK in a meaningful way. Fixing this will involve more than revision to the TEK Guidance, it will involve continuous employee training, extensive tribal engagement, and a change in the culture at NOAA and other Federal agencies.

Response: Accepted. NOAA agrees that guidance should reference NOAA capacity. A new section was added on, “Building Capacity Within NOAA.”

Comment 6: When approaching tribes regarding TEK, NOAA officials must view tribes as knowledge co-producers and co-owners and engage tribes as true partners in acquiring the information necessary for informed decision-making. NOAA must inform tribes of the specific, tangible benefits of such information sharing and refrain from making only broad claims that it will “inform policy.”

Response: NOAA appreciates the views expressed in this comment.

Comment 7: The TEK Guidance should also cite to Article 31 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) that relates specifically to traditional knowledge: Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their cultural heritage, traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions, as well as the manifestations of their sciences, technologies and cultures, including human and genetic resources, seeds, medicines, knowledge of the properties of fauna and flora, oral traditions, literatures, designs, sports and traditional games, and visual and performing arts. They also have the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their intellectual property over such cultural heritage, traditional knowledge, and traditional cultural expressions. In conjunction with indigenous peoples, states shall take effective measures to recognize and protect the exercise of these rights.

Response: Accepted. NOAA added a reference to Knowledge Sovereignty and UNDRIP language from Article 31 in a renamed “Principles” section.

Comment 8: Tribes should have an opportunity to review and object to any use or recitation of TEK by NOAA. Provision needs to be stronger by removing “should” and replacing it with “must.”

Response: Disagree. While the Guidance is premised on the principle of “Free, Prior and Informed Consent,” it is designed to provide best practices to help ensure that the sharing and application of IK is responsible, effective, and mutually beneficial. It does not create binding or enforceable rights, and as such, NOAA does not believe inclusion of mandatory directives such as “must” is appropriate.

Comment 9: TEK must come directly from tribes. On page 4 of the TEK Guidance, “literature review” is listed as the first method of identifying and collecting TEK. If NOAA officials utilize this method, tribes need to guide the literature review to ensure that the right sources are being reviewed. Further, literature review should always be used in conjunction with outreach to tribes to identify and collect TEK.

Response: Accepted. Added to “literature review” section: “Researchers should work with IK holder(s) to share information about the project and seek their guidance on sources.”

Comment 10: Confidentiality is important in order for tribes to candidly share TEK. In some cases, anonymity may be appropriate to prevent resource damage, backlash, enforcement action, legal risk, or other harms. Before any information is shared, NOAA and tribes should fully understand how such information will be shared. NOAA personnel should also explain to tribes if any of that information is subject to disclosure under the FOIA. NOAA should not approach individual tribal members for TEK without first receiving consent from the tribe through its formal, identified institutions. The qualifier “Ideally” should be removed, since collection outside a method established by a tribe does not amount to free, prior, and informed consent from the tribe to provide such TEK.

Response: Accepted. Removed word “ideally” from “Identifying and/or collect IK” section. The section now includes the following sentence: “No data should be collected until a preferred method is established with indigenous group leaders and, through them or previous fieldwork, with IK holder(s).”

Comment 11: The TEK Guidance provides one example of successful use of TEK in decision-making. Providing additional examples in more detail may help NOAA personnel and tribes understand the benefits of sharing TEK and what TEK may be useful for NOAA decision-makers.

Response: Accepted. NOAA has included four examples of the benefits of using IK in decision making.

Comment 12: NOAA should include TEK as the best available science. NOAA should be more forthright in its TEK Guidance and state that the “best available science shall incorporate TEK and other related indigenous practices.”

Response: Partly accepted. Under Guidance, the first paragraph has been changed to substitute the word “should” for “can.” Under the new Interagency Coordination section, the second sentence reads: “When conducting formal or informal consultations with other Federal agencies on issues with implications for tribes and indigenous communities, NOAA should include and acknowledge IK as part of best available science and as part of the administrative record.” As noted in the response to IK Comment 8, NOAA does not believe inclusion of mandatory directives such as “shall” is appropriate in this Guidance document.

Comment 13: NOAA should ensure that TEK is properly incorporated into decision-making. One impediment to the sharing of TEK is that knowledge holders frequently do not understand or observe how their information or data are incorporated into Federal decision-making. Final results used to inform Federal decision making and policy development should also be shared. We urge NOAA to adhere to these provisions in the TEK Guidance and foster true scientific collaboration with TEK holders.

Response: Accepted. NOAA will undertake training and outreach to ensure that staff are aware of the guidance. In addition, a section on “Building Capacity within NOAA” was added.

Comment 14: We encourage NOAA to conduct additional engagement directly with tribes, Alaska Native corporations, and other holders of Indigenous knowledge to further develop substantive guidance addressing the incorporation and consideration of TEK along with other scientific information.

Response: NOAA appreciates the recommendation provided in this comment. NOAA conducted tribal consultation on this guidance in January 2022, and does not believe additional consultation is needed at this time to finalize the IK Guidance, particularly given the additional consultation conducted by the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) in developing its interagency guidance on IK. As noted, the IK Guidance is intended to be a living document that will be updated and improved over time. NOAA anticipates continued engagement with tribes on this document as it continues to mature.

Comment 15: We request that the agency, through regulation or other means, more formally recognize indigenous knowledge in its definition of “best available science” under the Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq., and other applicable laws.

Response: Guidance updated to note that Indigenous Knowledge should be included in the definition of “best available science” where possible, but does not specifically reference the Endangered Species Act. Under Guidance, the first paragraph has been changed to substitute the word “should” for “can.” New text reads: “Best available science should incorporate IK and other related indigenous practices.”

Comment 16: Commenter requests that NOAA revise its “Guidance and Best Practices for Engaging and Incorporating Traditional Ecological Knowledge in Decision-Making” to reflect an acceptance of indigenous knowledge on their own terms.

Response: Addressed in new “Context” section.

Comment 17: NOAA also should repudiate any perceived need to integrate or assimilate indigenous knowledge into a Western science format. What is needed instead is a multiple evidence base approach that recognizes and respects the inherent value and worth of indigenous knowledge systems. We encourage NOAA to review and integrate Two-Eyed Seeing into its tribal policies and procedures.

Response: Reference to, and discussion of, “Two-Eyed Seeing” has been added to the Guidance section.

Comment 18: To the extent the Agency has questions about the best way to do this, we suggest that NOAA invite indigenous community members to help craft the Agency's policies and guidance documents.

Response: Accepted. NOAA held tribal consultation on this guidance, and incorporated most of the tribal input into the revised version. Added the Guidance section on co-production of knowledge. NOAA is interested in building partnerships with tribes to recognize and include IK.

Comment 19: Not all environmental concerns faced by Indigenous peoples are mere Environmental Justice concerns, but instead rise to the level of adverting cultural genocide from robbing of Environmental Sovereignty from the Indigenous population. By not clearly defining that the purpose of this document is to foster partnership and not disenfranchisement of Indigenous lifeways, this document leaves it open for industry to circumvent the Federal regulators and other Federal entities who have the fiduciary trust responsibilities to the tribes and other Indigenous peoples of the United States.

Response: In response to this comment, NOAA added “fulfill Federal trust responsibilities” to the purposes addressed by the inclusion of IK.

Comment 20: Commenter notes that the guidance leaves a big hole in this portrayal of what NOAA can do by neglecting to affirm that NOAA with its science-based objectivity have the ability to act as an advocate for the Indigenous peoples when speaking with other Federal agencies who do have the ability to ensure enforceability of rights or the ability to cause action under the law.

Response: Accepted. NOAA agrees that IK can be a relevant and valuable element of interagency coordination. In response to this section, NOAA has added a section on “Interagency Coordination” to acknowledge this concept and provide guidance to NOAA staff.

Comment 21: NOAA Fisheries should recognize generally, and in the subject documents specifically, the distinct, unique feature or attribute that distinguishes the tribe and its members from most other Americans (such as those commonly identified among “Environmental Justice” communities). We have Treaty Rights, and derived from that fact, the Federal Government has a Trust Responsibility to us.

Response: Accepted. A reference to treaty rights and trust responsibilities has been added to the Introduction section.

Comment 22: Given that “Ecology” is a relationship between an organism (or being) and its environment, NOAA needs to understand that the tribe has developed an applied First Foods management mission, and applied River and Upland Visions to guide restoration and management of First Foods (water, native fish, wildlife, plants), that are based on the ecology between and among First Foods, the ecology of the tribe and our Foods, and our relationship to the landscapes and waters that provide the Foods. Our management visions should be recognized as high level, applied “Traditional Ecological Knowledge,” and given at least equal weight to Federal agency management guidance. Where our management goals or priorities differ, we can consult to address those differences.

Response: NOAA appreciates the views expressed in this comment.

Comment 23: Infringement on Treaty Rights and Trust Irresponsibility have occurred in the Pacific Northwest, too often under active Federal oversight, or from the lack of it. A fundamental objective of the subject documents should be to facilitate the correction of these past and continuing injustices.

Response: A reference to treaty rights and trust responsibilities has been added to the Introduction section.

Comment 24: In developing and revising the documents, it may be helpful and informative to refer to the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) 2016 Guidance, “EPA Policy on Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribes: Guidance for Discussing Tribal Treaty Rights.”

Response: NOAA appreciates the recommendation provided in this comment. As noted above, a reference to treaty rights and trust responsibilities has been added to the Introduction.

Comment 25: NOAA Fisheries' response to our petition thus far has not only completely ignored the tribe's TEK and any sense of a meaningful Government-to-Government relationship but has also misrepresented Western science.

Response: This fact-specific concern is beyond the scope of the IK Guidance.

Comment 26: We request NOAA Fisheries' leadership team to immediately convene a Government-to-Government meeting with the [tribe] and relevant NOAA staff to revisit this issue and appropriately engage in consultation and integration of our TEK into decision making to ensure Executive Order 13175 is carried out appropriately.

Response: See response to IK Guidance Comment 25.

Comment 27: We recommend that NOAA integrate the best available Western science with Indigenous Knowledge provided by tribes to inform decision-making and management.

