Federal Register Vol. 83, No.97,

The purpose of the meeting is to:

(1) Introduce RAC members;

(2) Elect Chairperson; and

(3) Discuss the monitoring of previous projects.

The meeting is open to the public. The agenda will include time for people to make oral statements of three minutes or less. Individuals wishing to make an oral statement should request in writing by June 15, 2018, to be scheduled on the agenda. Anyone who would like to bring related matters to the attention of the committee may file written statements with the committee staff before or after the meeting. Written comments and requests for time to make oral comments must be sent to Lisa Canaday, Nez Perce-Clearwater National Forests, Grangeville Office, 104 Airport Road, Grangeville, Idaho 83530; or by email to [email protected], or via facsimile to 208-983-4098.

Meeting Accommodations: If you are a person requiring reasonable accommodation, please make requests in advance for sign language interpreting, assistive listening devices, or other reasonable accommodation. For access to the facility or proceedings, please contact the person listed in the section titled FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. All reasonable accommodation requests are managed on a case by case basis.

List of Petitions Received by EDA for Certification of Eligibility To Apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance [05/07/2018 through 05/13/2018] Firm name Firm address Date

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 March 16, 2018, Commerce published the notice of initiation of the CCRs requested by DAK Americas, LLC; Nan Ya Plastics Corporation, America; Auriga Polymers; and Palmetto Synthetics LLC (i.e., the domestic producers) pursuant to section 751(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act) and 19 CFR 351.216(b). The domestic producers requested the revocation of the orders with respect to any low-melt PSF that may be covered by the Orders 1 to avoid any potential overlap in coverage between the Orders and the AD orders that may result from the pending less-than-fair-value investigations of low-melt polyester staple fiber from Korea and Taiwan.2

On April 19, 2018, Commerce published the preliminary results of these CCRs, in which it found that producers accounting for substantially all of the production of the domestic like product to which the Orders pertain lack interest in the relief afforded by the Orders with respect to certain low-melt PSF.3 Commerce invited interested parties to submit comments on the preliminary results. We received no comments.

Because no party submitted comments opposing Commerce's preliminary results, and the record contains no other information or evidence that calls into question the preliminary results, Commerce determines, pursuant to section 751(d)(1) of the Act, section 782(h) of the Act, and 19 CFR 351.222(g), that there are changed circumstances that warrant revocation of the Orders, in part. Specifically, because the producers accounting for substantially all of the production of the domestic like product to which the Orders pertain lack interest in the relief provided by the Orders with respect to the following type of PSF, we are revoking the Orders, in part, by replacing the following language currently in the scope of the Orders: “{i}n addition, low-melt PSF is excluded from these orders. Low-melt PSF is defined as a bi-component fiber with an outer sheath that melts at a significantly lower temperature than its inner core,” with the following language: “{i}n addition, low-melt PSF is excluded from these orders. Low-melt PSF is defined as a bi-component polyester fiber having a polyester fiber component that melts at a lower temperature than the other polyester fiber component.” The scope description below includes this replacement language.

The product covered by the Orders is certain polyester staple fiber (PSF). PSF is defined as synthetic staple fibers, not carded, combed or otherwise processed for spinning, of polyesters measuring 3.3 decitex (3 denier, inclusive) or more in diameter. This merchandise is cut to lengths varying from one inch (25 mm) to five inches (127 mm). The merchandise subject to these Orders may be coated, usually with a silicon or other finish, or not coated. PSF is generally used as stuffing in sleeping bags, mattresses, ski jackets, comforters, cushions, pillows, and furniture. Merchandise of less than 3.3 decitex (less than 3 denier) currently classifiable under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) at subheading 5503.20.00.25 is specifically excluded from these orders. Also specifically excluded from these Orders are polyester staple fibers of 10 to 18 denier that are cut to lengths of 6 to 8 inches (fibers used in the manufacture of carpeting). In addition, low-melt PSF is excluded from these Orders. Low-melt PSF is defined as a bi-component polyester fiber having a polyester fiber component that melts at a lower temperature than the other polyester fiber component.

The merchandise subject to these Orders is currently classifiable in the HTSUS at subheadings 5503.20.00.45 and 5503.20.00.65.4 Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the merchandise under the Orders is dispositive.

