Federal Register Vol. 83, No.162,

Members of the public may listen to this discussion through the above call in number. An open comment period will be provided to allow members of the public to make a statement as time allows. The conference call operator will ask callers to identify themselves, the organization they are affiliated with (if any), and an email address prior to placing callers into the conference room. Callers can expect to incur regular charges for calls they initiate over wireless lines, according to their wireless plan. The Commission will not refund any incurred charges. Callers will incur no charge for calls they initiate over land-line connections to the toll-free telephone number. Persons with hearing impairments may also follow the proceedings by first calling the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339 and providing the Service with the conference call number and conference ID number.

Members of the public are entitled to submit written comments; the comments must be received in the regional office within 30 days following the meeting. Written comments may be mailed to the Regional Programs Unit, U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 230 S Dearborn, Suite 2120, Chicago, IL 60604. They may also be faxed to the Commission at (312) 353-8324, or emailed to Corrine Sanders at [email protected]. Persons who desire additional information may contact the Regional Programs Unit at (312) 353-8311.

Records generated from this meeting may be inspected and reproduced at the Regional Programs Unit Office, as they become available, both before and after the meeting. Records of the meeting will be available via www.facadatabase.gov under the Commission on Civil Rights, Nebraska Advisory Committee link (https://facadatabase.gov/committee/meetings.aspx?cid=269). Click on “meeting details” and then “documents” to download. Persons interested in the work of this Committee are directed to the Commission's website, http://www.usccr.gov, or may contact the Regional Programs Unit at the above email or street address.

The purpose of this collection is to gather information to mitigate variances in foreign access management program implementation and registration information requirements needed to reach risk-based determinations of physical and logical access by Foreign National Visitors and Guests to Commerce facilities and resources. Due to the increasing diversity of foreign national participation in Departmental programs, considerable efforts have been made to baseline requirements as a means to define uniform program standards as well as to expand current guidance beyond foreign visitor control to manage emerging risks associated with physical and logical access to the Department' s facilities and resources.

This information is collected in both paper form and electronically.

OMB Control Number: 0690-XXXX.

Form Number(s): 207-12-1.

Type of Review: New submission. Emergency request.

Affected Public: Individuals or households.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 12,000.

Estimated Time per Response: 15 minutes.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 3,000.

Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public: $7.

Commerce invites 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 (including hours and cost) of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

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

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

Please follow the requirements set forth in EDA's regulations at 13 CFR 315.9 for procedures to request a public hearing. The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance official number and title for the program under which these petitions are submitted is 11.313, Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms.

Background

On December 31, 2007, Leggett and Platt, Incorporated (the petitioner) filed a petition seeking imposition of antidumping duties on imports of uncovered innerspring units from, among other countries, China.1 Following the completion of investigations by Commerce and the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC), Commerce issued an antidumping duty order on innersprings from China.2

In the sixth administrative review of the Order, 3 the petitioner requested that Commerce review Macao Commercial and Industrial Spring Mattress Manufacturer (Macao Commercial) and East Grace Corporation. Commerce initiated the review on April 3, 2015,4 and sent questionnaires to both of the respondents under review. During the course of the sixth administrative review, and in response to Commerce's original and supplemental questionnaires, Macao Commercial acknowledged that it imports innerspring unit components from China for use in the production of innerspring units in Macau, but that it had no shipments of completed innerspring units from China to the United States.5 In the final results, Commerce found that Macao Commercial failed to demonstrate that it had no shipments of Chinese-origin innersprings, and assigned a rate to Macao Commercial using facts available with an adverse inference. Commerce stated that this determination applied only with respect to Macao Commercial's Chinese-origin subject merchandise, but explained that it intended to evaluate whether self-initiation of a circumvention inquiry would be warranted based upon information submitted during the review and in light of Commerce's prior circumvention findings in this proceeding.6

Commerce self-initiated an anti-circumvention inquiry pursuant to section 781(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, (the Act) and 19 CFR 351.225(h) to determine whether innersprings produced by Macao Commercial in Macao from materials originating in China and exported to the United States from Macao are circumventing the Order.7 For a complete description of the events that followed the initiation of this inquiry, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.8 A list of topics included in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is included as Appendix I to this notice. The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov, and to all parties in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed and the electronic versions of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

As explained further in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum, we find, based on the record evidence, that Macao Commercial is affiliated, pursuant to sections 771(33)(A), (E) and (F), of the Act, with Tai Wa Machinery, Tai Wa Commercial, Wa Cheong Hong, and Heshan Tai Hua Jian Ye Machinery Co., Ltd. Further, based on Macao Commercial's own statements and record evidence, we find that, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.401(f), these companies should be treated as a single entity, the Macao Commercial Group.

The products covered by the Order are uncovered innerspring units. For a complete description of the scope of the Order, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

The products covered by this inquiry are innersprings that are manufactured in Macau by the Macao Commercial Group with Chinese-origin components and materials and are then subsequently exported from Macau to the United States.

Commerce is conducting this anti-circumvention inquiry in accordance with section 781(b) of the Act. For a full description of the methodology underlying the Commerce's preliminary determination, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

As detailed in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum, we preliminarily determine that innersprings exported from Macau, which were manufactured in Macau by the Macao Commercial Group using components and/or materials from China, are circumventing the Order. Therefore, we preliminarily determine that it is appropriate to include this merchandise within the Order and to instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to suspend any entries of innersprings from Macau, which were manufactured in Macau by the Macao Commercial Group using components and/or materials from China.

As stated above, Commerce has made a preliminary affirmative finding of circumvention of the Order by exports to the United States of innersprings exported from Macau, which were manufactured in Macau by the Macao Commercial Group using components and/or materials from China. In accordance with section 19 CFR 351.225(l)(2), Commerce will direct CBP to suspend liquidation and to require a cash deposit of estimated duties on unliquidated entries of innersprings assembled or completed in Macau from Chinese-origin components or materials that were entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after November 22, 2016, the date of initiation of the anti-circumvention inquiry.

The suspension of liquidation instructions will remain in effect until further notice. Commerce will instruct CBP to require AD cash deposits equal to the China-wide rate of 234.51 percent, unless the importer/exporter can demonstrate to CBP that the Chinese-origin innersprings assembled or completed in Macau by the Macao Commercial Group were supplied by a Chinese manufacturer with a separate rate. In that instance, the cash deposit rate will be the rate of the Chinese innersprings manufacturer that has its own rate.9

Case briefs or other written comments may be submitted to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance no later than 14 days after the publication of this preliminary determination in the Federal Register, unless the Secretary alters the time limit. Rebuttal briefs, limited to issues raised in case briefs, may be submitted no later than five days after the deadline date for case briefs.10 Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.309(c)(2) and (d)(2), parties who submit case briefs or rebuttal briefs in this anti-circumvention inquiry are encouraged to submit with each argument: (1) A statement of the issue; (2) a brief summary of the argument; and (3) a table of authorities.

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.310(c), interested parties who wish to request a hearing, limited to issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs, must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, U.S. Department of Commerce, within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. Requests should contain the party's name, address, and telephone number, the number of participants, whether any participant is a foreign national, and a list of the issues to be discussed. If a request for a hearing is made, Commerce intends to hold the hearing at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20230, at a time and date to be determined. Parties should confirm by telephone the date, time, and location of the hearing two days before the scheduled date.

Commerce, consistent with section 781(e)(1)(B) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.225(f)(7)(i)(B), has notified the ITC of this preliminary determination to include the merchandise subject to this anti-circumvention inquiry within the scope of the Order. Pursuant to section 781(e)(2) of the Act, the ITC may request consultations concerning Commerce's proposed inclusion of the merchandise. If, after consultations, the ITC believes that a significant injury issue is presented by the proposed inclusion, it will have 60 days from the date of notification by Commerce to provide written advice.11

The IBP was established in the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988 (Pub. L. 100-418, title II, § 2304, codified at 15 U.S.C. 4724) to bring international buyers together with U.S. firms by promoting leading U.S. trade shows in industries with high export potential. The IBP emphasizes cooperation between the DOC and trade show organizers to benefit U.S. firms exhibiting at selected shows and provides practical, hands-on assistance such as export counseling and market analysis to U.S. companies interested in exporting. Shows selected for the IBP will provide a venue for U.S. companies interested in expanding their sales into international markets.

Through the IBP, ITA selects U.S. trade shows, with participation by U.S. firms interested in exporting, that ITA determines to be leading international trade shows, for promotion in overseas markets by U.S. Embassies and Consulates. The DOC is authorized to provide successful applicants with services in the form of overseas promotion of the show; outreach to show participants about exporting; recruitment of potential buyers to attend the events; and staff assistance in setting up international trade centers at the shows. Worldwide promotion is executed through ITA offices at U.S. Embassies and Consulates in more than 70 countries representing the United States' major trading partners, and also in Embassies in countries where ITA does not maintain offices.

ITA is accepting applications from trade show organizers for the IBP for trade shows taking place between April 1, 2019, and September 30, 2019. Selection of a trade show is valid for one show, i.e., a trade show organizer seeking selection for a recurring show must submit a new application for selection for each occurrence of the show. For shows that occur more than once in a calendar year, the trade show organizer must submit a separate application for each show.

For the IBP in quarters 2 and 3 of calendar year 2019, the ITA expects to select approximately 8 shows from among the applicants. The ITA will select those shows that are determined to most clearly meet the statutory mandate in 15 U.S.C. 4721 to promote U.S. exports, especially those of small- and medium-sized enterprises, and the selection criteria articulated below.

There is no fee required to submit an application. If accepted into the program for quarter 2 or 3 of calendar year 2019, a participation fee of $9,800 is required for shows of five days or fewer. For trade shows more than five days in duration, or requiring more than one International Trade Center, a participation fee of $15,000 is required. For trade shows ten days or more in duration, and/or requiring more than two International Trade Centers, the participation fee will be determined by DOC and stated in the written notification of acceptance calculated on a full cost recovery basis. Successful applicants will be required to enter into a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with ITA within 10 days of written notification of acceptance into the program. The participation fee (by check or credit card) is due within 30 days of written notification of acceptance into the program.

The MOA constitutes an agreement between ITA and the show organizer specifying which responsibilities for international promotion and export assistance services at the trade shows are to be undertaken by ITA as part of the IBP and, in turn, which responsibilities are to be undertaken by the show organizer. Anyone requesting application information will be sent a sample copy of the MOA along with the application and a copy of this Federal Register Notice. Applicants are encouraged to review the MOA closely as IBP participants are required to comply with all terms, conditions, and obligations in the MOA. Trade show organizer obligations include, but are not limited to, providing waived or reduced admission fees for international attendees who are participating in the IBP, the construction of an International Trade Center at the trade show, production of an export interest directory, and provision of complimentary hotel accommodations for DOC staff as explained in the MOA. Some of the most important commitments for the trade show organizer are to: include in the terms and conditions of its exhibitor contracts provisions for the protection of intellectual property rights (IPR); to have procedures in place at the trade show to address IPR infringement which, at a minimum, provide information to help U.S. exhibitors procure legal representation during the trade show; and to agree to assist the DOC to reach and educate U.S. exhibitors on the Strategy Targeting Organized Piracy (STOP!), IPR protection measures available during the show, and the means to protect IPR in overseas markets, as well as in the United States. ITA responsibilities include, but are not limited to, the worldwide promotion of the trade show and, where feasible, recruitment of international buyers to that show, provision of on-site export assistance to U.S. exhibitors at the show, and the reporting of results to the show organizer.

Selection as an IBP partner does not constitute a guarantee by DOC of the show's success. IBP selection is not an endorsement of the show except as to its international buyer activities. Non-selection of an applicant for the IBP should not be viewed as a determination that the show will not be successful in promoting U.S. exports.

Eligibility: All 2019 U.S. trade shows taking place between April 1, 2019, and September 30, 2019, are eligible to apply for IBP participation through the show organizer.

Exclusions: Trade shows that are either first-time or horizontal (non-industry specific) shows generally will not be considered. Trade shows that take place October 1, 2019, through December 31, 2019, will not be considered at this time. IBP has already selected shows for quarter 1 (January 1-March 31) of calendar year 2019.

General Evaluation Criteria: The ITA will evaluate shows for the International Buyer Program using the following criteria:

(a) Export Potential: The trade show promotes products and services from U.S. industries that have high export potential, as determined by DOC sources, including industry analysts' assessment of export potential, ITA best prospects lists and U.S. export statistics.

(b) Level of International Interest: The trade show meets the needs of a significant number of overseas markets and corresponds to marketing opportunities as identified by ITA. Previous international attendance at the show may be used as an indicator of such interest.

(c) Scope of the Show: The show offers a broad spectrum of U.S. made products and services for the subject industry. Trade shows with a majority of U.S. firms as exhibitors will be given priority.

(d) U.S. Content of Show Exhibitors: Trade shows with exhibitors featuring a high percentage of products produced in the United States or products with a high degree of U.S. content will be preferred.

(e) Stature of the Show: The trade show is clearly recognized by the industry it covers as a leading show for the promotion of that industry's products and services both domestically and internationally, and as a showplace for the latest technology or services in that industry.

(f) Level of Exhibitor Interest: U.S. exhibitors have expressed interest in receiving international business visitors during the trade show. A significant number of U.S. exhibitors should be seeking to begin exporting or to expand their sales into additional export markets.

(g) Level of Overseas Marketing: There has been a demonstrated effort by the applicant to market this show and prior related shows. For this criterion, the applicant should describe in detail, among other information, the international marketing program to be conducted for the show, and explain how efforts should increase individual and group international attendance.

(h) Logistics: The trade show site, facilities, transportation services, and availability of accommodations at the site of the exhibition (i.e. International Trade Center, interpreters) are capable of accommodating large numbers of attendees whose native language will not be English.

(i) Level of Cooperation: The applicant demonstrates a willingness to cooperate with the ITA to fulfill the program's goals and adhere to the target dates set out in the MOA and in the show timetables, both of which are available from the program office (see the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above). Past experience in the IBP will be taken into account in evaluating the applications received.

(j) Delegation Incentives: The IBP Office will be evaluating the level and/or range of incentives offered to delegations and/or delegation leaders recruited by U.S. overseas Embassies and Consulates. Examples of incentives to international visitors and to organized delegations include: Special organized events, such as receptions, meetings with association executives, briefings, and site tours; and complimentary accommodations for delegation leaders (beyond those required in the MOA).

Review Process: ITA will evaluate all applications received based on the criteria set out in this notice. Vetting will focus primarily on the export potential, level of international interest, and stature of the show. In reviewing applications, ITA will also consider scheduling and sector balance in terms of the need to allocate resources to support selected shows.

