This committee meeting is available to the public through the registration link above. Any interested member of the public may listen to the meeting. An open comment period will be provided to allow members of the public to make a statement as time allows. Per the Federal Advisory Committee Act, public minutes of the meeting will include a list of persons who are present at the meeting. If joining via phone, callers can expect to incur regular charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, according to their wireless plan. The Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Closed captioning will be available by selecting “CC” in the meeting platform. To request additional accommodations, please email lschiller@usccr.gov at least 10 business days prior to the meeting.

Members of the public are entitled to submit written comments; the comments must be received within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be emailed to Kayla Fajota at kfajota@usccr.gov. Persons who desire additional information may contact the Regional Programs Coordination Unit at (434) 515-2395.

Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Coordination Unit, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Records of the meeting will be available via the file sharing website, www.box.com. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's website, www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Regional Programs Coordination Unit at the above phone number.

Committee meetings are available to the public through a registration link (above). Any interested members of the public may attend committee meetings. An open comment period will be provided to allow members of the public to make oral statements as time allows. Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, public minutes of each meeting will include a list of persons who are present. If joining via phone, callers can expect to incur regular charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, according to their wireless plan. The Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Closed captioning is available by selecting “CC” in the meeting platform. To request additional accommodations, please email svillanueva@usccr.gov at least 10 business days prior to the meeting.

Members of the public are entitled to submit written comments; the comments must be received in the regional office within 30 days following the scheduled meeting. Written comments may be emailed to Sarah Villanueva at svillanueva@usccr.gov. Persons who desire additional information may contact the Regional Programs Coordination Unit at 1-202-656-8937.

Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Coordination Unit Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Records of the meetings will be available via the file sharing website, https://bit.ly/3BrSCZO. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's website, https://www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Regional Programs Coordination Unit at svillanueva@usccr.gov.

On September 13, 2024, Commerce published the Preliminary Determination in the Federal Register and aligned this countervailing duty (CVD) final determination with the final determination in the less-than-fair value investigation of 2,4-D from China, in accordance with section 705(a)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act) and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(4). 1 For a summary of the events that occurred since the Preliminary Determination, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum. 2 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/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx.

The product covered by this investigation is 2,4-D from China. For a complete description of the scope of this investigation, see Appendix I.

We received no comments from interested parties on the scope of the investigation as it appeared in the Preliminary Determination. Therefore, we made no changes to the scope of the investigation from that published in the Preliminary Determination for the final determination.

The subsidy programs under investigation and the issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs filed by the parties in this investigation are discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. For a list of the issues raised by interested parties and addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, see Appendix II.

As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, Commerce conducted verification of the subsidy information reported by company respondents Jiangxi Tianyu Chemical Co., Ltd. (Tianyu) and Shandong Rainbow Agrosciences Co., Ltd. (Rainbow Agrosciences), and of the Government of China's questionnaire responses pertaining to the Export Buyer Credit Program. 3

Commerce conducted this investigation in accordance with section 701 of the Act. For each of the subsidy programs found to be countervailable, Commerce determines that there is a subsidy, i.e., a financial contribution by an “authority” that gives rise to a benefit to the recipient, and that the subsidy is specific. 4 For a full description of the methodology underlying our final determination, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

In making this final determination, Commerce relied, in part, on facts otherwise available, including with an adverse inference, pursuant to sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act. For a full discussion of our application of adverse facts available (AFA), see the Preliminary Determination   5 and the Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comments 1, 5, 6, and 7.

Based on our review and analysis of the information received during verification and comments received from parties, we made certain changes to the subsidy rate calculations for Rainbow Agrosciences and Tianyu for the final determination. For a discussion of these changes, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

Pursuant to section 705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act, Commerce will determine an all-others rate equal to the weighted-average countervailable subsidy rates established for exporters and/or producers individually investigated, excluding any zero and de minimis countervailable subsidy rates, and any rates determined entirely under section 776 of the Act. As discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, for the final determination we assigned a rate based entirely on AFA to Rainbow Agrosciences. Therefore, the only rate that is not zero, de minimis, or based entirely on facts otherwise available is the rate calculated for Tianyu. Consequently, Commerce assigned the rate calculated for Tianyu as the rate for all other producers and exporters, pursuant to section 705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act.

Commerce determines that the following estimated countervailable subsidy rates exist for the period January 1, 2023, through December 31, 2023:

Commerce intends to disclose the calculations performed in this final determination within five days of its public announcement or, if there is no public announcement, within five days of the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register , in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

As a result of our Preliminary Determination, and pursuant to sections 703(d)(1)(B) and (d)(2) of the Act, we instructed U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to collect cash deposits and suspend liquidation of entries of 2,4-D from China that were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption, on or after September 13, 2024, the date of the publication of the Preliminary Determination in the Federal Register . 8 In accordance with section 703(d) of the Act, we instructed CBP to discontinue the suspension of liquidation of all entries of 2,4-D entered or withdrawn from warehouse, on or after January 11, 2025, the final day of provisional measures, but to continue the suspension of liquidation of all entries of 2,4-D on or before January 10, 2025.

If the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) issues a final affirmative injury determination, we will issue a CVD order, reinstate the suspension of liquidation under section 706(a) of the Act, and require a cash deposit of estimated countervailing duties for entries of 2,4-D in the amounts indicated above. If the ITC determines that material injury, or threat of material injury, does not exist, this proceeding will be terminated, and all estimated duties deposited or securities posted as a result of the suspension of liquidation will be refunded or canceled.

In accordance with section 705(d) of the Act, we will notify the ITC of our final affirmative determination that countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and exporters of 2,4-D from China. Because the final determination is affirmative, in accordance with section 705(b) of the Act, the ITC will make its final determination as to whether the domestic industry in the United States is materially injured, or threatened with material injury, by reason of imports of 2,4-D from China no later than 45 days after our final determination. In addition, we are making available to the ITC all non-privileged and non-proprietary information related to this investigation. We will allow the ITC access to all privileged and business proprietary information in our files, provided that the ITC confirms that it will not disclose such information, either publicly or under an administrative protective order (APO), without the written consent of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

If the ITC determines that material injury or threat of material injury does not exist, this proceeding will be terminated and all cash deposits will be refunded. If the ITC determines that such injury does exist, Commerce will issue a CVD order directing CBP to assess, upon further instruction by Commerce, countervailing duties on all imports of 2,4-D that are entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the effective date of the suspension of liquidation, as discussed above in the “Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation” section.

In the event that the ITC issues a final negative injury determination, this notice will serve as the only reminder to parties subject to an APO of their responsibility concerning the destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction.

This determination is issued and published in accordance with sections 705(d) and 777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.210(c).

On January 10, 2020, Commerce published the Orders on polyester textured yarn from China and India. 1 On December 2, 2024 Commerce published the notice of initiation of the first sunset reviews of the Orders, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). 2 On December 16, 2024, Commerce received a notice of intent to participate from the domestic interested parties, within the deadline specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(1)(i). 3 The domestic interested parties claimed interested party status under section 771(9)(C) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.102(b)(29)(v) as a manufacturer, producer, or wholesaler of the domestic like product in the United States. 4 On December 27, 2024, Commerce received an adequate substantive response from the domestic interested parties within the 30-day deadline specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i). 5 Commerce received no substantive response form the Governments of China or India or any respondent interested party.

On January 31, 2025, Commerce notified the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) that it did not receive an adequate substantive response from respondent interested parties. 6 As a result, Commerce conducted expedited (120-day) sunset reviews of the Orders, pursuant to section 751(c)(3)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(e)(1)(ii)(B)(2) and (C)(2).

The merchandise covered by the Orders is polyester textured yarn from China and India. For a complete description of the scope of the Orders, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum. 7

A complete discussion of all issues raised in these sunset reviews, including the likelihood of continuation or recurrence of subsidization and the countervailable subsidy rates likely to prevail if the Orders were to be revoked, is contained in the accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum. 8 A list of the topics discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum is attached as an appendix to this notice. The Issues and Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS), which is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov. In addition, complete versions of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at https://access.trade.gov/public/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx.

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

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

This notice serves as the only reminder to interested parties subject to an administrative protective order (APO) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a), 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.

Commerce is issuing and publishing these final results and this notice in accordance with sections 751(c), 752(b), and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.211(c)(5)(ii).

On September 13, 2024, Commerce published its Preliminary Determination in the in the Federal Register and aligned this countervailing duty (CVD) investigation with the final determination in the less-than-fair-value investigation of 2,4-D from India, in accordance with in accordance with section 705(a)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(4), Commerce aligned the final CVD determination with the final antidumping duty determination. 1 On October 31, 2024, Commerce issued its Post-Preliminary Analysis. 2 For a summary of the events that occurred since the Preliminary Determination, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum. 3 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/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx.

The product covered by this investigation is 2,4-D from India. For a complete description of the scope of this investigation, see Appendix I.

We received no comments from interested parties on the scope of the investigation as it appeared in the Preliminary Determination. Therefore, we made no changes to the scope of the investigation from that published in the Preliminary Determination for the final determination.

The subsidy programs under investigation, and the issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs that were submitted by interested parties in this investigation are discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. For a list of the issues raised by parties, and to which we responded in the Issues and Decision Memorandum, see Appendix II.