Because we determine that there are changed circumstances that warrant the revocation of the Orders, in part, we will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to liquidate without regard to antidumping duties, and to refund any estimated antidumping duties, on all unliquidated entries of the merchandise covered by this partial revocation that are not covered by the final results of an administrative review or automatic liquidation.5

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

We are issuing and publishing these final results and revocation, in part, and notice in accordance with sections 751(b) and 777(i) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.216, 19 CFR 351.221(c)(3), and 19 CFR 351.222.

The merchandise subject to the order is certain activated carbon. The products are currently classifiable under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheading 3802.10.00.1 Although the HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of the order remains dispositive.

This administrative review is being conducted in accordance with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). Commerce published the notice of initiation of this administrative review on June 7, 2017.2 On November 6, 2017, Commerce extended the preliminary results deadline until April 30, 2018.3 On January 23, 2018, Commerce exercised its discretion to toll all deadlines affected by the closure of the Federal Government from January 20 through 22, 2018.4 The revised deadline for the preliminary results of this review is May 3, 2018.

Based on our analysis of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) information, and the no shipment certifications submitted by Calgon Carbon (Tianjin) Co., Ltd., Datong Municipal Yunguang Activated Carbon Co., Ltd., Jilin Bright Future Chemicals Co., Ltd., Shanxi Dapu International Trade Co., Ltd., Shanxi Industry Technology Trading Co., Ltd., and Tianjin Channel Filters Co., Ltd., Commerce preliminarily determines that these companies had no shipments of subject merchandise during the POR. For additional information regarding this determination, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.

Consistent with our practice in non-market economy (NME) cases, we are not rescinding this review, in part, but intend to complete the review with respect to these six companies, for which it has preliminarily found no shipments, and issue appropriate instructions to CBP based on the final results of the review.5

Commerce is conducting this review in accordance with section 751(a)(1)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). We calculated constructed export prices and export prices in accordance with section 772 of the Act. Because China is an NME within the meaning of section 771(18) of the Act, NV has been calculated in accordance with section 773(c) of the Act.

For a full description of the methodology underlying our conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum. A list of the topics included in the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is included as an appendix to this notice. The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is made available to the public via Enforcement and Compliance's Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). ACCESS is available to registered users at https://access.trade.gov, and it is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, Room B8024 of the main Department of Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum is available at http://enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed and electronic versions of the Preliminary Decision Memorandum are identical in content.

Commerce preliminarily finds that 16 companies for which a review was requested, and not rescinded, did not establish eligibility for a separate rate because they failed to provide either a separate rate application or separate rate certification. As such, we preliminarily determine that these 16 companies are part of the China-wide entity.6

For those companies that have established their eligibility for a separate rate,7 Commerce preliminarily determines that the following weighted-average dumping margins exist for the POR:

The following listed species are covered in this notice:

Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha): Threatened Upper Willamette River (UWR).

Coho salmon (O. kisutch): Threatened Oregon Coast (OC).

Steelhead (O. mykiss): Threatened Lower Columbia River (LCR); threatened UWR.

Scientific research permits are issued in accordance with section 10(a)(1)(A) of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and regulations governing listed fish and wildlife permits (50 CFR parts 222-226). NMFS issues permits based on findings that such permits: (1) Are applied for in good faith; (2) if granted and exercised, would not operate to the disadvantage of the listed species that are the subject of the permit; and (3) are consistent with the purposes and policy of section 2 of the ESA. The authority to take listed species is subject to conditions set forth in the permits.

Anyone requesting a hearing on an application listed in this notice should set out the specific reasons why a hearing on that application would be appropriate (see ADDRESSES). Such hearings are held at the discretion of the Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NMFS.

The United States Geological Survey (USGS) is seeking to modify a permit that currently authorizes them to take juvenile LCR steelhead in the Wind River subbasin (Washington). The permit would expire on December 31, 2021. The purpose of the study is to provide information on growth, survival, habitat use, and life histories of LCR steelhead. This information would improve understanding of habitat associations and life history strategies for LCR steelhead in the Wind River and that, in turn, would help state, tribal, and Federal efforts to restore LCR steelhead. This information would benefit LCR steelhead by improving our understanding of habitat associations and life history strategies in the Wind River. This new information would, in turn, help state, tribal, and Federal efforts to restore LCR steelhead.