Application Requirements: Show organizers submitting applications for quarter 2 or 3 of calendar year 2019 IBP are requested to submit: (1) A narrative statement addressing each question in the application, Form OMB 0625-0143 (found at www.export.gov/ibp); (2) a signed statement that “The information submitted in this application is correct and the applicant will abide by the terms set forth in the Call for Applications for the 2019 International Buyer Program (April 1, 2019 through September 30, 2019);” and (3) two copies of the application: one copy of the application printed on company letterhead, and one electronic copy of the application submitted on a CD-RW (preferably in Microsoft Word® format), on or before the deadline noted above. There is no fee required to apply. Applications for the IBP must be received by October 5, 2018. ITA expects to issue the results of its review process in October 2018.

Legal Authority: The statutory program authority for the ITA to conduct the International Buyer Program is 15 U.S.C. 4724. The DOC has the legal authority to enter into MOAs with show organizers under the provisions of the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961 (MECEA), as amended (22 U.S.C. 2455(f) and 2458(c)). MECEA allows ITA to accept contributions of funds and services from firms for the purposes of furthering its mission.

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information collection requirements of the application to this program (Form OMB 0625-0143) under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) (OMB Control No. 0625-0143). Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act, unless that collection of information displays a currently valid OMB Control Number.

For further information please contact: Vidya Desai, Senior Advisor for Trade Events, Trade Promotion Programs ([email protected]).

The IBP was established in the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988 (Pub. L. 100-418, title II, § 2304, codified at 15 U.S.C. 4724) to bring international buyers together with U.S. firms by promoting leading U.S. trade shows in industries with high export potential. The IBP emphasizes cooperation between the DOC and trade show organizers to benefit U.S. firms exhibiting at selected shows and provides practical, hands-on assistance such as export counseling and market analysis to U.S. companies interested in exporting. Shows selected for the IBP Select will provide a venue for U.S. companies interested in expanding their sales into international markets.

Through the IBP Select, ITA selects U.S. trade shows, with participation by U.S. firms interested in exporting, that ITA determines to be leading international trade shows. DOC provides successful applicants with services in the form of targeted overseas promotion of the show by U.S. Embassies and Consulates; outreach to show participants about exporting; recruitment of potential buyers to attend the shows; and staff assistance in setting up and staffing international trade centers at the shows. Targeted promotion in up to five markets can be executed through the overseas offices of ITA or by U.S. Embassies in countries where ITA does not maintain offices.

ITA is accepting applications for IBP Select from trade show organizers of trade shows taking place between April 1, 2019, and September 30, 2019. Selection of a trade show for IBP Select is valid for one show. A trade show organizer seeking selection for a recurring show must submit a new application for selection for each occurrence of the show. For shows that occur more than once in a calendar year, the trade show organizer must submit a separate application for each show.

There is no fee required to submit an application. For IBP Select in quarters 2 and 3 of calendar year 2019, ITA expects to select approximately 2 shows from among the applicants. ITA will select those shows that are determined to most clearly support the statutory mandate in 15 U.S.C. 4721 to promote U.S. exports, especially those of small- and medium-sized enterprises, and that best meet the selection criteria articulated below. Once selected, applicants will be required to enter into a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the DOC, and submit payment of the $6,000 participation fee (by check or credit card) within 30 days of written notification of acceptance into IBP Select. The MOA constitutes an agreement between the DOC and the show organizer specifying which responsibilities for international promotion and export assistance services at the trade shows are to be undertaken by the DOC as part of the IBP Select and, in turn, which responsibilities are to be undertaken by the show organizer. Anyone requesting application information will be sent a sample copy of the MOA along with the application form and a copy of this Federal Register Notice. Applicants are encouraged to review the MOA closely, as IBP Select participants are required to comply with all terms, conditions, and obligations in the MOA. Trade show organizer obligations include the construction of an International Trade Center at the trade show, production of an export interest directory, and provision of complimentary hotel accommodations for DOC staff as explained in the MOA. ITA responsibilities include targeted promotion of the trade show and, where feasible, recruitment of international buyers to that show from up to five target markets identified, provision of on-site export assistance to U.S. exhibitors at the show, and the reporting of results to the show organizer.

Selection as an IBP Select show does not constitute a guarantee by DOC of the show's success. IBP Select selection is not an endorsement of the show except as to its international buyer activities. Non-selection of an applicant for IBP Select status should not be viewed as a determination that the show will not be successful in promoting U.S. exports.

Eligibility: U.S. trade shows taking place between April 1, 2019, and September 30, 2019, with 1,350 or fewer exhibitors are eligible to apply, through the show organizer, for IBP Select participation. First-time shows will also be considered.

Exclusions: U.S. trade shows with over 1,350 exhibitors will not be considered for IBP Select. Trade shows that take place October 1, 2019, through December 31, 2019, will not be considered at this time. IBP Select has already selected shows for quarter 1 (January 1-March 31) of calendar year 2019.

General Evaluation Criteria: ITA will evaluate applicants for IBP Select using the following criteria:

(a) Export Potential: The trade show promotes products and services from U.S. industries that have high export potential, as determined by DOC sources, including industry analysts' assessment of export potential, ITA best prospects lists, and U.S. export analysis.

(b) Level of International Interest: The trade show meets the needs of a significant number of overseas markets and corresponds to marketing opportunities as identified by ITA. Previous international attendance at the show may be used as an indicator.

(c) Scope of the Show: The show must offer a broad spectrum of U.S. made products and services for the subject industry. Trade shows with a majority of U.S. firms as exhibitors are given priority.

(d) U.S. Content of Show Exhibitors: Trade shows with exhibitors featuring a high percentage of products produced in the United States or products with a high degree of U.S. content will be preferred.

(e) Stature of the Show: The trade show is clearly recognized by the industry it covers as a leading show for the promotion of that industry's products and services both domestically and internationally, and as a showplace for the latest technology or services in that industry.

(f) Level of Exhibitor Interest: There is significant interest on the part of U.S. exhibitors in receiving international business visitors during the trade show. A significant number of U.S. exhibitors should be new-to-export or seeking to expand their sales into additional export markets.

(g) Level of Overseas Marketing: There has been a demonstrated effort by the applicant to market prior shows overseas. In addition, the applicant should describe in detail the international marketing program to be conducted for the show, and explain how efforts should increase individual and group international attendance.

(h) Level of Cooperation: The applicant demonstrates a willingness to cooperate with ITA to fulfill the program's goals and adhere to the target dates set out in the MOA and in the show timetables, both of which are available from the program office (see the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above). Past experience in the IBP will be taken into account in evaluating the applications received.

(i) Delegation Incentives: Waived or reduced (by at least 50% off lowest price) admission fees are required for international attendees who are participating in IBP Select. Delegation leaders also must be provided complimentary admission to the show. In addition, show organizers should offer a range of incentives to delegations and/or delegation leaders recruited by the DOC overseas posts. Examples of incentives to international visitors and to organized delegations include: special organized events, such as receptions, meetings with association executives, briefings, and site tours; or complimentary accommodations for delegation leaders.

Review Process: ITA will evaluate all applications received based on the criteria set out in this notice. Vetting will focus primarily on the export potential, level of international interest, and stature of the show. In reviewing applications, ITA will also consider scheduling and sector balance in terms of the need to allocate resources to support selected shows.

Application Requirements: Show organizers submitting applications for quarters 2 and 3 of calendar year 2019 IBP Select are required to submit: (1) A narrative statement addressing each question in the application, OMB 0625-0143 (found at www.export.gov/ibp); and (2) a signed statement that “The information submitted in this application is correct and the applicant will abide by the terms set forth in this Call for Applications for the International Buyer Program Select (April 1, 2019, through September 30, 2019);” on or before the deadline noted above. Applications for IBP Select must be received by October 5, 2018. There is no fee required to apply. ITA expects to issue the results of this process in October 2018.

Legal Authority: The statutory program authority for ITA to conduct the IBP is 15 U.S.C. 4724. ITA has the legal authority to enter into MOAs with show organizers under the provisions of the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961 (MECEA), as amended (22 U.S.C. 2455(f) and 2458(c)). MECEA allows ITA to accept contributions of funds and services from firms for the purposes of furthering its mission.

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the information collection requirements of the application to this program (0625-0143) under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) (OMB Control No. 0625-0143). Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is required to respond to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act, unless that collection of information displays a currently valid OMB Control Number.

For further information please contact: Vidya Desai, Senior Advisor, Trade Promotion Programs ([email protected]).

On April 17, 2018, the Department of Commerce (Commerce) initiated less-than-fair-value (LTFV) investigations of imports of glycine from India, Japan, and Thailand.1 Currently, the preliminary determinations are due no later than September 4, 2018.

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

On June 28, 2018, the petitioners 2 submitted a timely request that Commerce postpone the preliminary determinations in these LTFV investigations.3 The petitioners stated that they request postponement to provide adequate time for Commerce to issue supplemental questionnaires, receive responses, and consider rebuttal comments.4

For the reasons stated above and because there are no compelling reasons to deny the request, Commerce, in accordance with section 733(c)(1)(A) of the Act, is postponing the deadline for the preliminary determinations by 50 days (i.e., 190 days after the date on which these investigations were initiated). As a result, Commerce will issue its preliminary determinations no later than October 24, 2018. In accordance with section 735(a)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b)(1), the deadline for the final determinations of these investigations will continue to be 75 days after the date of the preliminary determinations, unless postponed at a later date.

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

On March 5, 2018, Commerce published a notice of opportunity to request an administrative review of the CVD order on OTR tires from India for the period of review (POR) June 20, 2016, through December 31, 2017.1 Commerce received timely-filed requests to conduct an administrative review of the CVD order from ATC Tires Private Limited (ATC) and Balkrishna Industries Limited (Balkrishna).2 Based on these requests, and in accordance with section 751(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), on May 2, 2018, Commerce initiated an administrative review of the CVD order on OTR tires from India.3 On May 24, 2018, and June 12, 2018, Balkrishna and ATC, respectively, each timely withdrew its request for an administrative review.4 No other party requested an administrative review.

Pursuant to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), Commerce will rescind an administrative review, in whole or in part, if the party, or parties, that requested the review withdraw(s) its request(s) for review within 90 days of the date of publication of the notice of initiation of the requested review. In this case, both Balkrishna and ATC each timely withdrew its request for review within the 90-day deadline, and no other party requested an administrative review of the CVD order. Therefore, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), Commerce is rescinding this administrative review in its entirety.

Commerce will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to assess countervailing duties on all appropriate entries. Because Commerce is rescinding this administrative review in its entirety, entries of OTR tires from India during the period June 20, 2016, through December 31, 2017, shall be assessed countervailing duties at rates equal to the cash deposit of estimated countervailing duties required at the time of entry, or withdrawal from warehouse, for consumption, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.212(c)(1)(i). Commerce intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions to CBP 15 days after the publication of this notice in the Federal Register.

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

This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4).

This meeting is being held under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) of 1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended), the Government in the Sunshine Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and 41 CFR 102-3.140 and 102-3.150.

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b and 41 CFR 102-3.140 through 102-3.165, and the availability of space, this meeting is open to the public. All members of the public who wish to attend the public meeting must contact Mrs. Marcia Moore or Mr. Mark Franklin at the number listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by September 13, 2018.

Purpose of the Meeting: The Department of Defense is publishing this notice to announce the following Federal advisory committee meeting of the Vietnam War Commemoration Advisory Committee. This meeting is open to the public. The Committee is asked to provide advice on the concept and design of the types of commemoration events the Vietnam War Commemoration Office (VWC) should consider supporting or coordinating during the close-out phase from 2023 through 2025. The objective of this task is to set the conditions for the closing of the Commemoration on Veterans Day 2025 at Arlington Cemetery by the President of the United States or his/her representative.

Agenda: The Committee will convene at 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. on September 20, 2018 and will discuss the Committee's advice on the concept and design of the types of commemoration events the Vietnam War Commemoration Office (VWC) should consider supporting or coordinating during the close-out phase from 2023 through 2025.

Meeting Accessibility: Special Accommodations: Individuals requiring special accommodations to access the public meeting should contact Mrs. Marcia Moore or Mr. Mark Franklin at the number listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by September 13, 2018 so that appropriate arrangements can be made.

Written Statements: Pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.105(j) and 102-3.140, and section 10(a)(3) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972, the public or interested organizations may submit written comments to the Committee about its mission and topics pertaining to this public meeting. Written comments should be received by the DFO by September 13, 2018. Written comments should be submitted via email to the address for the DFO given in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section in either Adobe Acrobat or Microsoft Word format. Please note that since the Committee operates under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, all submitted comments and public presentations will be treated as public documents and will be made available for public inspection, including, but not limited to, being posted on the Committee's website.

Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: Record of Military Processing for the Armed Forces of the United States; DD Form 1966, USMEPCOM Form 680-3A-E; OMB Control Number 0704-0173.

Type of Request: Reinstatement with change.

Number of Respondents: 423,000.

Responses per Respondent: 2.

Annual Responses: 846,000.

Average Burden per Response: 21 minutes.

Annual Burden Hours: 296,100.

Needs and Uses: The information collection requirement is necessary to comply with regulations in accordance with Title 10 U.S.C., Sections 504, 505, 508, 12102; Title 14 U.S.C., Sections 351 and 632; and 50 U.S.C. Appendix Section 451, which require applicants to meet standards for enlistment into the Armed Forces. This information collection is the basis for determining eligibility of applicants for enlistment in the Armed Forces and is needed to verify data given by the applicant and to determine his/her qualification of enlistment. The information collected aids in the determination of qualifications, term of service, and grade in which a person, if eligible, will enter active duty or reserve status.

Affected Public: Individuals or Households.

Frequency: On occasion.

Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.

OMB Desk Officer: Ms. Jasmeet Seehra.

You may also submit comments and recommendations, identified by Docket ID number and title, by the following method:

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name, Docket ID number, and title for this Federal Register document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information.

DOD Clearance Officer: Mr. Frederick Licari.

Requests for copies of the information collection proposal should be sent to Mr. Licari at [email protected].

Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number: Transitional Compensation (TC) for Abused Dependents; DD Form 2698; 0704-XXXX.

Type of Request: Existing collection in use without an OMB Control Number.

Number of Respondents: 500.

Responses per Respondent: 1.

Annual Responses: 500.

Average Burden per Response: 20 minutes.

Annual Burden Hours: 166.7.

