Under the regulations in “Subpart L—Fruits and Vegetables” (7 CFR 319.56-1 through 319.56-12, referred to below as the regulations), the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) prohibits or restricts the importation of fruits and vegetables into the United States from certain parts of the world to prevent plant pests from being introduced into or disseminated within the United States.

Section 319.56-4 contains a performance-based process for approving the importation of fruits and vegetables that, based on the findings of a pest risk analysis, can be safely imported subject to one or more of the five designated phytosanitary measures listed in paragraph (b) of that section.

APHIS received a request from the national plant protection organization of Belize to allow the importation of fresh (green, unhusked) coconut ( Cocos nucifera ) fruit from Belize into the United States. As part of our evaluation of Belize's request, we have prepared a pest risk assessment to identify the pests of quarantine significance that could follow the pathway of the importation of fresh coconut fruit into the United States from Belize. Based on the pest risk assessment, a risk management document (RMD) was prepared to identify phytosanitary measures that could be applied to the fresh coconut to mitigate the pest risk.

Therefore, in accordance with § 319.56-4(c), we are announcing the availability of our pest risk assessment and RMD for public review and comment. Those documents, as well as a description of the economic considerations associated with the importation of fresh coconut from Belize, may be viewed on the Regulations.gov website or in our reading room (see ADDRESSES above for a link to Regulations.gov and information on the location and hours of the reading room). You may request paper copies of the pest risk assessment and RMD by calling or writing to the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . Please refer to the subject of the analysis you wish to review when requesting copies.

After reviewing any comments we receive, we will announce our decision regarding the import status of fresh coconut fruit from Belize in a subsequent notice. If the overall conclusions of our analysis and the Administrator's determination of risk remain unchanged following our consideration of the comments, then we will authorize the importation of fresh coconut fruit from Belize into the United States subject to the requirements specified in the RMD.

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1633, 7701-7772, and 7781-7786; 21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.3.

The ROD identifies NRCS's selected alternative for the Gould Wash Flood Protection Project, as described in the March 2026 Final Plan-EIS for Washington County, Utah. NRCS reached its decision after reviewing the Final Plan-EIS, which is available on the NRCS project website listed in the ADDRESSES section of this notice and was announced on March 20, 2026, through a notice of availability (91 FR 13603). NRCS has selected the proposed action alternative, titled “New Detention Dam and 3,000 cfs Channel Modifications.” This alternative includes constructing a dry detention dam upstream of Hurricane City along Gould Wash to reduce and manage flood flows, modifications to the Gould Wash channel through Hurricane City to safely convey floodwaters, and acquisition of easements necessary for channel modifications and areas subject to flooding.

The ROD documents the basis for NRCS's decision on the selected alternative, including the mitigation measures that will be implemented and the environmental, social, and economic factors considered under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). NRCS concludes that the selected alternative provides the most balanced approach to meeting project objectives while minimizing adverse effects.

NRCS reviewed and considered all substantive comments received on the Final Plan-EIS following publication of the notice of availability on March 20, 2026 (91 FR 13603). While the comments did not require changes to the Final Plan-EIS, a summary of the comments and NRCS's responses, along with supporting materials, is available on the NRCS project website listed in the ADDRESSES section above. Watershed planning is authorized by the Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act of 1954 (Pub. L. 83-566), as amended, and the Flood Control Act of 1944 (Pub. L. 78-534).

In accordance with Public Law 116-156, 1134 Stat. 700 (2020), the U.S. Commission on the Social Status of Black Men and Boys (CSSBMB) will hold its FY26 Second Quarter Business Meeting exploring CSSBMB business items, operations, and next steps.

For more information on the CSSBMB or the upcoming briefing, please visit www.usccr.gov/CSSBMB and CSSBMB's Instagram, Facebook, and X.

The U.S. Census Bureau plans to request clearance from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the collection of information related to a field test of the CPS in calendar year 2027.

The CPS has been the source of official government statistics on employment and unemployment since 1942. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) and the Census Bureau jointly sponsor the basic monthly survey. The Census Bureau also prepares and conducts all the field work. The CPS collects labor force information for the civilian noninstitutional population including employment status, number of hours worked, job search activities, earnings, duration of unemployment, and the industry and occupation classification of the job held the previous week. Data for the CPS are currently collected by Census field interviewers via in-person interviews or by telephone. In February, March, and April of any collection year, the Census Bureau collects additional information via the ASEC supplement to the CPS.

The ASEC collects information on work experience, personal income, noncash benefits, current and previous year health insurance coverage, employer-sponsored insurance take-up, and migration. The ASEC is the official source of national poverty estimates calculated in accordance with the Office of Management and Budget's Statistical Policy Directive 14. Two other important national estimates derived from the ASEC are real median household income and the number and percent of individuals without health insurance coverage.

The 2027 Field Test's goal is to continue the testing conducted for the CPS by incorporating the ASEC supplement. This is the third of three major field tests with the first completed in 2025 and the second in 2026, with an ultimate goal for the ASEC to follow the phase-in changes to the CPS, planned for 2027 through 2028, in 2029.

The 2027 Field Test is planned for January 2027 until May 2027. This will be the first time that the ASEC supplement will be administered as a self-response mode, therefore, the two main goals of the proposed field test are outlined below.

Introducing a self-response mode: The current CPS ASEC questionnaire collects data via computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI). Since the ASEC is introducing an internet self-response (ISR) mode, qualitative research, expert review, and smaller-scale tests were conducted to transform the CAPI question wording into an ISR-appropriate format. The 2027 Field Test is the first opportunity to conduct a full-scale field test to evaluate comparability of the CAPI questions to the ISR questions.

Content Testing: Additionally, multiple rounds of qualitative tests, expert review, and smaller-scale tests were employed for questionnaire clarity and comparability. This field test will utilize the qualitative research findings to do a split-path examination of a control version to a test version of the ASEC questions changes. All questions on the ASEC will have some changes because this is the first instance of a self-response mode so questions that a field representative would ask are updated for a self-respondent. The goal of the test is to determine the impact of changing question wording and response categories, as well as redefining underlying constructs, on the quality of the key ASEC estimates.

OMB Control Number: 0607-0354.

Form Number(s): None.

Type of Review: Regular submission, Request for a Revision of a Currently Approved Collection.

Affected Public: Households.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 50,000.

Estimated Time per Response: 50 minutes.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 41,667.

Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $0. There are no costs to the respondents other than their time.

Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.

Legal Authority: Title 13, United States Code, Sections 141 and 182 and Title 29, United States Code, Sections 1-9.

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

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

On March 16, 2026, Commerce published the Preliminary Results of the 2023-2024 administrative review of the antidumping duty order of OCTG from Vietnam in the Federal Register and invited interested parties to comment. 1 On April 6, 2026, we received case briefs from SeAH VINA, and from Axis Pipe and Tube, Borusan Pipe US Inc., Vallourec Star, and Welded Tube USA, Inc. (collectively, the domestic interested parties). 2 On April 13, 2026, SeAH VINA and the domestic interested parties submitted rebuttal briefs. 3 Between July 10 and September 4, 2026, Commerce extended the deadline for the final results of this review by 59 days. 4 Accordingly, the deadline for these final results is September 11, 2026. Commerce conducted this administrative review in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act).

For a complete description of the events that occurred since the Preliminary Results, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum. 5 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, a complete version of the Issues and Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at https://access.trade.gov/frnotices.

The merchandise covered by the Order is OCTG from Vietnam. For a complete description of the scope of the Order, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum. 7

All issues raised in case and rebuttal briefs filed by interested parties in this administrative review are addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum. A list of the issues addressed in the Issues and Decision Memorandum is provided in Appendix I to this notice.

Based on our review of the record and our analysis of the comments received, Commerce made certain changes to the weighted-average dumping margin calculation for SeAH VINA. For further discussion of these changes, see the Issues and Decision Memorandum.

Commerce determines that the following estimated weighted-average dumping margin exists for the period September 1, 2023, through August 31, 2024:

Commerce intends to disclose the calculations performed in connection with these final results of review to interested parties in this review within five days after public announcement of the final results 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).

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

Because the mandatory respondent's weighted-average dumping margin is not zero or de minimis ( i.e., less than 0.50 percent) in the final results of this review, Commerce calculated importer-specific assessment rates on the basis of the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for each importer's examined sales to the total entered value of those sales. Where we do not have entered values for all U.S. sales to a particular importer, we calculated an importer-specific, per-unit assessment rate on the basis of the ratio of the total amount of dumping calculated for the importer's examined sales to the total quantity of those sales. To determine whether an importer-specific, per-unit assessment rate is de minimis, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.106(c)(2), we also calculated an importer-specific ad valorem ratio based on estimated entered values. Where a mandatory respondent's weighted-average dumping margin is zero or de minimis or where an importer-specific ad valorem assessment rate is zero or de minimis, we will instruct CBP to liquidate appropriate entries without regard to antidumping duties. 8

In accordance with Commerce's “automatic assessment” practice, for entries of subject merchandise during the POR produced by SeAH VINA which it did not know that the merchandise was destined for the United States, we intend to instruct CBP to liquidate those entries at the Vietnam-wide rate ( i.e., 111.47 percent)  9 if there is no rate for the intermediate companies involved in the transaction. 10

The final results of this review shall be the basis for the assessment of antidumping duties on entries of merchandise covered by the final results of this review and for future deposits of estimated duties, where applicable. 11

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

The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon publication of the final results of this administrative review for all shipments of the subject merchandise from Vietnam entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the publication date, as provided for by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) for SeAH VINA, the cash deposit rate will be the margin listed above; (2) for previously investigated or reviewed Vietnamese and non-Vietnamese exporters not listed above that received a separate rate in a prior segment of this proceeding, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the exporter-specific rate published for the most-recently completed segment of this proceeding in which the exporter was reviewed; (3) for all Vietnamese exporters of subject merchandise which have not been found to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the Vietnam-wide entity, which is 111.47 percent;  12 and (4) for all non-Vietnamese exporters of subject merchandise which have not received their own rate, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the Vietnamese exporter that supplied that non-Vietnamese exporter with the subject merchandise. These cash deposit requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further notice.

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

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 the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation.

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

This request is for a revision and extension to an approved information collection.

NOAA's Office of Ocean Exploration and Research (NOAA Ocean Exploration) is the only federal organization dedicated to ocean exploration. By using unique capabilities in terms of personnel, technology, infrastructure, and exploration missions, NOAA Ocean Exploration is reducing unknowns in deep-ocean areas and providing high-value environmental intelligence needed by NOAA and the nation to address both current and emerging science and management needs. Our expertise, work products, and services generally fall into the areas outlined at https://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/about/; however, none of these areas operate independently and it is only through leveraging resources internally and externally that we can truly achieve our mission. Since the inception of NOAA's exploration program in 2001, data management has been guided by the 2000 President's Panel Report recommendations which prioritized rapid and unrestricted data sharing as one of five critical exploration program components. More recently, Public Law 111-11 [Section XII Ocean Exploration] reinforced and expanded ocean exploration data management objectives, continuing to stress the importance of sharing unique exploration data and information to improve public understanding of the oceans, and for research and management purposes.

Telepresence satellite communication from the ship to shore brings the unknown ocean to the screens of both scientists and the general public in their homes, schools or offices in near real time. With technology constantly evolving it is important to address the needs of the shore-based scientists and public to maintain a high level of participation. We use voluntary surveys to identify the needs of users of data, best approaches to leverage expertise of shore-based participants for meaningful public engagement focused on ocean exploration. The four forms used to collect information are as follows: (1) Sailing Contact Information. This form is sent to the few scientists that directly sail on NOAA Ship Okeanos Explorer. The ship's operations and medical officers needs certain information such as: if a sailing individual has securely submitted their proper medical documents to NOAA's Office of Marine and Aviation Operations; if the person is up to date with required security documents, such as a passport, if the ship is traveling to a foreign port; any dietary restrictions so that the person will be served food that is safe. Modifications to this form are largely to bring it into compliance with new NOAA policies (remove COVID-19 language, updated medical policies, image and likeness releases, etc.) and small content edits to reflect office changes in partnership status and ship sailing logistics. (2) Okeanos Explorer Participation Assessment. This voluntary form is sent to the scientists that sailed on any Okeanos Explorer cruise funded by NOAA's Office of Ocean Exploration and Research to record any feedback they wish to provide to the office about their experience. The office uses their feedback in assessments for improving the utility and experience of these scientific guests sailing on the Okeanos Explorer. Minimal edits to this form are made to bring the form into compliance with current policy. (3) EX Collaboration Tools Account Request Form. This voluntary form is sent to members of the marine scientific community at the beginning of a fiscal year to ask if members would like to participate in any of the upcoming cruises and to what degree, such as simply asking to be included in emailed updates or if they want to be on a direct line to the ship for remotely operated vehicle dive operations. Modifications to this form are adding clarifying information based on user feedback, making office updates (new engineering partner) and updating information for the current field season. (4) Science Lead Interest Solicitation. This voluntary form will be used to solicit interest from the scientific community to serve as a Science Lead on one of NOAA Ocean Exploration's expeditions. No edits have been made to this form since the last submission. The Citizen Scientist Form was previously part of this information collection. It is no longer utilized by the office and can be removed for the renewal of this information collection.

Information is collected via online form.

OMB Control Number: 0648-0748.

Form Number(s): None.

Type of Review: Regular submission [revision and extension of a current information collection].

Affected Public: Individuals or households; business or other for-profit organizations; not-for-profit institutions; Federal government.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 1,000.

Estimated Time per Response: 10 minutes.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 668 hours.

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

Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary or required to obtain services or benefits.

Legal Authority: Public law 111-11, Section XII Ocean Exploration.

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

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

On August 6, 2026 (91 FR 50812) and August 13, 2026 (91 FR 52294), the Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled published notice of proposed deletions from the Procurement List. This notice is published pursuant to 41 U.S.C. 8503(a)(2) and 41 CFR 51-2.3.

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

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

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

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

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

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

On August 6, 2026 the Commission proposed the products listed above for deletion from the Procurement List (PL) (91 FR 50812). The Commission received one public comment, with the commenter suggesting that prior to proposing products for PL deletion the Commission should evaluate various employment-related consequences for individuals who are blind or have a significant disability. However, because each of the products proposed for deletion are either no longer being produced by the nonprofit agency or the purchase demand is too low further evaluation is unnecessary. See 41 CFR 51-6.8(b).

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

In accordance with 41 CFR 51-5.3(b), the Committee intends to add the services requirements listed below to the Procurement List as a mandatory purchase only for the contracting activities at the locations listed with the proposed qualified nonprofit agency as the authorized source of supply. Prior to adding these services to the Procurement List, the Committee will consider other pertinent information, including information from Government personnel and relevant comments from interested parties regarding the Committee's intent to geographically limit this services requirement.

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

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

Pursuant to section 4121 of Title 10, United States Code (U.S.C.), the Secretary of Defense is authorized to conduct PDPs at laboratories designated as DoW STRLs. Through the USW(R&E), the Secretary exercises the authorities of the Director, Office of Personnel Management (OPM), under 5 U.S.C. 4703 to conduct PDPs at DoW laboratories designated as STRLs. The DoW STRLs must have an approved PDP plan published in a Federal Register Notice (FRN) and fulfill any collective bargaining obligations before implementing the demonstration project or adopting the flexibilities available to other DoW STRL demonstration projects. In implementing this plan, the DHA R&D will establish internal operating procedures as appropriate.

A PDP was implemented at the USAMRMC in accordance with the plan at 63 FR 10440 (March 3, 1998). In 2019, the USAMRMC was redesignated as the USAMRDC and the PDP notice at 63 FR 10440 was updated through a minor modification on August 30, 2019, to reflect this change. On May 5, 2024, following the transfer of USAMRDC components to the DHA R&D, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of War for Science and Technology Foundations designated the DHA R&D as a DoW STRL. The DHA R&D has implemented the USAMRDC PDP authorities for the DHA R&D components that were formerly subordinate components of the USAMRDC. This notice implements the PDP for all DHA R&D components by adopting the USAMRDC PDP plan and includes updates, modifications, and adoptions of other flexibilities available to all DoW STRLs.

The purpose of the demonstration project is to demonstrate that the effectiveness of DoW organizations can be enhanced by allowing greater managerial control over personnel functions and, at the same time, expand the opportunities available to employees through a more responsive and flexible personnel system.

There were 17 comments received from commenters regarding the DHA PDP, 89 FR 89621, dated November 13, 2024. The following is a summary of comments received and a response to each.

Comment: For the Supervisory Bonus (SB), must they have completed a supervisory probationary period to be eligible? Can a supervisor get a SB, pro-rated, other than the beginning of the appraisal period to be used as a recruitment incentive?

Response: No changes to the notice were made based on this question. Eligibility for the SB will be described in the internal operating procedure. An employee may receive a pro-rated SB as a recruitment incentive for filling a supervisory position. To maintain the SB upon initial receipt, and thereafter, an employee must successfully complete the one-year probationary period and required supervisory training.

Comment: There are Special Salary Rates (SSR) that far exceed the with locality amount for certain geographic locations/Occupational Classification Code series. How will this apply to converting into demo if the SSR is higher than the top of the band?

Response: No changes to the notice were made based on this question. The R&D demonstration project does not recognize SSR. However, supplemental pay may be granted to address the difference in salary between the demonstration project salary and the SSR.

Comment: For contingent employees appointment Authority, is it still relevant to get commander approval for the 6th year when a 10-year term authority is available?

Response: No changes to the notice were made based on this question. This will be addressed in the internal operating procedure and includes implementing instructions for the Flexible Length and Renewable Term Technical Appointments.

Comment: Reduction in Force (RIF) rules in Federal Register Volume 63, No. 41, dated March 3, 1998, are superseded by 87 FR 58334, dated September 26, 2022.

Response: No changes to the notice were made based on this question. The RIF rules in 63 FR 10440, dated March 3, 1998, were superseded by those published in 87 FR 58334 dated Sept 26, 2022. The RIF rules as they apply to the DHA R&D demonstration project will be addressed in the internal operating procedure.

Comment: Is DoD still limited to 40 pay band V positions?

Response: No changes to the notice were made based on this question. The original limit of 40 pay band V positions was set by the OPM. Title 10 U.S.C. 4091 and 79 FR 43724, dated July 28, 2014, authorized the establishment of a new category of positions entitled Senior Scientific Technical Managers (SSTM). For the DHA R&D, this category is identified as the DB-05 pay band. The total number of authorized DB-05 positions cannot exceed two percent of the number of scientists and engineers employed at such laboratory as of the close of the last fiscal year before the fiscal year in which any appointments subject to that numerical limitation are made. If the two percent does not equate to a whole number, the R&D will round down to the next lower number.

Comment: Under the performance section, does the employee still receive retention years of credit for RIF?

Response: No changes to the notice were made based on this question. The rules for RIF will be outlined in the Internal Operating Procedures, which will mirror the MRDC RIF IOP #7 and allow the provision of RIF as described in 87 FR 58334.

Comment: For Expanded Development Opportunity, based on new RIF rules, retention years credit for RIF no longer applies, is this correct?

Response: No changes to the notice were made based on this question. Yes, this is correct.

Comment: Given the age of the MRDC FRN, is the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) designations still accurate as identified on Figure 1-Occupational Families and Pay Bands?

Response: No changes to the notice were made based on this question. The FLSA designations listed in the FRN are a guide and should not be used as the official designation. The duties of each position description are reviewed to make the final FLSA determination.