As provided in section 782(i) of the Act, in November 2024, Commerce conducted verification of the information reported by Atul Limited (Atul), Meghmani Organics Limited (MOL), and the Government of India (GOI) for use in our final determination. We used standard verification procedures, including an examination of relevant account records and original source documents provided by Atul, MOL, and the GOI. 4

Commerce conducted this investigation in accordance with section 701 of the Act. For each of the subsidy programs found to be countervailable, Commerce determines that there is a subsidy, i.e., a financial contribution by an “authority” that gives rise to a benefit to the recipient, and that the subsidy is specific. 5 For a full description of the methodology underlying our final determination, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

In making this final determination, Commerce relied, in part, on facts available, including adverse facts available (AFA), pursuant to sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act. For a full discussion of our application of AFA, see the section “Use of Facts Otherwise Available and Adverse Inferences” in the accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum.

Based on our review and analysis of the information reviewed during verification and analysis of comments received from interested parties, for this final determination, we made certain changes to the countervailable subsidy rate calculations for Atul, MOL, and for all other producers/exporters, including the addition of subsidy programs included in the Post-Preliminary Analysis. For a discussion of these changes, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

In accordance with section 705(c)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, we calculated an individual estimated countervailable subsidy rate for the two mandatory respondents, Atul and MOL. Section 705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act states that, for companies not individually investigated, Commerce will determine an all-others rate equal to the weighted-average countervailable subsidy rates established for exporters and/or producers individually investigated, excluding any zero and de minimis countervailable subsidy rates, and any rates determined entirely under section 776 of the Act.

In this investigation, we continue to calculate individual estimated countervailable subsidy rates for Atul and MOL that are not zero, de minimis, or based entirely on facts otherwise available. We, therefore, continue to calculate the all-others rate using a weighted average of the individual estimated subsidy rates calculated for the examined respondents (Atul and MOL) using each company's publicly-ranged sales value for their exports to the United States of subject merchandise, 6 in accordance with section 705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act.

Commerce determines that the following estimated net countervailable subsidy rates exist for the period January 1, 2023, through December 31, 2023:

Commerce intends to disclose its calculations performed to interested parties in this final determination within five days of its public announcement or, if there is no public announcement, within five days of the date of the publication of this notice in the Federal Register, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

As a result of our Preliminary Determination, and pursuant to sections 703(d)(1)(B) and (d)(2) of the Act, Commerce instructed U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to collect cash deposits and suspend liquidation of entries of subject merchandise from India that were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after September 13, 2024, the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination in the Federal Register . 8 In accordance with section 703(d) of the Act, we instructed CBP to discontinue the suspension of liquidation of all entries of subject merchandise entered or withdrawn from warehouse, on or after January 11, 2025, the final day of provisional measures, but to continue the suspension of liquidation of all entries of subject merchandise that were subject to suspension of liquidation on or before January 10, 2025.

If the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) issues a final affirmative injury determination, we will issue a CVD order, reinstate the suspension of liquidation under section 706(a) of the Act, and require a cash deposit of estimated countervailing duties for entries of subject merchandise in the amounts indicated above. Pursuant to section 705(c)(2) of the Act, if the ITC determines that material injury, or threat of material injury, does not exist, this proceeding will be terminated, and all estimated duties deposited or securities posted as a result of the suspension of liquidation will be refunded or cancelled.

In accordance with section 705(d) of the Act, Commerce will notify the ITC of its final affirmative determination that countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and exporters of 2,4-D from India. As Commerce's final determination is affirmative, in accordance with section 705(b) of the Act, the ITC will determine, within 45 days after this final determination, whether the domestic industry in the United States is materially injured, or threatened with material injury, by reason of import of 2,4-D from India. In addition, we are making available to the ITC all non-privileged and nonproprietary information related to this investigation. We will allow the ITC access to all privileged and business proprietary information in our files, provided the ITC confirms that it will not disclose such information, either publicly or under an administrative protective order (APO), without the written consent of the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance.

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

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

This determination is issued and published pursuant to sections 705(d) and 777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.210(c).

On May 13, 2009 and January 23, 2009, Commerce published in the Federal Register the AD and CVD orders, respectively, on welded line pipe from China. 1 On September 3, 2024, the ITC instituted, 2 and Commerce initiated, 3 the third sunset reviews of the Orders, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). As a result of its reviews, Commerce determined that revocation of the Orders would likely lead to the continuation or recurrence of dumping and countervailable subsidies, and therefore, notified the ITC of the magnitude of the margins of dumping and subsidy rates likely to prevail should the Orders be revoked. 4

On March 20, 2025, the ITC published its determination, pursuant to sections 751(c) and 752(a) of the Act, that revocation of the Orders would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time. 5

The merchandise covered by the Orders is circular welded carbon-quality steel pipe of a kind used for oil and gas pipelines (welded line pipe), not more than 406.4 mm (16 inches) in outside diameter, regardless of wall thickness, length, surface finish, end finish or stenciling.

The term “carbon quality steel” includes both carbon steel and carbon steel mixed with small amounts of alloying elements that may exceed the individual weight limits for non-alloy steels imposed in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Specifically, the term “carbon quality” includes products in which (1) iron predominates by weight over each of the other contained elements, (2) the carbon content is 2 percent or less by weight and (3) none of the elements listed below exceeds the quantity by weight respectively indicated:

(i) 2.00 percent of manganese,

(ii) 2.25 percent of silicon,

(iii) 1.00 percent of copper,

(iv) 0.50 percent of aluminum,

(v) 1.25 percent of chromium,

(vi) 0.30 percent of cobalt,

(vii) 0.40 percent of lead,

(viii) 1.25 percent of nickel,

(ix) 0.30 percent of tungsten,

(x) 0.012 percent of boron,

(xi) 0.50 percent of molybdenum,

(xii) 0.15 percent of niobium,

(xiii) 0.41 percent of titanium,

(xiv) 0.15 percent of vanadium, or

(xv) 0.15 percent of zirconium.

Welded line pipe is normally produced to specifications published by the American Petroleum Institute (API) (or comparable foreign specifications) including API A-25, 5LA, 5LB, and X grades from 42 and above, and/or any other proprietary grades or non-graded material. Nevertheless, all pipe meeting the physical description set forth above that is of a kind used in oil and gas pipelines, including all multiple-stenciled pipe with an API welded line pipe stencil is covered by the scope of the Orders.

Excluded from the scope are pipes of a kind used for oil and gas pipelines that are multiple-stenciled to a standard and/or structural specification and have one or more of the following characteristics: Is 32 feet in length or less; is less than 2.0 inches (50 mm) in outside diameter; has a galvanized and/or painted surface finish; or has a threaded and/or coupled end finish. (The term “painted” does not include coatings to inhibit rust in transit, such as varnish, but includes coatings such as polyester.)

The welded line pipe products that are the subject of the Orders are currently classifiable in the HTSUS under subheadings 7306.19.10.10, 7306.19.10.50, 7306.19.51.10, and 7306.19.51.50. While HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of the Orders is dispositive.

As a result of the determinations by Commerce and the ITC that revocation of the Orders would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping, countervailable subsidies, and material injury to an industry in the United States, pursuant to section 751(d)(2) of the Act, Commerce hereby orders the continuation of the Orders. U.S. Customs and Border Protection will continue to collect AD and CVD cash deposits at the rates in effect at the time of entry for all imports of subject merchandise.

The effective date of the continuation of the Orders will be March 20, 2025. 6 Pursuant to section 751(c)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.218(c)(2), Commerce intends to initiate the next five-year reviews of the Orders not later than 30 days prior to fifth anniversary of the date of the last determination by the ITC.

This notice also serves as a final reminder to parties subject to an 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 terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction.

These five-year (sunset) reviews and this notice are in accordance with sections 751(c) and 751(d)(2) of the Act and published in accordance with section 777(i) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.218(f)(4).

On November 14, 2024, Commerce published its Preliminary Determination in the in the Federal Register and invited interested parties to comment. 1 For a complete description of the events that followed the Preliminary Determination, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum. 2 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/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx.

The product covered by this investigation is 2,4-D from China. For a complete description of the scope of this investigation, see Appendix I.

We received no comments from interested parties on the scope of the investigation as it appeared in the Preliminary Determination. Therefore, we made no changes to the scope of the investigation from that published in the Preliminary Determination for the Final Determination.

As provided in section 782(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), Commerce conducted verification of the sales and factors of production information submitted by Thai Harvest Ltd. (Thai Harvest). 3 We used standard verification procedures, including an examination of relevant sales and accounting records, and original source documents provided by Thai Harvest.

All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs submitted by interested parties in this investigation are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum is attached to this notice as Appendix II.

Based on a review of the record and comments received from interested parties regarding the Preliminary Results, and in consideration of Commerce's verification findings, we determine that Thai Harvest's submitted information is incomplete and unreliable, warranting the application of facts available pursuant to section 776(a) of the Act. Further, due to the company's failure to act to the best of its ability, we find that Thai Harvest has significantly impeded Commerce's review and that application of an adverse inference (AFA) is warranted pursuant to section 776(b) of the Act. Accordingly, as Commerce determines that Thai Harvest's responses in this proceeding are unverifiable and the application of AFA appropriate, we conclude that the respondent did not demonstrate eligibility to qualify for a separate rate in this review and, thus, is considered a part of the China-wide entity for the final determination. 4 There were no additional changes to Commerce's Preliminary Determination.