Needs and Uses: The information collection requirement is necessary to establish eligibility, determine the number of payments, determine the number of dependents, determine the amount of compensation, and direct payment to the abused dependent(s).

Affected Public: Individuals or Households.

Frequency: On occasion.

Respondent's Obligation: Required to obtain or retain benefits.

OMB Desk Officer: Ms. Jasmeet Seehra.

You may also submit comments and recommendations, identified by Docket ID number and title, by the following method:

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.

Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name, Docket ID number, and title for this Federal Register document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information.

DOD Clearance Officer: Mr. Frederick Licari.

Requests for copies of the information collection proposal should be sent to Mr. Licari at [email protected].

The OSD proposes to modify a system of records subject to the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a. The DoD uses the system of records at installations to manage, track, account for, monitor and report on contracts, companies, and contractor employees supporting contingency operations, humanitarian assistance operations, peace operations, disaster relief operations, military exercises, events, and other activities that require contractor support. As a part of maintaining DoD installations in other nations, the Department must comply with existing treaties between the United States and host nations. This modification ensures DoD complies with an existing treaty between the U.S. and Japan by collecting additional information on the co-located dependents of contractor employees. This modification updates the following sections: Category of individuals, category of records, the authority for the maintenance, and the purpose and also reflects the reformatting of the notice to ensure compliance with Office of Management and Budget Circular Number A-108, “Federal Agency Responsibilities for Review, Reporting, and Publication under the Privacy Act.”

The OSD notices for systems of records subject to the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, have been published in the Federal Register and are available from the address in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT or at the Defense Privacy, Civil Liberties, and Transparency Division website at http://dpcld.defense.gov/.

The proposed systems reports, as required by of the Privacy Act, as amended, were submitted on August 3, 2018, to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) pursuant to Section 6 to OMB Circular No. A-108, “Federal Agency Responsibilities for Review, Reporting, and Publication under the Privacy Act,” revised December 23, 2016 (December 23, 2016, 81 FR 94424).

Purpose of Program: Two Department of Education (Department) programs fund this competition: the Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities (TA&D) program and the Personnel Development to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities (PD) program.

The purpose of the TA&D program is to promote academic achievement and to improve results for children with disabilities by providing technical assistance (TA), supporting model demonstration projects, disseminating useful information, and implementing activities that are supported by scientifically based research.

The purposes of the PD program are to: (1) Help address State-identified needs for personnel—in special education, related services, early intervention, and regular education—to work with children with disabilities; and (2) ensure that those personnel have the skills and knowledge—derived from practices that have been determined through research and experience to be successful—that are needed to serve those children.

Priority: In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(v), this priority is from allowable activities specified in the statute (see sections 662(c)(2), 663(c)(8)(A) and (C), and 681(d) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (20 U.S.C. 1462, 1463, and 1481)).

Absolute Priority: For FY 2018 and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this competition, this priority is an absolute priority. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3), we consider only applications that meet this priority.

This priority is:

State Technical Assistance Projects to Improve Services and Results for Children who are Deaf-Blind and a National Technical Assistance and Dissemination Center for Children who are Deaf-Blind.

Background:

The purpose of this priority is to establish and operate State Technical Assistance Projects to Improve Services and Results for Children Who Are Deaf-Blind and a National Technical Assistance and Dissemination Center for Children Who Are Deaf-Blind that will provide TA and support to the State projects.

The State Technical Assistance Projects to Improve Services and Results for Children who are Deaf-Blind (State Deaf-Blind Projects) will help State educational agencies (SEAs), Part C lead agencies (LAs), local educational agencies (LEAs)—including charter school LEAs, early intervention services (EIS) providers, teachers, service providers, and families to address the educational, related services, transitional, and early intervention needs of children who are deaf-blind.1 The State Deaf-Blind Projects are designed to increase access to, and progress in, the general education curriculum and grade-level academic content standards for children who are deaf-blind and improve their communication skills with a goal of supporting lifelong learning, including postsecondary education and employment readiness.

The National Technical Assistance and Dissemination Center for Children who are Deaf-Blind (National Center) will provide TA and support to the State Deaf-Blind Projects in addressing these needs. This support includes providing specialized TA, training, dissemination, and informational services to agencies and organizations, professionals, families, and others involved in providing services to children who are deaf-blind.

Children who are deaf-blind have complex needs and are among the most diverse groups of learners served under the IDEA. Approximately 90 percent of children who are deaf-blind also have additional physical, learning, or cognitive disabilities. As a result, children who are deaf-blind face a unique set of challenges not commonly faced by their peers with, and without, disabilities. Therefore, SEAs, LAs, LEAs, EIS providers, teachers, service providers, State TA providers, and families need significant support to address the intense educational, related services, transitional, and early intervention needs of children who are deaf-blind to ensure that these children are prepared for lifelong learning and successfully transition to postsecondary education or employment.

This priority will fund discretionary grants to establish and operate State Technical Assistance Projects to Improve Services and Results for Children Who are Deaf-Blind. For more than 20 years, the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) has supported State Deaf-Blind Projects to improve support to local schools and agencies within the States that are serving children who are deaf-blind and their families. The State Deaf-Blind Projects will work closely with SEAs, LAs, LEAs, EIS providers, teachers, service providers, and families to address the intense educational, related services, transitional, and early intervention needs of children who are deaf-blind to ensure that these children are prepared for lifelong learning and successfully transition to postsecondary education or employment. In partnership with the National Center, the targeted and intensive TA provided by State Deaf-Blind Projects will ensure that family members and caregivers, EIS providers, special and regular education teachers, and related services personnel have access to the specialized training and tools needed to support the educational and social success of children who are deaf-blind. In order to support the training and certification of trained paraprofessionals who are specifically trained to work with children who are deaf-blind, State Deaf-Blind Projects also will be encouraged to work with the National Center to utilize existing training modules (e.g., Open Hands Open Access) and paraprofessional evaluation systems.

This priority will also fund a cooperative agreement to establish and operate a National Technical Assistance and Dissemination Center for Children Who are Deaf-Blind. The National Center will work with the State Deaf-Blind Projects to ensure that family members and caregivers, EIS providers, special and regular education teachers, and related services personnel have access to the specialized training and tools needed to support the educational and social success of children who are deaf-blind.

The goals of this priority are to (1) expand upon a national TA network to improve outcomes for children who are deaf-blind; (2) expand the use of training modules to support personnel development of teachers and qualified personnel; (3) expand the body of knowledge and use of high-quality practices to facilitate emerging and developing literacy and numeracy for children who are deaf-blind; (4) facilitate increased parental involvement in the education and transition opportunities for children who are deaf-blind through providing networking opportunities for families, dissemination of knowledge, and engagement with deaf-blind family organizations; and (5) collaborate with the State Deaf-Blind Projects in collecting information to provide a State-by-State needs assessment, including disability and demographic information and trends, in order to ensure that children who are deaf-blind are identified early and receive appropriate services and supports. In addition, State Deaf-Blind Projects in States that utilize or plan to utilize certified paraprofessionals will collaborate with the National Center to (1) increase the number of certified paraprofessionals and qualified teachers within the State who have demonstrated skills to improve the classroom experience of children who are deaf-blind; and (2) increase the use of paraprofessional evaluation systems leading to increased availability of qualified paraprofessionals to support children who are deaf-blind.

This priority is consistent with the Secretary's Final Supplemental Priorities and Definitions for Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the Federal Register on March 2, 2018 (83 FR 9096) (Supplemental Priorities): Supplemental Priority 5—Meeting the Unique Needs of Students and Children With Disabilities and/or Those With Unique Gifts and Talents.

Priority:

For the purpose of this competition, we have separated the absolute priority into two focus areas: State Deaf-Blind Projects (Focus Area A) and a National Center (Focus Area B). Applicants must identify whether they are applying under Focus Area A, Focus Area B, or both.

Focus Area A: State Technical Assistance Projects to Improve Services and Results for Children Who Are Deaf-Blind.

Under Focus Area A, the Department will fund discretionary grants to establish and operate State Deaf-Blind Technical Assistance Projects (State Deaf-Blind Projects) to improve services and results for children who are deaf-blind. Grants under Focus Area A are available to support projects in all States, including the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the outlying areas and the freely associated States. A grant may be awarded to an entity to serve a single State or a multi-State consortium. Funds awarded under this priority may not be used to provide direct early intervention services under Part C of IDEA or direct special education and related services under Part B of IDEA.

State Deaf-Blind Projects funded under this priority must achieve, at a minimum, the following expected outcomes:

(a) Provide TA and training on improving outcomes to personnel who serve children who are deaf-blind;

(b) Increase early identification and referral of children who are deaf-blind for appropriate services and supports;

(c) Facilitate emerging and developing literacy and numeracy for children who are deaf-blind by promoting access to the general education curriculum and grade-level academic content standards through the use of high-quality practices;

(d) Continue and expand support to children who are deaf-blind and their families during the transition to postsecondary education or employment;

(e) Increase support to families to facilitate their involvement in the education and transition opportunities for children who are deaf-blind; and

(f) In collaboration with the National Center, collect information to provide a State-by-State needs assessment.

Also, State Deaf-Blind Projects in States that use, or plan to use, certified paraprofessionals will collaborate with the National Center to—

(a) Increase the number of certified paraprofessionals and qualified teachers within the State who have demonstrated skills to improve the educational, social, and communication outcomes and the classroom experience of children who are deaf-blind; and

(b) Increase the use of paraprofessional evaluation systems leading to increased availability of qualified paraprofessionals for children who are deaf-blind.

In addition to these programmatic requirements, to be considered for funding under Focus Area A of this priority, applicants must meet the application and administrative requirements in this priority, which are:

(a) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under “Significance of the Project,” how the proposed project will—

(1) Provide EIS providers, special education teachers, regular education teachers, related services personnel, and SEA, LEA, LA, and EIS provider administrators with the training and information needed to develop and implement individualized supports to ensure that children who are deaf-blind have access to and progress in the general education curriculum and grade-level academic content standards, and have access to high-quality educational opportunities that lead to successful transitions to postsecondary education or employment; and

(2) In conjunction with State Parent Training and Information Centers (PTIs), ensure that family members and caregivers of children who are deaf-blind have the training and information needed to maintain and improve productive partnerships with service providers.

To address the requirements of paragraphs (1) and (2) of this section, the applicant must—

(i) Present applicable State, regional, or local data (and, in the case of an application for a consortium, data for each State that the consortium will serve) demonstrating training and information needs of EIS providers, special and regular education teachers, related services personnel, and family members and caregivers identified in paragraphs (1) and (2) of this section, taking into account the critical needs of the diverse deaf-blind population and the geographical distribution of children who are deaf-blind; and

(ii) Demonstrate knowledge of current educational issues and policy initiatives in educating children who are deaf-blind, including any State-specific policy initiatives and how the applicant will support their implementation; and

(3) Improve educational, social, and communication outcomes for children who are deaf-blind, and indicate the likely magnitude or importance of the outcomes.

(b) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under “Quality of the Project Services,” how the proposed project will—

(1) Ensure equal access and treatment for members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability. To meet this requirement, the applicant must describe how it will—

(i) Identify the needs of the intended recipients for TA and information;

(ii) Ensure that services meet the needs of the intended recipients of the grant and that any products are first approved by the OSEP project officer and then developed in coordination with the National Center;

(2) Achieve its goals, objectives, and intended outcomes. To meet this requirement, the applicant must provide measureable intended project outcomes;

(3) Be based on current research and make use of high-quality practices. To meet this requirement, the applicant must describe—

(i) The current research and high-quality practices on ensuring access to the general education curriculum, grade-level academic content standards, and high-quality educational opportunities that lead to successful transitions to postsecondary education or employment;

(ii) How the project will provide high-quality training and TA to the family members and caregivers of children who are deaf-blind and TA and professional development to practitioners identified in paragraph (a) of the application and administrative requirements in this section; and

(iii) The process the proposed project will use to incorporate current research and high-quality practices in the development and delivery of its products and services;

(4) Develop and provide services that are of sufficient quality, intensity, and duration to achieve the intended outcomes of the proposed project. To address this requirement, the applicant must describe—

(i) Its proposed approach to universal, general TA,2 including the intended recipients of products and services;

(ii) Its proposed approach to targeted, specialized TA,3 including the intended recipients of products and services; and

(iii) Its proposed approach to intensive, sustained TA,4 including the intended recipients of products and services. To address this requirement, the applicant must describe—

(A) Its proposed approach to collaborate with SEAs, LEAs, LAs, EIS providers, PTIs, or other relevant entities, as appropriate, to support project initiatives and to leverage their available resources, ability to build supports for families, and ability to provide TA and training to teachers, EIS providers, and other service providers;

(B) Its proposed plan for assisting LEAs and EIS providers to address the needs of children who are deaf-blind based on best practices and current research on effective training and professional development; and

(C) Its proposed plan for working with individuals and entities at each level of the education system (e.g., SEAs, LEAs, LAs, EIS providers, schools, and families) to ensure communication among the different groups and that there are systems in place to support the use of high-quality practices for educating children who are deaf-blind.

(6) Implement services in collaboration with the National Center to meet the TA objectives within the State(s) served. To address this requirement, the applicant must describe—

(i) How the proposed project will use technology to achieve the intended project outcomes;

(ii) With whom the proposed project will collaborate and the intended outcomes of this collaboration;

(iii) How the proposed project will use non-project resources to achieve the intended project outcomes; and

(iv) How the applicant will facilitate States' ability to use and benefit from the National Center's initiatives, products, and TA, including those initiatives that cross State boundaries.

(c) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under “Quality of the Evaluation Plan,” how—

(1) The proposed project will collect and analyze data on specific and measurable goals, objectives, and outcomes of the project. To address this requirement, the applicant must describe—

(i) The proposed evaluation methodologies, including instruments, data collection methods, and possible analyses;

(ii) The proposed standards or targets for determining effectiveness; and

(iii) The proposed methods for collecting data on implementation supports and fidelity of implementation.

(2) The proposed project will use the evaluation results to examine the project's implementation strategies and the progress toward achieving intended outcomes; and

(3) The methods of evaluation will produce quantitative and qualitative data that demonstrate whether the project achieved the intended outcomes.

(d) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under “Adequacy of Project Resources,” how—

(1) The proposed project will encourage applications for employment from persons who are members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability, as appropriate;

(2) The proposed key project personnel, consultants, and subcontractors have the qualifications and experience to carry out the proposed activities and achieve the project's intended outcomes;

(3) The applicant and any key partners have adequate resources to carry out the proposed activities; and

(4) The proposed costs are reasonable in relation to the anticipated results and benefits.