Response: NOAA appreciates the recommendation included with this comment.

Comment 28: We also recommend that the TEK guidance document includes robust protective measures that ensure that sensitive information that may be shared with NOAA in the course of our work together is not made publicly available. We encourage NOAA to develop specific data-sharing agreements with tribes regarding the use of TEK that outline intellectual property and data ownership, privacy, and use.

Response: Accepted. Added the following to Data Confidentiality section, first paragraph: “NOAA employees should not begin collecting IK without establishing mutual trust, respect, and recognition of knowledge sovereignty, preferably in the form of a jointly developed agreement. The agreement should outline the purpose of the data collection, intellectual property and data ownership, privacy, and use.”

Comment 29: We further recommend that NOAA support TEK integration into management approaches by increasing dedicated and long-term capacity funding for natural and cultural research staff, including Tribal Historic Preservation Offices, to support coordinated engagement across tribal organizations. NOAA should integrate and fund opportunities for research and planning, training and capacity building, and implementation programs for the safe resumption of traditional management approaches, as these efforts would also support the integration of TEK into management.

Response: Comments regarding Federal funding allocation decisions are beyond the scope of the IK Guidance.

Comment 30: We would look forward to engaging with the NMFS Alaska Region to discuss the implementation of this guidance with Alaska Tribes, and urge you to encourage the Alaska Region to outreach to tribes and tribal organizations to engage in such discussions.

Response: NOAA appreciates the views expressed in this comment.

Comment 31: The NOAA TEK Guidance document constitutes an excellent baseline document on this topic and we encourage NOAA staff working with tribes to be familiar with it.

Response: Accepted. A new section on “Building Capacity Within NOAA” has been added to the IK Guidance.

Comment 32: As noted above with regard to the Tribal Consultation Handbook, it is important to bear in mind that there are other aspects of Alaska Native and tribal knowledge other than TEK which are valuable and should be engaged in NOAA's work. This includes the aspects of Traditional Knowledge (TK) outside those which are strictly considered ‘ecological,' understanding the interlinkages between the ‘ecological' and ‘other' aspects of TK, and crucially important forms of Indigenous Knowledge other than TK.

Response: NOAA appreciates the views expressed in this comment, and notes that the terminology of the IK Guidance has been revised from TEK to IK in the final document, in part, to address considerations noted in this comment.

Comment 33: We encourage NOAA to look at the work on Knowledge Sovereignty and Indigenization in which the tribe has been engaged.

Response: NOAA appreciates the recommendation provided in this comment. Discussion of knowledge sovereignty has been added to the Principles section of the IK Guidance.

Comment 34: We encourage NOAA to work with tribes via a co-productive framework as pertains to knowledge-related, as well as other ( e.g., policy), activities.

Response: Accepted. Discussion of knowledge sovereignty has been added to the Principles section of the IK Guidance. NOAA has also added the following text to the Guidance section: “NOAA staff should consider ways to co-develop and include IK for decision-making through multiple programs and approaches.”

Comment 35: Commenter emphasizes that “it may be inappropriate to suggest that TEK should be ‘validated,' ” and, “rather, indigenous peoples' own internal methods of defining, valuing, and validating their own knowledge/knowledge systems should be respected.” See NOAA Handbook (Section IV) regarding the unnecessary validation of TEK by Western science.

Response: Accepted. In the Guidance section of the IK Guidance, NOAA states: “Depending on the situation, it may be inappropriate to suggest that IK should be “validated”. Rather, Indigenous Peoples' own internal methods of defining, valuing, and validating their own knowledge/knowledge systems should be respected and trusted.”

Comment 36: TEK holders and communities have the right to review documents that include their TEK as well as the right to redact, remove, or reject how their TEK is included. Commenter requests that NOAA add a section in the TEK Guidance explicitly guiding NOAA Fisheries and NOS to let TEK holders and communities review the TEK collected and how it is included in the work and research of NOAA Fisheries and NOS before it is used or distributed.

Response: NOAA appreciates the views expressed in this comment and has added to the Best Practices for Identifying and Considering IK section in the IK Guidance the following addition: “NOAA should work to share and archive any data collected in cooperation with IK holder(s) and communities. IK holder(s) and communities should review NOAA products that include IK before publication. Any confidential or proprietary data that has been provided for public release solely in the aggregate form must not be shared in disaggregated form—except under any legal requirement ( e.g., Freedom of Information Act) and never without prior notification of the provider of that particular IK.” NOAA also notes that the applicability of the IK Guidance now extends to all of NOAA.

Comment 37: Our only suggestion is to follow the lead of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) and the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) which recently released a Memorandum for the Heads of Departments and Agencies on the subject of Indigenous Traditional Ecological Knowledge and Federal Decision Making. Not only in substance, but also including the use of Indigenous Knowledge and/or Indigenous Traditional Ecological Knowledge, instead of the archaic ambiguous term TEK, both of which are a more accurate descriptor of the body of knowledge we are all referring to.

Response: Accepted. As noted above, the NOAA IK Guidance now uses the term “Indigenous Knowledge” in lieu of TEK.

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

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

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

The following product(s) and service(s) are proposed for deletion from the Procurement List:

On 6/2/2023, the Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled published notice of proposed deletions from the Procurement List. This notice is published pursuant to 41 U.S.C. 8503 (a)(2) and 41 CFR 51-2.3.

After consideration of the relevant matter presented, the Committee has determined that the product(s) and service(s) listed below are no longer suitable for procurement by the Federal Government under 41 U.S.C. 8501-8506 and 41 CFR 51-2.4.

I certify that the following action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The major factors considered for this certification were:

1. The action will not result in additional reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements for small entities.

2. The action may result in authorizing small entities to furnish the product(s) and service(s) to the Government.

3. There are no known regulatory alternatives which would accomplish the objectives of the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (41 U.S.C. 8501-8506) in connection with the product(s) and service(s) deleted from the Procurement List.

Accordingly, the following product(s) and service(s) are deleted from the Procurement List:

Title of Collection: Generic Information Collection Plan for Foundational Research About Consumer Credit Markets and Household Financial Decision-Making.

OMB Control Number: 3170-00XX.

Type of Review: New information collection.

Affected Public: Individuals or households.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 8,000.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 32,000.

Abstract: Under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the Bureau is tasked with researching, analyzing, and reporting on topics relating to the Bureau's mission including developments in markets for consumer financial products and services, consumer awareness, and consumer behavior. Under this generic information collection plan, the Bureau collects data through qualitative and quantitative methods, including focus groups, interviews, and controlled trials in field and laboratory settings. The primary purpose of research carried out under this generic clearance is for foundational research of an exploratory nature. This foundational research will be used for developmental and informative purposes to increase the Bureau's understanding of consumer credit markets and household financial decision-making. In addition, research may be related to the Bureau's mission regarding financial education, including evaluating the effectiveness of financial education programs and understanding financial planning behaviors, including savings, spending, and investing behavior. The Bureau envisions that the research covered under this clearance will be basic foundational research about consumer credit markets and household finance.

Request for Comments: The Bureau published a 60-day Federal Register notice on November 23, 2022 (87 FR 71586) under Docket Number: CFPB-2022-0078. The Bureau is publishing this notice and soliciting comments on: (a) Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Bureau, including whether the information will have practical utility; (b) The accuracy of the Bureau's estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methods and the assumptions used; (c) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments submitted in response to this notice will be reviewed by OMB as part of its review of this request. All comments will become a matter of public record.

The text of the Presiding Officer's June 30, 2023 Order Scheduling Prehearing Conference appears below.

Authority: Consumer Product Safety Act, 15 U.S.C. 2064.

Additional prehearing conferences “may be convened at the discretion of the Presiding Officer.” 16 CFR 1025.21(c) (2023). The parties have requested a final prehearing conference in preparation for the hearing scheduled for August 7, 2023. A prehearing conference shall be held as follows:

Date: Tuesday, July 11, 2023.

Time: 11 a.m. Eastern Time.

Means: Zoom [link provided to those listed in Distribution].

Commission rules require issuance of a final prehearing order “after the conclusion of the final prehearing conference.” 16 CFR 1025.21(e). Parties should be prepared to discuss the following topics:

1. Nature of action and jurisdiction.

2. Stipulations and statements.

3. Complaint Counsel's evidence.

4. Respondent's evidence.

5. Additional actions taken or requested.

6. Limitations and Reservations.

7. Logistical requirements for hearing, including presentation of exhibits, audio/visual requirements, and accommodations for witnesses or parties requiring translation or other services.

Id. Pt. 1025, App. I. 1 This agenda is not exhaustive, and the parties should confer and come prepared with any other topics they wish to discuss.

The CPSC should arrange for a court reporter for the prehearing conference. I direct that notice of this conference be published in the Federal Register . 16 CFR 1025.21(b).

Brett Ruff, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, bruff@cpsc.gov .

Rosalee Thomas, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, rbthomas@cpsc.gov .

Caitlin O'Donnell, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, codonnell@cpsc.gov .

Michael J. Rogal, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, mrogal@cpsc.gov .

Gregory Reyes, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, greyes@cpsc.gov .

Frank Perilla, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, FPerilla@cpsc.gov .

Oliver J. Dunford, Pacific Legal Foundation, 4440 PGA Blvd., Suite 307, Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410, ODunford@pacificlegal.org .

John F. Kerkhoff, Pacific Legal Foundation, 3100 Clarendon Boulevard, Suite 610, Arlington, VA 22201, JKerkhoff@pacificlegal.org .

Frank Garrison, Pacific Legal Foundation, 3100 Clarendon Boulevard, Suite 610, Arlington, VA 22201, FGarrison@pacificlegal.org .

Jessica L. Thompson, Pacific Legal Foundation, 3100 Clarendon Boulevard, Suite 610, Arlington, VA 22201, JLThompson@pacificlegal.org .

Alberta E. Mills, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, amills@cpsc.gov .