Comment: Will the DB05 authority still be exercised at the DA level? Are high grade controls still in place

Response: No changes to the notice were made based on this question. The SSTM, DB-05, authority are authorized in 10 U.S.C. 4091 and 79 FR 43722. The number of DB-05 positions authorized is based on two percent of the number of scientists and engineers employed at the laboratory at the close of the last fiscal year.

Comment: Voluntary Separation Incentive Payment (VSIP)—authority has not been delegated to sub activity Commanders/Directors; can it be?

Response: No changes to the notice were made based on this question. The VSIP authority will be delegated accordingly by the agency. No changes to the Notice were made based on this question.

Comment: What does first line management mean? Does it mean the first line supervisor?

Response: No changes to the notice were made based on this question. Yes, first line management means the first line supervisor.

Comment: Recommend rewriting Supervisory Probation period because as written it's confusing on how long the probationary period are.

Response: The supervisory probationary period has been re-written to clarify the one-year requirement for a supervisory probationary period.

Comment: A score range of 85 to 100 or an “A” rating is quite broad when considering academic-type rating. Can the cumulative scores for each rating be adjusted and the Alpha character changed to a numerical level? Example: Instead of A superior = 85-100, make it a level 5 outstanding = 90-100?

Response: No changes to the notice were made based on this question. After the implementation of the DHA R&D STRL, the recommendation to adjust the rating scores will be further explored and if necessary, a minor modification to this FRN will be accomplished.

Comment: What is DA Form 374? Is it still applicable under DHA? Does Army still use it?

Response: No changes to the notice were made based on this question. This form is obsolete and no longer used.

Comment: Recommend references to the Civilian Personnel Advisory Center (CPAC)/Civilian Personnel Operations Center (CPOC) be updated to reflect Civilian Human Resources Service Center (CHRSC) now that the titling has changed.

Response: References to CPAC/CPOC were updated to the new name of CHRSC, Civilian Human Resources Service Center.

This serves as adoption of the USAMRDC STRL PDP plan, including the following modifications approved pursuant to DoD Instruction 3201.05: minor modification to administrative occupational family, DJ-03 and DJ-04 band structure of occupational series 1102 only (February 3, 2011); minor modification to pay for performance payment timeframe (January 5, 2018); minor modification to participating occupational series (November 28, 2022). Upon implementation, the DHA R&D will also utilize the flexibilities published in the following FRNs and any future omnibus flexibilities that are available to all DoW STRLs:

The purpose of the project is to demonstrate that the effectiveness of DoW laboratories can be enhanced by allowing greater managerial control over personnel functions and, at the same time, expanding the opportunities available to employees through a more responsive and flexible personnel system.

This demonstration project will cover approximately 1,224 DHA R&D positions. Approximately 59 percent of covered positions are at the following DHA R&D organizations located at Fort Detrick, Maryland: DHA R&D, Telemedicine and Advanced Technology Research and Medical Research Institute of Infectious Disease. The remaining positions are at the following sites: Medical Research Institute of Chemical Defense, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland; Walter Reed Institute of Army Research, Forest Glen Annex, Silver Spring, Maryland; Institute of Surgical Research and the Burn Center Directorate, Joint Base San Antonio, Texas. These positions transferred to the DHA R&D from the U.S. Army Medical Research and USAMRDC. The DHA R&D has successfully implemented the USAMRDC PDP authorities for the DHA R&D components that were formerly subordinate organizations of USAMRDC. Based on experience gained and following careful consideration, the DHA R&D has determined to conduct a PDP for all DHA R&D components by adopting the USAMRDC PDP plan and other flexibilities available to all DoW STRLs.

The demonstration project includes appropriated funded civilian employees in the competitive and excepted service (to include non-citizens hired in the absence of qualified citizens) paid under the General Schedule (GS) pay system and Interns assigned to the STRL. The project plan does not cover Senior Executive Service employees, Scientific and Professional employees, and Federal Wage System employees Personnel added to the DHA R&D in like positions, either through appointment, promotion, reassignment, change to lower grade or where their functions and positions have been transferred into the DHA R&D, will be converted to the demonstration project.

The DHA R&D will fulfill its obligations to consult and/or negotiate with the designated union as appropriate and applicable in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 4703(f) and 7117.

In October 1994, the USAMRMC began development of the specifics of this personnel demonstration proposal. A PDP Office was established, and administrative support added in April 1995. Briefings of the proposal were initially conducted for the workforce at every participating subordinate activity with subsequent briefings provided upon request by Commanders/Directors.

Status of the project was provided to subordinate activity Commanders/Directors for dissemination to all employees. An electronic mail address was established in the Fall of 1994 and made available to all employees and managers for the purpose of expressing opinions and/or obtaining specific information about the project. Review of the proposal and input by the U.S. Army Medical Command (MEDCOM), USAMRMC workforce, as well as critical and extensive reviews by Headquarters Department of the Army, the Office of the Secretary of War, and OPM since April 1995, led to the publication of the proposal in the March 12, 1997, Federal Register . Subsequently, Public Hearings were held, and comments from interested parties and the workforce were reviewed and considered, culminating in the publication of the final USAMRMC demonstration project plan.

In October 2018, USAMRMC was realigned from MEDCOM to the U.S. Army Materiel Command. On June 12, 2019, the USAMRMC was renamed to the USAMRDC. During the summer of 2019, USAMRDC began reporting to the Army Futures Command (AFC). On December 22, 2019, USAMRDC personnel were realigned to the AFC. On May 5, 2024, USAMRDC personnel were transferred from AFC to the DHA R&D with the exception of three subordinate activities, U.S. Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine and U.S. Army Aeromedical Research Laboratory, and U.S. Army Medical Materiel Development Activity Program Manager Soldier Medical Devices, which remained with AFC.

The DHA R&D intends to establish an appropriate balance between the personnel management authority/accountability delegated to subordinate activity Commanders/Directors and R&D management/oversight responsibilities by establishing a Personnel Management Board (PMB). The Chairperson and members will be appointed by the Director R&D. The PMB will serve to provide oversight, policy, guidelines, corrective action, and evaluation as subordinate activity Commanders/Directors execute the following:

1. Formulate and execute the civilian pay budget;

2. Determine the composition of the pay-for-performance pay pools in accordance with the guidelines of this proposal and internal procedures;

3. Administer funds allocation to pay pool managers;

4. Determine hiring and promotion salaries as well as exceptions to pay-for- performance salary increases;

5. Provide guidance to pay pool managers;

6. Manage the awards pools;

7. Select participants for the Expanded Developmental Opportunities Program, long term training, and any special developmental assignments;

8. Adhere to guidelines concerning the promotion of employees into salary ranges designated “high grades”;

9. Ensure in-house budget neutrality to include tracking of average salaries, FTEs, etc.;

10. Contact the PMB designee for problem resolution, recommending changes in policy/procedure, etc.; and

11. Ensure that all employees are treated in a fair and equitable manner in accordance with all policies, regulations, and guidelines covering this demonstration project.

Occupations at the DHA R&D will be grouped into occupational families. Occupations will be grouped according to similarities in type of work and customary requirements for formal training or credentials. The common patterns of advancement within the occupations as practiced at DoW Laboratories and in the private sector will also be considered. The current occupations and grades have been examined, and their characteristics and distribution have served as guidelines in the development of the four occupational families described below. Positions included in each occupational family are listed in Appendix A.

1. Engineers and Scientists (E&S) . This occupational family includes all technical professional positions, such as positions in the biological, physical and social sciences, medical, veterinary, mathematical, and engineering fields. Ordinarily, specific course work or educational degrees are required for these occupations.

2. E&S Technicians . This occupational family contains specialized functions in fields that provide direct technical support to the scientific/engineering effort. Positions in these occupations may or may not require completion of formal college course work. However, training and skills in the various specialties are generally required.

3. Administrative . This occupational family contains specialized functions in such fields as management analysis, accounting, budgeting, contracting, purchasing, legal, business and industry, library, quality assurance, and supply. Special skills in administrative fields or special degrees are required.

4. General Support . This occupational family is composed of positions requiring special skills and knowledge, such as typing, shorthand, or office automation skills, and job-related experience. Clerical work usually involves the processing and maintenance of records. Assistant work requires knowledge of methods and procedures within a specific administrative area. Support functions include positions such as secretary, mail clerk, medical clerk, accounting technician and supply technician.

Each occupational family will be composed of discrete pay bands (levels) corresponding to recognized advancement within the occupations. These pay bands will replace grades. They will not be the same for all occupational families. Each occupational family will be divided into three to five pay bands, each pay band covering the same pay range now covered by one or more grades. A salary overlap, like the current overlap between GS grades, will be maintained.

Ordinarily, an individual will be hired at the lowest salary in a pay band. Exceptional qualifications, specific organizational requirements, or other compelling reasons may lead to a higher entrance level within a band. The DHA R&D broadbanding plan is expanded to create a Pay Band V of the Engineers and Scientists Occupational Family. This pay band is designed for Senior Scientific Technical Managers (79 FR 43722). Current OPM guidelines of Senior Executive Service (SES) and Scientific and Professional (ST) positions do not fully meet the needs of DHA R&D. The SES designation is appropriate for executive level managerial positions whose classification exceeds the GS-15 grade level. The primary knowledge and abilities of SES positions relate to supervisory and managerial responsibilities. Positions classified as ST are reserved for bench research scientists and engineers; these positions require a very high level of technical expertise, and they have little or no supervisory responsibility.

The DHA R&D currently has many positions, typically division/directorate chiefs, which have characteristics of both SES and ST classifications. Most division/directorate chiefs in DHA R&D are responsible for supervising other GS-15 positions, including branch chiefs, non- supervisory researcher scientists and engineers, and possibly ST positions. Most division/directorate chief positions are classified at the GS-15 level, although their technical expertise warrants classification beyond GS-15. Because of their management responsibilities, these individuals are excluded from the ST system. Because of management considerations, they cannot be placed in the SES. Management considers the primary requirement for division/directorate chiefs to be knowledge of, and expertise in, the specific scientific and technology areas related to the mission of their divisions/directorates. Historically, incumbents of these positions have been recognized within the community as scientific and engineering leaders, who possess primarily scientific/engineering credentials and are considered experts in their field. However, they must also possess strong managerial and supervisory abilities. Therefore, although some of these employees have scientific credentials that might compare favorably with ST criteria, classification of these positions as STs is not an option, because the managerial and supervisory responsibilities inherent in the positions cannot be ignored.

The purpose of Pay Band V (which will reinforce the equal pay for equal work principle) is to solve a critical classification problem. It will also contribute to an SES “corporate culture” by excluding from the SES positions for which technical expertise is paramount. Pay Band V proposes to overcome the difficulties identified above by creating a new category of positions, the Senior Scientific Technical Manager, which has both scientific/technical expertise and full managerial and supervisory authority. Current GS-15 division/directorate chiefs will convert into the demonstration project at Pay Band IV. After conversion, they will be reviewed against established criteria to determine if they should be reclassified to Pay Band V. Other positions possibly meeting criteria for classification to Pay Band V will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. The salary range is a minimum of 115 percent of the minimum rate of basic pay for GS-15 with a maximum rate of basic pay established at the rate of basic pay (excluding locality pay) for SES level 4 (EX-4). Vacant positions in Pay Band V will be competitively filled to ensure that selectees are preeminent researchers and technical leaders in the specialty fields who also possess substantial managerial and supervisory abilities. Panels will be created to assist in filling Pay Band V positions. Panel members will be selected from a pool of current DHA R&D senior military and SES members, ST employees, and later those in Pay Band V, and the unit Commander to ensure impartiality, breadth of technical expertise, and a rigorous and demanding review. The panel will apply criteria developed largely from the current OPM Research Grade Evaluation Guide for positions exceeding the GS-15 level.

The pay bands for the occupational families and how they relate to the current GS grades are shown in Figure 1. Application of the FLSA within each pay band is also shown in Figure 1. It should be noted that for recruitment and retention reasons for the occupational series 1102 and 1105, the DJ-03 pay band range will be GS-11 through GS-13, and DJ-04 is GS-14. This pay-band concept has the following advantages:

1. It reduces the number of classification decisions required during an employee's career.

2. It simplifies the classification decision-making process and paperwork. A pay band covers a larger scope of work than a grade and thus will be defined in shorter and simpler language.

3. It supports delegation of classification authority to line managers.

4. It provides a broader range of performance-related pay for each level. In many cases, employees whose pay would have been frozen at the top step of a grade will now have more potential for upward movement in the broader pay band.

5. It prevents the progression of low performers through a pay band by mere longevity, since job performance serves as the basis for determining pay.

The FLSA exemption and non-exemption determinations will be made consistent with criteria found in 5 CFR part 551. Supervisors with classification authority will make the determinations on a case-by-case basis with reference to documentation in the operating procedures manual and the advice and assistance of the CHRSC. The generic position description benchmark will not be the sole basis for the determination. The basis for exemption/non-exemption will be documented and annotated on each description. Exemption criteria will be narrowly construed and applied only to those employees who clearly meet the spirit of the exemption. The basis for determinations will be reviewed as a part of the performance review process and when salary adjustments are warranted. Changes will be documented and provided to the CHRSC, as appropriate.

Today's environment of rightsizing and workforce transition mandates that the DHA R&D have maximum flexibility to assign duties and responsibilities to individuals. Broad banding can be used to address this need. As a result of the assignment to a particular level descriptor, the organization will have maximum flexibility to assign an employee with no change in basic pay, within broad descriptions consistent with the needs of the organization, and the individual's qualifications and rank or level. Subsequent assignments to projects, tasks, or functions anywhere within the organization requiring the same level and area of expertise, and qualifications would not constitute an assignment outside the scope or coverage of the current level descriptor, or benchmark position description.

Such assignments within the coverage of the generic descriptors are accomplished without the need to process a personnel action. For instance, a technical expert can be assigned to any project, task, or function requiring similar technical expertise. Likewise, a manager could be assigned to manage any similar function or organization consistent with that individual's qualifications. This flexibility allows a broader latitude in assignments and further streamlines the administrative process and system.

A promotion is the movement of an employee to a higher pay band within the same occupational family, or to a pay band in a different occupational family, which results in an increase in the employee's salary. Progression within a pay band is based upon performance pay increases; as such, these actions are not considered promotions and are not subject to the provisions of this section.

(a) Re-promotion to a position which is in the same pay band and occupational family as the employee previously held on a permanent basis within the competitive service.

(b) Promotion, reassignment, demotion, transfer, or reinstatement to a position having promotion potential no greater than the potential of a position an employee currently holds or previously held on a permanent basis in the competitive service.

(c) A position change permitted by reduction-in-force procedures.

(d) Promotion without current competition when the employee was appointed through competitive procedures to a position with a documented career ladder.

(e) A temporary promotion, or detail to a position in a higher pay band, of 180 days or less.

(f) Impact of person on the job, accretion of duties, or Factor IV process (application of the Research Grade Evaluation Guide, Equipment Development Grade Evaluation Guide or similar guides) promotions.

(g) A promotion resulting from the correction of an initial classification error or the issuance of a new classification standard.

To be promoted competitively or noncompetitively from one band to the next, an employee must meet the minimum qualifications for the job and have a current performance rating of “B” or better (see Performance Evaluation) or equivalent under a different performance management system.

The objectives of the classification system are to simplify the classification process, make the process more serviceable and understandable, and place more decision-making authority and accountability with line managers. All positions listed in Appendix A will be in the classification structure. Provisions will be made for including other occupations as employment requirements change in response to changing missions and technical programs.

The present GS classification system has over 400 occupations (also called series), which are divided into 22 groups. The occupational series will be maintained. New series, established by OPM, may be added as needed to reflect new occupations in the workforce. Appendix A lists the occupational series currently represented at the DHA R&D by occupational family.

The DHA R&D will use a classification system that is used by the USAMRDC STRL personnel demonstration project. The present classification standards will be used to create local benchmark position descriptions for each pay band, reflecting duties and responsibilities comparable to those described in present classification standards for the span of grades represented by each pay band. There will be at least one benchmark position description for each pay band. A supervisory benchmark position description will be added to those pay bands that include supervisory employees. Present titles and series will continue to be used to recognize the types of work being performed and educational backgrounds and requirements of incumbents. Locally developed specialty codes and OPM functional codes will be used to facilitate titling, making qualification determinations, and assigning competitive levels to determine retention status.

The R&D Director will have delegated classification authority and will redelegate this authority to subordinate activity Commanders/Directors for redelegation to activity managers as appropriate. New position descriptions will be developed to assist managers in exercising delegated position classification authority. Managers will identify the occupational family, job series, the functional code, the specialty code, pay band level, and the appropriate acquisition codes. Specialty codes will be developed by Subject Matter Experts to identify the special nature of work performed. Functional codes are those currently found in the OPM Introduction to the Classification Standards which defines certain kinds of activities, e.g., Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, etc., and covers E&S.

An employee may appeal the occupational series or pay band level of his or her position at any time. An employee must formally raise the areas of concern to supervisors in the immediate chain of command, either verbally or in writing. If an employee is not satisfied with the supervisory response, he or she may then appeal to the DoW appellate level. If an employee is not satisfied with the DoW response, he or she may then appeal to the OPM, only after DoW has rendered a decision under the provisions of this demonstration project. Appellate decisions from OPM are final and binding on all administrative, certifying, payroll, disbursing, and accounting officials of the Government. Time periods for case processing under Title 5 apply. An employee requesting a classification decision that would exceed the equivalent of a GS-15 level may not submit the appeal to OPM.

An employee may not appeal the assignment of the occupational series to an occupational family; the accuracy of the occupational family; the title of a position; the accuracy of the position description; the demonstration project classification criteria, or the pay-setting criteria; the propriety of a salary schedule; or matters grievable under an administrative or negotiated grievance procedure or an alternative dispute resolution procedure. The evaluation of classification appeals under this demonstration project are based upon the demonstration project classification criteria. Case files will be forwarded for adjudication through the CHRSC providing personnel services and will include copies of appropriate demonstration project criteria.

The performance appraisal system will link compensation to performance through annual performance evaluations and performance ratings. The performance appraisal system will allow optional use of peer evaluation input and/or input from subordinates whenever appropriate. The system will have the flexibility to be modified, if necessary, as more experience is gained under the project. Details of the system may be found in the implementation instructions.

Performance objectives are statements of job responsibilities based on the work unit's mission, goals, and supplemental benchmark position descriptions. Employees and supervisors will jointly develop performance objectives which will reflect the types of duties and responsibilities expected at the respective pay level. Absent agreement between employees and supervisors, final authority to establish performance objectives and element weights rests with management. The performance objectives, representing joint efforts of employees and their rating chains, should be in place within 30 days from the beginning of each rating period.

Performance elements and rating forms have been designed to implement a scoring and rating system. The performance evaluation system will be based on critical performance elements defined in Appendix C. All elements in the performance evaluation system are critical. Non-critical elements will not be used. Each performance element is assigned a weight between a specified range. The total weight of all elements in a performance plan is 100 points. The supervisor assigns each element some portion of the 100 points in accordance with its importance for mission attainment. These weights will be developed along with employee performance objectives.

A mid-year review between a supervisor and employee will be held to determine whether objectives are being met and whether performance objectives should be modified to reflect changes in planning, workload, and resource allocation. Additional reviews may be held throughout the rating cycle; to include possible changes in assigned weights, if necessary.