In this final determination, consistent with the Preliminary Determination, 5 Commerce continues to find that the use of facts otherwise available, with adverse inferences, is warranted in determining the dumping rate for the China-wide entity, pursuant to sections 776(a) and (b) of the Act. There is no new information on the record that would cause us to reconsider our decision in the Preliminary Determination. Thus, we made no changes to our analysis or to the China-wide entity's dumping margin for the final determination. For a full description of the methodology underlying Commerce's final determination, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

In the Initiation Notice, 6 Commerce stated that it would calculate producer/exporter combination rates for the respondents that are eligible for a separate rate in this investigation. Policy Bulletin 05.1 describes this practice. 7 In this investigation, we preliminarily calculated producer/exporter combination rates for the sole entity that was found to be eligible for a separate rate ( i.e., Thai Harvest). However, as explained above, we determine that Thai Harvest is no longer eligible for a separate rate in this final determination and, as a result, all entities are now found to be part of the China-wide entity. As a result, Commerce had no need to calculate producer/exporter combination rates for this final determination.

Commerce determines that the following estimated weighted-average dumping margin exists for the period, July 1, 2023, through December 31, 2023:

Normally, Commerce discloses to interested parties the calculations performed in connection with a final determination within five days of its public announcement 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). However, because Commerce applied AFA to the mandatory respondents in this investigation in accordance with section 776 of the Act, and the applied AFA rate is based solely on the Petition, there are no calculations to disclose.

In accordance with section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, we will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to continue to suspend liquidation of all appropriate entries of subject merchandise, as described in Appendix I of this notice, which were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption, on or after November 14, 2024, the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination in the Federal Register . These suspension of liquidation instructions will remain in effect until further notice.

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

To determine the cash deposit rate, Commerce normally adjusts the estimated weighted-average dumping margin by the amount of export subsidies countervailed in a companion countervailing duty (CVD) proceeding, when CVD provisional measures are in effect. Accordingly, where Commerce has made a final affirmative determination for countervailable export subsidies, Commerce offsets the estimated weighted-average dumping margin by the appropriate CVD rate. Commerce has continued to adjust the cash deposit rate for export subsidies in the companion CVD investigation by the appropriate export subsidy rate as indicated in the above chart. However, the suspension of liquidation of provisional measures in the companion CVD case has been discontinued;  9 therefore, we are not instructing CBP to collect cash deposits based upon the adjusted estimated weighted-average dumping margin for those export subsidies at this time.

In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, Commerce will notify the ITC of its final affirmative determination of sales at LTFV. Because Commerce's final determination is affirmative, in accordance with section 735(b)(2) of the Act, the ITC will determine, within 45 days, whether the domestic industry in the United States is materially injured, or threatened with material injury, by reason of imports of 2,4-D. If the ITC determines that material injury or threat of material injury does not exist, this proceeding will be terminated, all cash deposits posted will be refunded, and suspension of liquidation will be lifted. If the ITC determines that such injury does exist, Commerce will issue an antidumping duty order directing CBP to assess, upon further instruction by Commerce, antidumping duties on all imports of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the effective date of the suspension of liquidation, as discussed in the “Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation” section above.

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

This determination is issued and published in accordance with sections 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.210(c).

Background

On July 22, 2024, Commerce tolled certain deadlines in this administrative proceeding by seven days. 1 On July 30, 2024, Commerce published the Preliminary Results of the 2022-2023 administrative review of the antidumping duty (AD) order on nails from Malaysia. 2 We invited interested parties to comment on the Preliminary Results. 3 On November 26, 2024, we extended the deadline for these final results until January 31, 2024. 4 On December 9, 2024, Commerce tolled the deadline to issue the final results in this administrative review by 90 days. 5 Accordingly, the deadline for these final results is now April 24, 2025. For a detailed summary of the events that occurred since Commerce published the Preliminary Results, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum. 6

The products covered by the scope of the Order are nails from Malaysia. For a complete description of the scope of the Order, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum. 8

All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs filed by interested parties in this review are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the topics included in the Issues and Decision Memorandum is attached as Appendix I to this notice. The Issues and 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 Issues and Decision Memorandum can be found at https://access.trade.gov/public/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx.

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3), it is Commerce's practice to rescind an administrative review of an AD order when there are no reviewable entries of subject merchandise during the POR for which liquidation is suspended. 9 Normally, upon completion of an administrative review, the suspended entries are liquidated at the AD assessment rate calculated for the review period. 10 Therefore, for an administrative review to be conducted, there must be a reviewable, suspended entry that Commerce can instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to liquidate at the AD assessment rate calculated for the review period. 11

On July 24, 2024, we issued a memorandum to all interested parties listing 36 companies for which we initiated this administrative review and for which there was no evidence of any suspended entries during the POR. 12 See Appendix II for a list of these companies. We invited parties to comment, and we received no comments. Accordingly, in the absence of suspended entries of subject merchandise during the POR, we are hereby rescinding this administrative review for these 36 companies, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3).

We made no changes to the margin calculation methodology used in the Preliminary Results and have not changed the dumping margin for these final results of review, as discussed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

The statute and Commerce's regulations do not address the establishment of a rate to be applied to companies not selected for individual examination when Commerce limits its examination in an administrative review pursuant to section 777A(c)(2) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). 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, for guidance when calculating the rate for companies which were not selected for individual examination in an administrative review. 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 and de minimis margins, and any margins determined entirely {on the basis of facts available}.”

In this review, we preliminarily calculated weighted-average dumping margins for both Region International Co., Ltd. and Region System Sdn. Bhd. (collectively, Region) and Inmax Sdn. Bhd. and Inmax Industries Sdn. Bhd. (collectively, Inmax) that are not zero, de minimis, or determined entirely on the basis of facts available. 13 For the final results, we continue to calculate weighted-average dumping margins for both Region and Inmax that are not zero, de minimis, or determined entirely on the basis of facts available. Accordingly, consistent with our practice, for the final results of this review, we continue to assign to the non-selected mandatory respondents a dumping margin which is determined as the simple average of the margins calculated for Region and Inmax.

We determine that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist for the period July 1, 2022, through June 30, 2023:

Background

On November 14, 2024, Commerce published the Preliminary Determination in the Federal Register and invited interested parties to comment. 1 For a complete description of the events that occurred since the Preliminary Determination, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum. 2 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/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx.

The product covered by this investigation is 2,4-D from India. For a complete description of the scope of this investigation, see Appendix I.

We received no comments from interested parties on the scope of the investigation as it appeared in the Preliminary Determination. 3 Therefore, we made no changes to the scope of the investigation from that published in the Preliminary Determination for the Final Determination.

As provided in section 782(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), Commerce conducted verifications of the sales and cost information submitted by Atul Limited (Atul), its U.S. affiliate, Atul USA Inc. (Atul USA), and Meghmani Organics Limited (MOL). We used standard verification procedures, including an examination of relevant sales and accounting records, and original source documents provided by Atul, Atul USA, and MOL. 4

All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs submitted by interested parties in this investigation are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum is attached to this notice as Appendix II.

Based on our review and analysis of the information received during verification and comments received from interested parties, we made certain changes to the estimated weighted-average dumping margins for Atul and MOL. For a discussion of these changes, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

Section 735(c)(5)(A) of the Act provides that Commerce shall determine an estimated all-others rate for all exporters and producers not individually examined. This rate shall be an amount equal to the weighted average of the estimated weighted-average dumping margins established for exporters and producers individually investigated, excluding any zero and de minimis margins, and any margins determined entirely under section 776 of the Act.

In this investigation, Commerce calculated estimated weighted-average dumping margins for Atul and MOL that are not zero, de minimis, or based entirely on facts otherwise available. Accordingly, Commerce calculated the all-others rate using a simple average of the estimated weighted-average dumping margins calculated for the examined respondents. 5

Commerce determines that the final estimated weighted-average dumping margins exist for the period, January 1, 2023, through December 31, 2023:

Commerce intends to disclose the calculations performed in connection with this final determination to interested parties within five days of any public announcement or, if there is no public announcement, within five days of the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register , in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b).

In accordance with section 735(c)(1)(B) of the Act, Commerce will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to continue to suspend liquidation of all entries of subject merchandise, as described in Appendix I of this notice, which were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption, on or after November 14, 2024, the date of publication of the Preliminary Determination of this investigation in the Federal Register . These suspension of liquidation instructions will remain in effect until further notice.

Pursuant to section 735(c)(1)(B)(ii) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(d), upon the publication of this notice, we will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit for estimated antidumping duties for such entries as follows: (1) the cash deposit rate for the respondents listed in the table above will be equal to the company-specific estimated weighted-average dumping margin determined in this final determination; (2) if the exporter is not a respondent listed in the table above, but the producer is, then the cash deposit rate will be equal to the company-specific estimated weighted-average dumping margin listed for the producer of the subject merchandise; and (3) the cash deposit rate for all other producers and exporters will be equal to the all-others estimated weighted-average dumping margin listed in the table above. These suspension of liquidation instructions will remain in effect until further notice.

To determine the cash deposit rate, Commerce normally adjusts the estimated weighted average dumping margin by the amount of export subsidies countervailed in a companion countervailing duty (CVD) proceeding, when CVD provisional measures are in effect. Accordingly, where Commerce has made a final affirmative determination for countervailable export subsidies, Commerce offsets the estimated weighted-average dumping margin by the appropriate CVD rate. Commerce has continued to adjust the cash deposit rate for export subsidies in the companion CVD investigation by the appropriate export subsidy rate as indicated in the above chart. However, suspension of liquidation of provisional measures in the companion CVD case has been discontinued;  6 therefore, we are not instructing CBP to collect cash deposits based on the adjusted estimated weighted-average dumping margin for those export subsidies at this time.

In accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, Commerce will notify the ITC of its final affirmative determination of sales at LTFV. Because Commerce's final determination is affirmative, in accordance with section 735(b)(2) of the Act, the ITC will determine, within 45 days, whether the domestic industry in the United States is materially injured, or threatened with material injury, by reason of imports of 2,4-D. If the ITC determines that material injury or threat of material injury does not exist, this proceeding will be terminated, all cash deposits posted will be refunded, and suspension of liquidation will be lifted. If the ITC determines that such injury does exist, Commerce will issue an antidumping duty order directing CBP to assess, upon further instruction by Commerce, antidumping duties on all imports of the subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the effective date of the suspension of liquidation, as discussed in the “Continuation of Suspension of Liquidation” section above.

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

This determination is issued and published in accordance with sections 735(d) and 777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(c).

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7704(a)(5) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), as amended, 5 U.S.C. 1001 et seq. The Committee is currently composed of 13 members, appointed by the Director of NIST, who were selected for their established records of distinguished service in their professional community, their knowledge of issues affecting NEHRP, and to reflect the wide spectrum of technical disciplines, competencies, and communities involved in earthquake hazards reduction. In addition, the Chairperson of the U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Earthquake Studies Advisory Committee serves as an ex-officio member of the Committee.

Pursuant to the FACA, as amended, 5 U.S.C. 1001 et seq., notice is hereby given that the ACEHR will meet on the dates and at the times set forth in the DATES section of this notice. The meeting will be open to the public and will be held via web conference. Interested members of the public will be able to participate in the meeting from remote locations. The primary purpose of this meeting is for the Committee to discuss their 2025 Biennial Report on the Effectiveness of NEHRP. The final agenda will be posted on the NEHRP website at https://nehrp.gov/committees/meetings.htm.

Individuals and representatives of organizations who would like to offer comments and suggestions related to the Committee's business are invited to request a place on the agenda. Approximately fifteen minutes will be reserved for public comments and speaking times will be assigned on a first-come, first-serve basis. The amount of time per speaker will be determined by the number of requests received. This meeting will be recorded. Public comments can be provided via email or by web conference attendance. Questions from the public will not be considered during this period. All those wishing to speak must submit their request by email to Tina Faecke at tina.faecke@nist.gov by 5 p.m. eastern time, Tuesday, May 13, 2025. Speakers who wish to expand upon their oral statements, those who had wished to speak but could not be accommodated on the agenda, and those who were unable to participate are invited to submit written statements electronically by email to tina.faecke@nist.gov.

Anyone wishing to attend this meeting via web conference must register by 5 p.m. eastern time, Tuesday, May 13, 2025, to attend. Please submit your full name, the organization you represent (if applicable), email address, and phone number to Tina Faecke at tina.faecke@nist.gov. After pre-registering, participants will be provided with instructions on how to join the web conference.

The purpose of this meeting is for the Advisory Panel to develop a fishery performance report (FPR) for Atlantic surfclam and ocean quahog. The intent of the FPR is to facilitate a venue for structured input from the Advisory Panel for the specifications processes. The FPR will be used by the MAFMC's Scientific and Statistical Committee and Council when reviewing specifications for the 2026 fishing year.

The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aid should be directed to Shelley Spedden, (302) 526-5251, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

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

DOE seeks to enable the construction of AI infrastructure at select DOE sites to begin by the end of 2025, with a target of commencing operation by the end of 2027. This RFI seeks to assess industry interest in developing, operating, and maintaining AI infrastructure on select DOE owned or managed lands, along with information on potential development approaches, technology solutions, operational models, and economic considerations associated with establishing AI infrastructure on DOE sites. In addition, this RFI seeks input from grid operators that serve DOE sites on opportunities and challenges associated with existing energy infrastructure and potential co-location of data centers with new energy generation.

DOE recognizes its relationships with Tribes and States and local governments as well as local communities, universities, businesses, utilities, and governments, contributing to economic development, education, and scientific advancement. As such, this RFI also seeks to gather input from potentially interested entities and individuals.

For the purposes of this RFI, AI infrastructure includes AI data centers, which contain specialized Information Technology (IT) equipment and associated cooling facilities, as well as their energy supply, including sources of generation, such as nuclear energy, and transmission and storage.

The Government anticipates authorizing land use rights and privileges through either a long-term Ground Lease or an Easement. The information gathered through this RFI may be considered in developing a public solicitation of private-sector proposals for AI infrastructure construction, operation, maintenance, and decommissioning on federal land.

This RFI is issued solely for information and planning purposes and does not constitute a solicitation.

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) owns or manages significant amounts of land across the United States that may be suitable to support buildout of AI infrastructure. DOE sites offer potential advantages such as access to or the potential to build power infrastructure, secure locations, and opportunities for technological collaboration with DOE research facilities. DOE is considering opportunities to utilize these assets in a manner that enhances the United States' leading position in AI and benefits local economies. For the purposes of this RFI, the term “AI infrastructure” refers collectively to AI data centers, their specialized IT equipment and associated cooling facilities, and their energy supply, including sources of generation, transmission (including substations), and storage.

For decades, DOE and its National Laboratories have been developing cutting-edge AI tools to support science, energy, and security missions. DOE and its National Laboratories are driving progress in AI through their enabling infrastructure: world-leading supercomputers, cutting-edge algorithms and software stacks through programs like the Exascale Computing Program, high-quality scientific datasets, and a scientific and technical workforce unmatched in the world to address the most critical energy, security, and science challenges of our time. DOE's capabilities and leadership in AI make it a natural partner for strategic public-private partnerships related to AI infrastructure.

Additionally, DOE is a leader in developing advanced energy technologies. DOE and National Laboratory sites can provide an opportunity to accelerate deployment of key technologies like nuclear, geothermal, and energy storage, through existing site characterization work, existing energy infrastructure like microgrids and transmission availability, ability to support permitting, and supportive communities. For example, DOE has already performed extensive site characterization and permitting activities for new nuclear reactors at Idaho National Laboratory for the National Reactor Innovation Center.

The primary purpose of this RFI is to solicit information from entities with experience in the development, operation, and management of AI infrastructure. DOE is also seeking information from grid operators, technology developers, the public, and potentially affected entities on areas that should be considered or further evaluated for potential solicitations.

DOE is seeking input on a range of topics, including:

• Industry interest in any of the locations identified in the Appendices for consideration.

• Potential data center designs, technologies, and operational models that could be deployed.

• Potential power needs, timelines, and approaches to co-locating energy sources with data centers or sources for surplus interconnection capacity.

• Financial and contractual considerations related to leasing DOE owned or managed land for data center development.

• Potential benefits and collaboration opportunities associated with siting AI infrastructure on DOE sites.

• Economic, realty, and environmental information.

• Potential challenges associated with siting AI infrastructure on DOE sites, and any additional information required for potential solicitations.

DOE is interested in hearing Tribal government and community perspectives on potential collaboration with industry partners towards advancement of AI infrastructure goals. DOE has not made any final agency decisions at this time and will communicate with Tribes and stakeholders on potential proposed land uses, as appropriate.

DOE has identified locations at 16 DOE owned or managed sites that could be amenable to hosting AI infrastructure. Publicly available information about each site, including location, available acreage, and other characteristics is provided in Appendices to this RFI. The potential DOE sites for AI infrastructure are listed below, in no particular order.

Based in part on consideration of responses to this RFI, DOE will prioritize areas for potential future solicitations, gather additional site information to inform proposal development, identify potential use conflicts and mitigation measures, and develop terms and conditions to operate on DOE owned or managed lands. In potential future solicitations, DOE would aim to provide additional information such as acreage, access to water, environmental sensitivities, geotechnical and flood information, hazards, land use plans, power access and energy infrastructure, security, thermal management infrastructure, existing compute infrastructure, site access restrictions, and further information as determined from this RFI.

The listed sites in this RFI are not comprehensive of sites under consideration by DOE. DOE has not made any preliminary or final decisions as to changes to land use or designation relating to those sites or others. This RFI is solely a request for voluntary information to inform future potential actions.

DOE's statutory authority for leases and easements of DOE real property is outlined in Section 161g of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2201g) and 40 U.S.C. 1304(b).

DOE may enter into a realty agreement to lease land to an entity or enter into an agreement for an easement over the land, depending on the desired length and terms. Realty agreement terms could include requirements that non-federal parties agree to bear all responsibility for costs and liabilities related to construction and operation of the AI data centers as well as other infrastructure upgrades necessary to support those data centers, including costs to transmission providers or transmission organizations necessary to support the data centers. It is possible that in-kind contributions may be counted as part of the costs of any non-federal party entering into a realty agreement. DOE anticipates that the AI infrastructure developer would be responsible for ensuring compliance with state and local requirements governing electricity, including interconnection requirements.

A recent DOE initiative to locate energy generation on DOE lands includes examples of the range of terms that could be included in realty agreements for data centers. See https://www.energy.gov/management/osp/cleanup-clean-energy-expanding-clean-energy-generation-doe-lands .

To assist DOE in evaluating the potential for AI infrastructure on DOE owned or managed lands, interested parties are requested to provide the following information, as available, in response to this RFI. Respondents can choose to answer as many or as few questions as they feel appropriate. Responses addressing any aspect of a potential future program that seeks to lease DOE owned or managed lands for AI infrastructure beyond the specific categories and questions listed here are also welcome.

Category 1: Interest in Solicitation: Identify and comment on any specific sites or locations listed in Section III of this document, including interest in a potential future solicitation. See Section VI of this document, “Confidential Business Information,” regarding protection and release of information and how to submit proprietary information. See the Appendices for more detailed information on site characteristics.

1. Are any sites identified in Section III of more interest than others for possible development?

2. What characteristics of a site make it more or less favorable for development?

3. What regional characteristics ( e.g., workforce availability, supply chains, existing transmission capacity, related industries) would impact site favorability?