The OMB is particularly interested in comments which:

• Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of CNCS, including whether the information will have practical utility;

• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions;

• Propose ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

• Propose ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

A 60-day Notice requesting public comment was published in the Federal Register on Thursday, March 30, 2023 at 88 FR 19094. This comment period ended May 30, 2023. Four public comments were received from this Notice. Commenters' primary concerns were related to the reduction in the number of questions regarding formal volunteering activity in the CEV relative to the previous volunteering supplement. AmeriCorps agrees that reinstating questions about types of volunteer organizations and activities would generate valuable knowledge. Although Census policy does not allow AmeriCorps to add these kinds of lengthy questions to the CEV at this time, we have included them in this clearance package in the event that Census recommendations change and resources allow them to be reinstated in future rounds of data collection.

Title of Collection: Current Population Survey Civic Engagement and Volunteering Supplement.

OMB Control Number: 3045-0139. Type of Review: Revision of an Existing Collection.

Respondents/Affected Public: Individuals and Households.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 30,000.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 3,335.

Abstract: AmeriCorps is soliciting comments concerning proposed revision of its Current Population Survey Volunteering and Civic Engagement Supplement. Since 2002, AmeriCorps has partnered with the U.S. Census Bureau and the Bureau of Labor Statistics to collect data and produced annual volunteering reports, and is mandated by the Serve America Act of 2009 to produce an annual civic health assessment in partnership with the National Conference on Citizenship. Reports, tables, and data for Volunteering and Civic Life in America (VCLA) are made public on americorps.gov, and specialized tables are made available upon request.

The proposed survey will be the only source of nationally representative data on the number of Americans who are active in their communities, through volunteering, social interactions, and civic behaviors. These measures include formal volunteering in an organization; a person's interactions with family, friends and neighbors; participation in community events; informal interactions; communication with one another on issues of public concern; and interactions with public and private institutions.

AmeriCorps seeks to renew the current information collection with revisions that are intended to enhance the survey. The information collection will otherwise be used in the same manner as the existing collection. AmeriCorps also seeks to continue using the current survey until the revised survey is approved by OMB. The current survey is due to expire on November 30, 2023.

Purpose of Program: P3 was first authorized by Congress in FY 2014 by the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014 (2014 Act), and the authority has been included by Congress in appropriations acts each year since FY 2014, most recently in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (Pub. L. 117-328) (2023 Act). The FY 2023 P3 authority enables pilot sites to blend FY 2023 Federal funds and obtain waivers of program requirements, including statutory, regulatory, and administrative requirements that are barriers to achieving improved outcomes for youth-serving programs included in the authority. Under P3, pilots can test innovative strategies to achieve significant improvements in educational, employment, and other key outcomes for disconnected youth using the flexibility provided by P3.

Background: Reengaging the more than 4.8 million young people in the United States who are neither working nor enrolled in school—and preventing other young people from joining them—is a national concern because their disconnection can have severe, long-term consequences.

Youth who drop out and never earn a high school credential have higher rates of unemployment, lower earnings, poorer health, and higher rates of mortality, and are more likely to be dependent on public assistance than those who earn a high school credential. 1 Interrupted or delayed schooling and employment also can have long-lasting consequences. Youth whose completion of high school is delayed are significantly less likely to enroll in postsecondary education after they do earn their high school credential. 2 Youth whose enrollment in postsecondary education is delayed after high school graduation are considerably more likely to drop out than peers who enter college immediately following high school. 3 They also earn less as young adults, with one study estimating that those who delay entry into postsecondary institutions earn $41,000 less during the first 13 years after high school graduation than young adults who enrolled in college the semester after high school graduation. 4 A prolonged period of unemployment experienced by a young adult can have an enduring negative consequence on his or her earnings that lasts as long as 9 years after he or she finds work. 5

P3 may be a useful tool in preventing and effectively addressing youth disconnection. It gives ED, the Departments of Labor (DOL), Health and Human Services (HHS), and Justice (DOJ), 6 the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS), and the Institute of Museum and Library Services (collectively, the Agencies) authority, provided certain conditions and requirements are met, to waive Federal statutory and regulatory requirements that inhibit access to assistance and effective service delivery for disconnected youth.

P3 authorizes the Agencies to enter into Performance Partnership Agreements (performance agreements) with State, local, or Tribal governments. The performance agreements provide pilots with additional flexibility in the use of certain discretionary funds administered by the Agencies, 7 including competitive and formula grant funds. Pilots must include two or more Federal programs (at least one of which is administered in whole or in part by a State, local, or Tribal government) that target disconnected youth or are designed to prevent youth from disconnecting from school or work, and that provide education, training, employment, and other related social services. Entities that seek to participate in these pilots must commit to achieving significant improvements in outcomes for disconnected youth in exchange for flexibility permitted under P3. The authorizing statute states that improving outcomes for disconnected youth means increasing the rate at which those individuals between the ages of 14 and 24 who are low-income and are either homeless, in foster care, involved in the juvenile justice system, unemployed, or not enrolled in or at risk of dropping out of an educational institution achieve success in meeting educational, employment, or other key goals (2014 Act, section 526(a)(2)).

This notice invites applications for selection as FY 2023 pilots and offers opportunities for prospective applicants to obtain optional technical assistance from the Agencies prior to applying. The purpose of the pre-application technical assistance is to help prospective applicants identify and propose to address—through waivers, blending of funds, or other flexibilities—Federal barriers to effective and integrated service delivery that will improve the educational and employment outcomes of disconnected youth.

If interest in technical assistance exceeds the Agencies' capacity to provide it, the Agencies will give first priority to assisting eligible entities that intend to serve communities that have experienced civil unrest because the statutory authority for FY 2023 directs the Agencies to include such communities among the designated pilots. Second priority will be given to requests for technical assistance from applicants that propose to serve the highest numbers of disconnected youth.

P3 provides important opportunities to improve access to Federal programs and their effectiveness in addressing the needs of disconnected youth. The Agencies have published on Youth.gov a list of the waivers previously granted to pilots under the first three rounds of P3 in which pilots were designated. 8 These waivers were helpful to the pilots that received them, and, in this latest round, the Agencies hope that applicants propose even more ambitious and bold efforts to remove Federal constraints on effective, innovative, and promising service delivery for disconnected youth. We provide several examples below.

These examples are provided for illustrative purposes only, and the allowability of specific proposals will depend on the unique circumstances of individual applicants. Any waivers must be consistent with the statutory safeguards that apply to P3, discussed below, and the Agencies will consider whether the inclusion of a program in a specific pilot is consistent with, or conflicts with, other significant legal or policy considerations. Also, the Agencies will review the blending of competitive grants on a case-by-case basis to consider how the scope, objectives, and target populations of the existing awards align with the proposed pilot. Any changes in terms and conditions of the existing competitive grant awards required for pilot purposes must be justified by the applicant and consistent with the scope and objectives of the grantee's application. In addition, the Agencies can only waive Federal statutory or regulatory requirements and cannot waive State or local requirements. The Agencies encourage applicants to analyze whether implementation of their request also requires State or local statutory or regulatory flexibilities or waivers, as those rules are not under the jurisdiction of the Agencies to waive for P3.

Example A: P3 enables State, local, and Tribal governments to blend dollars from multiple Federal funding streams to provide more comprehensive, holistic services for youth without having to allocate costs among the contributing programs and separately track and report on each source of funding. For example, a State could propose to use P3 to support a comprehensive education, training, and reentry services program for youthful offenders before, during, and after their incarceration. Funding for the project could be contributed from the Governor's reserve of the State's Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Title I Youth program grant, the State's Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act Title II State grant, and the State educational agency's Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA) Title I, Part D grant for Prevention and Intervention Programs for Children and Youth Who are Neglected, Delinquent, or At-Risk. The State also could propose to use P3 to waive the statutory performance indicators and reporting requirements under the three programs, replacing them with one set of indicators tailored to match the objectives of the project that the State reports on annually. Funds available to the State for evaluation under section 116(e)(1) of WIOA could be used to evaluate the program.

Similarly, to expand mental health and well-being supports through comprehensive school-based mental health services, an LEA could blend funding from its ESEA Title IV, Part A subgrant and its FY 2023 continuation award for its School-Based Mental Health Services grant and braid  9 funding from its FY 2023 Project AWARE (Advancing Wellness and Resiliency in Education) grant from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration in HHS to have school-based mental health services providers create learn-and-earn opportunities for high school students through which they receive a stipend paid with ESEA Title IV, Part A funds or academic credit for training in an evidence-based curriculum that teaches suicide prevention education and awareness, including associated risk factors, methods that students can use to seek help, and student resources for suicide awareness and prevention. This strategy promotes a supportive and inclusive school climate and also serves to develop the next generation of high-quality, trained school-based mental health services professionals.

Example B: Registered Apprenticeship (RA) and pre-apprenticeship programs that are linked to RA programs can provide disconnected youth with a pathway to educational advancement and economic mobility. There is encouraging evidence that participation in RA programs is associated with significant earnings gains and that the costs to government of supporting RA programs are far exceeded by the benefits because the higher earnings of participants reduce their use of government programs. 10 However, RA programs can be more challenging to finance than other programs and cost more to start up because they span and can draw funding from both postsecondary education and workforce development and require extensive coordination among funders and the employers who hire apprentices. 11 P3 can ease some of these challenges by enabling RA program sponsors, intermediaries, and other key players in creating RA and pre-apprenticeship to blend rather than braid funding from multiple Federal programs. For example, a State seeking to ensure there are trained workers who are ready to meet the demands of implementing the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act could create pre-apprenticeship and RA programs for disconnected youth by blending funds from Adult Education and Family Literacy Act (AEFLA) State leadership funds available under section 223 of WIOA, statewide youth activities under Title I of WIOA, Youth Title I formula funding, State leadership activities under the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act, as amended by the Strengthening Career and Technical Education for the 21st Century Act (Perkins V), and the Social Services Block Grant. 12

Example C: Some Federal programs contain statutory or regulatory requirements that limit the duration of an individual's participation in a program. Due to service interruptions and disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, participants may not have been able to take full advantage of the opportunities provided by a program over the last year. A P3 applicant could seek flexibility to waive eligibility requirements to extend the duration of an individual's participation in the program as part of a larger strategy to compensate for the time and learning that youth lost due to the COVID-19 pandemic. For example, a State, local, or Tribal governmental unit administering a YouthBuild grant  13 could seek to extend program services to individuals beyond 24 months.