A performance appraisal is scheduled for the final weeks of the annual performance cycle. A special performance appraisal may be conducted at any time prior to the final weeks of the performance cycle if the employee has been on approved standards for a minimum of 60 days. Other instances that would warrant a special performance appraisal will be identified in the Internal Operating Procedures. The performance appraisal process brings supervisors and employees together for formal discussions on performance and results in (1) written appraisals, (2) performance ratings, (3) performance pay increases and/or bonuses, (4) cash awards, and (5) other individual performance-related actions, as appropriate. A performance appraisal will consist of two meetings held between employee and supervisor: the performance review meeting and the evaluation feedback meeting.

The review meeting is to discuss job performance and accomplishments. Supervisors do not assign scores, ratings, pay increases, or awards at this meeting. The supervisor notifies the employee of the review meeting in time to allow the employee to prepare a list of accomplishments. Employees will be given an opportunity at the meeting to give a personal performance assessment and describe accomplishments. The supervisor and employee discuss job performance and accomplishments in relation to the performance elements, objectives, and planned activities established in the performance plan.

In this second meeting between employee and supervisor, the supervisor informs the employee of management's appraisal of the employee's performance, the employee's performance score and rating, and any recommended related pay increase, bonus, award, or other personnel action. During this second meeting, the supervisor and employee will discuss and document performance objectives for the next rating period.

Selection of the weighted points to assign to an employee's performance is assisted by use of benchmark performance standards (Appendix D). Each benchmark performance standard describes the level of performance associated with a particular point on a rating scale. Supervisors may add supplemental standards to the performance plans of the employees they supervise to further elaborate the benchmark performance standards. The overall score is the sum of the individual element scores. Employees will receive an academic-type rating of “A,” “B,” “C,” or “F” depending upon the percentage of goal attainment and overall cumulative score. The academic-type ratings will be used to determine pay or bonus values. These summary ratings are representative of Pattern E in Summary Level Chart in 5 CFR 430.208(d)(1). This rating will become the rating of record, and

(1) Employees rated “B” or higher will be eligible to receive performance-based pay increases and/or bonuses; and

(2) Employees rated “F” will not receive the general increase or be eligible to receive performance-based pay increases and/or bonuses. A rating of “A” will be assigned for cumulative scores of 85 to 100 points, “B” for cumulative scores of 70 through 84, and “C” for cumulative scores of 50 through 69. An overall rating of “F” indicates failure to perform at the 50 percent level for any one of the assigned weighted elements. (In such a case, even though the cumulative score may exceed 49, the employee will nonetheless receive an overall rating of “F.” NOTE: An “F” constitutes an unacceptable rating).

The DHA R&D will implement a two-step process to deal with poor performers. This process may lead to involuntary separation if the employee receives a score of less than 50 percent of the points for any weighted element. The process will begin with the acknowledgement that an employee's performance is unacceptable (any element that would be rated at less than the 50 percent level of its assigned benchmark rate). The two steps are as follows: (1) Performance Improvement Plan (PIP), and (2) either change in assignment (optional), reduction in pay or grade (optional) or separation. When the employee is determined to be performing below the 50 percent level for any element, the supervisor and the employee will develop a structured PIP that will be monitored for a reasonable period of time. If the employee fails to improve during the PIP, the employee will be given notice of proposed appropriate action. The activity may consider a change in assignment or reduction in pay or grade as opposed to removal if the mission, organizational structure and available resources warrant such action. Separated employees have due process recourse.

If a PIP ends prior to the end of the annual performance cycle and the employee's performance improves to the 50 percent or above level in all assigned elements, the employee is appraised again at the end of the annual performance cycle.

If, in conjunction with the completion of the PIP, the employee attains an annual rating of “C” or higher, they will receive the annual general increase. In addition, employees attaining an annual rating of “B” or higher will be eligible for an increase to base-pay and/or bonus.

If a PIP ends after the end of the annual performance cycle and the employee's performance has improved to the 50 percent or above level in all assigned elements, employment continues, but no retroactive annual general increase, performance base pay increase or performance bonus is granted for that performance cycle. No new appraisal will be created to replace the failing rating, and the Defense Civilian Personnel Data System (DCPDS) will not be updated to change the rating from “F” to “C” or higher. Upon improvement, the employee will be placed on a performance plan for the next rating cycle, which will begin on July 1 through the end of the rating cycle (June 30).

Employees covered by the project will be evaluated under a performance evaluation system that affords administrative grievance rights. The DHA R&D will maintain the substantive and procedural appeal rights currently afforded when taking action for misconduct and poor performance.

The DHA R&D currently has an extensive awards program consisting of both internal and external awards. While not linked to the pay-for-performance system, awards will continue to be given for special acts and other categories as they occur. Awards may include, but are not limited to, special acts, patents, suggestions, on-the-spot, and time-off, and may be modified or expanded as appropriate. Major Command and DoW awards and other honorary noncash awards will be retained. In an effort to foster and encourage teamwork among its employees, a Commander/Director may allocate a sum of money to a team for outstanding completion of a special task or significant achievement, and the team may decide the individual distribution of the total dollars among themselves.

The objective is to establish a pay system that will improve the ability of the DHA R&D to attract and retain quality employees. The system will be a pay-for-performance system and, will result in a distribution of performance pay resources based upon individual performance.

The DHA R&D will use a simplified performance appraisal system that will permit both the supervisor and the employee to focus on quality of the work. This system will permit the manager/supervisor to base compensation on performance or value added to the goal of the organization rather than on longevity and risk aversion. This system will also allow managers to withhold pay increases from nonperformers, thereby giving the nonperformers the incentive to improve performance or leave government service. Pay-for-performance has two components: Performance pay increases ( i.e. base pay increases) and/or bonuses. All covered employees will be given the full amount of locality pay adjustments (as applicable) when they occur, regardless of performance. The funding for performance pay increases and/or bonuses is composed of money previously available for within-grade increases, quality step increases, and promotions from one grade to another when the grades are now in the same pay band.

The funding in the performance pay pool will be used for base pay increases and/or performance bonus pay. The payouts made to employees from the performance pay pool may be a mix of base pay increases, subject to the pay ceiling in the pay bands, and bonus payments. The Headquarters (HQ), DHA R&D Comptroller, in conjunction with each subordinate activity Commander/Director, will calculate the total performance pay pool and allocate pay pools to subordinate activities. Each subordinate activity Commander/Director will allocate pay pools to organizational units or teams as appropriate.

A pay pool manager is accountable for staying within pay pool limits. The pay pool manager assigns pay increases and/or bonuses to individuals on the basis of an academic-type rating, the value of the performance pay pool resources available, and the individual's current basic rate of pay within a given pay band. A pay pool manager may request approval from the Commander/Director or his/her designee to grant a higher performance pay increase/performance bonus than is generated by the compensation formula to recognize an employee's extraordinary achievement (also known as payout above) or to provide accelerated compensation for local interns.

A performance payout will be initially calculated for each individual based upon a pay pool assignment that will be composed of monies outlined previously. For illustration purposes, approximately 2.4 percent of the value of the combined basic rates of pay of the assigned employees will be used. A share will be calculated so that a pay pool manager will not exceed the resources that are available in the pay pool. The performance payout for an individual will be determined as follows:

To illustrate the formula, the basic rates of pay of the 10 employees in a pay pool, who each earn $50,000 per year, total to $500,000. The employees earned a total of 15 shares based on their ratings (5 individuals earned an “A” rating, and 5 individuals earned a “B” rating). The pay pool value is then 2.4 percent of the sum of $500,000, or $12,000. The individual performance payout being determined is for an individual who earns $50,000 per year and receives an “A” on the appraisal, thus earning 2 shares. Using the formula, the individual performance payout is calculated by multiplying the pay pool value, $12,000, by the individual basic rate of pay, $50,000, by the number of shares earned, 2. This product is divided by the sum of the products of the individual basic rates of pay times the number of shares earned, or 750,000. The resulting individual performance payout is $1,600 for the year.

An annual performance base pay increase could be all, none, or part of the compensation formula depending on the current basic rate of pay of the employee. Annual performance base pay increases will be limited to the difference between the particular band pay cap and the employee's current basic rate of pay, or total dollar value of shares, whichever is less, with the balance converted to a performance bonus. This means that employees whose basic rates of pay have reached the upper limits of a particular pay band will receive most performance compensation as a performance bonus. Cash bonuses will not become a part of the employee's basic rate of pay. Employees receiving retained rates are subject to special rules governing basic pay adjustments. An employee receiving a retained rate whose performance rating is “F” at the time of a general pay increase will receive no increase in the retained rate. All other employees receiving a retained rate will receive a general pay increase equal to 50 percent of the amount of the increase in the maximum rate of basic pay payable for the pay band of the employee's position.

A pay pool manager may request approval from the Commander/Director or his/her designee to grant a higher performance pay increase/performance bonus than is generated by the compensation formula to recognize an employee's extraordinary achievement (also known as payout above) or to provide accelerated compensation for local interns. The payout above will be calculated outside the mass pay process. If a payout above is awarded the payout may be paid as a base pay increase, subject to the pay ceiling in the pay bands, and/or a bonus.

Supervisory bonuses of up to 10 percent of the basic rate of pay may be paid at the discretion of Commanders/Directors to supervisors with employees in the same pay band. In exceptional cases (approved by HQ, DHA R&D), supervisors who do not have employees in the same pay band may be compensated up to five percent of basic rate of pay. Employees who qualify for the bonus include supervisors in all occupational families with formal supervisory authority meeting that required for coverage under the OPM GS Supervisory Guide. The supervisory bonus is to recognize supervisory responsibilities required of supervisors most often receiving the same pay as non-supervisory subordinates. There are two situations in which a supervisory bonus may be warranted:

1. Supervisors may be granted up to 10 percent of the basic rate of pay if they supervise employees within the same pay band, or

2. Up to five percent of the basic rate of pay for those supervising employees in lower or other pay bands.

Because the bonus is paid at the beginning of the appraisal period, if the individual leaves a supervisory position or is removed from supervisory responsibilities (unless affected through RIF action), the prorated portion of the bonus for the non-supervisory portion of the performance year will be recovered as a debt due the Government. Before any supervisory bonus is paid, the supervisor (employee) will sign an agreement to make any required repayment.

An employee's total monetary compensation paid in a calendar year may not exceed the basic rate of pay paid in Level I of the Executive Schedule consistent with 5 U.S.C. 5307 and 5 CFR part 530, subpart B. In addition, each pay band will have its own pay ceiling, just as grades do in the GS system. Pay rates for the various pay bands will be directly keyed to the GS rates, except the maximum rate for pay band V of the engineer and scientist occupational family which cannot exceed EX4. Basic pay will be limited to the maximum rates payable for each pay band, except for retained rates as previously described.

The minimum basic pay increase upon promotion to a higher pay band will be six percent or the minimum rate of the new pay band. The maximum amount of pay increase upon promotion will not exceed $10,000 or the minimum rate of the new pay band. When a temporary promotion is terminated, the employee's pay entitlements will be redetermined based on the employee's position of record, with appropriate adjustments to reflect pay events during the temporary promotion, subject to the specific policies and rules established by DHA R&D. In no case may those adjustments increase the pay for the position of record beyond the applicable pay range maximum rate.

Employees who receive 50 percent or less of an assigned benchmark score in any element or who are on a performance improvement plan at the time pay determinations are made, do not receive performance payouts or the general increase. This action may result in a base salary that is identified in a lower pay band. This occurs because the minimum rates of basic pay in a pay band increase as the result of the general increase (5 U.S.C. 5303). This situation, (a reduction in band level with no reduction in pay) will not be considered an adverse action, nor will band retention provisions apply.

A candidate's basic eligibility will be determined using OPM's Qualification Standards Handbook of GS Positions. Candidates must meet the minimum standards for entry into the pay band. For example, if the pay band includes positions in grades GS-5 and GS-7, the candidates must meet the qualifications for positions at GS-5 level. Specific experience/education required will be determined based on whether a position to be filled is at the lower or higher end of the band. Selective placement factors may be established when determined to be critical to successful job performance. These factors must be communicated to all candidates for specific vacancies and must be met for basic eligibility. As a general rule, appointments will be made at the entry level of the pay band and pay will be set at the lowest level in a pay band.

Appointments made above the minimum level will be based upon superior qualifications of the candidate. A candidate appointed toward the higher end of a pay band should have qualifications approaching the lowest GS grade incorporated into the next higher pay band. For example, a person appointed at the higher end of Pay Band II in the E&S Occupational Family would have education, experience, or a combination of the two, approaching the qualifications of the GS-13 level, which is the lowest GS grade incorporated into Pay Band III.

Under the demonstration project, there will continue to be career, and career conditional appointments. These appointments will use existing authorities and entitlements. Non-permanent positions (exceeding one year) needed to meet fluctuating or uncertain workload requirements will be filled using a Contingent Employee appointment authority.

Employees hired for more than one year, under the contingent employee appointment authority are given term appointments in the competitive service for no longer than five years. The DHA R&D Commander is authorized to extend a contingent appointment one additional year. These employees are entitled to the same rights and benefits as term employees and will serve a one year probationary period. The Pay-for-Performance Management System outlined in this Plan applies to contingent employees. Appointment will be made under the same appointment authorities and process as regular term appointments, but recruitment bulletins must indicate that there is a potential for conversion to permanent employment.

Employees hired under the contingent employee authority may be eligible for conversion to career-conditional appointments. To be converted, the employee must (1) have been selected for the term position under competitive procedures, with the announcement specifically stating that the individual(s) selected for the term position(s) may be eligible for conversion to career-conditional appointment at a later date; (2) served two years of substantially continuous service in the term position; (3) be selected under merit promotion procedures for the permanent position; and (4) have a current rating of “B” or better.

Employees serving under regular term appointments at the time of conversion to the demonstration project will be converted to one of the following term appointments at management discretion, with no change to the existing Not To Exceed date;

1. New contingent employee appointments provided they were hired for their current positions under competitive procedure. These employees will be eligible for conversion to career-conditional appointment if they have a current rating of “B” or better (or the equivalent of “B” in their current evaluation system) and are selected under merit promotion procedures for their permanent position after having completed two years of continuous service. Time served in term positions prior to conversion to the contingent employee appointment is creditable, provided the service was continuous.

2. The Flexible Length and Renewable Term Technical Appointment as published in 82 FR 43339 and the internal operating procedures.

The current one-year probationary period will be extended to “up to three years” for all newly hired employees in all pay bands. The purpose of extending the probationary period is to allow supervisors an adequate period of time to fully evaluate an employee's ability to complete a research cycle and/or to fully evaluate an employee's contribution and conduct. The length of the probationary period for the E&S Occupational Family will be three years. The probationary period for all other occupational families will be two years.

Aside from extending the time period, all other features of the current probationary period are retained including the potential to remove an employee without providing the full substantive and procedural rights afforded a non-probationary employee. Any employee subject to serving a probationary period that was appointed prior to the implementation date will not be affected. The “up to three years” probation will apply to new hires or those who do not have reemployment rights or reinstatement privileges.

Probationary employees will be terminated when the employee fails to demonstrate proper conduct, technical competency, and/or adequate contribution for continued employment. When the DHA R&D decides to terminate an employee serving a probationary period because his/her work performance or conduct during this period fails to demonstrate his/her fitness or qualifications for continued employment, it shall terminate his/her services by written notification of the reasons for separation and the effective date of the action. The information in the notice as to why the employee is being terminated shall, as a minimum, consist of the manager's conclusions as to the inadequacies of his/her performance or conduct.

Supervisory probationary periods will be made consistent with 5 CFR 315.901. Employees that have successfully completed the initial probationary period will be required to complete an additional one-year supervisory probationary period for the initial appointment to a supervisory position. An employee may simultaneously complete the one-year supervisory probationary period at the same time they complete the initial two- or three-year probationary period. If an employee is promoted into the supervisory position, during this time the decision is made to return the employee to a non-supervisory position for reasons solely related to supervisory performance, the employee will be returned to a comparable position of no lower pay band and basic pay than the position from which he/she was promoted.

Under the demonstration project, Commanders/Directors will have the authority to offer retired, or separated employees voluntary assignments in their activities. This authority will include individuals who have retired or separated from Federal service. Voluntary Emeritus Program (VEP) assignments are not considered “employment” by the Federal Government (except for the purposes of injury compensation). Thus, such assignments do not affect an employee's entitlement to buy-outs or severance payments based on an earlier separation from Federal service. The VEP will ensure continued quality research while reducing the overall salary line by allowing individuals to accept retirement incentive with the opportunity to retain a presence within their community. The program will be of most benefit during manpower reductions as individuals could accept retirement and return to provide valuable on-the-job training or mentoring to less experienced individuals.

To be accepted into the emeritus program, a volunteer must be approved by the subordinate activity Commander/Director. Everyone who applies is not entitled to a voluntary assignment. The laboratory Commander/Director must clearly document the decision-making process for each applicant (whether accepted or rejected) and retain the documentation throughout the assignment.

Documentation of rejections will be maintained for two years. To ensure success and encourage participation, the individual's Federal retirement pay (whether military or civilian) will not be affected while serving in a voluntary capacity. Retired or separated Federal individuals may accept an emeritus position without a break or mandatory waiting period.

Volunteers will not be permitted to monitor contracts on behalf of the government or to participate on any contracts where a conflict of interest exists. The same rules that currently apply to source selection members will apply to volunteers. An agreement will be established between the volunteer, the subordinate activity Commander/Director, and the servicing CHRSC. The agreement will be reviewed by the DHA legal office for ethics determinations under the Joint Ethics Regulations. The agreement must be finalized before the assumption of duties and shall include:

(a) a statement that the voluntary assignment does not constitute an appointment in the civil service and is without compensation, and any and all claims against the Government because of the voluntary assignment are waived by the volunteer;

(b) a statement that the volunteer will be considered a Federal employee for the purpose of injury compensation;

(c) volunteer's work schedule;

(d) length of agreement (defined by length of project or time defined by weeks, months, or years);

(e) support provided by the subordinate activity (travel, administrative, office space, supplies);

(f) a one-page or less Statement of Duties and Experience;

(g) a provision that states no additional time will be added to a volunteer's service credit for such purposes as retirement, severance pay, and leave as a result of being a member of the VEP;

(h) a provision allowing either party to void the agreement with 10 working days written notice; and

(i) the level of security access required (any security clearance required by the position will be managed by the subordinate activity while the volunteer is a member of the VEP).

Under the demonstration project, Commanders/Directors will have the authority to offer voluntary assignments to U.S. citizens who are retired, separated or on sabbatical from private or public sector organizations. The VEP will provide opportunities for these individuals to bring commercial sector or public sector knowledge and experience into the STRLs. The VEP will not be used to replace any government personnel or interfere with their career opportunities. The VEP may not be used to replace of substitute for work performed by government personnel occupying positions required to perform the STRL's mission. The VEP assignments are not considered “employment” by the Federal government (except as described in 85 FR 5639). The DHA R&D will implement the VEP in accordance with 85 FR 5639.

The DHA R&D Expanded Developmental Opportunities Program will cover all demonstration project employees. An expanded developmental opportunity complements existing developmental opportunities such as (1) long-term training, (2) one-year work experiences in an industrial setting via the Relations With Industry Program, (3) one-year work experiences in laboratories of allied nations via the Science and Engineer Exchange Program, (4) rotational job assignments within the DHA R&D, (5) developmental assignments in higher headquarters within the DHA and DoW, (6) self-directed study via correspondence courses and local colleges and universities, (7) details within DHA R&D and to other Federal Agencies, and (8) Intergovernmental Personnel Act Agreements.