(e) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under “Quality of the Management Plan,” how—

(1) The proposed management plan will ensure that the project's intended outcomes will be achieved on time and within budget. To address this requirement, the applicant must describe—

(i) Clearly defined responsibilities for key project personnel, consultants, and subcontractors, as appropriate; and

(ii) Timelines and milestones for accomplishing the project tasks;

(2) Key project personnel and any consultants and subcontractors will be allocated and how these allocations are appropriate and adequate to achieve the project's intended outcomes;

(3) The proposed management plan will ensure that the products and services provided are of high quality, relevant, and useful to recipients;

(4) The proposed project will benefit from a diversity of perspectives, including families, educators, TA providers, researchers, and policy makers, among others, in its development and operation;

(5) If applicable, the States within a consortium will receive appropriate services; and

(6) If applicable, the proposed project will ensure that the distribution of resources is equitable within a consortium.

(f) In the narrative under “Required Project Assurances” or appendices as directed, meet the following application requirements—

(1) Include, in Appendix A, charts and timelines, as applicable, to illustrate the management plan described in the narrative;

(2) Include, in the budget, attendance at the following:

(i) A one-day planning meeting preceding the OSEP-hosted project directors' conference held in Washington, DC, in coordination with the National Center and an annual planning meeting with the OSEP project officer and other relevant staff during each subsequent year of the project period;

(ii) A two and one-half day project directors' conference in Washington, DC, during each year of the project period; and

(3) If the project maintains a website, ensure that it will be of high quality, with an easy-to-navigate design, that meets government or industry-recognized standards for accessibility.

Note: States are invited to form consortia to apply for funding under Focus Area A of this priority in accordance with the Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR 75.127 to 75.129. A consortium may be comprised of any group of States.

Focus Area B: National Technical Assistance and Dissemination Center for Children Who Are Deaf-Blind.

The purpose of Focus Area B of this priority is to fund a cooperative agreement to establish and operate a National Technical Assistance and Dissemination Center for Children Who Are Deaf-Blind (National Center). The Center must achieve, at a minimum, the following expected outcomes:

(a) Increase the ability of State Deaf-Blind Projects to assist personnel in SEAs, LEAs, LAs, and EIS providers to use high-quality practices and products to improve outcomes for children who are deaf-blind;

(b) Increase assistance to State Deaf-Blind Projects in supporting families in order to facilitate family involvement in the education and transition opportunities for children who are deaf-blind;

(c) Increase collaboration between the OSEP-funded PTIs and State Deaf-Blind Projects to increase their ability to assist the families of children who are deaf-blind to support the development of self-advocacy;

(d) Increase early identification of children who are deaf-blind;

(e) In collaboration with State Deaf-Blind Projects, expand the use by SEAs, LAs and LEAs of paraprofessional evaluation systems (e.g., National Intervener Certification E-Portfolio) leading to increased availability of qualified paraprofessionals to support children who are deaf-blind;

(f) Increase ability of school-based personnel to meet State-identified competencies for educators serving children who are deaf-blind; and

(g) Promote access to, and progress in, the general education curriculum and grade-level academic content standards through the use of high-quality practices. The Center must also collect information to provide a State-by-State needs assessment, and develop and disseminate high-quality tools to State Deaf-Blind Projects and individuals and entities at each level of the education system to improve outcomes for children who are deaf-blind.

In addition to these programmatic requirements, to be considered for funding under this priority, applicants must meet the application and administrative requirements in this priority, which are:

(a) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under “Significance of the Project,” how the proposed project will—

(1) Address the current and emerging needs of State Deaf-Blind Projects, SEAs, LEAs, LAs, EIS providers, and organizations serving children who are deaf-blind to ensure they have the training and information needed to implement and sustain high-quality, effective, and efficient systems that have the implementation supports in place to ensure children who are deaf-blind have access to and progress in the general education curriculum and grade-level academic content standards, and have access to high-quality educational opportunities that lead to successful transitions to postsecondary education or employment. To meet this requirement the applicant must—

(i) Present applicable data demonstrating current State capacity to deliver high-quality IDEA services for children who are deaf-blind, and ensure they have access to and progress in the general education curriculum and grade-level academic content standards, and have access to high-quality educational opportunities that lead to successful transitions to postsecondary education or employment;

(ii) Demonstrate knowledge of current issues and ongoing challenges in ensuring children who are deaf-blind have access to and progress in the general education curriculum and grade-level academic content standards, and have access to high-quality educational opportunities that lead to successful transitions to postsecondary education or employment; and

(iii) Present information about the current level of implementation and current capacity of SEAs, LEAs, LAs, and EIS providers to ensure that children who are deaf-blind have access to and progress in the general education curriculum and grade-level academic content standards, and have access to high-quality educational opportunities that lead to successful transitions to postsecondary education or employment.

(2) Improve educational outcomes for children who are deaf-blind, and indicate the likely magnitude or importance of the outcomes.

(b) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under “Quality of the Project Services,” how the proposed project will—

(1) Ensure equal access and treatment to members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability. To meet this requirement, the applicant must describe how it will—

(i) Identify the needs of the intended recipients for TA and information; and

(ii) Ensure that TA services and products meet the needs of the intended recipients of the grant;

(2) Achieve its goals, objectives, and intended outcomes. To meet this requirement, the applicant must provide—

(i) Measurable intended project outcomes; and

(ii) In Appendix A, the logic model (as defined in this notice) by which the proposed project will achieve its intended outcomes that depicts, at a minimum, the goals, activities, outputs, and intended outcomes of the proposed project;

(3) Use a conceptual framework (and provide a copy in Appendix A) to develop project plans and activities, describing any underlying concepts, assumptions, expectations, beliefs, or theories, as well as the presumed relationships or linkages among these variables, and any empirical support for this framework;

Note: The following websites provide more information on logic models and conceptual frameworks: www.osepideasthatwork.org/logicModel and www.osepideasthatwork.org/resources-grantees/program-areas/ta-ta/tad-project-logic-model-and-conceptual-framework.

(4) Be based on current research and make use of high-quality practices. To meet this requirement, the applicant must describe—

(i) The current research on the effectiveness of systems change efforts, capacity building, and inclusive practices that will inform the TA and related high-quality practices; and

(ii) The current research about adult learning principles and implementation science that will inform the proposed TA and products; and

(5) Develop products and provide services that are of high quality and sufficient intensity and duration to achieve the intended outcomes of the proposed project. To address this requirement, the applicant must describe—

(i) How it proposes to identify and develop the knowledge base on high-quality practices addressing the early intervention, related services, educational, transitional, and functional needs of children who are deaf-blind;

(ii) Its proposed approach to universal, general TA,5 which must identify the intended recipients of the products and services under this approach and should include, at minimum—

(A) A plan for ensuring that State Deaf-Blind Projects, as well as SEAs, LEAs, LAs, and EIS providers, can easily access and use products and services developed by the proposed project; and

(B) A plan for increasing awareness and recognition at the national level of how children who are deaf-blind can benefit from high-quality practices addressing their early intervention, related services, educational, transitional, and functional needs.

(iii) Its proposed approach to targeted, specialized TA,6 which must identify—

(A) The intended recipients, including the type and number of recipients, that will receive the products and services under this approach;

(B) Its proposed approach to measure the readiness of State Deaf-Blind Projects to work with the proposed project, assessing, at a minimum, their current infrastructure, available resources, and ability to build capacity at the LEA and EIS program level;

(C) Its proposed plan for assisting State Deaf-Blind Projects to build professional development systems to support children who are deaf-blind; and

(D) Its proposed plan for working with individuals and entities at each level of the education system (e.g., SEAs, LEAs, LAs, EIS providers, schools, and families) to ensure that there are systems in place to support the use of high-quality practices for educating children with deaf-blindness;

(iv) Its proposed approach to intensive, sustained TA,7 which must identify—

(A) The intended recipients, including the type and number of recipients, that will receive the products and services under this approach;

(B) Its proposed approach to measure the readiness of State Deaf-Blind Projects to work with the proposed project, including their commitment to the initiative, alignment of the initiative to their needs, current infrastructure, available resources, and ability to build capacity at the local district and EIS program level;

(C) Its proposed plan for assisting State Deaf-Blind Projects to build training systems that include professional development based on adult learning principles and coaching;

(D) The process by which the proposed project will collaborate with OSEP-funded centers (see www.osepideasthatwork.org/find-center-or-grant/find-a-center) and other federally funded TA centers to develop and implement a coordinated TA plan when they are involved in a State;

(E) The process by which the proposed project will ensure the use of effective TA practices and continuously evaluate the practices to improve the delivery of TA;

(6) Develop products and implement services that maximize efficiency. To address this requirement, the applicant must describe—

(i) How the proposed project will use technology to achieve the intended project outcomes;

(ii) With whom the proposed project will collaborate and the intended outcomes of this collaboration; and

(iii) How the proposed project will use non-project resources to achieve the intended project outcomes.

(c) In the narrative section of the application under “Quality of the Evaluation Plan,” include an evaluation plan for the project as described in the following paragraphs. The evaluation plan must describe: measures of progress in implementation, including the criteria for determining the extent to which the project's products and services have met the goals for reaching the project's target population; measures of intended outcomes or results of the project's activities in order to evaluate those activities; and how well the goals or objectives of the proposed project, as described in its logic model, have been met.

The applicant must provide an assurance that, in designing the evaluation plan, it will—

(1) Designate, with the approval of the OSEP project officer, a project liaison staff person with sufficient dedicated time, experience in evaluation, and knowledge of the project to work in collaboration with the Center to Improve Program and Project Performance (CIP3),8 the project director, and the OSEP project officer on the following tasks:

(i) Revise, as needed, the logic model submitted in the grant application to provide for a more comprehensive measurement of implementation and outcomes and to reflect any changes or clarifications to the model discussed at the kick-off meeting;

(ii) Refine the evaluation design and instrumentation proposed in the grant application consistent with the logic model (e.g., prepare evaluation questions about significant program processes and outcomes; develop quantitative or qualitative data collections that permit both the collection of progress data, including fidelity of implementation, as appropriate, and the assessment of project outcomes; and identify analytic strategies); and

(iii) Revise, as needed, the evaluation plan submitted in the grant application such that it clearly—

(A) Specifies the measures and associated instruments or sources for data appropriate to the evaluation questions, suggests analytic strategies for those data, provides a timeline for conducting the evaluation, and includes staff assignments for completion of the plan;

(B) Delineates the data expected to be available by the end of the second project year for use during the project's evaluation (3+2 review) for continued funding described under the heading Fourth and Fifth Years of the Project; and

(C) Can be used to assist the project director and the OSEP project officer, with the assistance of CIP3, as needed, to specify the performance measures to be addressed in the project's Annual Performance Report;

(2) Cooperate with CIP3 staff in order to accomplish the tasks described in paragraph (1) of this section; and

(3) Dedicate sufficient funds in each budget year to cover the costs of carrying out the tasks described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of this section and implementing the evaluation plan.

(d) Demonstrate in the narrative section of the application under “Adequacy of Project Resources,” how—

(1) The proposed project will encourage applications for employment from persons who are members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability, as appropriate;

(2) The proposed key project personnel, consultants, and subcontractors have the qualifications and experience to carry out the proposed activities and achieve the project's intended outcomes;

(3) The applicant and any key partners have adequate resources to carry out the proposed activities; and

(4) The proposed costs are reasonable in relation to the anticipated results and benefits.

(e) Demonstrate, in the narrative section of the application under “Quality of the Management Plan,” how—

(1) The proposed management plan will ensure that the project's intended outcomes will be achieved on time and within budget. To address this requirement, the applicant must describe—

(i) Clearly defined responsibilities for key project personnel, consultants, and subcontractors, as applicable; and

(ii) Timelines and milestones for accomplishing the project tasks;

(2) Key project personnel and any consultants and subcontractors will be allocated and how these allocations are appropriate and adequate to achieve the project's intended outcomes;

(3) The proposed management plan will ensure that the products and services provided are of high quality, relevant, and useful to recipients; and

(4) The proposed project will benefit from a diversity of perspectives, including those of families, educators, TA providers, doctoral and post-doctoral scholars, researchers, and policy makers, among others, in its development and operation.

(f) Address the following application requirements. The applicant must—

(1) Include, in Appendix A, personnel-loading charts and timelines, as applicable, to illustrate the management plan described in the narrative;

(2) Include, in the budget, attendance at the following:

(i) A one and one-half day kick-off meeting in Washington, DC, after receipt of the award, and an annual planning meeting.

Note: Within 30 days of receipt of the award, a post-award teleconference must be held between the OSEP project officer and the grantee's project director or other authorized representative;

(ii) A two and one-half day project directors' conference in Washington, DC, during each year of the project period;

(iii) Four annual two-day trips to attend Department briefings, Department-sponsored conferences, and other meetings, as requested by OSEP; and

(iv) A one-day intensive 3+2 review meeting in Washington, DC, during the last half of the second year of the project period;

(3) Include, in the budget, a line item for an annual set-aside of five percent of the grant amount to support emerging needs that are consistent with the proposed project's intended outcomes, as those needs are identified in consultation with and approved by the OSEP project officer. With approval from the OSEP project officer, the project must reallocate any remaining funds from this annual set-aside no later than the end of the third quarter of each budget period;

(4) Maintain a high-quality website, with an easy to navigate design, that meets government or industry-recognized standards for accessibility; and

(5) Include, in Appendix A, an assurance to assist OSEP with the transfer of pertinent resources and products and to maintain the continuity of services to States during the transition to this new award period and at the end of this award period, as appropriate.

Fourth and Fifth Years of the Project:

In deciding whether to continue funding the project for the fourth and fifth years, the Secretary will consider the requirements of 34 CFR 75.253(a), as well as—

(a) The recommendation of a 3+2 review team consisting of experts selected by the Secretary. This review will be conducted during a one-day intensive meeting that will be held during the last half of the second year of the project period;

(b) The timeliness with which, and how well, the requirements of the negotiated cooperative agreement have been or are being met by the project; and

(c) The quality, relevance, and usefulness of the project's products and services and the extent to which the project's products and services are aligned with the project's objectives and likely to result in the project achieving its intended outcomes.

Requirement:

This requirement is from the notice of final requirement for this program published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.

This requirement is:

Allowable indirect costs.