Example D: P3 authority can also be used by applicants to propose changes to projects funded under multiple Federal grants that are each, separately, intended to support programs designed to help disconnected youth achieve greater success in meeting their educational and employment goals. For example, a public college or university might propose to increase the share of the Federal Work Study (FWS) program funds available for Job Location and Development programs and waive the 25 percent cap on the amount of the school's allocation that may be used to pay wages to students employed with private, for-profit organizations so that it could use more than 25 percent of its FWS funds to provide students who are at risk of dropping out with subsidized career internships in the private sector that are aligned with students' educational and career goals. To help students identify their career goals, the college or university could partner with a local American Job Center, which uses funds from the WIOA Title I Adult program, to provide students with intensive career counseling and information relating to local occupations in demand and the earnings and skill requirements of those occupations. Similarly, a community college could request waivers to blend and use a portion of a TRIO Educational Opportunity Center grant and its WIOA Title II AEFLA program subgrant to implement an intensive integrated education and training (IET) program for young adults who lack a high school credential, or a State government could request authority to blend AEFLA funds with funds from a Second Chance Act grant from the Department of Justice to implement an IET program or wraparound academic support services for incarcerated individuals to prepare them for postsecondary education.

Example E: P3 waivers can help programs reach currently unserved disconnected youth. Current ED regulations for the TRIO programs limit participation in these programs to citizens or permanent residents of the United States, or individuals who are in the United States for other than a temporary purpose who provide evidence from the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) of their intent to become a permanent resident. 14 Applying in partnership with affiliated local public institutions of higher education that administer TRIO grants, a multi-State consortium of public college or university systems that are considered units of State government could seek a waiver of this requirement so that their affiliated schools could use TRIO funds to serve disconnected youth who are not citizens or permanent residents of the United States, or individuals who are in the United States for other than a temporary purpose who provide evidence from the INS of their intent to become a permanent resident.

Example F: P3 waivers can make childcare more accessible for youth who are parents and pursuing a postsecondary degree or credential but at risk of leaving without a degree or credential or employment due to the lack of affordable, high-quality childcare. A public college or university that receives funds under the Strengthening Institutions program authorized by Title III, Part A of the HEA could obtain a waiver of the regulatory prohibition against using a portion of these funds for childcare services in order to augment the childcare services it provides with its Child Care Access Means Parents in School Program grant.

Example G: An LEA could use the P3 authority to create a comprehensive educational program to provide support to English learners (ELs) to support the successful transition from secondary school to postsecondary education and a career in a high-demand field, focusing on students who continue to be identified as ELs for more than 5 years, students who enroll with prior educational experiences other than formalized learning experiences, or who have special needs. Students who are proficient in both their home language and English are an asset, including in the labor market. For example, funds available under ESEA Title I, Part A and Title III could be used to support dual language programs for ELs to support language acquisition, including providing high-quality tutoring to support academic achievement. The LEA could also use ESEA Title IV, Part A funds to provide targeted support for ELs, including ELs with special needs. The LEA could use Perkins V funds to support career advising and navigation services and cover the costs associated with a career and technical education dual enrollment pathway or an apprenticeship where students can apply multilingual skill sets. The local workforce development board could also contribute funds to provide paid internships during the summer months.

Although P3 provides the Agencies broad waiver authority to increase flexibility and relieve burden in order to improve the effectiveness of Federal funding for disconnected youth, it is important to note that there are some limitations on the waivers. In particular, as stated in the original statutory authority for P3, the P3 waivers—

• May not involve any requirement related to nondiscrimination, wage and labor standards, or the allocation of funds to State and sub-State levels;

• Must be consistent with the statutory purposes of the Federal program for which such discretionary funds were appropriated;

• May not result in denying or restricting the eligibility of any individual for any of the services that (in whole or in part) are funded by the agency's programs and Federal discretionary funds that are involved in the pilot;

• Based on the best available information, may not otherwise adversely affect vulnerable populations that are the recipients of such services;

• Must be necessary to achieve the outcomes of the pilot as specified in the performance agreement, and no broader in scope than is necessary to achieve such outcomes; and

• Must result in either (a) realizing efficiencies by simplifying reporting burdens or reducing administrative barriers with respect to such discretionary funds; or (b) increasing the ability of individuals to obtain access to services that are provided by the discretionary funds.

P3 was reauthorized for FY 2023 for programs administered by all of the six Agencies, and the Agencies may select up to 10 pilots.

An applicant must propose to include FY 2023 funds from at least one of the six Agencies.

If Congress extends the P3 authority in future years, pilots may propose to amend the number of Federal programs supporting pilot activities using future funding appropriated. However, authority for pilots to expand in future years is subject to congressional action as well as agency discretion.

Application Requirements: The application requirements for this opportunity are from the notice of final priorities, requirements, definitions, and selection criteria for this program published on April 28, 2016, in the Federal Register (81 FR 25339) (P3 NFP) and are as follows:

(a) Executive summary. The applicant must provide an executive summary that briefly describes the proposed pilot, the flexibilities being sought, and the interventions or systems changes that would be implemented by the applicant and its partners to improve outcomes for disconnected youth.

(b) Flexibility, including waivers:

Federal requests for flexibility, including waivers. For each program to be included in a pilot, the applicant must complete Table 1, Requested Flexibility. The applicant must identify two or more discretionary Federal programs that will be included in the pilot, 15 at least one of which must be administered (in whole or in part) by a State, local, or Tribal government. 16 In Table 1, the applicant must identify one or more program requirements that would inhibit implementation of the pilot and request that the requirement(s) be waived in whole or in part. Examples of potential waiver requests and other requests for flexibility include, but are not limited to, blending of funds and changes to align eligibility requirements, allowable uses of funds, and performance reporting.

Program Requirements: The program requirement for this opportunity is from the P3 NFP.

Performance Agreement. Each P3 pilot, along with other non-Federal government entities involved in the partnership, must enter into a performance agreement that will include, at a minimum, the following (as required by section 526(c)(2) of Division H of the 2014 Act):

(a) The length of the agreement;

(b) The Federal programs and federally funded services that are involved in the pilot;

(c) The Federal discretionary funds that are being used in the pilot;

(d) The non‐Federal funds that are involved in the pilot, by source (which may include private funds as well as governmental funds) and by amount;

(e) The State, local, or Tribal programs that are involved in the pilot;

(f) The populations to be served by the pilot;

(g) The cost-effective Federal oversight procedures that will be used for the purpose of maintaining the necessary level of accountability for the use of the Federal discretionary funds;

(h) The cost-effective State, local, or Tribal oversight procedures that will be used for the purpose of maintaining the necessary level of accountability for the use of the Federal discretionary funds;

(i) The outcome (or outcomes) that the pilot is designed to achieve;

(j) The appropriate, reliable, and objective outcome measurement methodology that will be used to determine whether the pilot is achieving, and has achieved, specified outcomes;

(k) The statutory, regulatory, or administrative requirements related to Federal mandatory programs that are barriers to achieving improved outcomes of the pilot; and

(l) Criteria for determining when a pilot is not achieving the specified outcomes that it is designed to achieve and subsequent steps, including:

(1) The consequences that will result; and

(2) The corrective actions that will be taken in order to increase the likelihood that the pilot will achieve such specified outcomes.

Definitions: The following definitions are from the P3 NFP.

Blended funding is a funding and resource allocation strategy that uses multiple existing funding streams to support a single initiative or strategy. Blended funding merges two or more funding streams, or portions of multiple funding streams, to produce greater efficiency and/or effectiveness. Funds from each individual stream lose their award-specific identity, and the blended funds together become subject to a single set of reporting and other requirements, consistent with the underlying purposes of the programs for which the funds were appropriated.

An interim indicator is a marker of achievement that demonstrates progress toward an outcome and is measured at least annually.

Outcomes are the intended results of a program or intervention. They are what applicants expect their projects to achieve. An outcome can be measured at the participant level (for example, changes in employment retention or earnings of disconnected youth) or at the system level (for example, improved efficiency in program operations or administration).

A waiver provides flexibility in the form of relief, in whole or in part, from specific statutory, regulatory, or administrative requirements that have hindered the ability of a State, locality, or Tribe to organize its programs and systems or provide services in ways that best meet the needs of its target populations. Under P3, waivers provide flexibility in exchange for a pilot's commitment to improve programmatic outcomes for disconnected youth consistent with underlying statutory authorities and purposes.

Program Authority: Section 523 of Title III, Division H of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (Pub. L. 117-328).

Note: Projects will be awarded and must be operated in a manner consistent with the nondiscrimination requirements contained in Federal civil rights laws.

Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 86, 97, 98, and 99, and such other regulations as the Agencies may apply based on the programs included in a particular pilot. (b) The Office of Management and Budget Guidelines to Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement) in 2 CFR part 180, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR part 3485. (c) The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards in 2 CFR part 200, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR part 3474. (d) The P3 NFP.

Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 86 apply to institutions of higher education only.

Type of Award: Flexibility.

Estimated Available Funds: None.

Estimated Number of Designations: 10 pilots.

Project Period: FY 2023 pilots may operate for as long as FY 2023 appropriated funds remain available to pilots to obligate to support project activities, but not past September 30, 2027.

1. Eligible Applicants: The lead applicant must be a State, local, or Tribal government entity, represented by a chief executive, such as a governor, mayor, or other elected leader, or the head of a State, local, or Tribal agency.

2. Cost Sharing or Matching: This program does not require cost sharing or matching.

1. Application Submission Instructions: Applicants must submit completed applications to DisconnectedYouth@ed.gov unless electronic submission is not possible. Where electronic submission is not possible ( e.g., you do not have access to the internet), you must provide a written statement that you intend to submit a paper application. Send this written statement no later than 2 weeks before the application deadline date (14 calendar days or, if the 14th calendar day before the application deadline date falls on a Federal holiday, the next business day following the Federal holiday). If you mail your written statement to the Department, it must be postmarked no later than 2 weeks before the application deadline date. Please send this statement to the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this notice. If you submit a paper application, you must mail the original and two copies of your application, on or before the application deadline date, to the Department at the following address: U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, LBJ Basement Level 1, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20202-4260. You must show proof of mailing consisting of one of the following: (1) A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service postmark. (2) A legible mail receipt with the date of mailing stamped by the U.S. Postal Service. (3) A dated shipping label, invoice, or receipt from a commercial carrier. (4) Any other proof of mailing acceptable to the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education. If you mail your application through the U.S. Postal Service, we do not accept either of the following as proof of mailing: (1) A private metered postmark. (2) A mail receipt that is not dated by the U.S. Postal Service.