4. Are there other DOE sites not listed that would be of more interest to possible development?

Category 2: Site Information and Considerations for Data Center Design and Technology: These questions cover desired data center characteristics and associated site characterization information that DOE could provide to AI infrastructure developers to develop a realty agreement proposal.

1. What purpose would the data center serve? Would research take place at the data center?

2. What is the minimum area footprint needed for viable development?

3. What site water and sewer availability requirements are needed? Does this vary based on cooling technology system?

4. What information about natural hazards or infrastructure within close proximity is needed for site consideration?

5. What information about the topography and geology of the sites would be needed to determine site suitability?

6. What kinds of zoning (ex: setbacks or height restrictions), land use planning objectives, or permitting jurisdictions are favorable for site consideration?

7. What are some technologies that would enable data centers to be sited in locations with hot humid weather where little water is available?

8. What are the prospects for using advanced data center technologies ( e.g., innovative cooling, high efficiency power electronics, and innovative conductors and ultra-energy efficient compute technologies that require cryogenics)? Is there additional information on each site DOE could provide that would inform use of these technologies?

9. What advanced or novel construction technologies or methods can be employed to accelerate development of a federal AI data center while abiding by all necessary standards, codes, and regulations?

10. What types of industrial ecology principles can be employed to integrate data centers with nearby industries or facilities, such as but not limited to integration of data center waste heat into district heating networks?

11. What is the expected upgrade frequency for key components of the data center, including high performance chips?

Category 3: On-Site Energy Development: DOE anticipates that some sites may be suitable for co-located development of data centers and innovative energy technologies and approaches such as nuclear reactors, enhanced geothermal systems, fuel cells, carbon capture, energy storage systems, and portfolios of on-site technologies.

1. What type of co-located energy technologies are of highest interest in being developed with AI data centers? What type of site information would need to be provided to inform use of a given energy technology ( e.g., subsurface data, solar resource potential)?

2. What information would you need about DOE's progress to date on nuclear siting ( e.g., for the National Reactor Innovation Center) to determine necessary further steps?

3. What information regarding topography, soil, seismicity, water availability, adjacent facilities, transportation infrastructure, security, potential exclusion zones, and other topics would you need to assess site suitability for nuclear energy?

4. What information would be needed in consideration of geothermal power generation development (enhanced geothermal systems or conventional hydrothermal resources) to determine necessary further steps?

5. What information would you need to determine the suitability of various energy storage systems ( e.g., subsurface thermal energy storage, flow battery, metal anode battery) as a means for supporting data center cooling or other operations?

6. What information would be needed in consideration of fossil-based generation systems ( e.g., carbon capture and storage (CCS), CCS through a “capture-ready” design, duty cycle, cooling needs, and re-use of waste heat in the capture system)?

7. What other site-specific information is required and why?

Category 4: Off-Site Energy and Transmission Capacity: DOE anticipates providing information about existing capacity and interconnection infrastructure available to the site as available and information about possible expansion of capacity that can serve the site.

1. What is the minimum set of information necessary from grid operators to develop a proposal?

2. What substation performance and likely equipment and capacity would be ideal?

3. Assuming additional capacity could be procured or built in stages, what are desired timelines for electricity capacity availability?

4. Would flexible data center operations be possible if it would enable faster capacity interconnection?

5. What additional information could DOE collect from grid operators to inform potential AI infrastructure development at DOE sites?

6. What information, coordination, or other support could DOE or site owners provide to advance the use of innovative grid technologies ( e.g., advanced conductors, grid enhancing technologies, advanced power electronics) to accelerate electric capacity serving DOE sites?

Category 5: Financial and Contractual Considerations: Preferred realty agreement terms and suggestions to improve potential solicitations.

1. What realty agreement time frames would be preferred?

2. What types of large load utility tariffs or tariff design elements would make developing a data center in a certain service territory more or less preferable?

Category 6: Benefits and Collaboration Opportunities: Potential benefits and collaboration opportunities associated with siting AI infrastructure on DOE sites ( e.g., collaboration including potential for new technology testbeds with National Laboratories, partnerships with local universities, research and development opportunities).

1. What kinds of DOE data would be beneficial to have access to for training new AI models?

2. Are there any scientific domains that require benchmarking and support from DOE scientists?

3. Would sharing computational resources or providing compute credits to researchers from DOE or local universities be possible?

4. Are there opportunities to leverage National Laboratory capabilities such as digital twin and full-stack co-design ( i.e., integrated hardware-software design) to enable data center infrastructure on DOE sites that minimizes operational cost and maximizes compute efficiency?

5. What opportunities are there for collaborating with the nearby communities on ultra energy-efficient, low-noise advanced technologies that minimize adverse impacts and maximize local job creation?

6. What types of opportunities exist to improve modularity and upgradability in servers and server racks, such as seamlessly upgrading IT equipment, cooling technologies, and battery systems?

7. What facilities or capabilities should exist for ongoing research, development, and demonstration of efficient data center technologies at a federal AI data center to improve operations and reduce energy and resource demand?

8. Would industry be open to partnering with National Laboratory personnel to use existing grid testbed infrastructure for research ( e.g., operational impacts, security, interconnection equipment, load flexibility, protection schemes and ride-through behavior, etc.)?

Category 7: Economic Opportunities and Considerations: Potential opportunities for local economic activity, workforce development, capital investments into infrastructure, tax revenues, and other economic considerations.

1. What workforce requirements would inform the feasibility of development at a particular site?

2. Are there specific local tax structures that impact site selection?

3. Which components of data center infrastructure ( e.g., advanced chips and other components of AI servers, advanced busbar, substation equipment, on-site energy generation/storage equipment, etc.) for these sites can be manufactured domestically now or for regular future server upgrades?

4. What other economic impacts are projected barriers to developing a data center or new energy infrastructure on these sites?

5. Are there local or state energy efficiency standards or policies that are required to be met in order to receive economic or other incentives?

6. What local opportunities exist to develop a local tech support service industry sector to maintain and continuously upgrade servers and AI infrastructure and what role might National Laboratory scientists play in standing up such a sector?

Category 8: Relevant and Available Environmental Documentation: DOE anticipates background regulatory work such as the production of engineering studies, feasibility studies, or designs will be needed to support regulatory approvals. Environmental factors should be identified and considered for potential siting, construction, operations, and development of AI infrastructure at these sites. This can also include strategies for minimizing the adverse environmental impact of data center development and operations on federal land.

1. What environmental baseline data should inform the site selection process?

2. What background information on land use constraints and environmental permits could accelerate the project development timeline?

3. What publicly available data (ex: public comments) could the government analyze, with respect to protection of Tribal cultural resources, to facilitate preparing licenses, permits, or other regulatory authorizations for data center development?

4. What types of potentially adverse impacts to the environment and communities should be considered?

Category 9: Challenges and Any Additional Information Required for Potential Solicitations: Potential concerns associated with siting AI infrastructure on DOE sites ( e.g., site security, accessibility). Additional information that would be required from DOE for a respondent to comprehensively respond to a potential future solicitation.

1. What potential challenges, including but not limited to timeline, physical security, and cybersecurity, could be associated with siting AI infrastructure on DOE sites?

2. What concerns exist with supply chain limitations, such as long lead times on certain power and onsite energy equipment, and what alternatives should be considered?

3. What additional information would be required from DOE for a respondent to comprehensively respond to a potential future solicitation?

Category 10: Engagement Strategy with Local Communities and Other Stakeholders, as well as Tribes: DOE anticipates establishing AI infrastructure in a manner that supports the relationships with local government authorities, Tribal governments, and the surrounding communities.

1. What information about relevant Tribal governments, surrounding communities, and local and state governments' past or current engagement with data center development could inform project proposals?

2. Are there existing consortia, partnerships, or entities that could improve data center, nuclear energy, or other energy infrastructure siting and permitting in the locations identified in Section III of this document?

3. What are advanced technologies ( e.g., liquid cooling, energy efficient compute) that could mitigate local concerns about energy prices, noise pollution, water use, and land footprint?

4. What treaty rights or reserved rights could intersect with data center development at DOE sites?

5. What cultural resources ( e.g., archaeological sites, burial grounds, traditional use areas) should be considered during the development of AI centers?

DOE invites all interested parties to submit responses to this RFI by May 7, 2025. Responses must be provided as a Microsoft Word (*.docx) or as an Adobe Acrobat (*.pdf) attachment to an email to aiinfrastructure@hq.doe.gov with the subject line “Data Center RFI Response.” It is recommended that attachments with file sizes exceeding 25 MB be compressed ( i.e., zipped) to ensure message delivery. Any questions regarding the RFI may be included in the RFI response or sent directly to aiinfrastructure@hq.doe.gov. DOE may address questions after the RFI response due date with a public FAQ document.

In your response, please use the associated category and question number. Respondents may answer as many or as few questions as they wish.

DOE will not respond to individual submissions or publish publicly a compendium of responses. A response to this RFI will not be viewed as a binding commitment to develop or pursue the project or ideas discussed.

Respondents are requested to provide the following information at the start of their response to this RFI:

DOE will not release information that identifies any particular interest in a location with any particular party, so as not to compromise the competitive position of any participants. Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.11, any person submitting information that he or she believes to be confidential and exempt by law from public disclosure should submit via email two well-marked copies: one copy of the document marked “confidential” including all the information believed to be confidential, and one copy of the document marked “non-confidential” with the information believed to be confidential deleted. Failure to comply with these marking requirements may result in the disclosure of the unmarked information under the Freedom of Information Act or otherwise. The U.S. Government is not liable for the disclosure or use of unmarked information and may use or disclose such information for any purpose. If your response contains confidential, proprietary, or privileged information, you must include a cover sheet marked as follows identifying the specific pages containing confidential, proprietary, or privileged information:

Pages [list applicable pages] of this response may contain confidential, proprietary, or privileged information that is exempt from public disclosure. Such information shall be used or disclosed only for the purposes described in this RFI. The Government may use or disclose any information that is not appropriately marked or otherwise restricted, regardless of source.