Each developmental opportunity period should benefit the DHA R&D, as well as increase the employee's individual effectiveness. Various learning or uncompensated developmental work experiences may be considered, such as advanced academic teaching or research, sabbaticals, or on-the-job work experience with public or non-profit organizations.

An expanded developmental opportunity period will not result in loss of (or reduction in) basic pay, leave to which the employee is otherwise entitled, or credit for time or service. Input for performance rating purposes will be obtained from the gaining organization to ensure a rating of record is on file and, if warranted, a performance award and/or bonus and retention years credit for RIF purposes is documented. The opportunity to participate in the Expanded Developmental Opportunities Program will be announced as opportunities arise. Instructions for application and the selection criteria will be included in the announcement. Final selection/approval for participation in the program will be made by activity Commanders/Directors. The position of employees on an expanded developmental opportunity may be backfilled by temporary promotion, or temporary/contingent employees. However, that position or its equivalent must be made available to the employee returning from the expanded developmental opportunity.

An employee accepting an Expanded Developmental Opportunity must sign a continuing service agreement. If the employee voluntarily leaves the DHA R&D before the service obligation is completed, the employee is liable for repayment. However, the DHA R&D Director has the authority to waive this agreement.

The DHA R&D will follow the RIF rules as published in 87 FR 58334 dated September 26, 2022. The RIF rules as they apply to DHA R&D will be addressed in the internal operating procedures.

When an employee in the DHA R&D demonstration project is faced with separation or downgrading due to lack of work, shortage of funds, reorganization, insufficient personnel ceiling, the exercise of reemployment or restoration rights, or furlough for more than 30 calendar days or more than 22 discontinuous days, RIF procedures will be used. The RIF notice period will follow OPM guidelines. Except where waived or modified in the waiver section of this plan, grade and pay retention will follow current law and regulations ( e.g. occupational family pay bands will substitute for grade.)

The 82 FR 43339, September 15, 2017, authorizes the DHA R&D Director to offer Voluntary Early Retirement (VERA) and VSIP authorities, as appropriate, to: Approve the use of VERA/VSIP incentives; determine which employees should be offered such incentives; and determine the amount of VSIP.

The key to the success or failure of the proposed demonstration project will be the training provided for all involved. This training will not only provide the necessary knowledge and skills to carry out the proposed changes but will also lead to commitment to the program on the part of participants.

Training at the beginning of implementation and throughout the demonstration will be provided to supervisors, employees, and the administrative staff responsible for assisting managers in effecting the changeover and operation of the new system. The elements to be covered in the orientation portion of this training will include at a minimum: (1) A description of the personnel system, (2) how employees are converted into and out of the system, (3) the pay adjustment and/or bonus process, (4) familiarization with the new position descriptions and performance objectives, (5) the performance evaluation management system, (6) the reconsideration process, and (7) the demonstration project administrative and formal evaluation process.

The focus of this project on management-centered personnel administration, with increased supervisory and managerial personnel management authority and accountability, demands thorough training of supervisors and managers in the knowledge and skills that will prepare them for their new responsibilities. Training will include detailed information on the policies and procedures of the demonstration project, training in using the classification system, position description preparation, and performance evaluation. Additional training may focus on non-project procedural techniques such as interpersonal and communication skills.

The administrative staff, including human resources specialists, subordinate activity administrative officers, and human resources points of contact will play a key role in advising, training, and coaching supervisors and employees in implementing the demonstration project. This staff will need training in the procedural and technical aspects of the project.

The DHA R&D Demonstration Project Office will make and coordinate all arrangements necessary to train employees covered under the demonstration project. In the months leading up to the implementation date, meetings will be held for employees to fully inform them of all project decisions, procedures, and processes.

Initial entry into the demonstration project will be accomplished through a full employee protection approach that ensures each employee an initial place in the appropriate pay band and pay preservation as allowed by regulation.

(a) Under the GS pay structure, employees progress through their assigned grade in step increments. The DHA R&D demo replaces the GS grade structure with pay bands. Employees being assigned to the DHA R&D demo from the GS structure, whether voluntary or involuntary, will be awarded that portion of the next higher step based upon the portion of the waiting period they have completed prior to the date of conversion to the DHA R&D demo; this is called a within grade increase (WGI) buy-in and will be added to the employee's base pay (without locality), as long as the WGI buy-in does not cause the total base pay to exceed the top of the pay band for which assigned. Employees at step 10, or receiving retained rates, on the date of implementation will not be eligible for a prorated lump sum buyout of the WGI since they are already at or above the top of the step scale.

(b) Employees who are covered by special salary rates, prior to the demonstration project, will no longer be considered a special rate employee under the demonstration project. These employees will, therefore, be eligible for full locality pay. The adjusted salaries of these employees will not change. Rather, the employees will receive a new basic pay rate computed by dividing their adjusted basic pay (higher of special rate or locality rate) by the locality pay factor for their area. A full locality adjustment will then be added to the new basic pay rate. Adverse action and pay retention provisions will not apply to the conversion process as there will typically be no change in total salary. In situations where the special salary rate exceeds the adjusted salary rate (that includes locality pay) may be considered for a staffing supplement.

(c) Employees serving under regular term appointments at the time of the implementation of the demonstration project will be converted to the contingent employee appointments so long as the original term appointment was made under competitive procedures. An automatic conversion from current GS grade and pay into a new broadband system will be accomplished. Each employee's initial total salary under the demonstration project will be set as outlined in paragraph (b) above. If conversion into the demonstration project is accomplished by a geographic move, the employee's GS pay entitlements in the new geographic area must be determined before performing the pay conversion.

(d) Employees who are on temporary promotions at the time of conversion will be converted to a pay band commensurate with the grade of the position to which temporarily promoted. At the conclusion of the temporary promotion, the employee will revert to the pay band which corresponds to the grade of record. When a temporary promotion is terminated, the employee's pay entitlements will be determined based on the employee's position of record, with appropriate adjustments to reflect pay events during the temporary promotion, subject to the specific policies and rules established by the DHA R&D. In no case may those adjustments increase the pay for the position of record beyond the applicable pay range maximum rate. The only exception will be if the original competitive promotion announcement stipulated that the promotion could be made permanent; in these cases, actions to make the temporary promotion permanent will be considered, and if implemented, will be subject to all existing priority placement programs.

(e) Employees who voluntarily accept a lower pay band where the maximum rate is lower than the employee's current salary, pay will be set at the maximum rate of the lower pay band.

If a DHA R&D demonstration project employee is moving to a GS position, or if the project ends and each project employee must be converted back to the GS system, the following procedures will be used to convert the employee's project pay band to a GS-equivalent grade and the employee's project rates of pay to GS-equivalent rates of pay. The converted GS grade and GS rates of pay must be determined before movement or conversion out of the demonstration project and any accompanying geographic movement, promotion, or other simultaneous action. For conversions upon termination of the project and for lateral reassignments, the converted GS grade and rate will become the employee's actual GS grade and rate after leaving the demonstration project (before any other action). For transfers, promotions, and other actions, the converted GS grade and rate will be used in applying any GS pay administration rules applicable in connection with the employee's movement out of the project ( e.g., promotion rules, highest previous rate rules, pay retention rules), as if the GS converted grade and rate were actually in effect immediately before the employee left the demonstration project. The converted GS grade may be used to determine placement in non-GS positions.

An employee in a pay band corresponding to a single GS grade is converted to that grade. An employee in a pay band corresponding to two or more grades is converted to one of those grades according to the following rules:

(a) The employee's adjusted rate of basic pay under the demonstration project (including any locality payment) is compared with step 4 rates in the highest applicable GS rate range. (For this purpose, a “GS rate range” includes a rate range in (1) the GS base schedule, (2) the locality rate schedule for the locality pay area in which the position is located, or (3) the appropriate special rate schedule for the employee's occupational series, as applicable.) If the series is a two-grade interval series, only odd-numbered grades are considered below GS-11.

(b) If the employee's adjusted project rate equals or exceeds the applicable step 4 rate of the highest GS grade in the band, the employee is converted to that grade.

(c) If the employee's adjusted project rate is lower than the applicable step 4 rate of the highest grade, the adjusted rate is compared with the step 4 rate of the second highest grade in the employee's pay band. If the employee's adjusted rate equals or exceeds step 4 rate of the second highest grade, the employee is converted to that grade.

(d) This process is repeated for each successively lower grade in the band until a grade is found in which the employee's adjusted project rate equals or exceeds the applicable step 4 rate of the grade. The employee is then converted at that grade. If the employee's adjusted rate is below the step 4 rate of the lowest grade in the band, the employee is converted to the lowest grade.

(e) Exception: If the employee's adjusted project rate exceeds the maximum rate of the grade assigned under the above-described “step 4” rule but fits in the rate range for the next higher applicable grade ( i.e., between step 1 and step 4), then the employee shall be converted to that next higher applicable grade.

(f) Exception: An employee will not be converted to a lower GS grade than the GS grade currently encompassed within employee's current pay band.

An employee's pay within the converted GS grade is set by converting the employee's demonstration project rate of pay to GS rate of pay in accordance with the following rules:

(a) The pay conversion is done before any geographic movement or other pay-related action that coincides with the employee's movement or conversion out of the demonstration project.

(b) An employee's adjusted rate of basic pay under the project (including any locality payment) is converted to a GS adjusted rate on the highest applicable GS rate range for the converted GS grade. (For this purpose, a “GS rate range” includes a rate range in (1) the GS base schedule, (2) an applicable locality rate schedule, or (3) an applicable special rate schedule.)

(c) If the highest applicable GS rate range is a locality pay rate range, the employee's adjusted project rate is converted to a GS locality rate of pay. If this rate falls between two steps in the locality-adjusted schedule, the rate must be set at the higher step. The converted GS unadjusted rate of basic pay would be the GS base rate corresponding to the converted GS locality rate ( i.e., same step position). (If this employee is also covered by a special rate schedule as a GS employee, the converted special rate will be determined based on the GS step position. This underlying special rate will be basic pay for certain purposes for which the employee's higher locality rate is not basic pay.)

(d) If the highest applicable GS grade is GS-15, and the employee's adjusted pay falls within the locality pay cap range, i.e., the maximum allowed for the GS-15, the step will be determined by looking at the base pay (without locality). If the employee's base pay falls between two steps, the rate will be set at the higher step.

(e) If the highest applicable GS rate range is a special rate range, the employee's adjusted project rate is converted to a special rate. If this rate falls between two steps in the special rate schedule, the rate must be set at the higher step. The converted GS unadjusted rate of basic pay will be the GS rate corresponding to the converted special rate ( i.e., same step position).

An employee in Pay Band V of the E&S Occupational Family will convert out of the demonstration project at the GS-15 level. The DHA R&D, in consultation with the CHRSC, will develop a procedure to ensure that employees entering Pay Band V understand that if they leave the demonstration project and their adjusted pay exceeds the GS-15, step 10 rate, there is no entitlement to retained pay; their GS-equivalent rate will be deemed to be the rate for GS-15, step 10. For those Pay Band V employees paid below the adjusted GS-15, step 10 rate, the converted rates will be set in accordance with Pay-Setting Provisions above.

If an employee is retaining a band level under the demonstration project, apply the procedures in the Grade-Setting and Pay-Setting Provisions above, using the grades encompassed in the employee's retained band to determine the employee's GS-equivalent retained grade and pay rate. The time in a retained band under the demonstration project counts toward the two-year limit on grade retention in 5 U.S.C. 5362.

If an employee is receiving a retained rate under the demonstration project, the employee's GS-equivalent grade is the highest grade encompassed in his or her band level. The standard provisions of pay retention under 5 U.S.C. 5362 shall apply to DHA R&D employees, except as waived or modified in Section IX of the FRN.

Service under the demonstration project is creditable for within-grade increase purposes upon conversion back to the GS pay system. Performance pay increases (including a zero increase) under the demonstration project are equivalent increases for the purpose of determining the commencement of a within-grade increase waiting period under 5 CFR 531.405(b).

All personnel laws, regulations, and guidelines not waived by this plan will remain in effect. Basic employee rights will be safeguarded, and merit principles will be maintained. Supporting personnel specialists in CHRSC will continue to process personnel-related actions and provide consultative and other appropriate services.

The DHA R&D will continue to use the DCPDS for the processing of personnel-related data. Payroll servicing will continue from the respective payroll offices. Local automated systems will be developed to support computation of performance-related pay increases and awards, and other personnel processes and systems associated with this project.

Modifications may be made from time to time as experience is gained, results are analyzed, and conclusions are reached on how the system is working. The DHA R&D will make minor modifications, such as changes in the occupational series in an occupational family without further notice.

The main purpose of the evaluation is to determine whether the waivers granted result in a more effective personnel system and improvements in both intermediate and ultimate outcomes ( i.e., organizational effectiveness, mission accomplishment, and customer satisfaction). In conducting the evaluation DHA R&D will ensure the Under Secretary of War for Research and Engineering (USW(R&E)) evaluation requirements are met in addition to applying knowledge gained from other DoW laboratories and their evaluations to ensure a timely, useful evaluation of the demonstration project.

This STRL adopts innovative practices tested in other STRLs, tailored policies and procedures to meet the specific needs of DHA R&D, and allows continued exploration and adaptation of innovative practices to meet future needs. The STRL flexibilities may be modified, new interventions adopted, unintended consequences corrected, and guidance clarified as experience is gained, results analyzed, and conclusions are reached on how the system is working in a changing workforce environment.

An evaluation model for the DHA R&D Demo will utilize elements critical to an assessment of the effectiveness of the flexibilities. Evaluation will include pre-implementation of DHA R&D data to assess actual effect size of transitioning out of the USAMRDC and comparing across the likely annual and five-year milestones as a baseline. The focus of the evaluation will be on pre-implementation of DHA R&D data to assess actual effect size of transitioning out of the USAMRDC, intermediate outcomes, i.e., the results of specific personnel system changes which are expected to improve human resources management; and, ultimate outcomes, i.e., improved organizational effectiveness, mission accomplishment, and DHA R&D customer satisfaction.

Interim evaluations, as requested by the PMB, DHA R&D Director, DHA, or DoW authority, are conducted to review and assess the effectiveness of STRL features. Qualitative and quantitative data from various sources will be used in the evaluation, to include summary data from performance rating periods and workforce surveys. Annually, reviews and analyses of the performance management system and the performance payout process are conducted for consistency, fairness, and equity and findings and recommendations are presented to the PMB, DHA R&D Director, and/or other authority, as appropriate. The DHA R&D reviews and considers the evaluations provided, may revise operating policies and procedures, and make recommendations to the PMB.

Procedures for evaluating temporary authorities are incorporated into the normal STRL evaluation process as appropriate. The DHA R&D Demo Program Manager will provide information on the use of such authorities including, but not limited to, hires, retention rates, compensation, awards, workforce composition, etc. when requested by the DHA, the Defense Civilian Personnel Advisory Service, USW(R&E), or other appropriate requesting authority.

Data from a variety of different sources will be used in the evaluation. Sources may include employees, leadership, stakeholder, decision-maker, customer, mission partners, etc. Information from existing personnel management information systems supplemented with perceptual survey data from employees, leadership, and mission-related organizations will be used to assess variables related to effectiveness. Multiple methods provide more than one perspective on how the DHA R&D Demo is working. Information gathered through one method will be used to validate information gathered through another. Confidence in the findings will increase as results are substantiated by the review and validation of results through different collection methods (see Appendix B). The following types of qualitative and/or quantitative data may be collected as part of the evaluation:

1. Workforce data.

2. Personnel office data.

3. Employee attitudes and feedback using surveys, structured interviews, and focus groups.

4. Leadership attitudes and feedback using surveys, structured interviews, and focus groups.

5. Local activity histories.

6. Core measures of laboratory effectiveness.

Title 10 U.S.C. 4121 provides authorities to the STRL to experiment with several personnel management innovations. In addition to the authorities granted by the law, the following are the waivers of law and regulation that will be necessary for implementation of the demonstration project. The below Title 5, U.S.C., and Title 5, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) are waived to the extent necessary to allow the provisions described in this FRN. In due course, additional laws and regulations may be identified for waiver request.

Chapter 31, Section 3111: Acceptance of volunteer service—To the extent that the acceptance of retired or separated civilian and military are included as volunteers under current statute in addition to student volunteers.

Chapter 31, Section 3132: The Senior Executive Service, Definitions and Exclusions.

Chapter 33, Section 3324: Appointments to Positions Classified Above GS-15.

Chapter 33, Section 3341: Details; within Executive or military departments—Increasing 120-Day Increments for Details to 180 days.

Chapter 35, Section 3502: Order of Retention—Waived to the extent necessary to allow the provisions of RIF as described in 87 FR 58334.

Chapter 43, Sections 4302 and 4303: To the extent necessary to (1) substitute “pay band” for “grade” and (2) provide that moving to a lower pay band as a result of not receiving the full amount of a general pay increase because of poor performance is not an action covered by the provisions of section 4303.

Chapter 51, Sections 5101-5111: Purpose, definitions, basis, classification of positions, review, authority—Applies to the extent that white collar employees will be covered by broad banding. Pay category determination criteria for Federal wage system positions remain unchanged.

Chapter 53, Sections 5301, 5302 (8) and (9), 5303 and 5304: Pay Comparability System—Sections 5301, 5302, and 5304 are waived only to the extent necessary to allow (1) demonstration project employees to be treated as GS employees, (2) basic rates of pay under the demonstration project to be treated as scheduled rates of pay, and (3) employees in Pay Band V of the E&S Occupational Family to be treated as ST employees for the purposes of these provisions.

Chapter 53, Section 5305: Special Salary rates.

Chapter 53, Sections 5331-5336: General Schedule Pay Rates.

Chapter 53, Sections 5361-5366: Grade and pay retention—This waiver applies only to the extent necessary to:

(1) replace “grade” with “pay band;”

(2) allow demonstration project employees to be treated as GS employees;

(3) provide that pay band retention provisions do not apply to movements to a lower pay band as a result of not receiving the general increase due to an annual performance rating of “F;”

(4) provide that pay retention provisions do not apply to conversions from GS special rates to demonstration project pay, as long as total pay is not reduced;

(5) provide that an employee receiving a retained rate whose performance rating is “F” at the time of a general pay increase will receive no increase in the retained rate;

(6) ensure that, for employees in Pay Band V of the E&S Occupational Family, pay band retention is not applicable and pay retention provisions are modified so that no rate established under these provisions may exceed the rate of basic pay for GS-15, step 10 ( i.e., there is no entitlement to a retained rate).

Chapter 53, Section 5371: Health Care Positions—This waiver applies only to the extent necessary to allow demonstration project employees to be treated as if they hold positions subject to chapter 51 of title 5.

Chapter 55, Section 5545(d): Hazardous Duty Differential—This waiver applies only to the extent necessary to allow demonstration project employees to be treated as GS employees. This waiver does not apply to employees in Pay Band V of the E&S Occupational Family.

Chapter 57, Sections 5753, 5754, and 5755: Recruitment and relocation bonuses, retention incentives, and supervisory differentials waved to the extent necessary to allow provisions as described in this FRN.