Note: The U.S. Postal Service does not uniformly provide a dated postmark. Before relying on this method, you should check with your local post office.

We will not consider applications postmarked after the application deadline date.

2. Submission of Proprietary Information: Given the types of projects that may be proposed in applications for the P3 opportunity, your application may include business information that you consider proprietary. In 34 CFR 5.11 we define “business information” and describe the process we use in determining whether any of that information is proprietary and, thus, protected from disclosure under Exemption 4 of the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552, as amended).

Because we plan to make successful applications available to the public, including performance agreements, and may make all applications available, you may wish to request confidentiality of business information.

Consistent with Executive Order 12600, please designate in your application any information that you believe is exempt from disclosure under Exemption 4. In the appropriate appendix section of your application, please list the page number or numbers on which we can find this information. For additional information please see 34 CFR 5.11(c).

3. Intergovernmental Review: This program is subject to Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79.

4. Recommended Page Limit: The application narrative is where you, the applicant, provide the information specified in the application requirements and address the selection criteria that reviewers use to evaluate your application. We recommend that you (1) limit the application narrative to no more than 5 pages and (2) use the following standards:

• A “page” is 8.5″ x 11″, on one side only, with 1″ margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.

• Double-space (no more than three lines per vertical inch) all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings, footnotes, quotations, references, and captions.

• Use a font that is either 12 point or larger.

• Use one of the following fonts: Times New Roman, Courier, Courier New, or Arial.

5. Requests for Technical Assistance: For interested eligible entities, the Agencies are offering technical assistance over the next several months that will help prospective applicants to identify Federal impediments to effective and integrated service delivery for disconnected youth and flexibilities that can be removed under P3 and to develop an application submission for a P3 pilot. The Agencies want to engage with as many eligible entities as possible and will accept technical assistance requests on a rolling basis until August 7, 2023. If interest in technical assistance exceeds the Agencies' capacity to provide it, the Agencies will give first priority to assisting eligible entities that intend to serve communities that have experienced civil unrest, because the statutory authority for FY 2023 directs the Agencies to include such communities among the designated pilots. 17 Second priority will be given to requests for technical assistance from applicants that propose to serve the highest numbers of disconnected youth. To request technical assistance, please email DisconnectedYouth@ed.gov with the subject line “Request for Technical Assistance,” and include the prospective applicant's name, a contact person's name and email address, and the names of the Federal programs that the prospective applicant is interested in including in a P3 pilot. Applicants that do not request technical assistance may still apply for designation as a pilot; applicants that do request technical assistance are not bound to apply or bound by the information provided in their initial request for technical assistance.

6. Other Submission Requirements: Applications under this opportunity must be submitted electronically unless electronic submission is not possible.

Please note the following:

• The Department is not publishing an application package for this program. To submit an application, provide all of the information specified in the application requirements. Additionally, complete and submit Standard Form 424B, Assurances for Non-Construction Programs (available at https://youth.gov/youth-topics/reconnecting-youth/performance-partnership-pilots ) with your application.

• The Department must receive your application by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on September 5, 2023. We will notify you if we are rejecting your application because it was received after the application deadline date.

• We may request that you provide us original signatures on forms at a later date.

1. Review and Selection Process: The Department will screen applications that are submitted in accordance with the requirements in this notice and will determine which applications are eligible to be read based on whether they have met the eligibility and application requirements.

The Secretary of Education (Secretary) will also consider compliance with assurances, including those applicable to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance (such as, for ED programs, 34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).

2. Review of Requests for Flexibility, Including Blending of Funds and Other Waivers: Representatives of the Agencies that administer programs under which flexibility in Federal requirements is sought will evaluate whether the flexibility, including blending of funds and other waivers, requested by applicants meets the statutory requirements for P3 and is otherwise appropriate. For example, if an applicant is seeking flexibility under programs administered by HHS and DOL, its requests for flexibility will be reviewed by HHS and DOL officials. Applicants may be asked to participate in telephone calls at this point in the process in order to clarify requests for flexibility and other aspects of their proposals.

3. Selecting Finalists: Agency officials may recommend projects for selection by the Secretary of Education. In consultation with the other Agencies, the Secretary will select up to 10 finalists after considering the recommendations of the Agencies that administer the programs for which the applicants are seeking flexibility, and other information, including an applicant's performance and use of funds and compliance history under a previous award under any agency program. In selecting pilots, the Secretary will first give priority to applicants that will serve communities that have experienced civil unrest, to address the statutory requirement that designated pilots include communities that have experienced civil unrest, and will then select those applications that will serve the highest numbers of disconnected youth.

For each finalist, ED and any other Agencies implicated in the pilot will negotiate the performance agreement. If a performance agreement cannot be finalized for an applicant, an alternative applicant may be selected as a finalist instead. The recommended projects will be considered finalists until performance agreements are signed by all parties, and pilot designation will be awarded only after finalization and approval of each finalist's performance agreement.

1. Designation Notices: If your application is successful, we notify your U.S. Representative(s) and U.S. Senators and send you a letter notification of your selection as a pilot. We may notify you informally, also.

If your application is not evaluated or not selected as a pilot, we will notify you.

2. Performance Measures: The performance agreement for each pilot will include outcome measures, interim indicators, and targets.

Accessible Format: On request to the program contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT , individuals with disabilities can obtain this document in an accessible format. The Department will provide the requestor with an accessible format that may include Rich Text Format (RTF) or text format (txt), a thumb drive, an MP3 file, braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc, or other accessible format.

Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register . You may access the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations at www.govinfo.gov . At this site you can view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal Register , in text or 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.

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. The Department is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) that is described below. The Department is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.

Title of Collection: Evaluation of the Toolkit to Support Evidence-Based Algebra Instruction in Middle and High School—Recruitment Activities.

OMB Control Number: 1850-NEW.

Type of Review: A new ICR.

Respondents/Affected Public: Individuals and households

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 30.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 30.

Abstract: The current authorization for the Regional Educational Laboratories (REL) program is under the Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002, part D, section 174, (20 U.S.C. 9564), administered by the Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences (IES), National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance (NCEE). The central mission and primary function of the RELs is to support applied research and provide technical assistance to state and local education agencies within their region (ESRA, Part D, section 174[f]). The REL program's goal is to partner with educators and policymakers to conduct work that is change-oriented and supports meaningful local, regional, or State decisions about education policies, programs, and practices to improve outcomes for students.

IES requests clearance for activities to support the recruitment of school districts to participate in an efficacy study of a Toolkit to Support Evidence-Based Algebra Instruction in Middle and High School as part of the REL Central contract. A second OMB package, which will be submitted later this year, will request clearance for data collection instruments and the collection of district administrative data.

Even prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, Algebra I proved challenging for many students because of the extensive abstract thinking it requires (Katz, 2007; Susa et al., 2014). To help students succeed in Algebra I, REL Central is developing a toolkit of professional learning supports to help Algebra I teachers learn about, make sense of, plan for, and implement three evidence-based Algebra I teaching practices that were identified in the related What Work Clearinghouse (WWC) Practice Guide, “Teaching Strategies for Improving Algebra Knowledge in Middle and High School Students.” The toolkit contains the following three parts: (1) Initial Diagnostic and On-going Monitoring Instruments, (2) Professional Development Resources, and (3) Steps for Institutionalizing Supports for Evidence-Based Practice.

This study will assess whether implementing the toolkit improves teacher and student outcomes and will describe the implementation of the toolkit in study schools that use it. Using a school-level randomized controlled trial during the 2024-2025 school year, the study will estimate the impact of the toolkit on teachers' self-efficacy and their understanding and use of the promising practices, as well as on students' algebraic content knowledge, self-efficacy, and mathematical mindsets. To provide context for the impact estimates and inform future use of the toolkit, the study will also describe the implementation of the toolkit. The study plans to include 20 schools from three districts. To disseminate these findings, REL Central will produce a report for school leaders and teachers who are potential users of the toolkit.

The Technical Guidelines Development Committee (TGDC) is a non-discretionary Federal Advisory Committee established by the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA), Public Law 107-252, 116 Stat. 1666 (2002). The TGDC assists the EAC in developing the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines (VVSG). The chairperson of the TGDC is the director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). The TGDC is composed of 14 other members appointed jointly by EAC and the director of NIST.

HAVA mandates that the 14 other members appointed jointly by the EAC and NIST must include a representative of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. The TGDC Charter requires that notice of vacancies on the Committee for those individuals jointly appointed by EAC and NIST will be published in the Federal Register as well as on the Commission's website. Pursuant to HAVA and the TGDC Charter, the EAC is publishing this notice of vacancy on the TGDC for a representative of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. This vacancy shall be filled through a joint appointment by the EAC and NIST.

Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the extension of 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 proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

This information collection request contains:

(1) OMB No.: 1910-5197;

(2) Information Collection Request Title: Output and Outcome Metrics for Financial Assistance and Rebates;

(3) Type of Request: Extension of an ICR;

(4) Purpose: Given the historic level of investment represented by Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act programs, it is incumbent on DOE to transparently track, report, and communicate the outcomes of DOE's financial assistance and rebate programs. Executive Order 14052 directs federal agencies to prioritize “investing public dollars efficiently and equitably, working to avoid waste, and focusing on measurable outcomes for the American people.” This guidance specifies the uniform collection, measurement, and reporting methodologies necessary for a set of key metrics that DOE can use to communicate the outcomes and outputs of funds awarded, ensuring consistency, transparency, and accountability to support Administration and program objectives. This Information Collection addresses a set of key cross-cutting metrics that will track across DOE programs to assess and communicate DOE's progress toward meeting key agency priorities, including creating quality jobs, supporting domestic manufacturing, increasing equity and justice, reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and providing pathways to private sector uptake. The metrics will inform transparent and consistent reporting of the key metrics across DOE awards and will include project-level location data covering outcomes and outputs for specific communities, allowing DOE to better understand who is affected by DOE funded programs and how. This approach will enable DOE to report metrics at the agency, office, portfolio, and program levels and will provide data that can help evaluate the efficiency and equity of the programs, educate the design and implementation of future programs, and identify and address potential waste. DOE proposes to collect information through applications and supporting documents information necessary to determine that whether rebate applicants meet the specified statutory criteria to receive payments under the equipment rebate programs;

(5) Annual Estimated Number of Respondents: 59,625;

(6) Annual Estimated Number of Total Responses: 88,125;

(7) Annual Estimated Number of Burden Hours: 98,250;

(8) Annual Estimated Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost Burden: $0.

Statutory Authority: Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act, 31 U.S.C. 6301-6308; Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13).

This document of the Department of Energy was signed on June 30, 2023, by David Crane, Under Secretary for Infrastructure, pursuant to delegated authority from the Secretary of Energy. 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 .

Rate Order No. SWPA-80 is approved and placed into effect on an interim basis for the period July 15, 2023, through September 30, 2023, for the following rate schedule:

Rate Schedule P-13B, Wholesale Rates for Hydro Peaking Power , which supersedes the existing Rate Schedule P-13A, Wholesale Rates for Hydro Peaking Power.

Southwestern's Administrator determined that a change to the Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time was needed to provide Southwestern with more flexibility and greater certainty when making replacement power purchases, and better align Southwestern with regional organized energy market considerations. Rate Schedule P-13B replaces the existing Rate Schedule P-13A and will expire on September 30, 2023. Rate Schedule P-13B updates the Peaking Energy Schedule Submission time from 2:30 p.m. Central Prevailing Time (CPT) to 8:30 a.m. CPT and allows the Southwestern's Administrator to change the Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time no more than once per year to a time no earlier than 8:00 a.m. CPT and no later than 9:00 a.m. CPT. Additionally, in response to comments received, Rate Schedule P-13B includes a new Section 4.2.3 that, for a transition period of approximately two months, provides for customers to reduce their Peaking Energy schedules submitted for the next day after the 8:30 a.m. Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time, provided that such adjustments: (1) do not increase the amount of Peaking Energy scheduled for any one hour; (2) are limited to a 25 percent reduction in Peaking Energy scheduled for any one hour; and (3) are coordinated with Southwestern's Scheduling and Operations staff no later than 2:00 p.m. on the day prior to schedule implementation. Additional responses to comments received on the proposed Rate Schedule P-13B published in the Federal Register on April 5, 2023 (Proposed Rate Schedule P-13B), are contained in the Rate Order.

Pursuant to Sections 301(b) and 302(a) of the Department of Energy Organization Act, Public Law 42 U.S.C. 7151(b) and 7152(a), the functions of the Secretary of the Interior and the Federal Power Commission under Section 5 of the Flood Control Act of 1944, 16 U.S.C. 825s, relating to the Southwestern Power Administration (Southwestern), were transferred to, and vested in the Secretary of Energy. By Delegation Order No. S1-DEL-RATES-2016, effective November 19, 2016, the Secretary of Energy delegated: (1) the authority to develop power and transmission rates to Southwestern's Administrator; (2) the authority to confirm, approve, and place such rates into effect on an interim basis to the Deputy Secretary of Energy; and (3) the authority to confirm, approve, and place into effect on a final basis, or to remand or disapprove such rates, to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). By Delegation Order No. S1-DEL-S3-2023, effective April 10, 2023, the Secretary of Energy also delegated the authority to confirm, approve, and place such rates into effect on an interim basis to the Under Secretary for Infrastructure. By Redelegation Order No. S3-DEL-SWPA1-2023, effective April 10, 2023, the Under Secretary for Infrastructure redelegated the authority to confirm, approve, and place such rates into effect on an interim basis to the Southwestern Administrator.

Pursuant to that delegated authority, the Southwestern Administrator has issued this interim rate order.

Originally established by Order 1865, Secretary of the Interior, dated August 31, 1943 and effective September 1, 1943 (8 FR 12142 (Sept. 3, 1943)), Southwestern is authorized by Congress to market the hydroelectric power and energy from Federal dams controlled by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), pursuant to Section 302(a)(1) of the Department of Energy Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7152(a)(1)), Section 5 of the Flood Control Act of 1944 (16 U.S.C. 825s), and Public Law 95-456 (16 U.S.C. 825s-3). Guidelines for preparation of power repayment studies are included in Department of Energy (DOE) Order No. RA 6120.2 (Sept. 20, 1979), entitled Power Marketing Administration Financial Reporting. Procedures for public participation in power and transmission rate adjustments of the Power Marketing Administrations are found at title 10, part 903, subpart A of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR part 903). Procedures for the confirmation and approval of rates for the Federal Power Marketing Administrations are found at title 18, part 300, subpart L of the Code of Federal Regulations (18 CFR part 300).

Southwestern markets power from 24 multi-purpose reservoir projects with hydroelectric power facilities constructed and operated by the Corps. These projects are located in Arkansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Texas. Southwestern's marketing area includes these states plus Kansas and Louisiana. The costs associated with 22 of these 24 hydropower projects are repaid with revenues received under the Integrated System rates. These rates also cover the costs of Southwestern's transmission facilities that consist of 1,381 miles of high-voltage transmission lines, 27 substations, and 46 microwave and VHF radio sites. Additionally, Southwestern markets power from two hydropower projects in southeastern Texas, Sam Rayburn Dam and Robert D. Willis. These projects are isolated hydraulically, electrically, and financially from the Integrated System, and are repaid via separate rate schedules and therefore are not addressed in this Order.

On September 30, 2013, in Rate Order No. SWPA-66, the Deputy Secretary of Energy placed into effect Southwestern's Integrated System rate schedules (P-13, NFTS-13, and EE-13) on an interim basis for the period October 1, 2013 to September 30, 2017. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) confirmed and approved Southwestern's interim Integrated System rates on a final basis on January 9, 2014 for a period ending September 30, 2017.

Southwestern re-designated Integrated System rate schedule “NFTS-13” as “NFTS-13A” with no revenue adjustment. In Rate Order No. SWPA-71, the Deputy Secretary of Energy placed into effect Southwestern's rate schedule NFTS-13A on an interim basis beginning January 1, 2017. FERC confirmed and approved NFTS-13A on a final basis on March 9, 2017.

On September 13, 2017, in Rate Order No. SWPA-72, the Deputy Secretary of Energy extended all of Southwestern's Integrated System rate schedules (P-13, NTFS-13A, and EE-13) for two years, for the period of October 1, 2017 through September 30, 2019.

Southwestern re-designated Integrated System rate schedule “P-13” as “P-13A” with no revenue adjustment. In Rate Order No. SWPA-73, the Assistant Secretary for Electricity placed into effect Southwestern's rate schedule P-13A on an interim basis beginning July 15, 2019. FERC confirmed and approved P-13A on a final basis on August 29, 2019.

On September 22, 2019, in Rate Order No. SWPA-74, the Assistant Secretary for Electricity extended all of Southwestern's Integrated System rate schedules (P-13A, NFTS-13A, EE-13) for two years, for the period of October 1, 2019 through September 30, 2021.

On August 30, 2021, in Rate Order No. SWPA-77, the Administrator, Southwestern, extended all of Southwestern's Integrated System rate schedules (P-13A, NFTS-13A, EE-13) for two years, for the period of October 1, 2021 through September 30, 2023.

Southwestern must at times make replacement capacity and energy purchases to fulfill its contractual obligations associated with the delivery of Hydro Peaking Power as required through the majority of Power Sales Contracts that utilize Southwestern's Integrated System rate schedules. Historically, a significant portion of needed replacement power purchases were made through pre-arranged Purchase Power Agreements (PPAs), many of which were capacity and energy “call options” that allowed Southwestern to schedule the energy as needed after the historic Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time of 2:00 p.m. Central Prevailing Time (CPT). In 2019, Southwestern implemented a rate schedule change to move the Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time to 2:30 p.m. CPT. To facilitate the 30-minute shift in the Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time, Southwestern negotiated with its bilateral trading partners at the time to shift the call option strike time later by 30 minutes as well. Over the last several years, even prior to 2019, the role of FERC-approved reliability transmission organizations (RTOs) in Southwestern's marketing region has increased to the point where the majority of Southwestern's traditional bi-lateral trading partners are members of or participants in RTO energy markets. The regional organized day-ahead energy markets close by 9:30 a.m. CPT, which means that Southwestern's call option trading partners lose the opportunity to bid their resources into the day-ahead markets if they allow Southwestern to wait until the afternoon to determine whether to call on the capacity and energy. Additionally, the planning reserve margins for the RTOs surrounding Southwestern have either been increased or are in the process of being increased which has led to entities keeping their resources within their own portfolios to ensure their own resource adequacy. These two complications have led to increased pricing and decreased flexibility in the bilateral PPA offers available to Southwestern as well as a decrease in the availability of offers for firm, deliverable capacity and energy in recent months. As a strategy for addressing this issue, Southwestern has recently become a Market Participant of the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO), which enables Southwestern to purchase physical and financial energy from the MISO Day-Ahead and Real-Time energy markets. Southwestern is also exploring becoming a Market Participant in the Southwest Power Pool (SPP). Both the MISO and SPP day-ahead energy markets close bidding at 9:30 a.m. CPT every day. In order to best utilize regional organized day-ahead energy markets as a cost-competitive and risk-management option for replacement energy purchases, Southwestern must have increased certainty about its Peaking Energy obligations before 9:30 a.m. the day before the Peaking Energy will be delivered. Further, Southwestern expects that earlier day-ahead certainty of Peaking Energy schedules will provide Southwestern with additional options when seeking new PPAs, as Southwestern could accept a strike time prior to the closing times of regional organized day-ahead energy markets and mitigate the lost opportunity concerns of trading partners. Ultimately, Southwestern's effective participation in regional organized day-ahead energy markets as well as the ability to attract more cost-competitive PPAs will best ensure Southwestern can procure sufficient energy to meet its contractual obligations at the lowest costs while limiting the purchase of unneeded energy. Reduced risk and greater surety in the delivery of Federal Power and Energy, as well as any cost savings realized by Southwestern, will be to the benefit of all Integrated System customers for which Southwestern has the contractual obligation to provide replacement power.