The USGS proposes to capture juvenile LCR steelhead using backpack electrofishing equipment, hold the fish in aerated buckets, anesthetize them with MS-222, measure length and weight, tag age-0 and age-1 fish with passive integrated transponders (PIT-tags), and release all fish at the site of collection after they recover from anesthesia. The permit modification would not change the methods or scope of the ongoing research except to increase the take of juvenile LCR steelhead that are captured, handled, and then released without PIT-tagging from 2,500 to 4,500 fish annually. The USGS also requests to increase the unintentional mortalities authorized for fish that are released without PIT-tagging, from 75 to 135 fish annually. The USGS requests this increase in take because they captured unusually high numbers of age-0 LCR steelhead in 2017. The researchers do not propose to kill any fish but a small number may die as an unintended result of research activities.

Researchers at the Oregon State University are requesting a permit that would allow them to take juvenile and adult UWR Chinook salmon and UWR steelhead. The research permit would expire on December 31, 2022. The researchers propose to work in the upper Willamette River (Oregon) and its tributaries including the Middle Fork Willamette, Coast Fork Willamette, Calapooia, Long Tom, Marys, and Luckiamute Rivers. The purpose of their research is to describe how water temperature and the presence of coldwater refugia influence the behavior, growth, diet, body condition, seasonal movements, and habitat associations of coastal cutthroat trout. The research would provide information to help fisheries managers prioritize conservation and management efforts in the context of climate change. The research would benefit UWR Chinook salmon and UWR steelhead by providing information on how a salmonids with similar ecological requirements—coastal cutthroat trout—adapt to increasing water temperatures. This new information would help fisheries managers prioritize conservation and management efforts in the context of climate change.

The researchers propose to capture fish using boat and backpack electrofishing, stick and beach seining, and angling. The researchers would identify fish immediately after capture and hold them in cool, aerated buckets. The researchers propose to hold ESA-listed fish only long enough to avoid recapturing them. They would release the fish to the site of capture, with no further handling or measurements, as soon as they complete sampling at a site. The researchers propose the following measures to minimize take of adult UWR Chinook and UWR steelhead for each sampling date: (1) Request current information from the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife on adult run timing and distribution, (2) conduct visual reconnaissance surveys before sampling each site, and (3) avoid sampling in areas where adult salmonids are likely to hold, such as pools, glides, and tributary junctions. If researchers observe adult salmon or steelhead, the researchers would immediately stop sampling and leave the site. The researchers would not seine a single site more than five times or electrofish a single site more than three times across the summer sampling season. The researchers do not propose to kill any fish but a small number of juveniles may die as an unintended result of research activities.

The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) is requesting a permit that would allow them to take OC coho in the Tillamook Bay (Oregon). The research permit would expire on December 31, 2022. ODFW proposes to conduct a radio telemetry study of OC fall-run Chinook salmon, which are not ESA-listed. Researchers may unintentionally take OC coho salmon while collecting Chinook salmon. The goal of the research study is to improve information on the distribution and abundance of Chinook spawners in the Tillamook basin. The OC Chinook salmon ESU is subject to management under the Pacific Salmon Treaty, which calls for use of abundance-based management. Information on the distribution of spawning OC Chinook in the Tillamook basin is essential for developing an efficient and cost effective program to monitor Chinook spawner abundance. In addition, this research would benefit ESA-listed salmonids by demonstrating and improving methods for capturing and tagging fish in a large bay setting, and tracking spawner movement into multiple geographic strata.

The ODFW proposes to capture fish from August through December in the lower portion of Tillamook Bay, below the mouths of the five primary Chinook spawning streams that flow into the bay. ODFW proposes to capture juvenile and adult OC coho using angling, seines, and tangle nets. The nets would have a nylon mesh size of 4.5 inches and range from 75 to 150 feet in length and 8 to 20 feet in depth, dependent upon water levels and sampling conditions. To minimize stress and injury of fish captured using tangle nets, the researchers propose to: (1) Observe nets constantly during deployment, (2) remove fish immediately upon detection of capture (i.e., typically less than two minutes after entanglement), and (3) relocate tangle nets if a coho is captured or if any fish is recaptured on the same day. ODFW proposes to identify fish upon capture, and immediately release any coho salmon without further handling. The researchers do not propose to kill any fish but a small number may die as an unintended result of the activities.