Chapter 59, Section 5941: Allowances based on living costs and conditions of environment; employees stationed outside continental U.S. or Alaska. This waiver applies only to the extent necessary to provide that Cost of Living Adjustments paid to employees under the demonstration project are paid in accordance with regulations prescribed by the President (as delegated to OPM).

Chapter 59, Section 5948(1): Physicians Comparability Allowances—This waiver applies only to the extent necessary to allow (1) physicians under the demonstration project to be treated as employees paid under the GS and (2) physicians in Pay Band V of the E&S Occupational Family who are performing research and technology assignments to be treated as ST positions.

Chapter 75, Adverse Actions, sections 7501(1), 7511(a)(1)(A)(ii), and 7511(a)(1)(C)(ii): Waived to the extent necessary to apply probationary and trial period requirements described in STRL FRNs.

Chapter 75, Section 7512(3): Adverse actions—This provision is waived only to the extent necessary to (1) replace “grade” with “pay band” and (2) provide that a reduction in band level is not an adverse action if it results from the employee's rate of basic pay being exceeded by the minimum rate of basic pay for his or her pay band.

Chapter 75, Section 7512(4): Adverse actions—This provision is waived only to the extent that adverse action provisions do not apply to conversions from GS special rates to demonstration project pay, as long as total pay is not reduced.

Part 300.601-605: Time-In-Grade Restrictions—Restrictions eliminated under the demonstration.

Part 308.101-103: Volunteer Service—To the extent that retired/separated civilians and military can perform voluntary services in addition to student volunteers.

Part 11 Probationary and Trial Periods, part 11: Waived to the extent necessary to apply probationary and trial period requirements described in this FRN.

Part 316.301: Term Employment—Adding years to exceed four and establishment of Contingent appointments and allow provisions of the flexible length and renewable term-technical appointments.

Part 316.303: Tenure of term employees—Demonstration allows for conversion to career/career-conditional appointments.

Part 316.303(a): Waived to the extent necessary to allow flexible length and renewable term technical appointments to count toward competitive status.

Part 316.304(a): Waived to allow a two-year probationary period under the flexible length and renewable term-technical appointments.

Part 316.305: Eligibility for within- grade increases—Demonstration employees no longer receive WGIs.

Part 334, Section 334.102: Temporary Assignment of Employees Outside the Agency. Waived to the extent necessary to allow the provisions described in this FRN.

Part 335.103: Covering the length of details and temporary promotions.

Part 351, Subparts B, D, E, F, and G: Waived to the extent necessary to allow the provisions of RIF as described in 87 FR 58334.

Part 430: Subpart B, Performance Appraisal for General Schedule, Prevailing Rate, and Certain Other Employees—Employees under the demonstration project will not be subject to the requirements of this subpart.

Part 430.208: Rating performance is waived to the extent necessary to allow STRLs to assign an assumed rating as described in 87 FRN 58334.

Part 432: Performance-Based Reduction In Grade and Removal Actions—Modified to the extent that an employee may be removed, reduced in band level with a reduction in pay, and reduced in pay without a reduction in band level based on unacceptable performance. For employees who are reduced in band level without a reduction in pay as a result of non-receipt of a general increase, Sections 432.105 and 432.106 (a) and (c) do not apply.

Part 432, Sections 104 and 105: Addressing unacceptable performance and proposing and taking action based on unacceptable performance—In so far as references to “critical elements” are deleted (all elements are critical), and adding that the employee may be “reduced in band level, or pay, or removed” if performance does not improve to acceptable levels after a reasonable opportunity.

Part 511: Classification Under the General Schedule—To the extent that grades are changed to broadbands, and that white collar positions are covered by broad banding.

Part 530, subpart C: Special Salary Rate Schedules for Recruitment and Retention. Waived to the extent necessary to allow the provisions described in this FRN.

Part 531, subparts B, D, and E: Pay Under the GS—Determining rate of basic pay, within-grade increases, and quality step increases. Waived to the extent necessary to allow the provisions described in this FRN.

Part 531, subpart F: Locality Based Comparability Payments—This waiver applies only to the extent necessary to allow:

(1) Demonstration project employees to be treated as GS employees,

(2) basic rates of pay under the demonstration project to be treated as scheduled annual rates of pay, and

(3) employees in Pay Band V of the E&S Occupational Family to be treated as ST employees for the purposes of these provisions.

Part 536: Grade and pay retention—This waiver applies only to the extent necessary to:

(1) Replace “grade” with “pay band;”

(2) allow demonstration project employees to be treated as GS employees;

(3) provide that pay band retention provisions do not apply to movements to a lower pay band as a result of not receiving the general increase due to an annual performance rating of “F;”

(4) provide that pay retention provisions do not apply to conversions from GS special rates to demonstration project pay, as long as total pay is not reduced;

(5) provide that an employee receiving a retained rate whose performance rating is “F” at the time of a general pay increase will receive no increase in the retained rate;

(6) ensure that, for employees in Pay Band V of the E&S Occupational Family, pay band retention is not applicable and pay retention provisions are modified so that no rate established under these provisions may exceed the rate of basic pay for GS-15, step 10 ( i.e., there is no entitlement to a retained rate).

Part 550.703: Severance Pay—This waiver applies only to the extent necessary to modify the definition of “reasonable offer” by replacing “two grade or pay levels” with “one band level” and “grade or pay level” with “band level.”

Part 550.902: Hazardous Duty Differential—This waiver applies only to the extent necessary to allow demonstration project employees to be treated as GS employees. This waiver does not apply to employees in Pay Band V of the E&S Occupational Family.

Part 575, Subparts A-D: Recruitment incentives, relocation incentives, retention incentives, and supervisory differentials. Waived to the extent necessary to allow provisions as described in this FRN.

Part 591, subpart B: Cost-of-Living Allowances and Post Differential-Non-foreign Areas—This waiver applies to the extent necessary to allow (1) Demonstration project employees to be treated as employees under the GS and (2) employees in Pay Band V of the E&S Occupational Family to be treated as ST employees for the purposes of these provisions.

Part 752.401(a)(3): Adverse Actions—This waiver applies only to the extent necessary to (1) replace “grade” with “pay band” and (2) provide that a reduction in pay band level is not an adverse action if it results from the employee's rate of basic pay being exceeded by the minimum rate of basic pay for his or her pay band.

Part 752.401(a)(4): Adverse Actions—This waiver applies only to the extent that adverse action provisions do not apply to conversions from GS special rates to demonstration project pay, as long as total pay is not reduced.

Bonneville is proposing to add power rate adjustment mechanisms to the FY 2026-2028 Wholesale Power Rate Schedules and General Rate Schedule Provisions (GRSPs) for the remainder of the BP-26 rate period in order to address the financial impact of the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon's Amended Preliminary Injunction Order, ECF No. 2674, NWF, et al. v. NMFS, et al., Case No. 3:01-cv-640-SI, issued March 2, 2026. This proceeding, the BP-27 proceeding, is limited solely to this purpose. The proposed power rate adjustment mechanisms are expected to recover an additional $250 million from power rates, which would result in a 6.3 percent increase to the average effective Priority Firm Non-Slice power rate, a 5.3 percent increase to the average effective Industrial Firm power rate, and a 2.2 percent increase to the average effective New Resources Firm power rate.

In light of the limited purpose of the BP-27 proceeding, and in compliance with the procedures for the establishment of Bonneville rates set forth in Section 7(i) of the Northwest Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 839e(i), Bonneville is conducting the hearing process for a review of this proposal on an expedited basis.

The Rules of Procedure that govern Bonneville's rate proceedings were published in the Federal Register , 83 FR 39993 (Aug. 13, 2018), and posted on Bonneville's website at https://www.bpa.gov/Finance/RateCases/RulesProcedure/Pages/default.aspx. Sections 1010.4(b)(4) and 1010.22 of the Rules of Procedure provide for expedited rate processes. In order to facilitate the expedited process in the BP-27 proceeding, pursuant to Section 1010.1(e) of the Rules of Procedure, the Administrator authorizes the Hearing Officer to waive any procedural requirements of the rules for the purpose of developing the record and completing the proceeding on an expedited basis.

Bonneville has made prospective parties aware of its intent to use an expedited process pursuant to section 1010.22 of the Rules of Procedure. The official schedule will be established by the Hearing Officer and may be amended by the Hearing Officer as needed during the proceeding. The Hearing Officer may circumscribe or reduce the timing or availability of any procedural activities in the case as he or she determines are unnecessary or overly burdensome in consideration of the limited scope and purpose of this case.

Section 1010.5 of the Rules of Procedure prohibits ex parte communications. Ex parte communications include any oral or written communication (1) relevant to the merits of any issue in the proceeding; (2) that is not on the record; and (3) with respect to which reasonable prior notice has not been given. The ex parte rule applies to communications with all Bonneville and DOE employees and contractors, the Hearing Officer, and the Hearing Clerk during the proceeding. Except as provided, any communications with persons covered by the rule regarding the merits of any issue in the proceeding by other executive branch agencies, Congress, existing or potential Bonneville customers, nonprofit or public interest groups, or any other non-DOE parties are prohibited. The rule explicitly excludes and does not prohibit communications (1) relating to matters of procedure; (2) otherwise authorized by law or the Rules of Procedure; (3) from or to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission); (4) that all litigants agree may be made on an ex parte basis; (5) in the ordinary course of business, about information required to be exchanged under contracts, or in information responding to a Freedom of Information Act request; (6) between the Hearing Officer and Hearing Clerk; (7) in meetings for which prior notice has been given; or (8) as otherwise specified in section 1010.5(b) of the Rules of Procedure. The prohibition on ex parte communications applies from the date of publication of this notice and will remain in effect until the Administrator's Final Record of Decision is issued.

The scope of the BP-27 rate proceeding is limited solely to consideration of the proposed revision to add the Court-Ordered Operation Rate Adder (COORA) and COORA True-Up adjustment mechanisms to section II.AD to the Wholesale Power Rate Schedules and GRSPs. The BP-26 power and transmission rates were approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on a final basis on February 19, 2026. Bonneville is not otherwise revising the BP-26 power or transmission rates in the BP-27 rate proceeding.

Bonneville may revise the scope of the proceeding to include new issues that arise as a result of circumstances or events occurring outside the proceeding that are substantially related to the rates under consideration in the proceeding. See Rules of Procedure, section 1010.4(b)(8)(ii), (iii), (iv). Only Bonneville may prescribe or revise the scope of the proceeding. Id. If Bonneville revises the scope of the proceeding to include new issues, Bonneville will provide public notice on its website, present testimony or other information regarding such issues, and provide a reasonable opportunity to intervene and respond to Bonneville's testimony or other information. Id.

Pursuant to section 1010.4(b)(8) of the Rules of Procedure, the Administrator directs the Hearing Officer to exclude from the record all argument, testimony, or other evidence that challenges the appropriateness or reasonableness of any other matter, issue, topic, or policy that is not directly related to the proposed revisions to section II.AD of the Power Rate Schedules and GRSPs discussed in section IV of this notice.

Bonneville is in the process of assessing the potential environmental effects of its proposed power rate adjustments, consistent with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The NEPA process is conducted separately from the rate proceeding. All evidence and argument addressing potential environmental impacts of the rate adjustments being developed in the BP-27 rate proceeding are excluded from the rate proceeding record. Instead, comments on environmental effects should be directed to the NEPA process.

Based on its most current assessment of the proposed power rate adjustments, Bonneville believes this proposal may be the type of action typically excluded from further NEPA review pursuant to U.S. Department of Energy NEPA regulations and procedures, which apply to Bonneville. More specifically, the proposal appears to solely involve changes to Bonneville's rates and other cost recovery and management mechanisms to ensure that there are sufficient revenues to meet Bonneville's financial obligations and other costs and expenses, while using existing generation sources operating within normal operating limits. As such, it appears this rate proposal falls within Categorical Exclusion B4.3, found at 10 CFR part 1021, Appendix B, which provides for the categorical exclusion from further NEPA review of “[r]ate changes for electric power, power transmission, and other products or services provided by a Power Marketing Administration that are based on a change in revenue requirements if the operations of generation projects would remain within normal operating limits.”

Nonetheless, Bonneville is still assessing the proposal, and, depending upon the ongoing environmental review, Bonneville may instead take another appropriate approach to NEPA. Comments regarding the potential environmental effects of the proposal may be submitted to Katey Grange, NEPA Compliance Officer, EC-4, Bonneville Power Administration, 905 NE 11th Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97232, and to kcgrange@bpa.gov. Any such comments received by the comment deadline for Participant Comments identified in section III. A of this notice will be considered by Bonneville's NEPA compliance staff in the NEPA process that is being conducted for this proposal.

Any entity or person intending to become a party in the BP-27 proceeding must file a petition to intervene through Bonneville's secure website, https://www.bpa.gov/secure/Ratecase/. A first-time user of Bonneville's secure website must create a user account to submit an intervention. Returning users may request access to the BP-27 rate proceeding through their existing accounts and may submit interventions once their permissions have been updated. The secure website contains a link to the user guide, which provides step-by-step instructions for creating user accounts, submitting filings, and uploading interventions. Please contact the Hearing Coordinator via email at cwgriffen@bpa.gov or, if the question is time-sensitive, via telephone at (503) 230-5107, with any questions regarding the registration and submission process.

All petitions to intervene must be uploaded to Bonneville's secure website by 4:30 p.m. Pacific Prevailing Time on the deadline in the procedural schedule adopted by the Hearing Officer. Late interventions are strongly disfavored. Petitions to intervene must conform to the format and content requirements in sections 1010.6 and 1010.11 of the Rules of Procedure. Petitions must state the name and address of the entity or person requesting party status and the entity or person's interest in the hearing.

The Hearing Officer will rule on all petitions to intervene. Bonneville customers and affiliated customer groups will be granted intervention based on petitions filed in conformance with the Rules of Procedure. Other petitioners must explain their interests in sufficient detail to permit the Hearing Officer to determine whether the petitioners have a relevant interest in the hearing.

Bonneville or any party may oppose a petition to intervene. The deadline for opposing a timely petition to intervene is two business days after the deadline for filing the petition.

Opposition to an untimely petition to intervene must be filed within two business days after service of the petition.

Bonneville distinguishes between “participants in” and “parties to” the BP-27 proceeding. Separate from the formal hearing process, Bonneville will accept written comments, views, opinions, and information from participants who have not intervened in the BP-27 proceeding and been granted “party” status by the Hearing Officer. Participants are not entitled to participate in the prehearing conference; may not cross-examine parties' witnesses, seek discovery, or serve or be served with documents; and are not subject to the same procedural requirements as parties. Bonneville customers whose rates are subject to this proceeding, or their affiliated customer groups, may not submit participant comments. Members or employees of organizations that have intervened in the proceeding may submit participant comments as private individuals (that is, not speaking for their organizations) but may not use the comment procedures to address specific issues raised by their intervenor organizations.

Written comments by participants must be received by October 19, 2026, to be included in the record and considered by the Administrator. Participants should submit comments through Bonneville's website at www.bpa.gov/comment or by hard copy to: BPA Public Involvement, Bonneville Power Administration, P.O. Box 14428, Portland, Oregon 97293. All comments should contain the designation “BP-27” in the subject line.

The hearing record will include, among other things, the transcripts of the hearing, written evidence and argument entered into the record by Bonneville and the parties, written comments from participants, and other material accepted into the record by the Hearing Officer. The Hearing Officer will review and certify the record to the Administrator.

The Administrator will make a final determination on the issue in this proceeding based on the record and such other materials and information as may have been submitted to or developed by the Administrator. The Final ROD will be made available to all parties. Bonneville will submit the Final ROD and the hearing record to the Commission for confirmation and approval after issuance of the Final ROD.

Bonneville is proposing limited revisions to the Fiscal Year 2026-2028 Power Rate Schedules and GRSPs to add new power rate adjustment mechanisms to address the expected financial impact of the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon's Amended Preliminary Injunction Order, ECF No. 2674, NWF, et al. v. NMFS, et al., Case No. 3:01-cv-640-SI, issued March 2, 2026.

The Power GRSPs include general rate schedule terms and conditions applicable to Bonneville's power rates. In addition, the Power GRSPs contain special rate adjustments, charges, credits, and pass-through mechanisms for specific events and customer circumstances.

Specifically, Bonneville proposes adding the COORA and COORA True-Up to GRSP section II.AD. These mechanisms would apply to the following products under the PF-26 Rate Schedule: Load Following, Block, and the Block portion of Slice/Block. The COORA and COORA True-Up also apply to power purchased at the PF Melded Rate (PF-26), Industrial Firm Power Rate (IP-26), and New Resource Firm Power Rate (NR-26). These mechanisms would adjust the PF Tier 1 Equivalent Energy Rates (GRSP II.AA), the Load Shaping Charge True-Up Rate (GRSP II.E, Section 1), and the PF Melded Equivalent Energy Scalar Rate (GRSP II.R, Section 1(c)).

Bonneville's proposed GRSP revisions are a part of this notice and are available for viewing and downloading on Bonneville's website at https://www.bpa.gov/bp-27-rate-case.

This document of the Department of Energy was signed on September 10, 2026, by Travis R. Kavulla, Administrator and Chief Executive Officer of the Bonneville Power Administration, pursuant to delegated authority from the Secretary of Energy. That document with the original signature and date is maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes only, and in compliance with requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the undersigned DOE Federal Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to sign and submit the document in electronic format for publication, as an official document of the Department of Energy. This administrative process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon publication in the Federal Register .

Pursuant to 40 CFR 155.42(c), this notice announces the availability of EPA's case closures for the pesticides shown in Table 1. The registration review case closures are supported by rationales included in the docket for each chemical, if established.

EPA is conducting its registration review of the chemicals listed in Table 1 of Unit I pursuant to the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) section 3(g) (7 U.S.C. 136a(g)) and the Procedural Regulations for Registration Review at 40 CFR part 155, subpart C. FIFRA section 3(g) provides, among other things, that pesticide registrations are to be reviewed every 15 years. Consistent with 40 CFR 155.57, in its final registration review decision, EPA will ultimately determine whether a pesticide continues to meet the registration standard in FIFRA section 3(c)(5) (7 U.S.C. 136a(c)(5)). As part of the registration review process, the Agency has completed case closures for the pesticides in Table 1 of Unit I because all products in the cases are cancelled.

For additional background on the registration review program, see: https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-reevaluation.

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

Section 1321(t)(2)(E)(ii)(III) of the Resources and Ecosystems Sustainability, Tourist Opportunities, and Revived Economies Act of 2012 (33 U.S.C. 1321(t) and note ) (RESTORE Act) and the Department of the Treasury's implementing regulation at 31 CFR 34.401(b) set forth certain notice and publication requirements. They require that for purposes of awards made under the Comprehensive Plan Component of the RESTORE Act, a State or Federal award recipient may make a subaward to or enter into a cooperative agreement with a nongovernmental entity that equals or exceeds 10 percent of the total amount of the award only if at least 30 days before the State or Federal award recipient enters into such an agreement, the Council publishes in the Federal Register and delivers to specified Congressional committees the name of the recipient and subrecipient; a brief description of the activity, including its purpose; and the amount of the award. This notice accomplishes the Federal Register publication requirement.