In addition, (1) the header and footer of every page that contains confidential, proprietary, or privileged information must be marked as follows: “Contains, Confidential, Proprietary, or Privileged Information Exempt from Public Disclosure” and (2) every line and paragraph containing proprietary, privileged, or trade secret information must be clearly marked with [[double brackets]] or highlighting.

Please be aware that DOE may make available for public inspection all other comments, in their entirety, submitted by organizations and businesses (except as provided above for proprietary information) or by individuals identifying themselves as representatives of organizations or businesses.

This RFI is issued solely for information and planning purposes and does not constitute a solicitation. Responses to this notice are not offers and cannot be accepted by the Government to form a binding contract. DOE may choose to make available all, some, or none of the sites listed in Section III of this document in potential future solicitations. DOE is not seeking proposals through this RFI and will not accept unsolicited proposals. Respondents are solely responsible for all expenses associated with responding to this RFI. Not responding to this RFI does not preclude participation in any future procurement, if conducted. No proprietary information should be included in any submittal except via the process outlined in Section VI of this document.

In accordance with the implementing regulations of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), specifically 5 CFR 1320.3(h)(4), and OMB guidance, this general solicitation is exempt from the PRA. Facts or opinions submitted in response to general solicitations of comments from the public, published in the Federal Register or other publications, regardless of the form or format thereof, provided that no person is required to supply specific information pertaining to the commenter, other than that necessary for self-identification, as a condition of the agency's full consideration, are not generally considered information collections and therefore not subject to the PRA.

This document of the Department of Energy was signed on March 21, 2025, by Neelesh Nerurkar, Director of Infrastructure Policy, Office of Policy, pursuant to delegated authority from the Secretary of Energy. That document with the original signature and date is maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes only, and in compliance with requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the undersigned DOE Federal Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to sign and submit the document in electronic format for publication, as an official document of the Department of Energy. This administrative process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon publication in the Federal Register .

Publicly available information about each site, including location, available acreage, and other characteristics, is provided below. Sites are listed in no particular order. For higher resolution maps, please visit https://www.energy.gov/policy/ai-infrastructure-rfi.

In accordance with regulations at 40 CFR part 53, the EPA evaluates various methods for monitoring the concentrations of those ambient air pollutants for which EPA has established National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) as set forth in 40 CFR part 50. Monitoring methods that are determined to meet specific requirements for adequacy are designated by the EPA as either reference or equivalent methods (as applicable), thereby permitting their use under 40 CFR part 58 by States and other agencies for determining compliance with the NAAQS. A list of all reference or equivalent methods that have been previously designated by EPA may be found at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/criteria.html.

The EPA hereby announces the designation of one new equivalent method for measuring concentrations of PM 2.5 in ambient air. This designation is made under the provisions of 40 CFR part 53, as amended on October 26, 2015 (80 FR 65291-65468).

This new equivalent method for PM 2.5 is an automated method (monitor) utilizing the measurement principle based on beta attenuation analysis. This newly designated equivalent method is identified as follows:

EQPM-1224-264, “DKK-TOA Models FPM-377C(S), FPM-377C, Particulate Monitor,” for monitoring PM 2.5 in Ambient Air (beta attenuation monitor), configured with a standard EPA PM 10 inlet (meeting 40 CFR part 50, appendix L specifications) and with either; a URG-2000-30EGN PM 2.5 cyclone, or BGI VSCC TM Very Sharp Cut Cyclone particle size separator, or Tisch TE-PM 2.5 C cyclone for PM 2.5 , or other PM 2.5 separator that meets 40 CFR 50 part, appendix L, and operated with Software Firmware Version FPM4-749840 or later, Corrected Slope Factor (FACT SLOPE) set to 1.242, Corrected Zero Value (FACT ZERO) set to 0, and with or without any of the following options: Auto Check and Serial Recorder. This designation applies to PM 2.5 measurements only.

This application for an equivalent method determination for this PM 2.5 method was received by the Office of Research and Development on October 22, 2023. This monitor is commercially available from the applicant, DKK-TOA Corporation 29-10, 1-Chome, Takadanobaba, Shinjuku-ku Tokyo 169-8648, Japan.

The EPA hereby announces the designation of one new equivalent method for measuring concentrations of PM 10-2.5 in ambient air. This designation is made under the provisions of 40 CFR part 53, as amended on October 26, 2015 (80 FR 65291-65468).

This new equivalent method for PM 10-2.5 is an automated method (monitor) utilizing the measurement principle based on beta attenuation analysis. This newly designated equivalent method is identified as follows:

EQPM-1224-265, “DKK-TOA Models FPM-377C(S), FPM-377C, Particulate Monitor Pair,” for the determination of coarse particulate matter as PM 10-2.5 , consisting of a pair of DKK-TOA monitors, with one being the approved PM 10 monitors (EQPM-0905-156) and the other being the approved PM 2.5 monitors (designation EQPM-1224-264). The monitors are collocated with 1-4 meters of one another and are concurrently operated. Both monitors are operated in accordance with their associated Operating Manual. This designation applies to PM 10-2.5 measurements only.

This application for an equivalent method determination for this PM 10-2.5 method was received by the Office of Research and Development on December 23, 2024. This monitor is commercially available from the applicant, DKK-TOA Corporation 29-10, 1-Chome, Takadanobaba, Shinjuku-ku Tokyo 169-8648, Japan.

Representative test monitors were tested in accordance with the applicable test procedures specified in 40 CFR part 53, as amended on October 26, 2015. After reviewing the results of those tests and other information submitted by the applicant, EPA has determined, in accordance with 40 CFR part 53, that these methods should be designated as equivalent methods.

As designated equivalent methods, these methods are acceptable for use by states and other air monitoring agencies under the requirements of 40 CFR part 58, Ambient Air Quality Surveillance. For such purposes, these methods must be used in strict accordance with the operation or instruction manual associated with these methods and subject to any specifications and limitations ( e.g., configuration or operational settings) specified in the designated method descriptions (see the identification of the methods above).

Use of these methods should also be in general accordance with the guidance and recommendations of applicable sections of the “Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement Systems, Volume I,” EPA/600/R-94/038a and “Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement Systems, Volume II, Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Program,” EPA-454/B-13-003, (both available at https://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/qalist.html ). Provisions concerning modification of such methods by users are specified under section 2.8 (Modifications of Methods by Users) of appendix C to 40 CFR part 58.

Consistent or repeated noncompliance with any of these conditions should be reported to: Director, Air Methods and Characterization Division (MD-D205-03), Center for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711.

Designation of these equivalent methods is intended to assist the States in establishing and operating their air quality surveillance systems under 40 CFR part 58. Questions concerning the commercial availability or technical aspects of these methods should be directed to the applicant.

OMB Control Number: 3060-0526.

Title: Section 69.123, Density Pricing Zone Plans, Expanded Interconnection with Local Telephone Company Facilities.

Form Number: N/A.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other for-profit.

Number of Respondents and Responses: 1 respondent; 1 response.

Estimated Time per Response: 60 hours.

Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement.

Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. The statutory authority for this collection is contained in sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 201-205, 303(r), and 403 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), 201-205, 303(r), 403, 47 CFR parts 1, 61, 69 and section 553 of Title 5, United States Code, 5 U.S.C. 553.

Total Annual Burden: 60 hours.

Total Annual Cost: $1,040.

Needs and Uses: The Commission requires Tier 1 local exchange carriers (LECs) to provide expanded opportunities for third party interconnection with their interstate special access facilities. The LECs are permitted to establish a number of rate zones within study areas in which expanded interconnection are operational. In a previous rulemaking, Fifth Report and Order, CC Docket No. 96-262, the Commission allowed price cap LECs to define the scope and number of zones within a study area. These LECs must file and obtain approval of their pricing plans which will be used by FCC staff to ensure that the rates are just, reasonable and nondiscriminatory.

OMB Control Number: 3060-XXXX.

Title: Sections 88.27, 88.31, 88.33, 88.35, 88.135, 88.137, 88.141; Uncrewed Aircraft Communications in the 5030-5091 MHz band.

Form Number: N/A.

Type of Review: New information collection.

Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities, not-for-profit institutions, and state, local or tribal governments.

Estimated Number of Respondents and Responses: 436 respondents and 8,326 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: .25 hours to 10 hours.

Frequency of Response: One-time and on occasion reporting requirements, as-needed reporting requirements; recordkeeping requirement and third party disclosure requirement.

Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. Statutory authority for this information collection is contained in 47 U.S.C. 151, 154, 301, 303, 307, and 310.

Estimated Total Annual Burden: 4,219 hours.

Total Annual Costs: $3,000.

Needs and Uses: On August 21, 2024, the Federal Communications Commission (“Commission” or “FCC”) adopted a Report and Order, Spectrum Rules and Policies for the Operation of Unmanned Aircraft Systems, FCC 24-91, in WT Docket No. 22-323 ( Report and Order ), establishing rules for Non-networked Access (NNA) in the Uncrewed Aircraft System Services (UASS), to enable uncrewed aircraft systems (UAS) operators to obtain direct frequency assignments in a portion of the 5030-5091 MHz band for protected wireless communications between UAS operators on the ground and uncrewed aircraft (UA) for flight control and telemetry. Under the new rules, incorporated in a new rule part, part 88, operators' use of the spectrum designated for NNA (the 5040-5060 MHz portion of the 5030-5091 MHz band) will be authorized and coordinated by one or more dynamic frequency management systems (DFMSs). UAS operators must register with a Commission-approved DFMS, and then may request short-term frequency assignments in the NNA spectrum from the DFMS. UAS operators may transmit in the NNA spectrum only using rule-compliant NNA stations and only pursuant to and consistent with the terms of a frequency assignment from a DFMS.