A grantee under Focus Area A may recover the lesser of (a) its actual indirect costs as determined by the grantee's negotiated indirect cost rate agreement and (b) 10 percent of its modified total direct costs. If a grantee's allocable indirect costs exceed 10 percent of its modified total direct costs, the grantee may not recoup the excess by shifting the cost to other grants or contracts with the U.S. Government, unless specifically authorized by legislation. The grantee must use non-Federal revenue sources to pay for such unrecovered costs.9

Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking: Under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553) the Department generally offers interested parties the opportunity to comment on proposed priorities. Section 681(d) of IDEA, however, makes the public comment requirements of the APA inapplicable to the priority in this notice.

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1462, 1463 and 1481.

Applicable Regulations: (a) The Education Department General Administrative Regulations in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 81, 82, 84, 86, 97, 98, and 99. (b) The Office of Management and Budget Guidelines to Agencies on Governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement) in 2 CFR part 180, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR part 3485. (c) The Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards in 2 CFR part 200, as adopted and amended as regulations of the Department in 2 CFR part 3474.

Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 79 apply to all applicants except federally recognized Indian Tribes.

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

Type of Award: Discretionary grants (Focus Area A) and cooperative agreement (Focus Area B).

Estimated Available Funds: $11,600,000.

Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2019 from the list of unfunded applicants from this competition.

Estimated Range of Awards: Focus Area A: See chart. Focus Area B: $2,100,000.

Estimated Average Size of Awards: Focus Area A: $176,000. Focus Area B: $2,100,000.

Maximum Award: Focus Area A: The following chart lists the maximum amount of funds for individual States and for a single budget period of 12 months. We will not make an award exceeding funding levels listed in this notice for individual States, or the combined funding levels listed in this notice for each State member of a consortium, for any single budget period of 12 months. A State may be served by only one supported project. In determining the maximum funding levels for each State, the Secretary considered, among other things, the following factors:

(1) The total number of children from birth through age 21 in the State.

(2) The number of people in poverty in the State.

(3) The previous funding levels.

(4) The maximum and minimum funding amounts.

Focus Area B: We will not make an award exceeding 2,100,000 for any single budget period of 12 months.

Note: The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services may change the maximum amount through a notice published in the Federal Register.

Estimated Number of Awards: Focus Area A: 54. Focus Area B: 1.

Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice.

Project Period: Up to 60 months.

1. Eligible Applicants: SEAs; LEAs, including public charter schools that are considered LEAs under State law; IHEs; other public agencies; private nonprofit organizations; freely associated States and outlying areas; Indian Tribes or Tribal organizations; and for-profit organizations. Because the Bureau of Indian Affairs is not a State, it will not be eligible for a State grant under this priority.

With respect to Focus Area A of the priority, in order to provide SEAs with greater flexibility in how TA is delivered and ensure high-quality TA, individual States have the following options: (1) Participating as a member of a multi-State consortium; or (2) applying directly for funds as a single State. Therefore, eligible applicants for funds awarded under Focus Area A of this absolute priority may be an entity serving a multi-State consortium, or a single State.

Eligible applicants under Focus Area A are invited to submit single-State or consortium applications to provide deaf-blind TA services to individual States, as they have done in the past. If a State is included in more than one application as a member of a consortium or submits an individual State application, and more than one application is determined to be fundable for the State, the State will be given the option to choose the award (individual State or consortium) under which it will receive funding. A State may not be funded under multiple awards. The maximum level of funding for a consortium will reflect the combined total that the eligible entities comprising the consortium would have received if they had applied separately. For States within a consortium, each State must receive services consistent with its identified funding level.

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

3. Subgrantees: Under 34 CFR 75.708(b) and (c) a grantee under this competition may award subgrants—to directly carry out project activities described in its application—to the following types of entities: IHEs and private nonprofit organizations suitable to carry out the activities proposed in the application. The grantee may award subgrants to entities it has identified in an approved application.

4. Other General Requirements: (a) Recipients of funding under this program must make positive efforts to employ and advance in employment qualified individuals with disabilities (see section 606 of IDEA).

(b) Applicants for, and recipients of, funding must, with respect to the aspects of their proposed project relating to the absolute priority, involve individuals with disabilities, or parents of individuals with disabilities ages birth through 26, in planning, implementing, and evaluating the project (see section 682(a)(1)(A) of IDEA).

1. Application Submission Instructions: For information on how to submit an application please refer to our Common Instructions for Applicants to Department of Education Discretionary Grant Programs, published in the Federal Register on February 12, 2018 (83 FR 6003) and available at www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys/pkg/FR-2018-02-12/pdf/2018-02558.pdf.

2. Intergovernmental Review: This competition is subject to Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. However, under 34 CFR 79.8(a), we waive intergovernmental review in order to make awards by the end of FY 2018.

3. Funding Restrictions: We reference regulations outlining funding restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.

4. Recommended Page Limit: The application narrative (Part III of the application) is where you, the applicant, address the selection criteria that reviewers use to evaluate your application. We recommend that you (1) limit the application narrative to no more than 70 pages and (2) use the following standards:

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

• Double-space (no more than three lines per vertical inch) all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings, footnotes, quotations, reference citations, and captions, as well as all text in charts, tables, figures, graphs, and screen shots.

• Use a font that is 12 point or larger.

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

The recommended page limit does not apply to Part I, the cover sheet; Part II, the budget section, including the narrative budget justification; Part IV, the assurances and certifications; or the abstract (follow the guidance provided in the application package for completing the abstract), the table of contents, the list of priority requirements, the resumes, the reference list, the letters of support, or the appendices. However, the recommended page limit does apply to all of the application narrative, including all text in charts, tables, figures, graphs, and screen shots.

1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this competition are from 34 CFR 75.210 and are as follows:

(a) Significance (30 points).

(1) The Secretary considers the significance of the proposed project.

(2) In determining the significance of the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(i) The significance of the problem or issue to be addressed by the proposed project.

(ii) The extent to which the proposed project is likely to build local capacity to provide, improve, or expand services that address the needs of the target population.

(b) Quality of project services (30 points).

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the services to be provided by the proposed project.

(2) In determining the quality of the services to be provided by the proposed project, the Secretary considers the quality and sufficiency of strategies for ensuring equal access and treatment for eligible project participants who are members of groups that have traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national origin, gender, age, or disability.

(3) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(i) The extent to which the services to be provided by the proposed project are appropriate to the needs of the intended recipients or beneficiaries of those services.

(ii) The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable.

(iii) The extent to which the services to be provided by the proposed project reflect up-to-date knowledge from research and effective practice.

(iv) The extent to which the training or professional development services to be provided by the proposed project are of sufficient quality, intensity, and duration to lead to improvements in practice among the recipients of those services.

(v) The extent to which the technical assistance services to be provided by the proposed project involve the use of efficient strategies, including the use of technology, as appropriate, and the leveraging of non-project resources.

(c) Quality of the project evaluation (15 points).

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the evaluation to be conducted of the proposed project.

(2) In determining the quality of the evaluation, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(i) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are thorough, feasible, and appropriate to the goals, objectives, and outcomes of the proposed project.

(ii) The extent to which the methods of evaluation are appropriate to the context within which the project operates.

(d) Adequacy of resources (15 points).

(1) The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources for the proposed project.

(2) In determining the adequacy of resources for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(i) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, of the project director or principal investigator.

(ii) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, of key project personnel.

(iii) The qualifications, including relevant training and experience, of project consultants or subcontractors.

(iv) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the objectives, design, and potential significance of the proposed project.

(e) Quality of the management plan (10 points).

(1) The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan for the proposed project.

(2) In determining the quality of the management plan for the proposed project, the Secretary considers the following factors:

(i) The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing project tasks.

(ii) The extent to which the time commitments of the project director and principal investigator and other key project personnel are appropriate and adequate to meet the objectives of the proposed project.

2. Review and Selection Process: We remind potential applicants that in reviewing applications in any discretionary grant competition, the Secretary may consider, under 34 CFR 75.217(d)(3), the past performance of the applicant in carrying out a previous award, such as the applicant's use of funds, achievement of project objectives, and compliance with grant conditions. The Secretary may also consider whether the applicant failed to submit a timely performance report or submitted a report of unacceptable quality.

In addition, in making a competitive grant award, the Secretary requires various assurances, including those applicable to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department (34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).

3. Additional Review and Selection Process Factors: In the past, the Department has had difficulty finding peer reviewers for certain competitions because so many individuals who are eligible to serve as peer reviewers have conflicts of interest. The standing panel requirements under section 682(b) of IDEA also have placed additional constraints on the availability of reviewers. Therefore, the Department has determined that for some discretionary grant competitions, applications may be separated into two or more groups and ranked and selected for funding within specific groups. This procedure will make it easier for the Department to find peer reviewers by ensuring that greater numbers of individuals who are eligible to serve as reviewers for any particular group of applicants will not have conflicts of interest. It also will increase the quality, independence, and fairness of the review process, while permitting panel members to review applications under discretionary grant competitions for which they also have submitted applications.

4. Risk Assessment and Specific Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR 200.205, before awarding grants under this competition the Department conducts a review of the risks posed by applicants. Under 2 CFR 3474.10, the Secretary may impose specific conditions and, in appropriate circumstances, high-risk conditions on a grant if the applicant or grantee is not financially stable; has a history of unsatisfactory performance; has a financial or other management system that does not meet the standards in 2 CFR part 200, subpart D; has not fulfilled the conditions of a prior grant; or is otherwise not responsible.

5. Integrity and Performance System: If you are selected under this competition to receive an award that over the course of the project period may exceed the simplified acquisition threshold (currently $150,000), under 2 CFR 200.205(a)(2) we must make a judgment about your integrity, business ethics, and record of performance under Federal awards—that is, the risk posed by you as an applicant—before we make an award. In doing so, we must consider any information about you that is in the integrity and performance system (currently referred to as the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS)), accessible through the System for Award Management. You may review and comment on any information about yourself that a Federal agency previously entered and that is currently in FAPIIS.

Please note that, if the total value of your currently active grants, cooperative agreements, and procurement contracts from the Federal Government exceeds $10,000,000, the reporting requirements in 2 CFR part 200, Appendix XII, require you to report certain integrity information to FAPIIS semiannually. Please review the requirements in 2 CFR part 200, Appendix XII, if this grant plus all the other Federal funds you receive exceed $10,000,000.

1. Award Notices: If your application is successful, we notify your U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators and send you a Grant Award Notification (GAN); or we may send you an email containing a link to access an electronic version of your GAN. We may notify you informally, also.

If your application is not evaluated or not selected for funding, we notify you.

2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements: We identify administrative and national policy requirements in the application package and reference these and other requirements in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.

We reference the regulations outlining the terms and conditions of an award in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice and include these and other specific conditions in the GAN. The GAN also incorporates your approved application as part of your binding commitments under the grant.

3. Open Licensing Requirements: Unless an exception applies, if you are awarded a grant under this competition, you will be required to openly license to the public grant deliverables created in whole, or in part, with Department grant funds. When the deliverable consists of modifications to pre-existing works, the license extends only to those modifications that can be separately identified and only to the extent that open licensing is permitted under the terms of any licenses or other legal restrictions on the use of pre-existing works. Additionally, a grantee or subgrantee that is awarded competitive grant funds must have a plan to disseminate these public grant deliverables. This dissemination plan can be developed and submitted after your application has been reviewed and selected for funding. For additional information on the open licensing requirements please refer to 2 CFR 3474.20.

4. Reporting: (a) If you apply for a grant under this competition, you must ensure that you have in place the necessary processes and systems to comply with the reporting requirements in 2 CFR part 170 should you receive funding under the competition. This does not apply if you have an exception under 2 CFR 170.110(b).

(b) At the end of your project period, you must submit a final performance report, including financial information, as directed by the Secretary. If you receive a multiyear award, you must submit an annual performance report that provides the most current performance and financial expenditure information as directed by the Secretary under 34 CFR 75.118. The Secretary may also require more frequent performance reports under 34 CFR 75.720(c). For specific requirements on reporting, please go to www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.

5. Performance Measures: Under the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993, the Department has established a set of performance measures, including long-term measures, that are designed to yield information on various aspects of the effectiveness and quality of the Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for Children With Disabilities program. These measures are:

• Program Performance Measure #1: The percentage of Technical Assistance and Dissemination products and services deemed to be of high quality by an independent review panel of experts qualified to review the substantive content of the products and services.

• Program Performance Measure #2: The percentage of Special Education Technical Assistance and Dissemination products and services deemed by an independent review panel of qualified experts to be of high relevance to educational and early intervention policy or practice.

• Program Performance Measure #3: The percentage of all Special Education Technical Assistance and Dissemination products and services deemed by an independent review panel of qualified experts to be useful to improve educational or early intervention policy or practice.

• Program Performance Measure #4: The cost efficiency of the Technical Assistance and Dissemination Program includes the percentage of milestones achieved in the current annual performance report period and the percentage of funds spent during the current fiscal year.

• Long-term Program Performance Measure: The percentage of States receiving Special Education Technical Assistance and Dissemination services regarding scientifically or evidence-based practices for infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities that successfully promote the implementation of those practices in school districts and service agencies.

The measures apply to projects funded under this competition, and grantees are required to submit data on these measures as directed by OSEP.

Grantees will be required to report information on their project's performance in annual and final performance reports to the Department (34 CFR 75.590).

6. Continuation Awards: In making a continuation award under 34 CFR 75.253, the Secretary considers, among other things: Whether a grantee has made substantial progress in achieving the goals and objectives of the project; whether the grantee has expended funds in a manner that is consistent with its approved application and budget; and, if the Secretary has established performance measurement requirements, the performance targets in the grantee's approved application.

In making a continuation award, the Secretary also considers whether the grantee is operating in compliance with the assurances in its approved application, including those applicable to Federal civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination in programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance from the Department (34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).

Accessible Format: Individuals with disabilities can obtain this document and a copy of the application package in an accessible format (e.g., braille, large print, audiotape, or compact disc) by contacting the Management Support Services Team, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Room 5113, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-2500. Telephone: (202) 245-7363. If you use a TDD or a TTY, call the FRS, toll free, at 1-800-877-8339.

Electronic Access to This Document: The official version of this document is the document published in the Federal Register. You may access the official edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations via the Federal Digital System at: www.thefederalregister.org/fdsys. At this site you can view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the Federal Register, in text or Portable Document Format (PDF). To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at the site.

You may also access documents of the Department published in the Federal Register by using the article search feature at: www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, through the advanced search feature at this site, you can limit your search to documents published by the Department.