Therefore, Southwestern's Administrator determined that Section 4.2, Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time, should be modified to establish the Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time as on or before 8:30 a.m. Central Prevailing Time (CPT) of the day preceding the day for delivery of Peaking Energy. Additionally, Section 4.2.2, Procedure for Adjusting the Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time, which allows the Southwestern Administrator to adjust the Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time no more than once annually should be updated to allow for a submission time no earlier than 8:00 a.m. CPT and no later than 9:00 a.m. CPT. These updates are expected to provide Southwestern with more flexibility and greater certainty when making replacement power purchases, and better align Southwestern with regional organized energy market considerations. After considering comments received, Southwestern's Administrator determined that a new Section 4.2.3 should be added to provide for an approximate two-month transition period during which customers will be allowed to reduce their Peaking Energy schedules submitted for the next day after the 8:30 a.m. Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time, provided that such adjustments: (1) do not increase the amount of Peaking Energy scheduled for any one hour; (2) are limited to a 25 percent reduction in Peaking Energy scheduled for any one hour; and (3) are coordinated with Southwestern's Scheduling and Operations staff no later than 2:00 p.m. on the day prior to schedule implementation. The changes to Rate Schedule P-13A, which will be delineated as Rate Schedule P-13B, is a change to a rate schedule in accordance with 18 CFR part 300.

Notice of a proposed rate schedule change was published in the Federal Register April 5, 2023 (88 FR 20163). The notice advised parties of the Proposed Rate Schedule P-13B and an associated public consultation and comment period to provide for an open and transparent process. Comments were accepted through May 5, 2023. Southwestern received five responses containing comments on the Proposed Rate Schedule P-13B. In finalizing the Rate Schedule P-13B, Southwestern reviewed and considered all comments received during the public consultation and comment period. The following is a summary of comments received and Southwestern's response to those comments.

Comment 1: Three commenters acknowledged the regional capacity challenges that Southwestern and other entities are facing: Arkansas Electric Cooperative Corporation (AECC) “understands the capacity situation that exists”; City Water and Light Plant of the City of Jonesboro, Arkansas (Jonesboro) “empathizes with the lack of capacity that [Southwestern] and other utilities in our region are facing”; and the Southwestern Power Resources Association (SPRA), which represents the interests of consumer-owned electric systems that are customers of Southwestern, “recognize[s] the difficult position that [Southwestern] and all utilities in our region are facing with the lack of capacity.”

Response 1: As stated above, regional capacity challenges are a driving factor for Southwestern's decision. Rate Schedule P-13B allows Southwestern to better align itself with the closing times of regional organized day-ahead energy markets, and therefore be better positioned to utilize those markets and/or enter into PPAs that provide consideration of those markets to ensure Southwestern is able to meet its mission of marketing Federal hydropower at the lowest possible costs.

Comment 2: Four commenters noted that their Federal hydropower allocation is a valuable portion of their energy portfolios: AECC “appreciate[s] the great value that [Southwestern] has provided in the past few years”; Associated Electric Cooperative, Inc. (AECI) “views its longstanding partnership with [Southwestern] as integral to AECI's mission to provide the lowest cost and reliable wholesale power to its membership”; Jonesboro's “Federal Hydropower Allocation is a critical resource in [its] wholesale power portfolio”; and SPRA stated that “Federal hydropower is a valued piece of the portfolio for the members of SPRA.”

Response 2: Southwestern works hard to maintain and improve the value of Federal hydropower in its region while providing wholesale power to its preference customers at the lowest possible costs.

Comment 3: Three commenters expressed appreciation for their partnerships with Southwestern: AECC “appreciates [Southwestern] working with customers”; Jonesboro and Southwestern “have a long history or partnering to support the overall benefit of all [Southwestern's] customers” and “are very thankful for this partnership”; and SPRA has “long enjoyed working with [Southwestern] to address concerns that could threaten the value or reliability of federal hydropower.”

Response 3: Southwestern also appreciates and works hard to foster the collaborative relationship it has with its customers.

Comment 4: ARKMO, a group consisting of five municipally-owned utilities, located in Northeast Arkansas and Southeast Missouri, all of which are Southwestern customers, stated that “as small municipal utilities the ARKMO group members are impacted significantly through their [Southwestern] rates. Because of this, the ARKMO group is in support of moving the peaking schedule submission time to 8:30 a.m.”

Response 4: Southwestern appreciates ARKMO's acknowledgement of the beneficial aspects of this rate schedule change on its Integrated System customers for which Southwestern has the contractual obligation to provide replacement power. As noted, the purpose of this change is to facilitate Southwestern's effective participation in regional organized day-ahead energy markets and increase Southwestern's ability to attract more cost-competitive PPAs.

Comment 5: ARKMO stated that the proposed change will allow Southwestern “to better manage their resources. The ARKMO group is in support of [Southwestern] making strategic decisions to help maintain lower rates for their customers.”

Response 5: As noted above, this change allows Southwestern to better align itself with the closing times of regional organized day-ahead energy markets. Southwestern's effective participation in regional organized day-ahead energy markets as well as the ability to attract more cost-competitive PPAs will best ensure Southwestern can procure sufficient energy to meet its contractual obligations at the lowest costs while limiting the purchase of unneeded energy. Reduced risk and greater surety in the delivery of Federal Power and Energy, as well as any cost savings realized by Southwestern, will be to the benefit of all Integrated System customers for which Southwestern has the contractual obligation to provide replacement power, and will ensure Southwestern meets its mission of marketing Federal hydropower at the lowest possible costs.

Comment 6: Three commenters indicated a desire for Southwestern to revisit the need for the Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time change in the future to look for a more mutually agreeable solution to Southwestern's capacity and energy concerns: AECC hopes the conditions which have caused the capacity situation that exists “change soon to allow for a return to the scheduling timeline that exists today”; Jonesboro “respectfully encourage[s] [Southwestern] to continue its partnership with the customers and evaluate solutions that (1) provide for the lowest cost power purchase adder and (2) provide for the overall maximum benefit for [Southwestern] customers”; and SPRA is ” looking forward to a robust conversation during SPRA's upcoming September meeting to analyze the data that was gathered during this time, and continuing to work with [Southwestern] to produce solutions which ensure the most value for all federal hydropower customers.”

Response 6: Southwestern will evaluate the impact of the Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time after implementation and will continue to informally and periodically discuss the change as well as other possible solutions with its customers. The ability to optimize energy purchases via regional organized day-ahead energy markets will help alleviate its capacity and energy shortage issues. Southwestern will continue to monitor its progress and engage its customers to ensure the most effective use of the Federal hydropower system consistent with sound business principles.

Comment 7: Two commenters, Jonesboro and SPRA, stated that Southwestern should use a “temporary solution that allows for the total reduction of a peaking schedule made to [Southwestern] by 8:30 a.m. by no more than 25 percent of the total of each individual hour submitted. Any proposed reductions must be coordinated with [Southwestern] Operations and Merchant Staff and completed by no later than 2:00 p.m. the day prior to energy flow.”

Response 7: As a result of informal discussion with customers and in response to comments received, to mitigate some of the immediate impact of this change Southwestern has included a new Section 4.2.3 in Rate Schedule P-13B that, for a transition period of approximately two months, allows customers to reduce their Peaking Energy schedules submitted for the next day after the 8:30 a.m. Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time, provided that such adjustments: (1) do not increase the amount of Peaking Energy scheduled for any one hour; (2) are limited to a 25 percent reduction in Peaking Energy scheduled for any one hour; and (3) are coordinated with Southwestern's Scheduling and Operations staff no later than 2:00 p.m. on the day prior to schedule implementation.

Comment 8: Two commenters noted that the Proposed Rate Schedule P-13B will limit customers' ability to optimize their Federal hydropower resource in day-ahead markets: AECC “estimates a loss in energy value of 15-20 percent” and “a trim on the capacity of 82%” which “would have been a loss in value for 2022 of 23%”, and AECI stated that “limiting [Southwestern] customers' flexibility to choose when to call on peaking power in this way will drive unnecessary cost increases to AECI's end-use members.”

Response 8: Southwestern has determined that purchased power from regional organized energy markets is one of the more cost-effective and viable replacement power options available. Having more certainty about Southwestern's obligations to customers prior to the closing times of regional organized day-ahead energy markets will ensure that when a resource shortage occurs, Southwestern can procure sufficient energy to meet its obligations at the lowest costs while limiting the purchase of unneeded energy. Any cost savings realized by Southwestern will be to the benefit of all Integrated System customers for which Southwestern has the contractual obligation to provide replacement power.

Comment 9: AECC stated it “would appreciate [Southwestern's] further consideration of allowing for increased flexibility, such as allowing a customer to agree to trim capacity, keeping energy the same, in return for allowing for the customer to have the ability to offer the energy into the market.”

Response 9: Although this proposal would lower Southwestern's capacity obligation, there would still be concerns regarding Southwestern's next-day energy obligation and Southwestern's limited ability to optimize regional organized day-ahead energy market purchases. Southwestern has determined that a Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time that is prior to the closing times of regional organized day-ahead energy markets is in the best interest of Southwestern customers overall. Southwestern intends to move forward with Rate Schedule P-13B, which allows the Administrator to change the Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time no more than once per year to a time no earlier than 8:00 a.m. CPT and no later than 9:00 a.m. CPT. Additionally, Rate Schedule P-13B includes a new Section 4.2.3 that, for a transition period of approximately two months, allows customers limited ability to reduce their Peaking Energy schedules submitted for the next day after the 8:30 a.m. Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time.