As specified in the 2026 FPL, which is available on the Council's website at https://www.restorethegulf.gov/our-work/fpl/fpl-2026/, RESTORE Act funds in the amount of $600,000.00 will support the Colonial Waterbird Rookery Island Restoration Project through an Interagency Agreement (IAA) with DOI. DOI will provide a subaward in the amount of $200,000.00 to HRI. HRI will establish a Project Advisory Committee, convene its meetings, document the proceedings, and evaluate and rank potential projects based on their success potential. HRI will develop a site restoration plan incorporating the work from professional engineers. Each plan will include an adaptive monitoring plan to document the effectiveness of the techniques and actions used to restore habitat for colonial nesting waterbirds.

Under the Medicare program, eligible beneficiaries may receive covered services from a hospital, provided certain requirements are met. Section 1861(e) of the Social Security Act (the Act) establishes distinct criteria for facilities seeking designation as a hospital. Regulations concerning provider agreements are at 42 CFR part 489 and those pertaining to activities relating to the survey and certification of facilities are at 42 CFR part 488. The regulations at 42 CFR part 482 specify the minimum conditions that a hospital must meet to participate in the Medicare program.

Generally, to enter into an agreement with Medicare, a hospital must first be certified by a state survey agency (SA) as complying with the conditions or requirements set forth in part 482 of our regulations. Thereafter, the hospital is subject to regular surveys by an SA to determine whether it continues to meet these requirements. However, there is an alternative to surveys by SAs.

Section 1865(a)(1)(A) of the Act provides that, if a provider entity demonstrates through accreditation by a Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) approved national accrediting organization (AO) that all applicable Medicare requirements are met or exceeded, we will deem that provider entity to have met such requirements. Accreditation by an AO is voluntary and is not required for Medicare participation.

If an AO is recognized by the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services as having standards for accreditation that meet or exceed Medicare requirements, any provider entity accredited by the national accrediting body's approved program would be deemed to meet the Medicare conditions. A national AO applying for approval of its accreditation program under part 488, subpart A, must provide CMS with reasonable assurance that the AO requires the accredited provider entities to meet requirements that meet or exceed the Medicare conditions. “Deemed status” is defined at § 488.1, and it means that CMS has certified that a provider or supplier for Medicare participation based on the fact it has been accredited by a CMS-approved AO and met other participation requirements to become a “deemed” provider or supplier.

CMS reviews the standards and processes utilized by such AOs periodically, and if CMS determines that the AO's standards and processes meet or exceed those used by CMS surveyors, CMS grants or renews “deeming authority” to the AO for certain types of providers and suppliers, as outlined within this notice. Any provider or supplier thereafter surveyed by such approved AO and found to have met Medicare's regulatory standards is recognized by CMS as a “deemed” provider or supplier. Our regulations concerning the approval of AOs are set forth at §§ 488.4 and 488.5. The regulation at § 488.5(e)(2)(i) permits CMS to approve or re-approve an AO application for a period not to exceed 6 years.

DNV's current term of approval for their hospital accreditation program expires September 26, 2026.

Section 1865(a)(3)(A) of the Act provides a statutory timetable to ensure that our review of applications for CMS-approval of an accreditation program is conducted in a timely manner. The Act provides us 210 days after the date of receipt of a complete application, with any documentation necessary to make the determination, to complete the application review process. Within 60 days after receiving a complete application, we must publish a notice in the Federal Register that identifies the national accrediting body making the request, describes the request, and provides no less than a 30-day public comment period. At the end of the 210-day period, we must publish a notice in the Federal Register approving or denying the application.

On April 9, 2026, we published a proposed notice in the Federal Register (91 FR 17970), announcing DNV Healthcare USA Inc.'s (DNV's) request for continued approval of its Medicare hospital accreditation program. CMS approves or denies an AO's application based on an assessment of the factors stated, which may include, but is not limited to, a review of the information required to be submitted by the AO, interviews with AO staff, an evaluation of the AO's survey process and findings, or other activities necessary to determine that the AO meets the requirements set forth at §§ 488.4 and 488.5. Under Section 1865(a)(2) of the Act and in our regulations at § 488.5 and § 488.8(h), we reviewed DNV's Medicare hospital application in accordance with the criteria specified by our regulations, which included an assessment of the following:

• DNV's (1) corporate policies; (2) financial viability; (3) ability to investigate and respond appropriately to allegations of violations of the Medicare program requirements; and (4) survey review and decision-making process.

• Survey processes to confirm that they are comparable to SAs' survey processes, and DNV can adequately assess whether a provider or supplier meets or exceeds the Medicare program requirements.

• The composition of the survey team.

• Procedures for monitoring deemed hospitals it has found to be out of compliance with DNV's program requirements.

• Ability to report deficiencies to the surveyed hospital and respond to the hospital's plan of correction in a timely manner.

• Verification of DNV's agreement to provide CMS with a copy of the most current accreditation survey, together with any other information related to the survey as we may require, including corrective action plans.

In accordance with Section 1865(a)(3)(A) of the Act, on April 9, 2026, the proposed notice solicited public comments regarding whether DNV's requirements met or exceeded the Medicare conditions for hospitals. CMS received several comments, all of which supported the continued approval of DNV's hospital accreditation program. Commenters described DNV as fair, thorough, and knowledgeable of applicable standards and noted that its accreditation program supports hospital quality, patient safety, and effective hospital management. We thank the commenters for their input and have considered it when making our decision.

We assessed DNV's hospital accreditation requirements and survey process in comparison with the Medicare CoPs of part 482 and the survey and certification process requirements of parts 488 and 489. Our review and evaluation of DNV's hospital application, which were conducted as described in section III. of this final notice, yielded the following areas where, as of the date of this final notice, DNV has completed revising its documentation in order to meet our requirements by:

• Revising the Survey Report and Corrective Action Plan Submittal Form to include an allowance for the Fire Safety Evaluation System (FSES) and revising the survey guidance to address the FSES process, required documentation, survey resubmittal requirements, and approval process.

• Revising the inspection, testing, and maintenance frequency guidance to define quarterly, semiannual, annual, 3-year, and 5-year frequencies consistent with CMS requirements and clarifying that the specified frequency is required unless otherwise permitted by the manufacturer or applicable National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) codes and standards.

Based on our review and observations described in sections III. and V. of this final notice, we find that DNV provides reasonable assurance that accredited entities would meet or exceed the applicable Medicare conditions and we approve DNV as a national AO for hospitals that request participation in the Medicare program. The decision announced in this final notice is effective September 26, 2026, through September 26, 2032 (6 years). In accordance with § 488.5(e)(2)(i), the term of the approval will not exceed 6 years.

This document does not impose information collection requirements, that is, reporting, recordkeeping or third-party disclosure requirements. Consequently, there is no need for review by the Office of Management and Budget under the authority of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ).

The Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Mehmet Oz, having reviewed and approved this document, authorizes Vanessa Garcia, who is the Federal Register Liaison, to electronically sign this document for purposes of publication in the Federal Register .

Description: This notice is to invite public comments on OCS's proposal to revise the Beneficiary Survey, introduce a survey of grant recipients and their partners, and to continue to use the Beneficiary Report with no changes. This revision request would extend approval of information collection activities for an additional 3 years.

The DDDRP beneficiary survey was developed to examine diaper need and outcomes for beneficiaries served by DDDRP. It was piloted under the Formative Data Collections for ACF Program Support umbrella generic (OMB #: 0970-0531) with the first three cohorts of DDDRP grant recipients. To continue to learn about the people who receive grant services and the extent to which they achieve expected short-term outcomes, the updated proposed survey includes two versions: An enrollment version and a follow-up version.

• The Enrollment Version of the Beneficiary Survey is a revised version of the current Beneficiary Survey. This version will continue to collect demographic data on the children served and caregivers enrolling in the program; information about the employment, education, and income of caregivers; and indicators of diaper need. The survey has been revised to also include contact information for the caregiver, early learning environment participation of children, and diaper-related health. The survey has also been revised to remove several items that proved to be not informative enough to warrant participant burden or that are inconsistent with administration priorities, including the size diaper each child wears, the language the caregiver speaks, and whether the caregiver is a single parent.

• The Follow up Version of the Beneficiary Survey is a new wave of collection for the survey, but it reduces the number of demographic items to focus on repeated measurement of employment, education, income, early learning environment participation, diaper need, and diaper health. It continues to collect contact information to ensure accurate individual-level linking of data across the two waves.

The DDDRP beneficiary report is a report submitted by grant recipients every 6 months that includes information on beneficiary characteristics and outcomes collected by grant recipient partners from beneficiaries. There are no changes proposed to this report.

Finally, the Organizational Survey is a new tool OCS has developed to capture baseline and follow-up data from grant recipients and partners to understand the extent to which participation in the DDDRP has improved organizational capacity to serve beneficiaries. It is based on findings from a recent implementation study that indicated what skills, capacities and knowledge previous DDDRP grant recipients and partners needed to have/develop to be successful.

Information collection materials will be translated into Spanish and may be translated into additional languages if necessary, based on beneficiaries enrolled by grant recipients. ACF acknowledges that English is the official language and authoritative version of all federal information and will note this on the translated material.

Respondents: Respondents for the Beneficiary Survey are the caregivers enrolling their family members with diaper needs in DDDRP services. Respondents for the Beneficiary Report are the grant recipients and their partners who collect and compile the data, as well as the beneficiaries who provide information about their characteristics and outcomes. Respondents to the Organizational Survey are staff at grant recipient and partner organizations most familiar with the execution of the grant.

The estimated burden for the currently approved information collection activities is 8,178.89 hours. The estimated burden of this revised information collection is 5,185.83 hours, a 36 percent reduction in burden. OCS made several changes to survey instruments and fielding to reduce overall burden:

• Beneficiary Survey—Enrollment Version: OCS identified items in the Beneficiary Survey that were not informative enough for the evaluation to warrant participant burden or consistent with administration priorities. Specifically, OCS removed 6 currently approved survey questions. OCS also identified opportunities to program the Beneficiary Survey with new skip patterns, looping and pre-population of questions to reduce time needed to answer items. These changes led to a reduced burden estimate of up to 9 minutes per respondent (reduced from 10 minutes per respondent in the prior information collection). Additionally, OCS reduced the overall number of beneficiaries who will participate in the survey. In this revised request, OCS will only collect Beneficiary Survey data from beneficiaries who enroll during a defined 1-year period during the grant recipient's program.

• Beneficiary Report—Grant Recipients: OCS reduced the overall number of grant recipients who will need to collect information from beneficiaries and fill out the beneficiary reports, based on upcoming planned funding competitions.

• Beneficiary Report—Partners: OCS reduced the number of potential partners anticipated based on current reporting practices for grant recipients and new programmatic recommendations to collaborate with four or fewer partners. Previously, grant recipients were allowed to partner with as many organizations as desired.

• Beneficiary Report—Beneficiaries: OCS anticipates that fewer beneficiaries will need to provide information for the Beneficiary Report compared to the prior information collection as there are fewer grant recipients operating during this information collection period overall.

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

Authority: Section 1110, Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 1310.

FDA is announcing the availability of a final guidance titled “Recommendations for the Development of Blood Collection, Processing, and Storage Systems for the Manufacture of Blood Components Using the Buffy Coat Method.” This guidance provides recommendations on the development of blood collection, processing, and storage systems ( e.g., blood bags with anticoagulant and additive solutions, empty bags for platelet pooling) intended for the manufacture of blood and blood components for transfusion using the BC method and on regulatory submissions to FDA for such products. This guidance is intended for manufacturers of blood collection, processing, and storage systems.

Blood and blood components must be prepared in a manner consistent with the instructions provided by the manufacturer (21 CFR 606.65(e)), including the directions provided in the instructions for use of the approved or cleared collection, processing, and storage system. To prepare blood components using the BC method, blood establishments must use blood collection, processing and storage systems approved or cleared for such use.

This guidance provides recommendations to manufacturers who wish to obtain FDA approval or clearance to market blood collection, processing, and storage systems intended for the manufacture of blood components for transfusion using the BC method. With the availability of such FDA-approved or cleared systems, blood establishments in the United States would have the option of manufacturing Whole Blood-derived blood components using the BC method and licensed blood establishments could submit Biologics License Application (BLA) supplements to FDA.

In the Federal Register of October 18, 2024, (89 FR 83886), FDA announced the availability of the draft guidance of the same title dated October 18, 2024. FDA received several comments on the draft guidance and those comments were considered as the guidance was finalized. In response to comments received, FDA made several clarifying edits. For example, FDA made clarifying revisions regarding timeframes for overnight ambient temperature holds, use of additive solutions that are currently not approved by FDA, and efforts to transition to systems that do not contain di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP). In addition, editorial changes were made to improve clarity. The guidance announced in this notice finalizes the draft guidance dated October 18, 2024.

This guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The guidance represents the current thinking of FDA on “Recommendations for the Development of Blood Collection, Processing, and Storage Systems for the Manufacture of Blood Components Using the Buffy Coat Method.” It does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations.

While this guidance contains no new collections of information, it does refer to previously approved FDA collections of information. The previously approved collections of information are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521). The collections of information in 21 CFR part 312.47 relating to the submission of investigational new drug applications and related meetings, including pre-IND meetings, “pre-NDA” stages, and pre-new drug application meetings, have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0014. The collections of information in 21 CFR part 314.102 relating to submission of new drug marketing applications, as well as related meetings between sponsors or applicants and FDA or other communication with appropriate FDA officials to obtain advice and other information necessary to support submissions, and to discuss appropriate regulatory pathways, have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0001. The collections of information in 21 CFR part 601 pertaining to the submission of biologics license applications have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0338. The collections of information in 21 CFR part 807, subpart E relating to the submission of a premarket notification ((510(k)) for a medical device have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0120. The collections of information in 21 CFR part 812 relating to the submission of Investigational Device Exemption applications have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0078. The collections of information in 21 CFR part 814 relating to the submission of a premarket approval application (PMA) have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0231.

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

CBP invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on the proposed and/or continuing information collections pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ). This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.8. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points: (1) whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) suggestions to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) suggestions to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. The comments that are submitted will be summarized and included in the request for approval. All comments will become a matter of public record.

Title: Exportation of Used Self-Propelled Vehicles.

OMB Number: 1651-0054.

Form Number: N/A.

Current Actions: Revision.

Type of Review: Revision.

Affected Public: Individuals and Businesses.

Abstract: U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) regulations require an individual attempting to export a used self-propelled vehicle to furnish documentation to CBP at the port of export. Exportation of a vehicle is permitted only upon compliance with these requirements. The required documentation includes, but is not limited to, a Certificate of Title or a Salvage Title, the Vehicle Identification Number (VIN), a Manufacturer's Statement of Origin, etc. CBP will accept originals or certified copies of the Certificate of Title. Supporting documentation may be submitted through the Document Image System (DIS). The purpose of this information is to help ensure that stolen vehicles or vehicles associated with other criminal activity are not exported.

Collection of this information is authorized by 19 U.S.C.1627a, which provides CBP with authority to impose export reporting requirements on all used self-propelled vehicles. It is also authorized by Title IV, Section 401 of the Anti-Car Theft Act of 1992, 19 U.S.C. 1646(c), which requires all persons exporting a used self-propelled vehicle to provide to CBP, at least 72 hours prior to export, the VIN and proof of ownership of each automobile. This information collection is provided for by 19 CFR Part 192. Further guidance regarding these requirements is provided at: https://www.cbp.gov/trade/basic-import-export/export-docs/motor-vehicle.

Type of Information Collection: Exportation of Self-Propelled Vehicles.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 1,400,000.

Estimated Number of Annual Responses per Respondent: 1.

Estimated Number of Total Annual Responses: 1,400,000.

Estimated Time per Response: 5 minutes (0.0833333 hours).

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 116,667.

Section 404 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, (Stafford Act), Public Law 93-288, as amended, 88 Stat. 143 (42 U.S.C. 5170c), established the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP). Program grant requirements and grants management procedures are outlined in 44 CFR part 206 subpart N, and 2 CFR parts 200 and 3002. FEMA administers the HMGP, and Recipients implement the grants under the HMGP per grant agreement, rules, and regulations. The HMGP is a disaster program that contributes funds toward the cost of hazard mitigation activities to reduce the risk of future damage, hardship, loss, or suffering in any area affected by a major disaster, or any area affected by a fire for which assistance was provided under Section 420 of the Stafford Act (42 U.S.C. 5187). Section 102(4) of the Stafford Act (42 U.S.C. 5122(4)) defines a “State” as any State of the United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. “Recipient,” as provided in 2 CFR 200.1, means a non-Federal entity that receives a Federal award directly from a Federal awarding agency to carry out an activity under a Federal program. “Subrecipient” refers to a non-Federal entity that receives a subaward from a pass-through entity to carry out part of a Federal program; but does not include an individual that is a beneficiary of such program. 2 CFR 200.1. A subrecipient may also be a recipient of other Federal awards directly from a Federal awarding agency. 2 CFR 200.1. The term “Indian Tribal government” is defined in section 102 of the Stafford Act, 42 U.S.C. 5122(6), as the governing body of any Indian or Alaska Native tribe, band, nation, pueblo, village, or community that the Secretary of the Interior acknowledges to exist as an Indian tribe under the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of 1994, Public Law 103-454, 108 Stat. 4791 (25 U.S.C. 479a). In addition, the Sandy Recovery Improvement Act of 2013, Public Law 113-2, 127 Stat. 47 (42 U.S.C. 5170(b)) amended the Stafford Act to allow the Chief Executive of a Federally recognized Indian tribe to make a direct request for a major disaster or emergency declaration to the President of the United States.

The Department of Homeland Security adopted in its entirety the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards in 2 CFR part 200 on December 26, 2014. 2 CFR 3002.1, 79 FR 75871 (Dec. 19, 2014). This rule eliminated overlapping and duplicative requirements for stakeholders, including states, territories and Indian Tribal governments, by using general terms such as “recipient” and “pass-through entity.”

The HMGP regulation describes the application process in 44 CFR 206.436. Information collected through the financial award application is the minimum information necessary for the financial award administration under the HMGP and includes the project narrative, analysis of the measure's cost-effectiveness referred to as the benefit-cost determination, and environmental review used.

According to 44 CFR 206.436(d), “The State must submit all local HMGP applications and funding requests for the purpose of identifying new projects to the Regional Administrator within 15 months of the date of disaster declaration.”

Additionally, under 44 CFR 206.438(c), progress reports must be submitted by the HMGP recipient to the Regional Administrator on a quarterly basis, certifying how the funds are being used and reporting on the progress of activities funded under the subrecipient awards made to the Recipient by FEMA. The Regional Administrator and Recipient negotiate the date for submission of the first report. Quarterly progress reports describe the status of those projects on which a final payment of the Federal share has not been made to the recipient, and outline any problems or circumstances expected to result in noncompliance with the approved award conditions.

The Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking At of 2018 (Evidence Act), Public Law 115-435, 132 Stat. 5534 (5 U.S.C. 311-315) establishes evaluation using systematic data collection and analysis of programs, policies, and organizations intended to assess their effectiveness and efficiency as an essential program activity.

Title: Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) Application and Reporting.

Type of Information Collection: Extension, without change, of a currently approved information collection.

OMB Number: OMB No. 1660-0076.

FEMA Forms: Project Narrative; Benefit-Cost Determination; Environmental Review; FEMA Form FF-206-FY-22-154 (formerly 009-0-111A), Quarterly Progress Reports.

Abstract: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) administers the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, which is a disaster program that contributes funds toward the cost of hazard mitigation activities to reduce the risk of future damage hardship, loss or suffering in any area affected by a major disaster. FEMA uses applications to provide financial assistance in the form of grant awards and, through grantee quarterly reporting, monitor grantee project activities and expenditure of funds.