The Historically Black Colleges and Universities Capital Financing Advisory Board's Statutory Authority and Function: The Historically Black Colleges and Universities Capital Financing Advisory Board (Board) is authorized by Title III, Part D, Section 347 of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended in 1998 (20 U.S.C. 1066f). The Board is established within the Department of Education to provide advice and counsel to the Secretary and the designated bonding authority as to the most effective and efficient means of implementing construction financing on historically black college and university campuses and to advise Congress regarding the progress made in implementing the Historically Black Colleges and Universities Capital Financing Program (Program). Specifically, the Board will provide advice as to the capital needs of Historically Black Colleges and Universities, how those needs can be met through the Program, and what additional steps might be taken to improve the operation and implementation of the Program.

Meeting Agenda: The purpose of this meeting is to update the Board on current program activities, set future meeting dates, enable the Board to make recommendations to the Secretary on the current capital needs of Historically Black Colleges and Universities, and discuss recommendations regarding how the Board might increase its effectiveness.

There will be an opportunity for members of the public to provide oral comment on Wednesday, September 19, 2018, 11:30 a.m.-12:00 p.m. Please be advised that comments cannot exceed five (5) minutes and must pertain to issues within the scope of the Board's authority. Members of the public interested in submitting written comments may do so by submitting comments to the attention of Adam H. Kissel, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, Washington, DC, 20202. Comments must be postmarked no later than Wednesday, September 12, 2018, to be considered for discussion during the meeting. Comments should pertain to the work of the Board or the Program.

Access to Records of the Meeting:The official minutes of the Board's public meeting will be made available for public inspection no later than 60 calendar days following the meeting.

Pursuant to the FACA, 5 U.S.C. App. as amended, Section 10(b), the public may also inspect meeting materials at http://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/hbcu-finance.html.

Reasonable Accommodations: The meeting site is accessible to individuals with disabilities. If you will need an auxiliary aid or service to participate in the meeting (e.g., interpreting service, assistive listening device, or materials in an alternate format), notify the contact person listed in this notice at least two weeks before the scheduled meeting date. We will attempt to meet a request received after that date, though, we may not be able to make available the requested auxiliary aid or service because of insufficient time to arrange it.

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

Purpose of the Committee: To provide advice and guidance on a continuing basis to the office of Science and to the Department of Energy on scientific priorities within the field of advanced scientific computing research.

Purpose of the Meeting: This meeting is the semi-annual meeting of the Committee.

Tentative Agenda Topics:

• Report from Subcommittee on 40 years of investments by the Department of Energy in advanced computing and networking

• Update on Oak Ridge Leadership Computing Facility—Summit

• Technical presentations

• Public Comment (10-minute rule)

The meeting agenda includes an update on the budget, accomplishments and planned activities of the Advanced Scientific Computing Research program and the exascale computing project; an update on the Office of Science; technical presentations from funded researchers; and there will be an opportunity comments from the public. The meeting will conclude at 12:00 p.m. on September 18, 2018. Agenda updates and presentations will be posted on the ASCAC website prior to the meeting: http://science.energy.gov/ascr/ascac/.

Public Participation: The meeting is open to the public. Individuals and representatives of organizations who would like to offer comments and suggestions may do so during the meeting. Approximately 30 minutes will be reserved for public comments. Time allotted per speaker will depend on the number who wish to speak but will not exceed 10 minutes. The Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Those wishing to speak should submit your request at least five days before the meeting. Those not able to attend the meeting or who have insufficient time to address the committee are invited to send a written statement to Christine Chalk, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington DC 20585, email to [email protected].

Minutes: The minutes of this meeting will be available within 90 days on the Advanced Scientific Computing's website at: http://science.energy.gov/ascr/ascac/.

Purpose of the Board: The purpose of EMAB is to provide the Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management (EM) with advice and recommendations on corporate issues confronting the EM program. EMAB contributes to the effective operation of the program by providing individual citizens and representatives of interested groups an opportunity to present their views on issues facing EM and by helping to secure consensus recommendations on those issues.

Tentative Agenda Topics:

Public Participation: EMAB welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with physical disabilities or special needs. If you require special accommodations due to a disability, please contact Jennifer McCloskey at least seven days in advance of the meeting at the phone number or email address listed above. Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral statements pertaining to the agenda should contact Jennifer McCloskey at the address or telephone number listed above. Requests must be received five days prior to the meeting and reasonable provision will be made to include the presentation in the agenda. The Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make public comments will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments.

Minutes: Minutes will be available by writing or calling Jennifer McCloskey at the address or phone number listed above. Minutes will also be available at the following website: http://energy.gov/em/services/communication-engagement/environmental-management-advisory-board-emab.

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

Tentative Agenda Topics:

Public Participation: The EM SSAB Chairs welcome the attendance of the public at their advisory committee meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with physical disabilities or special needs. If you require special accommodations due to a disability, please contact David Borak at least seven days in advance of the meeting at the phone number listed above. Written statements may be filed either before or after the meeting with the Designated Federal Officer, David Borak, at the address or telephone listed above. Individuals who wish to make oral statements pertaining to agenda items should also contact David Borak. Requests must be received five days prior to the meeting and reasonable provision will be made to include the presentation in the agenda. The Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make public comment will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments.

Minutes: Minutes will be available by writing or calling David Borak at the address or phone number listed above. Minutes will also be available at the following website: https://energy.gov/em/listings/chairs-meetings.

This information collection request contains:

(1) OMB No. 1905-0191;

(2) Information Collection Request Title: Annual Survey of Alternative Fueled Vehicles;

(3) Type of Request: Three-year extension with changes;

(4) Purpose: Form EIA-886 data are collected from suppliers and users of AFVs. EIA uses data from these groups as a basis for estimating total AFV and ATF use in the U.S. These data are needed by Federal and State agencies, fuel suppliers, transit agencies, and other fleets to determine if sufficient quantities of AFVs are available for purchase and to provide Congress with a measure of the extent to which the objectives of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 are being achieved. These data serve as market analysis tools for Congress, Federal/State agencies, AFV suppliers, vehicle fleet managers, and other interested organizations and persons. These data are also needed to satisfy public requests for detailed information on AFVs and ATFs (in particular, the distribution of AFVs by State, as well as the amount and location of the ATFs being consumed).

(4a) Changes to Information Collection:

• Changes to Vehicle Type and Weight Classifications: EIA will standardize the break out of weight classes to reflect industry standards by simplifying the list of vehicle type codes and adding a column for detailed weight classifications in Parts 2 and 3 of Form EIA-886. The changes to vehicle weight classifications support EPA's Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator model (MOVES) by making the weight classifications on the Form EIA-886 data collection consistent with the weight classifications used by EPA.

• Questions for Electric Vehicle Users: EIA will add the following two questions to Part 2 of Form EIA-886 to collect information on electric vehicle power consumption to establish parameters for estimating electricity consumption on charging patterns, and electric utility billing for electric vehicles:

1. How do you charge your electric/plug-in hybrid electric vehicles?

2. Does your electric utility provide separate billing on kilowatt hours used for refueling vehicles?

(5) Annual Estimated Number of Respondents: 1,334;

(6) Annual Estimated Number of Total Responses: 1,334;

(7) Annual Estimated Number of Burden Hours: 7,257;

(8) Annual Estimated Reporting and Recordkeeping Cost Burden: The cost of the burden hours is estimated to be $549,282 (7,257 burden hours times $75.69 per hour). EIA estimates there are no additional costs to respondents associated with the survey other than the costs associated with the burden hours.

Title: FERC-537 (Gas Pipeline Certificates: Construction, Acquisition, and Abandonment).

OMB Control No.: 1902-0060.

Type of Request: Three-year extension of the FERC-537 information collection requirements with no changes to the reporting requirements.

Abstract: The FERC-537 information collection requires natural gas companies to file the necessary information with FERC in order for the Commission to determine if the requested certificate should be authorized. Certain self-implementing construction and abandonment programs do not require the filing of applications. However, those types of programs do require the filing of annual reports, so many less significant actions can be reported in a single filing/response and less detail would be required.

The data required to be submitted in a normal certificate filing consists of identification of the company and responsible officials, factors considered in the location of the facilities and the impact on the area for environmental considerations. Also to be submitted are the following, as applicable to the specific request:

• Flow diagrams showing the design capacity for engineering design verification and safety determination;

• Cost of proposed facilities, plans for financing, and estimated revenues and expenses related to the proposed facility for accounting and financial evaluation.

• Existing and proposed storage capacity and pressures and reservoir engineering studies for requests to increase storage capacity;

• An affidavit showing the consent of existing customers for abandonment of service requests.

Additionally, requests for an increase of pipeline capacity must include a statement that demonstrates compliance with the Commission's Certificate Policy Statement by making a showing that the cost of the expansion will not be subsidized by existing customers and that there will not be adverse economic impacts to existing customers, competing pipelines or their customers, nor to landowners and to surrounding communities.

Type of Respondents: Natural gas companies.

Responses to public comments:

To the comment received from Ms. Joanne Collins on 5/30/2018, FERC responds:

To the comment received from Ms. Laurie Lubsen on 6/4/2018, FERC responds:

Estimate of Annual Burden: 1 The Commission estimates the annual public reporting burden for the information collection as:

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

On June 30, 2008, EPA established a nutrient total maximum daily load (“TMDL”) for the Goose Creek Watershed in Chester and Delaware Counties, Pennsylvania. EPA established that TMDL pursuant to the April 9, 1997 Consent Decree entered in American Littoral Society, et al., v. EPA, No. 96-489 (E.D. Pa.). Among other things, the TMDL assigned wasteload allocations (“WLAs”) for phosphorus to Goose Creek's point source dischargers, WGSA's wastewater treatment plant being the largest.

WGSA filed a complaint against EPA on September 19, 2012, alleging that in establishing the Goose Creek TMDL EPA failed to comply with requirements of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and Administrative Procedure Act (APA). In July 2013, the Court granted intervener status to the Delaware Riverkeeper Network (“DRN”).

The Court placed the case in “civil suspense” following the parties' execution in January 2014 of a first “Interim Settlement Agreement” (“the 2014 Agreement”) under which EPA reassessed the water quality of Goose Creek and WGSA made voluntary improvements in its operations to achieve phosphorus reductions. The parties have now reached agreement on the terms of a “Second Interim Settlement Agreement” in which (1) WGSA commits, among other things, to install a “CoMag” ballasted flocculation system at its wastewater treatment plant and achieve certain specified discharge limits for phosphorus and (2) EPA commits to reassess the water quality of Goose Creek and decide whether to withdraw, revise or retain the Goose Creek TMDL.

For a period of thirty (30) days following the date of publication of this notice, the Agency will accept written comments relating to the proposed Second Interim Settlement Agreement from persons who are not named as parties or intervenors to the litigation in question. If so requested, EPA will also consider holding a public hearing on whether to enter into the proposed Second Interim Settlement Agreement. EPA or the Department of Justice may withdraw or withhold consent to the proposed Second Interim Settlement Agreement if the comments disclose facts or considerations that indicate that such consent is inappropriate, improper, inadequate, or inconsistent with the requirements of the Act. Unless EPA or the Department of Justice determines that consent to this proposed Second Interim Settlement Agreement should be withdrawn, the parties intend to sign the Agreement and inform the Court.

The official public docket for this action (identified by EPA-HQ-OGC-2018-0591) contains a copy of the proposed Second Interim Settlement Agreement. The official public docket is available for public viewing at the Office of Environmental Information (OEI) Docket in the EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OEI Docket is (202) 566-1752.

An electronic version of the public docket is available on EPA's website at www.epa.gov/dockets and also through www.regulations.gov. You may use www.regulations.gov to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the official public docket, and access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, key in the appropriate docket identification number then select “search.” It is important to note that EPA's policy is that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available for public viewing online at www.regulations.gov without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information claimed as CBI and other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute is not included in the official public docket or in the electronic public docket.

EPA's policy is that copyrighted material, including copyrighted material contained in a public comment, will not be placed in EPA's electronic public docket but will be available only in printed, paper form in the official public docket. Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through the EPA Docket Center.

You may submit comments as provided in the ADDRESSES section. Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified comment period.

If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name, mailing address, and an email address or other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD ROM you submit. This ensures that you can be identified as the submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further information on the substance of your comment. Any identifying or contact information provided in the body of a comment will be included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment.

Use of the www.regulations.gov website to submit comments to EPA electronically is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. The electronic public docket system is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity, email address, or other contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. In contrast to EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's electronic mail (email) system is not an “anonymous access” system. If you send an email comment directly to the Docket without going through www.regulations.gov, your email address is automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket.

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

Abstract: Under the U.S. EPA National Environmental Information Exchange Network (NEIEN) Grant Program, EPA collects information from the NEIEN grantees on assistance agreements that EPA has awarded. Specifically, for each project, EPA proposes to have grantees submit semi-annual reports on the progress and current status of each goal and output, completion dates for outputs, and any problems encountered. This information will help EPA ensure projects are on schedule to meet their goals and produce high quality environmental results. New award recipients will complete one Quality Assurance Reporting Form for each award. This form provides a simple means for grant recipients to describe how quality will be addressed throughout their projects. Additionally, the Quality Assurance Reporting Form is derived from guidelines provided in the NEIEN 2018 Grant Solicitation Notice.

Form Numbers: EPA Form 5300-26 (Semi-Annual Progress Report Form) and EPA Form 5300-27 (Quality Assurance Reporting Form).

Respondents/affected entities: State, tribal, and territorial environmental government offices.

Respondent's obligation to respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits (2 CFR part 200 and 2 CFR part 1500).

Estimated number of respondents: 172 (total).

Frequency of response: Twice per year for the Semi-Annual Progress Report Form; one time per grant for the Quality Assurance Reporting Form.

Total estimated burden: 280 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b)

Total estimated cost: $16,187 (per year), includes $0 annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.

Changes in the Estimates: There is a decrease of 60 hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently approved by OMB. This is due to a slight decrease in the number of grants (from 200 to 172) that are expected to be awarded annually during the period of this ICR.

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

Abstract: The EPA uses contractors to perform services throughout the nation with regard to environmental emergencies involving the release, or threatened release, of oil, radioactive materials, or hazardous chemicals that may potentially affect communities and the surrounding environment. The Agency may request contractors responding to any of these types of incidents to conduct background checks and apply Government-established suitability criteria in Title 5 CFR Administrative Personnel 731.104 Appointments Subject to Investigation, 732.201 Sensitivity Level Designations and Investigative Requirements, and 736.102 Notice to Investigative Sources when determining whether employees are acceptable to perform on given sites or on specific projects. In addition to emergency response contractors, EPA may require background checks for contractor personnel working in sensitive sites or sensitive projects. The background checks and application of the Government's suitability criteria must be completed prior to contract employee performance. The contractor shall maintain records associated with all background checks. Background checks cover citizenship or valid visa status, criminal convictions, weapons offenses, felony convictions, and parties prohibited from receiving federal contracts.