Comment 10: AECC provided a “proposed revision to [Southwestern] Rate Schedule P-13A” which updates Section 4.2.2 to state the “Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time of 2:00 p.m. CPT, as noted in Section 4.2 of this Rate Schedule, may be adjusted by the Administrator, Southwestern, to a time no earlier than 8:30 a.m. CPT and no later than 2:00 p.m. CPT.”

Response 10: Southwestern has determined that a Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time that is prior to the closing times of regional organized day-ahead energy markets is in the best interest of Southwestern and its Integrated System customers for which Southwestern has the contractual obligation to provide replacement power. Southwestern intends to move forward with Rate Schedule P-13B, which allows the Administrator to change the Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time no more than once per year to a time no earlier than 8:00 a.m. CPT and no later than 9:00 a.m. CPT. Additionally, in response to comments received, Southwestern included a new Section 4.2.3 in Rate Schedule P-13B that, for a transition period of approximately two months, allows customers limited ability reduce their Peaking Energy schedules submitted for the next day after the 8:30 a.m. Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time.

Comment 11: AECI stated that the “unilateral change to [Southwestern's] Peaking Power Rate Schedule does not constitute a minor rate adjustment as it fails to adequately consider the significant negative economic impact that removal of the 2:30 p.m. peaking energy submission time will have on integrated system customers.”

Response 11: “Minor rate adjustment” is a defined term under 10 CFR part 903.2. Under 10 CFR part 903.2, determinations as to whether a rate adjustment qualifies as “minor” are based upon the revenue change to Southwestern's Integrated System as a whole and not the subjective impacts on an individual customer or set of customers. This comment afforded Southwestern an opportunity to reexamine its initial classification of the proposed change as a “minor rate adjustment.” The terms “rate,” “rate adjustment,” and “minor rate adjustment” are all defined in 10 CFR 903.2. A pre-requisite to any change being qualified as a “minor rate adjustment” is that it involves a “rate” and that it constitutes a “rate adjustment.” Upon further review, Southwestern has determined that this action does not meet the definition of a “rate adjustment,” and thus should not be classified as a “minor rate adjustment.” Under 10 CFR 903.2 a “rate adjustment” is defined as “a change in an existing rate or rates, or the establishment of a rate or rates for a new service.” The definition goes on to expressly state a rate adjustment “. . . does not include a change in rate schedule provisions or in contract terms . . .” Instead, the action should be classified simply as a change in the terms or provisions of the “Rate Schedule” that does not change the existing “rates” (the monetary charges or formula for computing such charges) to Southwestern's customers as provided for in Rate Schedule P-13A.

Comment 12: AECI stated Southwestern's “assertion that switching to an earlier peaking power submission deadline will increase its ability to provide shortfall capacity pre-supposes that power will be available during those needed hours. Thus, [Southwestern's] plan would on-balance create at least as much uncertainty as it attempts to resolve and would expose [Southwestern] customers to greater price risk in the organized markets.”

Response 12: Southwestern has been and is exposed to price risk through past and present PPAs that have a variable energy price based on a gas index or energy market nodal pricing. Additionally, such PPAs come with a capacity premium. The ability to optimize Southwestern's participation in regional organized day-ahead energy markets through an earlier Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time while maintaining optionality with PPAs, as needed, will allow Southwestern to better manage risk than if Southwestern were to rely solely on the recent PPA offers it has received.

Comment 13: AECI stated Southwestern “provides no data showing there are significant and recurring capacity shortfalls.”

Response 13: Southwestern has experienced recurring capacity shortfalls the last several years due to both scheduled and unscheduled maintenance outages. Long-term unit outages (defined as an outage anticipated to last longer than three months) are reported weekly to customers, including AECI, via a Monday Morning Report, and short-term outages were reported on that same report until October 2021. Additionally, Southwestern has provided outage information via regular reports to its customer organization, the Southwestern Power Resources Association (SPRA). Southwestern will make information supporting the assertion that it has experienced significant and recurring capacity shortfalls available on request.

Comment 14: AECI stated that “no supporting data and hence no substantial evidence underlies either assertion” that “ `the number of PPAs available to Southwestern has decreased and the pricing of available PPAs has increased' ”.

Response 14: In August 2022, Southwestern issued a request for proposals (RFP) for firm schedulable/dispatchable capacity and associated energy. No proposals were received. Southwestern issued an RFP for firm energy deliverable to Southwestern's transmission system in January and February 2023. Three proposals were received but only one of them met Southwestern's requested requirements but with energy pricing significantly higher than historical rates. In April 2023, Southwestern received additional proposals, none of which were for firm deliverable capacity. All proposals contained elements that were significantly higher in cost than historical responses. Even if more PPAs were available to Southwestern, participation in regional organized energy markets offers an additional tool for Southwestern to manage risk.

Comment 15: AECI stated that Southwestern's “scheduling rationale appears to ironically rely on creating `better options when seeking new PPAs' when the absence of previous PPAs is driving the change.”

Response 15: The current need for Rate Schedule P-13B is to allow Southwestern to better optimize its participation in regional organized day-ahead energy markets while competitively priced, firm, deliverable capacity and energy options are limited. Southwestern plans to utilize both regional organized energy markets as well as PPAs, when competitive, to manage risk and meet its contractual obligations.

Comment 16: AECI stated that “amending the day-ahead peaking scheduling requirement on all days of the year for the entire capacity of the integrated system, to guard against a relatively rare convergence of high customer needs, insufficient hydropower resources, and insufficient market liquidity is unnecessary and inconsistent with [Southwestern's] mission under Section 5 of the Flood Control Act of 1944 to encourage the most widespread use at the lowest possible rates of Federal hydropower consistent with sound business principles.”

Response 16: As Southwestern moves towards increased participation in regional organized energy markets, it is anticipated that Southwestern will benefit from the earlier Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time through having increased knowledge regarding Peaking Energy obligations prior to market close on a regular basis. This will help Southwestern prevent against either making purchases in excess of its energy needs, thereby unnecessarily increasing costs, or making purchases less than its energy needs, at which point the energy market liquidity is significantly reduced when procuring the remainder of needed energy. Furthermore, no matter the rarity of the situation at hand, Southwestern contends the certainty of energy delivery in accordance with our contractual obligations is paramount to its mission in accordance with Section 5 of the Flood Control Act of 1944.

Comment 17: AECI provided a “proposed revision to [Southwestern] Rate Schedule P-13A” Section 4.2.2 which would: (1) require that “Concurrent with the Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time, customers designated by Administrator, Southwestern, are required to submit to Southwestern a preliminary Peaking Energy Schedule for the second following day” in addition to the day-ahead peaking energy schedule by the then in-effect Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time; (2) allow for the “Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time of 2:00 p.m. CPT” to be “adjusted by the Administrator, Southwestern, to a time no earlier than 8:30 a.m. CPT and no later than 2:00 p.m. CPT”; (3) require that the Administrator “make a determination daily on the need to adjust the Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time, limited to the extent conditions required, based on preliminary Peaking Energy Schedules, regional energy market conditions, and/or operational considerations” and (4) require that the Administrator “notify customers of the determination to adjust the Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time via electronic communication no later than 7:30 a.m. of the day the Peaking Energy Schedule Submissions are due.”

Response 17: The suggested changes have been considered and Southwestern has chosen not to implement any of the changes for the following reasons: (1) the preliminary two-day-ahead schedule is allowed to change without any restrictions prior to being submitted as a final day-ahead schedule and therefore cannot be reliably used by Southwestern in making operational decisions; (2) the analysis of a preliminary schedule and daily determination of the Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time creates a significant additional workload and administrative burden for Southwestern's staff with no corresponding benefit for customers overall; (3) submission of a two-day-ahead preliminary schedule is likely to create a burden for a majority of Southwestern's customers, which currently submit Peaking Energy schedules prior to 8:30 a.m. CPT rather than waiting until closer to the 2:30 p.m. CPT Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time as permitted by the current Rate Schedule P-13A (although the comment allows for Southwestern's Administrator to select specific customers which are required to submit a two-day-ahead schedule, Southwestern applies rate schedule provisions equally to all customers); (4) frequent changes to the Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time could easily cause confusion among Southwestern's customers; (5) Southwestern desires to develop rate schedules which are as consistent as possible for its customers, and frequent changes to the Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time would increase volatility of daily operations; and (6) as noted previously, Southwestern has determined that a Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time that is coordinated with the closing times of regional organized day-ahead energy markets is in the best interest of Southwestern and its Integrated System customers for which Southwestern has the contractual obligation to provide replacement power. Southwestern intends to move forward with Rate Schedule P-13B, which allows the Administrator to change the Peaking Energy Schedule Submission Time no more than once per year to a time no earlier than 8:00 a.m. CPT and no later than 9:00 a.m. CPT.

Information regarding Rate Schedule P-13B, including public comments received, is available for public review in the offices of Southwestern Power Administration, One West Third Street, Suite 1500, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74103. Southwestern in-effect rate schedules are available on the Southwestern website at www.energy.gov/swpa.

Rate Schedule P-13B will repay all costs of the Integrated System including amortization of the power investment consistent with the provisions of Department of Energy Order No. RA 6120.2. In accordance with Delegation Order No. 00-037.00B, effective November 19, 2016, and Section 5 of the Flood Control Act of 1944, the Administrator has determined that Rate Schedule P-13B is consistent with applicable law and the lowest possible rates consistent with sound business principles.

Southwestern previously determined that the rate change actions, placed into effect on October 1, 2013, fit within the following class of categorically excluded actions as listed in Appendix B to Subpart D of 10 CFR part 1021, DOE's Implementing Procedures and Guidelines of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347): B4.4 (Electric power marketing rate changes). Categorically excluded actions do not require preparation of either an environmental impact statement or an environmental assessment. On June 13, 2023, Southwestern determined that categorical exclusion B4.4 applies to the current action as well.

In view of the foregoing, and pursuant to delegated authority from the Secretary of Energy, I hereby confirm, approve, and place into effect on an interim basis, effective July 15, 2023, the Southwestern Integrated System Rate Schedule P-13B which shall remain in effect on an interim basis through September 30, 2023, or the FERC confirms and approves the rates on a final basis.

This document of the Department of Energy was signed on June 30, 2023, by Mike Wech, Administrator for Southwestern 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 DOE. This administrative process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon publication in the Federal Register .