Affected Public: State, local, or Tribal Government.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 296.

Estimated Number of Responses: 6,808.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 56,499.

Estimated Total Annual Respondent Cost: $4,169,061.

Estimated Respondents' Operation and Maintenance Costs: $0.

Estimated Respondents' Capital and Start-Up Costs: $0.

Estimated Total Annual Cost to the Federal Government: $5,684,662.

Comments may be submitted as indicated in the ADDRESSES caption above. Comments are solicited to (a) evaluate whether the proposed data collection is necessary for the proper performance of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (c) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) 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 responses.

The information collection notice was previously published in the Federal Register on May 10, 2026, at 91 FR 25587, allowing for a 60-day public comment period. USCIS did receive comments in connection with the 60-day notice.

You may access the information collection instrument with instructions, or additional information by visiting the Federal eRulemaking Portal site at: http://www.regulations.gov and enter USCIS-2014-0008 in the search box. Comments must be submitted in English, or an English translation must be provided. The comments submitted to USCIS via this method are visible to the Office of Management and Budget and comply with the requirements of 5 CFR 1320.12(c). All submissions will be posted, without change, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov, and will include any personal information you provide. Therefore, submitting this information makes it public. You may wish to consider limiting the amount of personal information that you provide in any voluntary submission you make to DHS. DHS may withhold information provided in comments from public viewing that it determines may impact the privacy of an individual or is offensive. For additional information, please read the Privacy Act notice that is available via the link in the footer of http://www.regulations.gov.

Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points:

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

(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

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

(4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, 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 responses.

(1) Type of Information Collection: Extension, Without Change, of a Currently Approved Collection.

(2) Title of the Form/Collection: Generic Clearance of Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service Delivery.

(3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the DHS sponsoring the collection: No Agency Form Number; USCIS.

(4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals or households; businesses and organizations. This collection of information is necessary to enable the Agency to garner customer and stakeholder feedback in an efficient, timely manner, in accordance with our commitment to improving service delivery. The information collected from our customers and stakeholders will help ensure that users have an effective, efficient, and satisfying experience with the Agency's programs.

(5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: The estimated total number of respondents for the information collection 1615-0121 is 56,000 and the estimated hour burden per response is 0.5 hours.

(6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The total estimated annual hour burden associated with this collection is 28,000 hours.

(7) An estimate of the total public burden (in cost) associated with the collection: The estimated total annual cost burden associated with this collection of information is $0. Respondents to this collection of information are not required to provide documentation or take other actions that might incur a cost.

The information collection notice was previously published in the Federal Register on May 11, 2026, at 91 FR 25588, allowing for a 60-day public comment period. USCIS did not receive comments in connection with the 60-day notice.

You may access the information collection instrument with instructions, or additional information by visiting the Federal eRulemaking Portal site at: http://www.regulations.gov and enter USCIS-2012-0004 in the search box. Comments must be submitted in English, or an English translation must be provided. The comments submitted to USCIS via this method are visible to the Office of Management and Budget and comply with the requirements of 5 CFR 1320.12(c). All submissions will be posted, without change, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov, and will include any personal information you provide. Therefore, submitting this information makes it public. You may wish to consider limiting the amount of personal information that you provide in any voluntary submission you make to DHS. DHS may withhold information provided in comments from public viewing that it determines may impact the privacy of an individual or is offensive. For additional information, please read the Privacy Act notice that is available via the link in the footer of http://www.regulations.gov.

Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies should address one or more of the following four points:

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

(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

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

(4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, 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 responses.

(1) Type of Information Collection: Extension, Without Change, of a Currently Approved Collection.

(2) Title of the Form/Collection: Collection of Qualitative Feedback through Focus Groups.

(3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the DHS sponsoring the collection: No Form; USCIS.

(4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Primary: Individuals or households; Business or other for-profit; Not-for-profit institutions. Executive Order 12862 directs Federal agencies to provide service to the public that matches or exceeds the best service available in the private sector. In order to work continuously to ensure that our programs are effective and meet our customers' needs, Department of Homeland Security/U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services seeks to obtain OMB approval of a generic clearance to collect qualitative feedback on our service delivery. By qualitative feedback we mean information that provides useful insights on perceptions and opinions but are not statistical surveys that yield quantitative results that can be generalized to the population of study. This collection of information is necessary to enable the Agency to garner customer and stakeholder feedback in an efficient, timely manner, in accordance with our commitment to improving service delivery. The information collected from our customers and stakeholders will help ensure that users have an effective, efficient, and satisfying experience with the Agency's programs. This feedback will provide insights into customer or stakeholder perceptions, experiences and expectations, provide an early warning of issues with service, or focus attention on areas where communication, training or changes in operations might improve delivery of products or services. These collections will allow for ongoing, collaborative and actionable communications between the Agency and its customers and stakeholders. It will also allow feedback to contribute directly to the improvement of program management.

(5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: The estimated total number of respondents for this information collection is 25,000 and the estimated hour burden per response is 1.5 hours.

(6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The total estimated annual hour burden associated with this collection is 37,500 hours.

(7) An estimate of the total public burden (in cost) associated with the collection: The estimated total annual cost burden associated with this collection of information is $0. There is no cost to participate and there is no mailing cost as these are electronic submissions.

In accordance with the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ) and 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1), we provide the 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 July 17, 2026 (91 FR 44868). 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 comments 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 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 using 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 personally identifiable information (PII) in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your PII—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your PII from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

Abstract: The US Geological Survey (USGS) manages one National and nine Regional Climate Adaptation Science Centers (CASCs). Each regional CASC involves a cooperative agreement with a host institution. The host institution agreements are periodically re-competed, requiring collection of information from potential host institutions. In addition, this information collection addresses annual and biannual reporting required of host institutions as part of their hosting agreement and associated research agreements.

Title of Collection: Department of the Interior Regional Climate Adaptation Science Centers.

OMB Control Number: 1028-0096.

Form Number: N/A.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Respondents/Affected Public: Institutions that are expected to propose to serve as CASC host or partner institutions including state, local government, and tribal entities, and academic institutions. Existing host institutions are state academic institutions.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Respondents: 10.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 307 Responses (see table below).

Estimated Completion Time per Response: Each proposal for CASC hosting is expected to take 200 hours to complete. The time required to complete annual reports for any specific host cooperative agreement is expected to take 5 hours per report and annual reports for each research agreement are expected to total 2.5 hours per report.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 2,590 Hours (see table below).

Respondent's Obligation: Required to Obtain or Retain a Benefit.

Frequency of Collection: Information will be collected one time every five years for each CASC to enable re-competition of CASC hosting agreements. In addition, host institutions are required to provide annual financial reports and performance reports, as well as annual or biannual financial and performance reports on the associated research agreements.

Total Estimated Annual Non-hour Burden Cost: There are no “non-hour cost” burdens associated with this collection of information.

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. ).

On May 23, 2025, the Commission instituted this investigation based on a complaint filed by Entellus Medical, Inc. of Plymouth, Minnesota; Stryker Corporation of Portage, Michigan; and Stryker Sales, LLC of Portage, Michigan (collectively, “Complainants”). 90 FR 22,116-17 (May 23, 2025). The complaint alleged violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337 (“section 337”) based on the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the United States after importation of certain balloon dilation devices, systems, and components thereof by reason of infringement of one or more of claims 1-11, 14, 15, and 19-30 of U.S. Patent No. 11,083,878 (“the '878 patent”); claims 1-16, 18-22, 24, 25, 27, 29, and 30 of U.S. Patent No. 11,090,472 (“the '472 patent”); and claims 1-4, 6-12, 15-20, and 22 of U.S. Patent No. 12,274,847 (“the '847 patent”). Id. The Commission's notice of investigation named the following respondents: Fiagon GmbH of Hennigsdorf, Germany; Fiagon AG Medical Technologies of Hennigsdorf, Germany; Fiagon NA Corporation of Austin, Texas; Fiagon NA, LLC of Austin, Texas; and Hemostasis, LLC of White Bear Lake, Minnesota (collectively, “Fiagon”). The Office of Unfair Import Investigations is not participating in this investigation. Id.

On September 8, 2025, the ALJ held a Markman hearing on claim construction, and on December 8, 2025, the ALJ issued Order No. 15 construing certain claim terms. See Order No.15 (Dec. 8, 2025).

On January 29, 2026, the Commission terminated the investigation as to claims 2-11, 15, 19, 21, and 24-30 of the '878 patent; claims 2-16, 18-22, 24, 25, 27, 29, and 30 of the '472 patent; and claims 2-4, 6-10, 12, 15-20, and 22 of the '847 patent. See Order No. 17 (Jan. 6, 2026), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Jan. 29, 2026).

The ALJ held an evidentiary hearing on January 14-16 and 20-21, 2026. As of the evidentiary hearing, the following claims remained in the investigation: claims 1, 14, 20, 22, and 23 of the '878 patent; claim 1 of the '472 patent; and claims 1 and 11 of the '847 patent (collectively, “the Asserted Claims”).

On June 26, 2026, the presiding ALJ issued the FID, finding a violation of section 337 in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and/or the sale in the United States after importation of certain balloon dilation devices, systems, and components thereof with respect to certain claims of the asserted patents. Specifically, the FID finds that: (1) Complainants have satisfied the importation requirement for the accused products; (2) Complainants have shown infringement as to claims 1, 14, 20, 22, and 23 of the '878 patent, claim 1 of the '472 patent, and claims 1 and 11 of the '847 patent; (3) Fiagon has not shown invalidity as to claims 1, 14, 20, 22, and 23 of the '878 patent, claim 1 of the '472 patent, or claims 1 and 11 of the '847 patent; (4) Fiagon has not shown that the '878, '472 are unenforceable; and (5) Complainants have satisfied the technical and economic prongs of the domestic industry requirement for the '878, '472, and '847 patents.

The FID also includes a Recommended Determination on Remedy and Bonding (“RD”). Id. at 168-74. The RD recommends that the Commission issue a limited exclusion order and cease and desist orders against all respondents in the event the Commission finds a violation of section 337. Id. at 168-72. The RD also recommends that the Commission impose a of 61% for certain accused products, but no bond for other accused products during the period of Presidential Review. Id. at 174.

On July 27, 2026, Complainants submitted a public interest statement pursuant to Commission Rule 210.50(a)(4), 19 CFR 210.50(a)(4). On the same day, Fiagon also submitted a public interest statement pursuant to Commission Rule 210.50(a)(4). On July 28, 2026, Congressman Bill Huizenga from Michigan submitted a letter responding to the Commission's July 2, 2026 notice in the Federal Register . See 91 FR 40,588-89 (July 2, 2026). In addition, on July 29 and 30, 2026, Fiagon submitted separate letters from six doctors related to the public interest.

On July 10, 2026, Fiagon filed a petition for review of several of the FID's findings concerning claim construction, whether the accused articles are “articles that infringe,” induced infringement, validity under the written description requirement, and obviousness. On July 17, 2026, Complainants filed a response to Fiagon's petition.

Having reviewed the record of the investigation, including the parties' petitions for review and related submissions, the Commission has determined to review the FID in part. Specifically, the Commission has determined to review the FID's findings that: (1) Complainants have satisfied the importation requirement for the accused products; (2) Complainants have established induced infringement of the Asserted Claims; (3) Fiagon failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence that any asserted claim is invalid for lack of written description under 35 U.S.C. 112; (4) Fiagon failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence that any asserted claim is invalid as obvious under 35 U.S.C. 103; and (5) Complainants have satisfied the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement for the '878, '472, and '847 patents.

In connection with the final disposition of this investigation, the statute authorizes issuance of, inter alia, (1) an exclusion order that could result in the exclusion of the subject articles from entry into the United States; and/or (2) cease and desist orders that could result in the respondents being required to cease and desist from engaging in unfair acts in the importation and sale of such articles. Accordingly, the Commission is interested in receiving written submissions that address the form of remedy, if any, that should be ordered. If a party seeks exclusion of an article from entry into the United States for purposes other than entry for consumption, the party should so indicate and provide information establishing that activities involving other types of entry either are adversely affecting it or likely to do so. For background, see Certain Devices for Connecting Computers via Telephone Lines, Inv. No. 337-TA-360, USITC Pub. No. 2843, Comm'n Op. at 7-10 (Dec. 1994). In connection with these findings, the Commission requests responses from the parties to the following questions:

(1) Please explain whether and how the FID finds a violation of Section 337 based on Fiagon's own direct infringement of any Asserted Claim. Please discuss whether, including under the framework articulated by Commissioner Kearns in his Additional Views in Certain High-Density Fiber Optic Equipment and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-1194, the imported components (namely those combined with U.S.-sourced components and assembled into complete VenSure devices/systems at Fiagon's site in Minnesota) should be considered articles that directly infringe the asserted claims of the '878 and '472 patents and therefore are “articles that infringe” under section 337. See FID at 17-18; Certain High-Density Fiber Optic Equipment and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-1194, Comm'n Op. at 98-104, Additional Views of Chair Kearns Regarding “Articles that Infringe” (Aug. 23, 2021).

(2) Complainants argued before the ALJ that Fiagon takes actions to instruct or encourage physicians and healthcare facilities to use the Accused Products in a manner that constitutes direct infringement. The FID finds that the complaint, with its allegations of direct, induced, and contributory infringement, put Fiagon on notice of its infringement. Please identify evidence in the record showing that Fiagon took such actions after receipt of the complaint in this investigation.

The parties are invited to brief only the discrete issues requested above, with reference to the applicable law and limited to arguments and evidence in the existing evidentiary record. The parties are not to brief other issues on review, which are adequately presented in the parties' existing filings.

The statute requires the Commission to consider the effects of that remedy upon the public interest. The public interest factors the Commission will consider include the effect that an exclusion order and cease and desist orders would have on: (1) the public health and welfare, (2) competitive conditions in the U.S. economy, (3) U.S. production of articles that are like or directly competitive with those that are subject to investigation, and (4) U.S. consumers. To the extent that any party in this investigation asserts that the proposed remedy would adversely impact the public interest, please identify and describe specific evidence supporting this assertion and where in the record such evidence was first submitted to the ALJ. If such evidence was not submitted to the ALJ, please explain why the Commission should give such evidence any weight at this stage in the investigation.

If the Commission orders some form of remedy, the U.S. Trade Representative, as delegated by the President, has 60 days to approve, disapprove, or take no action on the Commission's determination. See Presidential Memorandum of July 21, 2005, 70 FR 43251 (July 26, 2005). During this period, the subject articles would be entitled to enter the United States under bond, in an amount determined by the Commission and prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury. The Commission is therefore interested in receiving submissions concerning the amount of the bond that should be imposed if a remedy is ordered.

Written submissions: Parties to the investigation, interested government agencies, and any other interested parties are encouraged to file written submissions on the issues of remedy, the public interest, and bonding. Such submissions should address the RD by the ALJ on remedy and bonding.

In its initial submission, Complainants are also requested to identify the remedy sought, and Complainants are requested to submit proposed drafts of remedial orders for the Commission's consideration. Complainants are further requested to provide the HTSUS subheadings under which the accused products are imported and to supply the identification information for all known importers of the products at issue in this investigation. All initial written submissions, from the parties and/or third parties/interested government agencies, and proposed remedial orders from the parties must be filed no later than close of business on September 28, 2026. All reply submissions must be filed no later than the close of business on October 5, 2026. Opening submissions from the parties are limited to 50 pages. Reply submissions from the parties are limited to 25 pages. All submission from third parties and/or interested government agencies are limited to 10 pages. No further submissions on any of these issues will be permitted unless otherwise ordered by the Commission.

Persons filing written submissions must file the original document electronically on or before the deadlines stated above. The Commission's paper filing requirements in 19 CFR 210.4(f) are currently waived. 85 FR 15798 (Mar. 19, 2020). Submissions should refer to the investigation number (“Inv. No. 337-TA-1449”) in a prominent place on the cover page and/or the first page. ( See Handbook for Electronic Filing Procedures, https://www.usitc.gov/documents/handbook_on_filing_procedures.pdf ). Persons with questions regarding filing should contact the Secretary, (202) 205-2000.

Any person desiring to submit a document to the Commission in confidence must request confidential treatment by marking each document with a header indicating that the document contains confidential information. This marking will be deemed to satisfy the request procedure set forth in Rules 201.6(b) and 210.5(e)(2) (19 CFR 201.6(b) & 210.5(e)(2)). Documents for which confidential treatment by the Commission is properly sought will be treated accordingly. Any non-party wishing to submit comments containing confidential information must serve those comments on the parties to the investigation pursuant to the applicable Administrative Protective Order. A redacted non-confidential version of the document must also be filed with the Commission and served on any parties to the investigation within two business days of any confidential filing. All information, including confidential business information and documents for which confidential treatment is properly sought, submitted to the Commission for purposes of this investigation may be disclosed to and used: (i) by the Commission, its employees and Offices, and contract personnel (a) for developing or maintaining the records of this or a related proceeding, or (b) in internal investigations, audits, reviews, and evaluations relating to the programs, personnel, and operations of the Commission including under 5 U.S.C. Appendix 3; or (ii) by U.S. government employees and contract personnel, solely for cybersecurity purposes. All contract personnel will sign appropriate nondisclosure agreements. All nonconfidential written submissions will be available for public inspection on EDIS.

The target date for completion of the investigation is extended to November 13, 2026. The Commission's vote on this determination took place on September 14, 2026. The authority for the Commission's determination is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in Part 210 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR Part 210).

The Plan submitted an exemption application to the Department of Labor (the Department) requesting retroactive exemptive relief, in effect as of November 15, 2022, for: (1) the Plan's acquisition and holding of “contingent value rights” (CVRs) following the tender of Abiomed, Inc. (Abiomed) common stock or the cancellation of Abiomed common stock; and (2) the Plan's receipt of payments in connection with the acquisition and holding of CVRs (collectively, the Covered Transactions). 1 The Plan's acquisition of CVRs was on essentially the same terms and in the same manner as the acquisition of CVRs by all other similarly situated shareholders of Abiomed common stock.

After reviewing the Plan's application, the Department tentatively determined that the Covered Transactions would be administratively feasible, in the interest of, and protective of, the Plan and its participants and beneficiaries. On June 3, 2026, the Department published a notice of proposed exemption that would permit the Covered Transactions subject to certain conditions (the Proposed Exemption). 2 The Proposed Exemption invited interested persons to submit comments and hearing requests to the Department.

The Department received one comment from Johnson & Johnson (J&J) on behalf of itself, Abiomed, and the Plan. 3 J&J requested that the Department revise the audit condition in Proposed Exemption Section II(j) which requires that, if J&J or Abiomed provides notice or takes the position that a CVR milestone has not been met, J&J must submit to an audit by an independent certified public accounting firm for the purpose of verifying whether the relevant CVR milestone has been met, and J&J must bear the cost of the audit.

J&J states in its comment that, due to the structure of the CVR milestones, payments are not contingent on all CVR milestones being met. Instead, the achievement of individual CVR milestones would trigger specific payments. J&J also represents that the audit condition, as proposed, would be inconsistent with the terms of the Contingent Value Rights Agreement governing the CVRs (CVR Agreement), in that the CVR Agreement does not require that audits automatically occur. J&J explains that the CVR Agreement permits holders of at least 35% of the CVRs to obtain an audit upon request if J&J provides notice that a CVR milestone relating to net sales figures has not been met. Only if the auditor were to determine that J&J's calculations of the net sales figures are incorrect, J&J would be required to pay for the costs of the audit. J&J presented that this framework for the CVR Agreement reflects market practice.