Form Numbers: None.

Respondents/affected entities: Private Contractors.

Respondent's obligation to respond: Required to obtain a benefit per Title 5 CFR Administrative Personnel 731.104 Appointments Subject to Investigation, 732.201 Sensitivity Level Designations and Investigative Requirements, and 736.102 Notice to Investigative Sources.

Estimated number of respondents: 1,000 (total).

Frequency of response: Annual.

Total estimated burden: 1,000 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b)

Total estimated cost: $195,070 (per year), includes $0 annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.

Changes in the Estimates: There is no change in the hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared with the ICR currently approved by OMB.

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

Abstract: The currently approved ICR addresses certification and compliance requirements for the following industries: Nonroad (NR) compression-ignition (CI) engines and equipment, marine CI engines in Categories 1 and 2; and heavy-duty (HD) engines. In this revision, the following ICRs are being incorporated, either in whole or in part, to eliminate redundancy: Control of Emissions from New Marine Compression-Ignition Engines at or Above 30 Liters per Cylinder (2060-0641); Engine Emission Defect Information Reports and Voluntary Emission Recall Reports (2060-0048); Emissions Certification and Compliance Requirements for Locomotives and Locomotive Engines (2060-0392); and Certification and Compliance Requirements for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles (2060-0678). With this consolidation, we are combining all certification and compliance burden associated with the heavy-duty and nonroad compression-ignition engine, equipment and vehicle industries under a single ICR.

Title II of the Clean Air Act (CAA), charges EPA with issuing certificates of conformity for those engines and vehicles that comply with applicable emission requirements. Such a certificate must be issued before those products may be legally introduced into commerce. To apply for a certificate of conformity, manufacturers are required to submit descriptions of their planned production, descriptions of emission control systems and test data. The emission values achieved during certification testing may also be used in the Averaging, Banking, and Trading (ABT) Program, which allows engine manufacturers to bank credits for engine families that emit below the standard and use the credits to certify engine families that emit above the standard.

The CAA also mandates EPA verify that manufacturers have translated their certified prototypes into mass produced engines; and that these engines comply with emission standards throughout their useful lives. EPA verifies this through Compliance Programs, including Production Line Testing (PLT), In-use Testing and Selective Enforcement Audits (SEAs). PLT is a self-audit program that allows marine engine manufacturers to monitor their products' emissions profile with statistical certainty and minimize the cost of correcting errors through early detection. In-use testing verifies compliance with emission standards throughout an engine family's useful life. Through SEAs, EPA verifies that test data submitted by engine manufacturers is reliable and testing is performed according to EPA regulations.

Under the Transition Program for Equipment Manufacturers (TPEM), NRCI equipment manufacturers may delay compliance with Tier 4 standards for up to seven years if they comply with certain limitations. The Program seeks to ease the impact of new emission standards on equipment manufacturers as they often need to redesign their products.

Form Numbers: HD/NR Engine Manufacturer Annual Production Report (5900-90); AB&T Report for Nonroad Compression Ignition Engines (5900-125); AB&T Report for Heavy-duty On-highway Engines (5900-134); AB&T Report for Locomotives (5900-274); AB&T Report for Marine Compression-ignition Engines (5900-125); PLT Report for Marine CI CumSum (5900-297); PLT Report for Marine CI Non-CumSum (5900-298); PLT Report for Locomotives (5900-135); PLT Report for Locomotives (5900-273); In-use Testing for Locomotives (5900-93); Replacement Engine Exemption Report (6900-5415); HD Defect Information Reports (590-301); HD Voluntary Emissions Recall Reports VERRs (590-300); HD VER Quarterly Reports (590-302); HD Alternative Fuel Conversions of Intermediate Age (5900-338); HD Alternative Fuel Conversions Outside of Useful Life (5900-259); TPEM Equipment Manufacturer Notification (5900-242); TPEM Equipment Manufacturer Report (5900-240); TPEM Engine Manufacturer Report (5900-241); TPEM Importers Notification (TBD); TPEM Importers Annual Report (TBD); TPEM Statement to Comply (5900-239); TPEM Hardship Relief Application Questionnaire (5900-465); TPEM Hardship Relief Prescreening Questionnaire (5900-465)

Respondents/affected entities: Manufacturers of engines, equipment and vehicles in the nonroad compression ignition (CI), marine CI, locomotives and medium- and heavy-duty on-highway industries; Marine CI vessel owners and operators and owners of HD truck fleets.

Respondent's obligation to respond: Regulated manufacturers must respond to this collection if they wish to sell their products in the US, as prescribed by Section 206(a) of the CAA (42 U.S.C. 7521). Participation in some programs such as ABT and TPEM is voluntary, but once a manufacturer has elected to participate, it must submit the required information.

Estimated number of respondents: 468 (total).

Frequency of response: Quarterly, Annually, On Occasion.

Total estimated burden: 127,900 hours per year. Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.03(b).

Total estimated cost: $21,639,590 (per year), which includes an estimated $11,682,548 annualized capital or maintenance and operational costs.

Changes in the Estimates: There is a net decrease of 73,137 hours in the total estimated burden. This decrease is due to: (1) A decrease in TPEM respondents; (2) respondents' reliance on carry-over testing data; and 3) eliminating duplication.

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

Abstract: The New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for Polymeric Coating of Supporting Substrates Facilities (40 CFR part 60, subpart VVV) apply to each existing and new coating operation and any on-site coating mix preparation equipment used to prepare coatings for the polymeric coating of supporting substrates. New facilities include those that commenced construction, modification, or reconstruction after the date of proposal. In general, all NSPS standards require initial notifications, performance tests, and periodic reports by the owners/operators of the affected facilities. They are also required to maintain records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring system is inoperative. These notifications, reports, and records are essential in determining compliance with 40 CFR part 60, subpart VVV.

Form Numbers: None.

Respondents/affected entities: Polymeric coating facilities.

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

Estimated number of respondents: 62 (total).

Frequency of response: Initially, quarterly and semiannually.

Total estimated burden: 14,200 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

Total estimated cost: $2,190,000 (per year), which includes $700,000 in annualized capital/startup and/or operation & maintenance costs.

Changes in the Estimates: There is a small adjustment increase in the total estimated burden and capital and O&M costs as currently identified in the OMB Inventory of Approved Burdens. This increase is not due to any program changes. The change in the burden and cost estimates occurred due to an increase in the respondent universe.

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

Abstract: The Emission Guidelines for Sewage Sludge Incinerators (SSI) for Sewage Sludge Incinerators (40 CFR part 60, subpart MMMM) apply to the administrators of air quality programs in a state or U.S. protectorate with one or more SSI units that commenced construction either on or before the date of proposal. States may choose to incorporate the model rule text directly in their state plan. If a State does not develop, adopt, and submit an approvable State plan, the EPA must develop a Federal plan to implement the emission guidelines. These regulations do not directly apply to SSI unit owners and operators. However, SSI unit owners and operators must comply with the state plan to implement the emission guidelines contained in this Subpart. These standards only affect existing units constructed on or before October 14, 2010; therefore, no new units will become subject to these same standards. This information is being collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR part 60, subpart MMMM.

In general, all emission guidelines require initial notifications, performance tests, and periodic reports by the owners/operators of the affected facilities. They are also required to maintain records of the occurrence and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected facility, or any period during which the monitoring system is inoperative. These notifications, reports, and records are essential in determining compliance, and are required of all affected facilities subject to emission guidelines.

Form Numbers: None.

Respondents/affected entities: Sewage sludge incinerators constructed on or before October 14, 2010.

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

Estimated number of respondents: 86 (total).

Frequency of response: Initially, semiannually and annually.

Total estimated burden: 32,800 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

Total estimated cost: $4,790,000 (per year), which includes $1,350,000 in annualized capital/startup and/or operation & maintenance costs.

Changes in the Estimates: There is an adjustment increase in the labor hours and costs as compared to the previously-approved ICR. The increase is not due to any program changes. The increase in labor burden and costs occurred for two reasons: (1) This ICR assumes all respondents will have to familiarize with the regulatory requirements each year; and (2) this ICR fixes an error in the previous ICR, which did not include recordkeeping burden for operating parameters. However, there is also an adjustment decrease in the total capital and O&M costs and number of responses as compared to the previous ICR. The decrease occurred for two reasons: (1) The total number of SSI units has decreased since the previous ICR; and (2) this ICR assumes that all facilities will meet the requirements for testing every three years rather than annual testing.

As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or the Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.

OMB Control Number: 3060-0874.

Title: Consumer Complaint Portal: General Complaints, Obscenity or Indecency Complaints, Complaints under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, Slamming Complaints, RDAs and Communications Accessibility Complaints.

Form Number: N/A.

Type of Review: Revision of a currently approved collection.

Respondents: Individuals or households; Business or other for-profit entities; Not for profit institutions; State, Local or Tribal Government.

Number of Respondents and Responses: 336,004 respondents; 336,004 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: 15 minutes (.25 hours) to 30 minutes (.50 hours).

Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement.

Obligation To Respond: Voluntary. The statutory authority for this collection is contained in 47 U.S.C. 208 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the Act).

Total Annual Burden: 84,012 hours.

Total Annual Cost: None.

Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: Confidentiality is an issue to the extent that individuals and households provide personally identifiable information, which is covered under the FCC's updated system of records notice (SORN), FCC/CGB-1, “Informal Complaints, Inquiries and Requests for Dispute Assistance.” As required by the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. 552a, the Commission also published a SORN, FCC/CGB-1 “Informal Complaints, Inquiries, and Requests for Dispute Assistance,” in the Federal Register on August 15, 2014 (79 FR 48152) which became effective on September 24, 2014. It may be reviewed at https://www.fcc.gov/general/privacy-act-information#systems.

Privacy Impact Assessment: The FCC completed a Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) on June 28, 2007. It may be reviewed at http://www.fcc.gov/omd/privacyact/Privacy-Impact-Assessment.html.

Needs and Uses: The Commission consolidated all of the FCC informal consumer complaint intake into an online consumer complaint portal, which allows the Commission to better manage the collection of informal consumer complaints. Informal consumer complaints consist of informal consumer complaints, inquiries and comments. This revised information collection requests OMB approval for the addition of a layer of consumer reported complaint information related to the FCC's disability accessibility requirements for apparatus designed to receive, play back, or record video programming to be equipped with built-in closed caption decoder circuitry or capability designed to display closed-captioned video programming.

The information collection burdens associated with these complaints is being transferred from OMB Control Number 3060-1162 (Closed Captioning of Video Programming Delivered Using internet Protocol, and Apparatus Closed Caption Requirements) to OMB Control Number 3060-0874 to enable consumers to file complaints related to the Commission's apparatus closed caption requirements through the Commission's online complaint portal.

OMB Control Number: 3060-0295.

Title: Section 90.607, Supplemental Information to be Furnished by Applicants for Facilities Under Subpart S.

Form Number: N/A.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

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

Number of Respondents and Responses: 478 respondents; 478 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: .25 hours.

Frequency of Response: One time reporting requirement.

Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. Statutory authority for this information collection is contained in 47 U.S.C. 308(b).

Total Annual Burden: 120 hours.

Total Annual Cost: No cost.

Privacy Impact Assessment: No impact(s).

Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: There is no need for confidentiality with this collection of information.

Needs and Uses: The information collection requirements contained in Section 90.607 require the affected applicants to submit a list of any radio facilities they hold within 40 miles of the base station transmitter site being applied for.

This information is used to determine if an applicant's proposed system is necessary in light of communications facilities it already owns. Such a determination helps the Commission to equitably distribute limited spectrum and prevents spectrum warehousing.

OMB Control Number: 3060-0180.

Title: Section 73.1610, Equipment Tests.

Form Number: N/A.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities; Not-for-profit institutions.

Number of Respondents and Responses: 500 respondents; 500 responses.

Estimated Hours per Response: 0.5 hours.

Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement.

Total Annual Burden: 250 hours.

Total Annual Cost: None.

Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. The statutory authority for this collection is contained in Section 154(i) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.

Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: There is no need for confidentiality with this collection of information.

Privacy Impact Assessment: No impact(s).

Needs and Uses: The information collection requirements contained in 47 CFR 73.1610 require the permittee of a new broadcast station to notify the FCC of its plans to conduct equipment tests for the purpose of making adjustments and measurements as may be necessary to assure compliance with the terms of the construction permit and applicable engineering standards. FCC staff use the data to assure compliance with the terms of the construction permit and applicable engineering standards.

OMB Control No.: 3060-0286.

Title: Section 80.302, Notice of Discontinuance, Reduction, or Impairment of Service Involving a Distress Watch.

Form No.: N/A.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other for profit, not-for-profit institutions, and State, local, or tribal government.

Number of Respondents and Responses: 50 respondents and 50 responses.

Estimated Time per Response: 1 hour.

Frequency of Response: Third party disclosure requirement.

Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. The statutory authority for this collection 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 307(e), 309 and 332, unless noted.

Total Annual Burden: 50 hours.

Annual Cost Burden: No cost.

Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No impact(s).

Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: There is no need for confidentiality with this collection of information.

Needs and Uses: The reporting requirement contained in section 80.302 is necessary to ensure that the U.S. Coast Guard is timely notified when a coast station, which is responsible for maintaining a listening watch on a designated marine distress and safety frequency discontinues, reduces or impairs its communications services. This notification allows the Coast Guard to seek an alternate means of providing radio coverage to protect the safety of life and property at sea or object to the planned diminution of service. The information is used by the U.S. Coast Guard district office nearest to the coast station. Once the Coast Guard is aware that such a situation exists, it is able to inform the maritime community that radio coverage has or will be affected and/or seek to provide coverage of the safety watch via alternate means.

OMB Control Number: 3060-1194.

Title: AM Station Modulation Dependent Carrier Level (MDCL) Notification Form; FCC Form 338.

Form Number: FCC Form 338.

Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.

Respondents: Business or other for-profit entities; Not-for-profit institutions.

Number of Respondents and Responses: 100 respondents and 100 responses.

Estimated Hours per Response: 1 hour.

Frequency of Response: On occasion reporting requirement.

Total Annual Burden: 100 hours.

Total Annual Costs: None.

Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. The statutory authority for this information collection is contained in Sections 154(i), 303, 310 and 533 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended.

Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: There is no need for confidentiality required with this collection of information.

Privacy Impact Assessment: No impact(s).