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

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

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

The following products and services are proposed for addition to the Procurement List for production by the nonprofit agencies listed:

The following products and services are proposed for deletion from the Procurement List:

The files for the ILS Program are organized and searchable only by business and parcel information. While the ILS Program also contains certain kinds of personally identifiable information, it does not collect individual identifiers on which searches are conducted and there is no accompanying file or process to cross-reference this kind of information to an individual. The ILS Program, therefore, does not require a System of Records Notice and the rescindment of such of notice would likely have little effect on the privacy of individuals whose information was maintained in the system of records. Rescindment of this System of Records Notice will also promote the overall streamlining and management of the CFPB Privacy Act record systems.

The Bureau never implemented the Judicial and Administrative Filings Collection and no information or documents were ever collected pursuant to this Systems of Records Notice. Accordingly, the Bureau reasonably believes that the rescindment of this System of Records Notice will have little effect on individuals' privacy. Rescindment of this System of Records Notice will also promote the overall streamlining and management of Privacy Act record systems for the Bureau.

This committee's charter is being renewed in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) of 1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended) and 41 CFR 102-3.50(d). The Board's charter and contact information for the Board's Designated Federal Officer (DFO) can be obtained at http://www.facadatabase.gov/.

The Board provides the Secretary of Defense independent advice and recommendations on matters relating to the Army's scientific, technical, manufacturing, acquisition, logistics, and business management functions, as well as other Department of the Army related matters as determined by the Secretary of the Army. The Board shall be composed of no more than 20 members who are eminent authorities in one or more of the following disciplines: Science, technology, manufacturing, acquisition, logistics, and business management functions, as well as other matters of special interest to the Department of the Army. Members who are not full-time or permanent part-time Federal officers or employees will be appointed as experts or consultants pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 3109 to serve as special government employee members. Members who are full-time or permanent part-time Federal officers or employees will be appointed pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.130(a) to serve as regular government employee members. All members are appointed to provide advice on behalf of the Government on the basis of their best judgment without representing any particular point of view and in a manner that is free from conflict of interest. Except for reimbursement of official Board-related travel and per diem, members serve without compensation. The DoD, as necessary and consistent with the Board's mission and DoD policies and procedures, may establish subcommittees, task forces, or working groups to support the Board, and all subcommittees must operate under the provisions of FACA and the Government in the Sunshine Act. Subcommittees will not work independently of the Board and must report all their recommendations and advice solely to the Board for full deliberation and discussion. Subcommittees, task forces, or working groups have no authority to make decisions and recommendations, verbally or in writing, on behalf of the Board. No subcommittee or any of its members can update or report, verbally or in writing, directly to the DoD or any Federal officers or employees. The Board's DFO, pursuant to DoD policy, must be a full-time or permanent part-time DoD employee, and must be in attendance for the duration of each and every Board/subcommittee meeting. The public or interested organizations may submit written statements to the Board membership about the Board's mission and functions. Written statements may be submitted at any time or in response to the stated agenda of planned meeting of the Board. All written statements shall be submitted to the DFO for the Board, and this individual will ensure that the written statements are provided to the membership for their consideration.

: Due to circumstances beyond the control of the Department of Defense (DoD) and the Designated Federal Officer, the Defense Science Board was unable to provide public notification required by 41 CFR 102-3.150(a) concerning the meeting on May 16 thru May 17, 2018, of the Defense Science Board. Accordingly, the Advisory Committee Management Officer for the Department of Defense, pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.150(b), waives the 15-calendar day notification requirement. 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.

Purpose of the Meeting: The mission of the DSB is to provide independent advice and recommendations on matters relating to the DoD's scientific and technical enterprise. The objective of the meeting is to obtain, review, and evaluate classified information related to the DSB's mission. DSB membership will meet with DoD Leadership to discuss current and future national security challenges within the DoD. This meeting will focus on matters related to Homeland Defense, Survivable Logistics, DoD Modernization Strategy, and DoD Technology Strategy.