The following is a description of information collection requirements for which the Commission seeks OMB approval:

Under Section 88.27(c) and 88.135(a) and (b), all NNA users are required to register once with a DFMS in order to submit requests to that DFMS for a short term assignment of frequencies that authorize the user to transmit in the NNA spectrum, with registrations including a party's legal name and contact information, and any other information required by the DFMS.

Under section 88.31(a), following registration, the NNA user may submit a request to the DFMS for a temporary frequency assignment to support UAS control communications, limited to the duration and geographic coverage necessary to support a single submitted UAS flight. Section 88.135(h) requires that, for each frequency assignment request, the NNA user must certify that it has flight authorization from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to cover the flight associated with the frequency assignment request, and that any remote pilots that will be involved in the flight have all necessary FAA remote pilot authorization, to the extent such authorization is required.

Section 88.31(c) requires that the NNA user must comply with all DFMS Administrator instructions, including those regarding registration process and procedures, requests and other submissions to the DFMS.

Section 88.31(e) requires a UAS ground station using an NNA assignment or proxy software acting on its behalf must be capable of communicating with the assigning DFMS to communicate specified confirmations and status information.

Section 88.33(a) requires that information submitted to a DFMS with registration or assignment requests must be accurate, complete, and made in good faith, and section 88.33(b) provides that parties must keep registration information up to date, and must keep frequency assignment request information up to date until the scheduled time of the operation.

Sections 88.31(d) and 88.35 require that parties seeking assignments in the National Radio Quiet Zone (NRQZ) must first notify the NRQZ Administrator, unless an exception applies, and otherwise follow certain submission requirements in filing their assignment requests.

Section 88.135(p) requires a DFMS to retain information on exclusion zones sufficient to protect Microwave Landing Systems in the 5030-5091 MHz band.

Section 88.135(q) requires a DFMS to maintain all records for at least 60 months.

Section 88.135(x) requires a DFMS to immediately notify the National Science Foundation when a request for frequency assignment is approved that will support operation of a UAS within 25 miles of one of sixteen specified radio astronomy sites.

Section 88.137(d) requires a DFMS administrator to securely transfer all information in the DFMS to another approved entity in the event it does not continue as the DFMS administrator at the end of its term.

Protective DFMS administrators must apply to, and be approved by, the Commission prior to commencing operation of the DFMS.

Sections 88.35(b) and 88.141(b) establish an Interim Access Mechanism, under which NNA users may access the 5040-5060 MHz band prior to the commencement of operation by the first DFMS administrator. As part of this mechanism, NNA users seeking to transmit in the band must first obtain concurrence from the Federal Aviation Administration for the requested use, and then submit to the FCC an online registration form making certain certifications. When a request for concurrence is submitted to the FAA for operations within the NRQZ, the request must state the date that notification to the NRQZ Administrator was made or provide an approval from the NRQZ Administrator.

These information collection requirements are designed to enable the implementation of the rules for NNA operations, including the establishment and operation of the automated process of frequency assignments through DFMSs. These direct frequency assignments will support highly reliable control links, and thereby help to safely integrate UAS flights into the National Airspace System (NAS) and promote the development of a diverse range of beneficial public and private uses of UAS technology. Without the required collections, the Commission would not be able to make this spectrum available for dynamic, short term assignments to support this important purpose.

By the authority vested in the Director of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS) by 29 U.S.C. 172, and to provide for the continuity of essential operations of the FMCS in all circumstances this Notice provides the succession plan of officials authorized to perform the functions and duties of the Director of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service. The following is the succession plan of officials hereby ordered:

During any period in which the Director has died, resigned, or otherwise become unable to perform the functions and duties of the office of the Director, and there is no Acting Director serving under the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998, 5 U.S.C. 3345-3349d, the following officers of the FMCS, in the order listed, are hereby delegated the authority to perform the functions and duties of the Director, to the extent permitted by law:

No individual who is serving in an office listed in this order in an acting capacity, by virtue of so serving, shall be delegated the functions and duties of the Director.

This report complies with 41 CFR 102-37.360, which requires a State Agency for Surplus Property (SASP) to submit annual reports of personal property donated to public agencies for use in carrying out such purposes as conservation, economic development, education, parks and recreation, public health, and public safety.

Respondents: 56.

Responses per Respondent: 4.

Total Responses: 224.

Hours per Response: 1.5.

Total Burden Hours: 336.

A 60-day notice was published in the Federal Register at 90 FR 4743 on January 16, 2025. No public comments were received.

Obtaining Copies: Requesters may obtain a copy of the information collection documents from the GSA Regulatory Secretariat Division, by calling 202-501-4755 or emailing GSARegSec@gsa.gov.

A. Purpose

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

Abstract: Under the Government Service Delivery Improvement (GSDI) Act  1 and the 21st Century Integrated Digital Experience Act, 2 along with OMB guidance, agencies are obligated to continually improve the services they provide the public and to collect qualitative and quantitative data from the public to do so.

The purpose of this request is to facilitate the General Service Administration's (hereafter “the Agency's”) ability to collect feedback from the public to continue to improve its services, thereby facilitating its compliance with statutory requirements and general principles of good governance. GSA will only submit collections if they meet the following criteria.

• The collections are voluntary;

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

• The collections are non-controversial;

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

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

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

• The agency will follow the procedures specified in any relevant OMB guidance for the required reporting to OMB of data from surveys.

• Outside of the reporting mentioned in the bullet immediately above, if the Agency intends to release journey maps, user personas, reports, or other data-related summaries stemming from this collection, the Agency must include appropriate caveats around those summaries, noting that conclusions should not be generalized beyond the sample, considering the sample size and response rates. The Agency must submit the data summary itself ( e.g., the report) and the caveat language mentioned above to OMB before it releases them outside the Agency. OMB will engage in a pass back process with the agency.

Type of Review: Renewal of an existing collection.

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

Estimated Number of Respondents: Below is an estimate of the aggregate burden hours for this new collection.

Average Expected Annual Number of Activities: Four types, namely: Screeners ( e.g., distributed before or during a usability testing session or other kind of session); Question script for focus group, interview group, etc., though scripts for usability testing sessions are exempt; Surveys to obtain feedback immediately following a transaction—Limited to 15 questions and 5 minutes max; Other surveys.

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

Annual Responses: 1,101,500.

Average Minutes per Response: 3 minutes-90 minutes, dependent upon activity.

Burden Hours: GSA requests 100,800 burden hours.

A 60-day notice was published in the Federal Register at 89 FR 101603 on December 16, 2024. No public comments were received.

Obtaining Copies: Requesters may obtain a copy of the information collection documents from the GSA Regulatory Secretariat Division, by emailing GSARegSec@gsa.gov.

The AIA Program actively seeks to commission works from American artists for public buildings. The GSA Form 7437, Art in Architecture Program National Artist Registry, will be used to collect information from artists across the country to participate and to be considered for commissions.

The AIA Program is the result of a policy decision made in January 1963 by GSA Administrator Bernard L. Boudin, who served on the Ad Hoc Committee on Federal Office Space in 1961-1962.

The program has been modified over the years, most recently in 2022, to align with Executive Order (E.O.) 14029 issued on May 14, 2021 “Revocation of Certain Presidential Actions and Technical Amendment,” and to support E.O. 13985 issued January 2021, titled “Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government. E.O. 14029 revoked E.O. 13934 issued July 3, 2020, Building and Rebuilding Monuments to American Heroes. E.O. 14189 of January 29, 2025 “Celebrating America's 250th Birthday, revoked E.O. 14129 and reinstates E.O. 13934. As mandated by E.O. 13934, the AIA program must prioritize the commissioning of artworks that portray historically significant Americans or events of American historical significance, or that illustrate the ideals upon which the Nation was founded. Priority is to be given to public-facing monuments to former Presidents of the United States, and to individuals and events relating to the discovery of America, the founding of the United States, and the abolition of slavery. Such works of art are to be designed to be appreciated by the general public and by those who use and interact with Federal buildings. When an artwork commissioned by GSA is meant to depict a historically significant American, the artwork is required to be a lifelike or realistic representation of that person, not an abstract or modernist representation.

With the implementation of the 2025 policy, the AIA program seeks to commission works from the American artists that “portray historically significant Americans or events of American historical significance or illustrate the ideals upon which our nation was founded.” In support of the AIA program's goal to commission the most talented contemporary American artists to create works for the nation's important new civic buildings, it is necessary to identify those artists. The National Artist Registry (Registry) offers the opportunity for artists across the country to participate and to be considered for commissions.

Respondents: 300.

Responses per Respondent: 1.

Total Responses: 300.

Hours per Response: 0.25.

Total Burden Hours: 75.

Public comments are particularly invited on: Whether this collection of information is necessary, whether it will have practical utility; whether our estimate of the public burden of this collection of information is accurate, and based on valid assumptions and methodology; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways in which we can minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, through the use of appropriate technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

Obtaining Copies of Proposals: Requesters may obtain a copy of the information collection documents from the GSA Regulatory Secretariat Division by calling 202-501-4755 or emailing GSARegSec@gsa.gov. Please cite OMB Control No. 3090-0274, Art-in-Architecture Program Center for Fine Arts, GSA Form 7437.