Needs and Uses: On October 23, 2015, the Commission released the First Report and Order, Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making, and Notice of Inquiry, Revitalization of the AM Radio Service (First R&O), FCC 15-142, MB Docket 13-249. In the First R&O, the Commission adopted its proposal for wider implementation of Modulation Dependent Carrier Level (MDCL) control technologies by amending Section 73.1560(a) of the rules, to provide that an AM station may commence operation using MDCL control technology without prior Commission authority, provided that the AM station licensee notifies the Commission of the station's MDCL control operation within 10 days after commencement of such operation using the Bureau's Consolidated Database System (CDBS).

In September 2011, the Commission's Media Bureau (Bureau) had released an MDCL Public Notice, in which it stated that it would permit AM stations, by rule waiver or experimental authorization, to use MDCL control technologies, which are transmitter control techniques that vary either the carrier power level or both the carrier and sideband power levels as a function of the modulation level. This allows AM licensees to reduce power consumption while maintaining audio quality and their licensed station coverage areas.

There are two basic types of MDCL control technologies. In one type, the carrier power is reduced at low modulation levels and increased at higher modulation levels. In the other type, there is full carrier power at low modulation levels and reduced carrier power and sideband powers at higher modulation levels. Use of any of these MDCL control technologies reduces the station's antenna input power to levels not permitted by Section 73.1560(a) of the Commission's rules.

The MDCL Public Notice permitted AM station licensees wanting to use MDCL control technologies to seek either a permanent waiver of Section 73.1560(a) for those licensees already certain of the particular MDCL control technology to be used, or an experimental authorization pursuant to Section 73.1510 of the Rules for those licensees wishing to determine which of the MDCL control technologies would result in maximum cost savings and minimum effects on the station's coverage area and audio quality. Between release of the MDCL Public Notice and release of the Notice of Proposed Rule Making in MB Docket No. 13-249, FCC 13-139 (NPRM), 33 permanent waiver requests and 20 experimental requests authorizing use of MDCL control technologies had been granted by the Bureau.

AM station licensees using MDCL control technologies have reported significant savings on electrical power costs and few, if any, perceptible effects on station coverage area and audio quality. Accordingly, the NPRM tentatively concluded that use of MDCL control technologies reduces AM broadcasters' operating costs while maintaining a station's current level of service to the public, without interference to other stations. The Commission therefore, proposed to allow an AM station to commence operation using MDCL control technology by notification to the Commission, without prior Commission authority.

Consistent with the Commission's new rule allowing AM broadcasters to implement MDCL technologies without prior authorization, by electronic notification within 10 days of commencing MDCL operations, the Commission created FCC Form 338, AM Station Modulation Dependent Carrier Level (MDCL) Notification. In addition to the standard general contact information, FCC Form 338 solicits minimal technical data, as well as the date that MDCL control operation commenced. This information collection regarding FCC Form 338 needs OMB review and approval.

The following rule section is covered by this information collection: 47 CFR 73.1560(a)(1) specifies the limits on antenna input power for AM stations. AM stations using MDCL control technologies are not required to adhere to these operating power parameters. AM stations may, without prior Commission authority, commence MDCL control technology use, provided that within ten days after commencing such operation, the licensee submits an electronic notification of commencement of MDCL operation using FCC Form 338.

The Commission is now requesting a three year extension for this collection from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

The NANC meeting is open to the public. The FCC will accommodate as many attendees as possible; however, admittance will be limited to seating availability. The Commission will also provide audio coverage of the meeting. Other reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities are available upon request. Request for such accommodations should be submitted via email to [email protected] or by calling the Consumer and governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432 (TTY). Such requests should include a detailed description of the accommodation needed. In addition, please allow at least five days advance notice for accommodation requests; last minute requests will be accepted but may not be possible to accommodate.

Members of the public may submit comments to the NANC in the FCC's Electronic Comment Filing System, ECFS, at www.fcc.gov/ecfs. Comments to the NANC should be filed in CC Docket No. 92-237.

More information about the NANC is available at https://www.fcc.gov/about-fcc/advisory-committees/general/north-american-numbering-council. You may also contact Marilyn Jones, DFO of the NANC, at [email protected], or (202) 418-2357, Michelle Sclater, Alternate DFO, at [email protected], or (202) 418-0388.

This is a summary of the Commission's document in CC Docket No. 92-237, DA 18-815 released August 6, 2018. The complete text in this document is available for public inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street SW, Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. The document may also be purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street SW, Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, telephone (800) 378-3160 or (202) 863-2893, facsimile (202) 863-2898, or via the internet at http://www.bcpiweb.com. It is available on the Commission's website at http://www.fcc.gov.

* The Agenda may be modified at the discretion of the NANC Chairman with the approval of the Designated Federal Officer (DFO).

On June 15, 1984, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) delegated to the Board authority under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) to approve of and assign OMB control numbers to collection of information requests and requirements conducted or sponsored by the Board. Board-approved collections of information are incorporated into the official OMB inventory of currently approved collections of information. Copies of the Paperwork Reduction Act Submission, supporting statements and approved collection of information instrument(s) are placed into OMB's public docket files. The Federal Reserve may not conduct or sponsor, and the respondent is not required to respond to, an information collection that has been extended, revised, or implemented on or after October 1, 1995, unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

Report title: Reporting Requirements Associated with Regulation QQ.

Agency form number: Reg QQ.

OMB control number: 7100-0346.

Frequency: Annually.

Respondents: Bank holding companies 1 with assets of $50 billion or more and nonbank financial firms designated by the Financial Stability Oversight Council for supervision by the Board.

Estimated number of respondents: Reduced Reporters: 72; Tailored Domestic Reporters: 11; Tailored Foreign Reporters: 6; Full Domestic Reporters: 3; Full Foreign Reporters: 6; Complex, Domestic Filers: 9; Complex, Foreign Filers: 4.

Estimated average hours per response: Reduced Reporters: 60 hours; Tailored Domestic Reporters: 9,000 hours; Tailored Foreign Reporters: 1,130 hours; Full Domestic Reporters: 26,000 hours; Full Foreign Reporters: 2,000 hours; Complex, Domestic Filers: 79,522 hours;2 Complex, Foreign Filers: 55,500 hours.

Estimated annual burden hours: Reduced Reporters: 4,320 hours; Tailored Domestic Reporters: 99,000 hours; Tailored Foreign Reporters: 6,780 hours; Full Domestic Reporters: 78,000 hours; Full Foreign Reporters: 12,000 hours; Complex, Domestic Filers: 715,697 hours; Complex Foreign Filers: 222,000 hours. Total estimated annual burden: 1,137,797.

General description of report: Regulation QQ (12 CFR part 243) requires each bank holding company (BHC) with assets of $50 billion or more and nonbank financial firms designated by the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) for supervision by the Board (collectively, covered companies) to report annually to the Board and the FDIC the plan of such company for rapid and orderly resolution under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code in the event of the company's material financial distress or failure. The plans submitted pursuant to Regulation QQ, and identified in this information collection, are reviewed jointly by the Board and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) (collectively, the Agencies). On May 24, 2018, the Economic Growth, Regulatory Reform, and Consumer Protection Act (EGRRCPA) 3 amended provisions in the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act) as well as other statutes administered by the Board. The amendments made by EGRRCPA provide for additional tailoring of various provisions of Federal banking laws, including an increase in the $50 billion asset threshold 4 in section 165 of the Dodd-Frank Act, which provides the statutory basis for Regulation QQ. On September 28, 2017, the Board and the FDIC announced the postponement of the next plan submission of the largest and most complex, domestic BHCs 5 from July 1, 2018, to July 1, 2019, to permit the agencies to provide meaningful feedback on the July 2017 plans and provide the BHCs with sufficient time to incorporate the feedback into their next plans. If these firms were filing each year covered by this notice, instead of only twice, the total estimated annual burden for the reporting of this information collection would be 1,439,100 hours instead of the aforementioned 1,137,797.

The Board is exploring ways to improve the resolution planning process. Such improvements could include, for example, extending the cycle for plan submissions; focusing certain filings on key topics of interest and material changes; or reducing the submission requirements for firms with small, simple, and domestically focused activities. The Board will solicit comments on the effects that any such changes would have on paperwork burden if and when the changes are proposed.

Legal authorization and confidentiality: This information collection is mandatory pursuant to section 165(d)(8) of the Dodd-Frank Act (Pub. L. 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376, 1426-1427), 12 U.S.C. 5365(d)(8), which requires the Board and the FDIC to jointly issue rules implementing the provisions of section 165(d) of the Dodd-Frank Act. The Board's Legal Division has determined that under section 112(d)(5)(A) of the Dodd-Frank Act, the Board and the FDIC “shall maintain the confidentiality of any data, information, and reports submitted under” Title I (which includes section 165(d), the authority this regulation is promulgated under) of the Dodd-Frank Act.

The Board and the FDIC will assess the confidentiality of resolution plans and related material in accordance with FOIA and the Board's and the FDIC's implementing regulations (12 CFR part 261 (Board); 12 CFR part 309 (FDIC)). The Board and the FDIC expect that large portions of the submissions will contain or consist of “trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person and privileged or confidential” and information that is “contained in or related to examination, operating, or condition reports prepared by, on behalf of, or for the use of an agency responsible for the regulation or supervision of financial institutions.” This information is subject to withholding under exemptions 4 and 8 of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4) and 552(b)(8).6 The Board and the FDIC also recognize, however, that the regulation calls for the submission of details regarding covered companies that are publicly available or otherwise are not sensitive and should be made public. In order to address this, the regulation requires resolution plans to be divided into two portions: A public section and a confidential section.

In addition to any responses to guidance from the Agencies, the public section of the resolution plan should consist of an executive summary of the resolution plan that describes the business of the covered company and includes, to the extent material to an understanding of the covered company: (i) The names of material entities; (ii) a description of core business lines; (iii) consolidated or segment financial information regarding assets, liabilities, capital and major funding sources; (iv) a description of derivative activities and hedging activities; (v) a list of memberships in material payment, clearing, and settlement systems; (vi) a description of foreign operations; (vii) the identities of material supervisory authorities; (viii) the identities of the principal officers; (ix) a description of the corporate governance structure and processes related to resolution planning; (x) a description of material management information systems; and (xi) a description, at a high level, of the covered company's resolution strategy, covering such items as the range of potential purchasers of the covered company, its material entities and core business lines.

While the information in the public section of a resolution plan should be sufficiently detailed to allow the public to understand the business of the covered company, such information can be high level in nature and based on publicly available information. The public section will be made available to the public exactly as submitted by the covered companies as soon as possible following receipt by the agencies. A covered company should submit a properly substantiated request for confidential treatment of any details in the confidential section that it believes are subject to withholding under exemption 4 of the FOIA. In addition, the Board and the FDIC will make formal exemption and segregability determinations if and when a plan is requested under the FOIA.

Current actions: On January 22, 2018 the Board published a notice in the Federal Register (83 FR 2983) requesting public comment for 60 days on the extension, with revision, of the Reporting Requirements Associated with Resolution Plans (Regulation QQ). The revision to the clearance is burden increase due to a reassessment of the burden hours associated with responding to the informational requirements of Regulation QQ and to guidance, feedback, and additional requests for information by the agencies as part of the iterative resolution planning process. The increase in burden is mitigated by the postponement of the July 2018 submission date for the resolution plans of the complex domestic filers, which account for the largest percentage of overall burden hours. The comment period for this notice expired on March 23, 2018. The Board received one comment on the proposal. The commenter recommended a number of potential changes to Regulation QQ intended to enhance the quality of the information collected pursuant to the regulation and reduce the burden of the information collection requirements.7

The Board is not adopting any of the recommended changes at this time. Either a revision to the Board's Regulation QQ or joint action with the FDIC would be necessary to implement each of the recommended changes. Most of the recommendations would require changes to the Board's Regulation QQ, which could only be accomplished pursuant to a rulemaking. In addition, the Board could not unilaterally take the actions requested by these comments, even those that would not require a rulemaking, as they fall under the purview of a rule that the Board proposed jointly with the FDIC and a process that is jointly administered by the two agencies.8 However, the Board will consider the recommended changes in due course as it determines, in consultation with the FDIC, whether to conduct a joint rulemaking. The revisions will be implemented as proposed.

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (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. In addition, the PRA also requires Federal agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each new proposed collection, each proposed extension of existing collection of information, and each reinstatement of previously approved information collection before submitting the collection to the OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, we are publishing this notice of a proposed data collection as described below.

The OMB is particularly interested in comments that will help:

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 submissions of responses.

5. Assess information collection costs.

List of Ingredients Added to Tobacco in the Manufacture of Cigarette Products—Extension (OMB# 0920-0210 Exp.Date 12/31/2018)—National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (NCCDPHP), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Cigarette smoking is the leading preventable cause of premature death and disability in our Nation. Each year more than 480,000 deaths occur as the result of cigarette smoking-related diseases.

The CDC's Office on Smoking and Health (OSH) has the primary responsibility for the HHS smoking and health program. Since 1986, as required by the Comprehensive Smoking Education Act (CSEA) of 1984, which amended the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act, 15 U.S.C. 1335a, CDC has collected information about the ingredients used in cigarette products. HHS has delegated responsibility for implementing the required information collection to CDC's OSH. Respondents are commercial cigarette manufacturers, packagers, or importers (or their representatives), who are required by the CSEA to submit ingredient reports to HHS on an annual basis.

Respondents are not required to submit specific forms; however, they are required to submit a list of all ingredients used in their products. CDC requires the ingredient report to be submitted by chemical name and Chemical Abstract Service (CAS) Registration Number, consistent with accepted reporting practices for other companies currently required to report ingredients added to other consumer products. The information collected is subject to strict confidentiality provisions.

Ingredient reports are due annually on March 31. Information is submitted to CDC by mailing or faxing a written report on the respondent's letterhead. All faxed lists should be followed up with a mailed original. Data may also be submitted to CDC by CD, three-inch floppy disk, or thumb drive. Electronic mail submissions are not accepted. Mail Annual Ingredient Submissions to Attention: FCLAA Program Manager, Office on Smoking and Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Highway, NE, MS S107-7, Atlanta, GA 30341-3717

Upon receipt and verification of the annual ingredient report, CDC issues a Certificate of Compliance to the respondent. As deemed appropriate by the Secretary of HHS, HHS is authorized to use the information to report to Congress the health effects of ingredients, research activities related to the health effects of ingredients, and other information that the Secretary determines to be of public interest. There are no costs to respondents other than their time. The total estimated annualized burden hours are 358. OMB approval is requested for three years.