Additionally, J&J explains that in any event, the CVR Agreement does not provide for an audit in connection with two of the CVR milestones. These CVR milestones would be publicly reported by organizations independent of J&J if they are achieved. For these two CVR milestones there would be no records to audit and the application of Section II(j) would be unworkable. 4

After reviewing J&J's comment, the Department has determined to revise Section II(j) so that the ability to request an audit is consistent with the terms of the CVR Agreement. In this regard, holders of at least 35% of the CVRs may obtain an audit upon request if J&J provides notice that a CVR milestone relating to net sales figures has not been met. First, the Department agrees that an automatic audit requirement is unnecessary for the CVR milestones that are determined by publicly reviewable actions of independent third parties. Second, the Department agrees that the audit rights already provided under the CVR Agreement are a sufficient, independent means to validate J&J's calculations in the event J&J provides notice that a CVR milestone was not reached. 5

The Department notes that, notwithstanding the above, Section II(j) provides that J&J will cover any audit costs that would otherwise be allocable to the Plan. This ensures the Plan is not required to bear costs arising from an audit process that is controlled by CVR holders generally and not by the Plan alone. The Plan should not bear these expenses, because the Plan acquired the CVRs through an independent corporate transaction, did not negotiate the CVR Agreement, and does not independently control whether the 35% holder threshold for requesting an audit is met. The condition preserves the Plan's economic position by ensuring that participant accounts are not reduced by audit expenses.

Based on the record and representations made by the Plan, the Department makes the requisite findings under ERISA section 408(a) that the exemption is: (1) administratively feasible for the Department; (2) in the interest of the Plan and its participants and beneficiaries; and (3) protective of the rights of the participants and beneficiaries of the Plan. All of the exemption's conditions must be met at all times. 6 Accordingly, affected parties should be aware that the exemption's conditions are, taken individually and as a whole, necessary for the Department to grant relief. The exemption provides only the relief specified herein and does not provide relief from violations of any law, including but not limited to, ERISA section 404, other than the prohibited transaction provisions of ERISA and the Code.

The complete application file (D-12097) will remain available for public inspection in the Public Disclosure room of the Employee Benefits Security Administration, Room N-1515, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20210, reachable by telephone at 866-444-3272. For a more complete statement of the facts and representations supporting the Department's decision to grant this exemption, please refer to the Proposed Exemption.

The attention of interested persons is directed to the following:

(1) The fact that a transaction is the subject of an exemption under ERISA section 408(a) and Code section 4975(c)(2) does not relieve a fiduciary or other party in interest or disqualified person from certain other provisions of ERISA or the Code, including any prohibited transaction provisions to which the exemption does not apply and the general fiduciary responsibility provisions of ERISA section 404, which, among other things, require a fiduciary to discharge their duties respecting the plan solely in the interest of the plan and its participants and beneficiaries and in a prudent manner in accordance with ERISA section 404(a)(1)(B); nor does it affect the requirement of Code section 401(a) that the plan must operate for the exclusive benefit of the employees of the employer maintaining the plan and their beneficiaries;

(2) As required by ERISA section 408(a) and Code section 4975(c)(2), the Department finds that the exemption is administratively feasible, in the interests of the plan and of its participants and beneficiaries, and protective of the rights of participants and beneficiaries of the plan;

(3) The exemption is supplemental to, and not in derogation of, any other provisions of ERISA and the Code, including statutory or administrative exemptions and transitional rules. Furthermore, the fact that a transaction is subject to an administrative or statutory exemption is not dispositive of whether the transaction is, in fact, a prohibited transaction; and

(4) The availability of this exemption is subject to the express condition that the material facts and representations contained in the application are true and complete at all times and that the application accurately describes all material terms of the transactions which are the subject of the exemption.

Accordingly, after considering the entire record developed in connection with the exemption application, the Department grants the following exemption under the authority of ERISA section 408(a) and Code section 4975(c)(2) in accordance with the Department's exemption procedures regulation. 7

If the conditions in Section II are met, the restrictions of ERISA sections 406(a)(1)(A), 406(a)(1)(E), 406(a)(2), and 407(a)(1)(A), and the excise tax imposed by Code section 4975(a) and (b) will not apply, effective November 15, 2022, to: (1) the Plan's acquisition and holding of “contingent value rights” (CVRs)  8 following the tender of Abiomed common stock or the cancellation of Abiomed common stock; and (2) the Plan's receipt of payments in connection with the transactions described in (1).

(a) The Plan's acquisition of the CVRs resulted solely from an independent corporate act of Johnson & Johnson (J&J), without participation on the part of any Plan fiduciary, in accordance with the terms of the Agreement and Plan of Merger  9 between J&J and Abiomed, dated November 15, 2022.

(b) The Plan's acquisition of CVRs was on essentially the same terms and in the same manner as the acquisition of CVRs by all other similarly situated shareholders of Abiomed common stock.

(c) Plan participants' acquisitions of the CVRs were consistent with the terms of the Plan.

(d) A Plan participant's decision whether or not to tender their shares had no impact on the amount of cash or the number of CVRs that they received.

(e) Abiomed 401(k) Fiduciary Committee (Committee) acted prudently and loyally in accordance with ERISA section 404, with respect to the transactions described in this exemption, including with respect to the Committee's decision to allow participants to decide whether or not to participate in the Tender Offer.

(f) The Plan did not pay any fees or commissions in connection with its acquisition and holding of the CVRs, and its receipt of cash payments in connection therewith.

(g) Plan participants have the same rights with respect to the CVRs allocated to their accounts under the Plan as unrelated CVR holders have with respect to CVRs not held under the Plan.

(h) Plan participants receive payment of all amounts due under the terms of the CVRs.

(i) The terms of the Plan's acquisition and holding of the CVRs, and the Plan's receipt of cash payments in connection therewith, will be the same as the terms applicable to all other holders of CVRs.

(j) The Contingent Value Rights Agreement governing the CVRs (CVR Agreement) permits holders of at least 35% of the CVRs to obtain an audit upon request if J&J provides notice that a CVR Milestone relating to net sales figures has not been met. To the extent an audit is performed in accordance with the terms of the CVR Agreement, then J&J will bear any audit-related costs and expenses that would otherwise have been allocated to the Plan regardless of the determinations of the auditor. The results of the audit will be provided to the Plan sponsor to review and maintain.

(k) The Plan maintains for a period of six (6) years from the date of publication of the exemption in the Federal Register , in a manner that is convenient and accessible for audit and examination, the records necessary to enable the persons described in paragraph (l)(1) below to determine whether conditions of this exemption, if granted, have been met, except that (1) a prohibited transaction will not be considered to have occurred if, due to circumstances beyond the control of Abiomed, the records are lost or destroyed prior to the end of the six-year period, and (2) no party in interest other than Abiomed shall be subject to the civil penalty that may be assessed under ERISA section 502(i) if the records are not maintained, or are not available for examination as required by paragraph (l) below.

(l)(1) Except as provided in Section (2) of this paragraph and notwithstanding any provisions of subsections (a)(2) and (b) of ERISA section 504, the records referred to in paragraph (k) above shall be unconditionally available at their customary location during normal business hours to:

(A) any duly authorized employee or representative of the Department or the Internal Revenue Service;

(B) Abiomed or any duly authorized representative of Abiomed;

(C) a Plan fiduciary or any duly authorized representative of a Plan fiduciary;

(D) any participant or beneficiary of the Plan, or any duly authorized representative of such participant or beneficiary;

(2) No person described in paragraph (l)(1)(B)-(D) is authorized to examine financial information which is privileged or confidential, and should the Applicant refuse to disclose information on the basis that such information is exempt from disclosure, the Applicant must, by the close of the thirtieth (30th) day following the request, provide a written notice advising that person of the reasons for the refusal and that the Department may request such information.

(m) The Plan provides the Department with the records necessary to demonstrate that the conditions of this exemption, if granted, have been met, within 30 days from the date the Department requests such records.

(n) All of the material facts and representations made by the Applicant that are set forth in the Summary of Facts and Representations are true and accurate at all times.

Exemption date: The exemption will be in effect as of November 15, 2022.

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

Whether seeking a loan, Social Security benefits, veterans benefits, or other services provided by the Federal Government, individuals and businesses expect Government customer services to be efficient and intuitive, just like services from leading private-sector organizations. Yet the 2016 American Consumer Satisfaction Index and the 2017 Forrester Federal Customer Experience Index show that, on average, Government services lag nine percentage points behind the private sector.

A modern, streamlined and responsive customer experience means: Raising government-wide customer experience to the average of the private sector service industry; developing indicators for high-impact Federal programs to monitor progress towards excellent customer experience and mature digital services; and providing the structure (including increasing transparency) and resources to ensure customer experience is a focal point for agency leadership. To support this, OMB Circular A-11 Section 280 established government-wide standards for mature customer experience organizations in government and measurement. To enable Federal programs to deliver the experience taxpayers deserve, they must undertake three general categories of activities: Conduct ongoing customer research, gather and share customer feedback, and test services and digital products.

These data collection efforts may be either qualitative or quantitative in nature or may consist of mixed methods. Additionally, data may be collected via a variety of means, including but not limited to electronic or social media, direct or indirect observation ( i.e., in person, video and audio collections), interviews, questionnaires, surveys, and focus groups. NASA will limit its inquiries to data collections that solicit strictly voluntary opinions or responses. Steps will be taken to ensure anonymity of respondents in each activity covered by this request.

The results of the data collected will be used to improve the delivery of Federal services and programs. It will include the creation of personas, customer journey maps, and reports and summaries of customer feedback data and user insights. It will also provide government-wide data on customer experience that can be displayed on performance.gov to help build transparency and accountability of Federal programs to the customers they serve.

NASA will collect this information by electronic means, when possible, as well as by mail, fax, telephone, technical discussions, and in-person interviews.

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

OMB Number: 2700-0181.

Type of Review: Notice of extension of an information collection.

Affected Public: Collections will be 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. For the purposes of this request, “customers” are individuals, businesses, and organizations that interact with a Federal Government agency or program, either directly or via a Federal contractor. This could include individuals or households; businesses or other for-profit organizations; not-for-profit institutions; State, local or tribal governments; Federal government; and Universities.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 2,001,550.

Estimated Time per Response: Varied, dependent upon the data collection method used. The possible response time to complete a questionnaire or survey may be 3 minutes or up to 2 hours to participate in an interview.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 101,125.

Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $0.

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

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

We are publishing notice of records schedules in which agencies propose to dispose of records they no longer need to conduct agency business. We invite public comments on these records schedules, as required by 44 U.S.C. 3303a(a), and list the schedules at the end of this notice by agency and subdivision requesting disposition authority.

In addition, this notice lists the organizational unit(s) accumulating the records or states that the schedule has agency-wide applicability. It also provides the control number assigned to each schedule, which you will need if you submit comments on that schedule.

We have uploaded the records schedules and accompanying appraisal memoranda to the regulations.gov docket for this notice as “other” documents. Each records schedule contains a full description of the records at the file unit level as well as their proposed disposition. The appraisal memorandum for the schedule includes information about the records.

We will post comments, including any personal information and attachments, to the public docket unchanged. Because comments are public, you are responsible for ensuring that you do not include any confidential or other information that you or a third party may not wish to be publicly posted. If you want to submit a comment with confidential information or cannot otherwise use the regulations.gov portal, you may contact request.schedule@nara.gov for instructions on submitting your comment.

We will consider all comments submitted by the posted deadline and consult as needed with the Federal agency seeking the disposition authority. After considering comments, we may or may not make changes to the proposed records schedule. The schedule is then sent for final approval by the Archivist of the United States. After the schedule is approved, we will post on regulations.gov a “Consolidated Reply” summarizing the comments, responding to them, and noting any changes we made to the proposed schedule. You may elect at regulations.gov to receive updates on the docket, including an alert when we post the Consolidated Reply, whether or not you submit a comment. If you have a question, you can submit it as a comment, and can also submit any concerns or comments you would have to a possible response to the question. We will address these items in consolidated replies along with any other comments submitted on that schedule.

We will post schedules on our website in the Records Control Schedule (RCS) Repository, at https://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/rcs, after the Archivist approves them. The RCS contains all schedules approved since 1973.

Each year, Federal agencies create billions of records. To control this accumulation, agency records managers prepare schedules proposing retention periods for records and submit these schedules for NARA's approval. Once approved by NARA, records schedules provide mandatory instructions on what happens to records when no longer needed for current Government business. The records schedules authorize agencies to preserve records of continuing value in the National Archives or to destroy, after a specified period, records lacking continuing administrative, legal, research, or other value. Some schedules are comprehensive and cover all the records of an agency or one of its major subdivisions. Most schedules, however, cover records of only one office or program or a few series of records. Many of these update previously approved schedules, and some include records proposed as permanent.

Agencies may not destroy Federal records without the approval of the Archivist of the United States. The Archivist grants this approval only after thorough consideration of the records' administrative use by the agency of origin, the rights of the Government and of private people directly affected by the Government's activities, and whether or not the records have historical or other value. Public review and comment on these records schedules is part of the Archivist's consideration process.

1. Department of State, Records of the Office of Inspector General (OIG) (DAA-0059-2026-0001).

2. Administrative Office of the United States Courts, Drug Testing Chain of Custody Forms (DAA-0021-2026-0001).

3. Bureau of Prisons, Special Housing Unit (SHU) Program Records (DAA-0129-2025-0018).

4. Defense Contract Management Agency, Military Human Resources Administration (DAA-0558-2026-0002).

5. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 549C—Standards for Business Practices of Interstate Natural Gas Pipelines (DAA-0138-2026-0004).

6. Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board, Office of the Chief Financial Officer (DAA-0474-2025-0002).

7. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Legislative Records (DAA-0255-2026-0002).

8. National Indian Gaming Commission, Records pertaining to the Office of General Counsel (OGC) (DAA-0600-2026-0002).

9. Rural Development, Rural Business Cooperative Services Records (DAA-0572-2026-0001).

As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2), OPM is soliciting comments for this collection. The Office of Management and Budget is particularly interested in comments that:

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

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

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

4. Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submissions of responses.

Section 1128 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Pub. L. 108-136, 5 U.S.C. 7101 note) requires executive agencies to conduct an annual employee survey and directs OPM to issue regulations prescribing the survey questions that must appear on all agency surveys to allow for comparison across agencies. The survey is the instrument through which agencies meet the statutory requirement to assess (1) leadership and management practices that contribute to agency performance and (2) employee satisfaction with leadership policies and practices, the work environment, rewards and recognition for professional accomplishment and personal contributions to achieving the organizational mission, opportunity for professional development and growth, and opportunity to contribute to achieving the organizational mission. OPM implemented this requirement through regulations at 5 CFR part 250, subpart C, to provide comparable governmentwide data and centrally administered the annual survey, the Annual Employee Survey (formerly Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS)), on behalf of agencies. Agencies participating in the AES satisfy the annual employee survey requirement by including the prescribed core survey questions, while retaining limited flexibility to add agency-specific items consistent with OPM guidance.

In a proposed rule (91 FR 40435) issued July 2, 2026, OPM proposed to reduce the number of prescribed annual employee survey questions from 16 to 10, retaining the most probative items to better serve workforce planning needs. In addition, OPM would no longer centrally administer the survey on behalf of agencies. Instead, each agency would administer the survey to its employees. The survey consists of Likert-type, mark-one, and mark-all-that-apply items. The information collection consists of the responses provided by the employees who complete the survey. The OPM survey will be available to agencies as a common form. An agency would submit the resulting data for the prescribed questions to OPM and OMB once per year to enable governmentwide comparison. Should agencies add questions to the common form, agencies would be responsible for their own collections separate from the OPM common form and would need to seek their own OMB control number.

Agency: Office of Personnel Management.

Title: Annual Employee Survey (AES).

OMB Number: 3206-NEW.

Frequency: Annually.

Affected Public: Federal Government.

Number of Respondents: 1,990.

Estimated Time per Respondent: 5 minutes.

Total Burden Hours: 166 hours.

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 ( http://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). The Public Representative does not represent any individual person, entity or particular point of view, and, when Commission attorneys are appointed, no attorney-client relationship is established. 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).: MC2026-384 and K2026-374; Filing Title: USPS Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage Contract 1093 to the Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing Materials Under Seal; Filing Acceptance Date: September 14, 2026; Filing Authority: 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 3035.105, and 39 CFR 3041.310; Public Representative: Kenneth Moeller; Comments Due: September 22, 2026.

2. Docket No(s).: MC2026-386 and K2026-376; Filing Title: USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Contract 957 to the Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing Materials Under Seal; Filing Acceptance Date: September 14, 2026; Filing Authority: 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 3035.105, and 39 CFR 3041.310; Public Representative: Jennaca Upperman; Comments Due: September 22, 2026.

1. Docket No(s).: MC2026-383 and K2026-373; Filing Title: USPS Request to Add New Fulfillment Standardized Distinct Product, PM-GA Contract 1092, and Notice of Filing Materials Under Seal; Filing Acceptance Date: September 14, 2026; Filing Authority: 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3633, 39 CFR 3035.105, and 39 CFR 3041.325.

2. Docket No(s).: MC2026-385 and K2026-375; Filing Title: USPS Request to Add New Mid-Market Standardized Distinct Product, PM-GA Contract 1094, and Notice of Filing Materials Under Seal; Filing Acceptance Date: September 14, 2026; Filing Authority: 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3633, 39 CFR 3035.105, and 39 CFR 3041.325.

This Notice will be published in the Federal Register .

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 ( http://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). The Public Representative does not represent any individual person, entity or particular point of view, and, when Commission attorneys are appointed, no attorney-client relationship is established. 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).: CP2024-262; Filing Title: USPS Request Concerning Amendment Three to Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, USPS Ground Advantage & Parcel Select Contract 5, with Materials Filed Under Seal; Filing Acceptance Date: September 11, 2026; Filing Authority: 39 CFR. 3035.105 and 39 CFR 3041.505; Public Representative: Christopher Mohr; Comments Due: September 21, 2026.

2. Docket No(s).: CP2023-108; Filing Title: USPS Request Concerning Amendment One to Parcel Return Service Contract 19, with Materials Filed Under Seal; Filing Acceptance Date: September 11, 2026; Filing Authority: 39 CFR. 3035.105 and 39 CFR 3041.505; Public Representative: Christopher Mohr; Comments Due: September 21, 2026.

3. Docket No(s).: CP2024-5; Filing Title: USPS Request Concerning Amendment One to Parcel Return Service Contract 20, with Materials Filed Under Seal; Filing Acceptance Date: September 11, 2026; Filing Authority: 39 CFR. 3035.105 and 39 CFR 3041.505; Public Representative: Jennaca Upperman; Comments Due: September 21, 2026.

4. Docket No(s).: MC2026-382 and K2026-372; Filing Title: USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express International & First-Class Package International Service Contract 124 to Competitive Product List and Notice of Filing Materials Under Seal; Filing Acceptance Date: September 11, 2026; Filing Authority: 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 3035.105, and 39 CFR 3041.310; Public Representative: Jennaca Upperman; Comments Due: September 21, 2026.

None. See Section II for public proceedings.

This Notice will be published in the Federal Register .