The Advisory Board was established in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-463. The following provides information about the Advisory Board, the membership, and the nomination process.

(a) Members of the Advisory Board will provide guidance, advice and recommendations with respect to special education and related services for children with disabilities in BIE funded schools in accordance with the requirements of IDEA.

(b) The Advisory Board will: (1) Provide advice and recommendations for the coordination of services within the BIE and with other local, State and Federal agencies; (2) Provide advice and recommendations on a broad range of policy issues dealing with the provision of educational services to American Indian children with disabilities; (3) Serve as advocates for American Indian students with special education needs by providing advice and recommendations regarding best practices, effective program coordination strategies, and recommendations for improved educational programming; (4) Provide advice and recommendations for the preparation of information required to be submitted to the Secretary of Education under 20 U.S.C. 1411(h)(2); (5) Provide advice and recommend policies concerning effective inter/intra agency collaboration, including modifications to regulations, and the elimination of barriers to inter- and intra-agency programs and activities; and (6) Will report and direct all correspondence to the Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs through the Director, BIE with a courtesy copy to the Designated Federal Officer (DFO).

(a) Pursuant to 20 U.S.C. 1411(h)(6), the Advisory Board will be composed of up to fifteen individuals involved in or concerned with the education and provision of services to American Indian infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities. The Advisory Board composition will reflect a broad range of viewpoints and will include at least one member representing each of the following interests: American Indians with disabilities; teachers of children with disabilities; American Indian parents or guardians of children with disabilities; service providers; state education officials; local education officials; state interagency coordinating councils (for States having Indian reservations); Tribal representatives or Tribal organization representatives; and other members representing the various divisions and entities of the BIE.

(b) The Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs may provide the Secretary of the Interior recommendations for the chairperson; however, the chairperson and other Advisory Board members will be appointed by the Secretary of the Interior. Advisory Board members shall serve staggered terms of two years or three years from the date of their appointment.

(a) Members of the Advisory Board will not receive compensation, but will be reimbursed for travel, including subsistence, and other necessary expenses incurred in the performance of their duties in the same manner as persons employed intermittently in Government Service under 5 U.S.C. 5703.

(b) A member may not participate in matters that will directly affect, or appear to affect, the financial interests of the member or the member's spouse or minor children, unless authorized by the appropriate ethics official. Compensation from employment does not constitute a financial interest of the member so long as the matter before the Advisory Board will not have a special or distinct effect on the member or the member's employer, other than as part of a class. The provisions of this paragraph do not affect any other statutory or regulatory ethical obligations to which a member may be subject.

(c) The Advisory Board meets at least three or four times a year, budget permitting, but additional meetings may be held as deemed necessary by the Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs or the DFO.

(d) All Advisory Board meetings are open to the public in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act regulations.

(a) Nominations are requested from individuals, organizations, and federally recognized tribes, as well as from State Directors of Special Education (within the 23 states in which BIE-funded schools are located) concerned with the education of Indian children with disabilities as described above.

(b) Nominees should have experience and knowledge of the issues and/or needs of American Indian children with disabilities. Such knowledge and experience are needed to provide advice and recommendations to the BIE regarding the needs of American Indian children with disabilities.

(c) A summary of the candidates' qualifications (resume or curriculum vitae) must be included with a completed nomination application form, which is located on the Bureau of Indian Education website. Nominees must have the ability to attend Advisory Board meetings, carry out Advisory Board assignments, participate in teleconference calls, and work in groups.

(d) The Department of the Interior is committed to equal opportunities in the workplace and seeks fairly balanced Advisory Board membership, which is bound by Indian Preference Act of 1990 (25 U.S.C. 472).

If you wish to nominate someone for appointment to the Advisory Board, please do not make the nomination until the person has agreed to have his or her name submitted to the BIE for this purpose. A person can also self-nominate.

Please submit a complete application form and a copy of the nominee's resume or curriculum vitae to the DFO by June 6, 2025. The nomination application form can be found on the BIE website at https://www.bie.edu/landing-page/special-education.

This collection of information is authorized by OMB Control Number 1076-0179, “Solicitation of Nominations for the Advisory Board for Exceptional Children” Dated: 11/30/2027.

Authority: 5 U.S.C. Ch. 10; 20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq.

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ) and 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1), we provide the general public and other Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on new, proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand our information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format.

A Federal Register notice with a 60-day public comment period soliciting comments on this collection of information was published on June 21, 2024 (89 FR 52076). No comments were received.

As part of our continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burdens, we are again soliciting comments from the public and other Federal agencies on the proposed ICR that is described below. We are especially interested in public comment addressing the following:

(1) Whether or not the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether or not the information will have practical utility;

(2) The accuracy of our estimate of the burden for this 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) How might the agency 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, e.g., permitting electronic submission of response.

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

Abstract: BIA is seeking renewal of the approval for the information collection conducted under 25 CFR part 243, “Reindeer in Alaska,” which is used to monitor and regulate the possession and use of Alaskan reindeer by non-Natives in Alaska. The information to be provided includes an applicant's name and address and where an applicant will keep the reindeer. The applicant must fill out an application for a permit to get a reindeer for any purpose. The applicant also is required to report on the status of reindeer annually or when a change occurs, including changes prior to the date of the annual report. This information collection utilizes four forms. A response is required to obtain and/or retain a benefit.

Title of Collection: Reindeer in Alaska.

OMB Control Number: 1076-0047.

Form Number: None.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Respondents/Affected Public: Non-Indians who wish to possess Alaskan reindeer.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Respondents: 4 per year, on average (1 respondent for the “Sale Permit for Alaska Reindeer,” 1 respondent for the sale report form for Alaska reindeer, 1 respondent for the special use permit for Alaskan reindeer, and 1 respondent for the special use reindeer report).

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 4.

Estimated Completion Time per Response: 5 minutes for the Sale Permit and Report forms; and 10 minutes for the Special Use Permit and Report forms, on average.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 30 minutes.

Respondent's Obligation: Required to obtain a benefit.

Frequency of Collection: Once a year, on average.

Total Estimated Annual Nonhour Burden Cost: $0.

An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The authority for this action is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ).

Pursuant to 39 CFR 3041.405, the Commission gives notice that the Postal Service filed request(s) for the Commission to consider matters related to Competitive negotiated service agreement(s). The request(s) may propose the addition of a negotiated service agreement from the Competitive product list or the modification of an existing product currently appearing on the Competitive product list.

The public portions of the Postal Service's request(s) can be accessed via the Commission's website ( https://www.prc.gov ). Non-public portions of the Postal Service's request(s), if any, can be accessed through compliance with the requirements of 39 CFR 3011.301. 1

Section II identifies the docket number(s) associated with each Postal Service request, if any, that will be reviewed in a public proceeding as defined by 39 CFR 3010.101(p), the title of each such request, the request's acceptance date, and the authority cited by the Postal Service for each request. For each such request, the Commission appoints an officer of the Commission to represent the interests of the general public in the proceeding, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505 and 39 CFR 3000.114 (Public Representative). Section II also establishes comment deadline(s) pertaining to each such request.

The Commission invites comments on whether the Postal Service's request(s) identified in Section II, if any, are consistent with the policies of title 39. Applicable statutory and regulatory requirements include 39 U.S.C. 3632, 39 U.S.C. 3633, 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR part 3035, and 39 CFR part 3041. Comment deadline(s) for each such request, if any, appear in Section II.

Section III identifies the docket number(s) associated with each Postal Service request, if any, to add a standardized distinct product to the Competitive product list or to amend a standardized distinct product, the title of each such request, the request's acceptance date, and the authority cited by the Postal Service for each request. Standardized distinct products are negotiated service agreements that are variations of one or more Competitive products, and for which financial models, minimum rates, and classification criteria have undergone advance Commission review. See 39 CFR 3041.110(n); 39 CFR 3041.205(a). Such requests are reviewed in summary proceedings pursuant to 39 CFR 3041.325(c)(2) and 39 CFR 3041.505(f)(1). Pursuant to 39 CFR 3041.405(c)-(d), the Commission does not appoint a Public Representative or request public comment in proceedings to review such requests.

1. Docket No(s).: MC2025-1275 and K2025-1274; Filing Title: USPS Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage Contract 677 to the Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing Materials Under Seal; Filing Acceptance Date: April 1, 2025; Filing Authority: 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 3035.105, and 39 CFR 3041.310; Public Representative: Maxine Bradley; Comments Due: April 9, 2025.

2. Docket No(s).: MC2025-1276 and K2025-1275; Filing Title: USPS Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage Contract 678 to the Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing Materials Under Seal; Filing Acceptance Date: April 1, 2025; Filing Authority: 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 3035.105, and 39 CFR 3041.310; Public Representative: Samuel Robinson; Comments Due: April 9, 2025.

3. Docket No(s).: MC2025-1277 and K2025-1276; Filing Title: USPS Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage Contract 679 to the Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing Materials Under Seal; Filing Acceptance Date: April 1, 2025; Filing Authority: 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 3035.105, and 39 CFR 3041.310; Public Representative: Elsie Lee-Robbins; Comments Due: April 9, 2025.

4. Docket No(s).: MC2025-1278 and K2025-1277; Filing Title: USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage Contract 1357 to the Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing Materials Under Seal; Filing Acceptance Date: April 1, 2025; Filing Authority: 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 3035.105, and 39 CFR 3041.310; Public Representative: Christopher Mohr; Comments Due: April 9, 2025.