Agenda: The DSB Spring Quarterly meeting will begin on May 16, 2018 at 8:00 a.m. with opening remarks by Edward Gliot, Designated Federal Officer, and DSB Chairman, Dr. Craig Fields. The first presentation will be from the DSB sponsor, Dr. Michael Griffin, Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering who will provide a classified briefing on the views and priorities of the current administration on DoD Research and Engineering goals and strategy. Following Dr. Griffin, Dr. Will Roper, Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition will provide a classified briefing on Air Force Modernization. Following Dr. Roper's presentation, Mr. James Geurts, Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development and Acquisition will provide a classified briefing on Navy Modernization. Following lunch, Honorable Dr. Bruce D. Jette, Assistant Secretary of the Army (Acquisition, Logistics and Technology) will provide a classified briefing on Army Modernization. The next briefing will be a presentation of findings, deliberations, and vote on the work of the Homeland Defense Task Force by Dr. Mim John and Dr. Judith Miller. The next briefing will be a presentation of findings, deliberations, and vote on the work of the Survivable Logistics Task Force by Gen Paul Kern, Ret. and Gen Duncan McNabb, Ret. The final presentations of the day will be the first two technology area working groups working on a high priority task from the USD(R&E). The Cybersecurity Group discussion will be led by Mr. Jim Gosler and the Command, Control & Communications Group discussion will be led by Mr. Al Grasso. The meeting on May 16, 2018 will adjourn at 5:15 p.m. On the second day of the meeting, May 17, 2018 the day will begin with a presentation and discussion from the Hypersonics Group led by Mr. Mark Russell and the Directed Energy Group led by Dr. Paul Kaminski. Following lunch, the following groups will engage in presentations and discussion: Space Offense & Defense Group led by Mr. Lou Von Thaer, Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning Group led by Dr. Ruth David, Missile Defense Group led by Mr. Bob Stein, Quantum Science & Computing led by Dr. John Manferdelli, Microelectronics Group led by Dr. Victoria Coleman, Nuclear Modernization Group led by Dr. Mim John. The meeting on May 17, 2018 will adjourn at 4:45 p.m.

Meeting Accessibility: In accordance with section 10(d) of the FACA and 41 CFR 102-3.155, the DoD has determined that the DSB meeting will be closed to the public. Specifically, the Under Secretary of Defense (Research and Engineering), in consultation with the DoD Office of General Counsel, has determined in writing that the meeting will be closed to the public because it will consider matters covered by 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(1). The determination is based on the consideration that it is expected that discussions throughout will involve classified matters of national security concern. Such classified material is so intertwined with the unclassified material that it cannot reasonably be segregated into separate discussions without defeating the effectiveness and meaning of the overall meetings. To permit the meeting to be open to the public would preclude discussion of such matters and would greatly diminish the ultimate utility of the DSB's findings and recommendations to the Secretary of Defense and to the Under Secretary of Defense (Research and Engineering).

Written Statements: In accordance with section 10(a)(3) of the FACA and 41 CFR 102-3.105(j) and 102-3.140, interested persons may submit a written statement for consideration by the DSB at any time regarding its mission or in response to the stated agenda of a planned meeting. Individuals submitting a written statement must submit their statement to the Defense Science Board DFO provided above at any point; however, if a written statement is not received at least three calendar days prior to the meeting, which is the subject of this notice, then it may not be provided to or considered by the DSB until a later date.

This committee's charter is being renewed in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) of 1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended) and 41 CFR 102-3.50(d). The charter and contact information for the Designated Federal Officer (DFO) can be obtained at http://www.facadatabase.gov/. The Board provides independent advice and recommendations on matters relating to the Department of the Air Force's scientific, technical, manufacturing, acquisition, logistics, and business management functions, as well as other Department of the Air Force related matters as determined by the Secretary of the Air Force. The Board shall be composed of no more than 20 members who are eminent authorities in one or more of the following disciplines: Science, technology, manufacturing, acquisition, logistics, and business management functions, as well as other matters of special interest to the Department of the Air Force. Members of the Board who are not full-time or permanent part-time Federal officers or employees will be appointed as experts or consultants pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 3109 to serve as special government employee members. Members of the Board who are full-time or permanent part-time Federal officers or employees will be appointed pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.130(a) to serve as regular government employee members. Each Board member is appointed to provide advice on the basis of their best judgment without representing any particular point of view and in a manner that is free from conflict of interest. Except for reimbursement of official Board-related travel and per diem, Board members serve without compensation. The DoD, as necessary and consistent with the Board's mission and DoD policies and procedures, may establish subcommittees, task forces, or working groups to support the Board, and all subcommittees must operate under the provisions of FACA and the Government in the Sunshine Act. Subcommittees will not work independently of the Board and must report all recommendations and advice solely to the Board for full deliberation and discussion. Subcommittees, task forces, or working groups have no authority to make decisions and recommendations, verbally or in writing, on behalf of the Board. No subcommittee or any of its members can update or report, verbally or in writing, directly to the DoD or any Federal officers or employees. The Board's DFO, pursuant to DoD policy, must be a full-time or permanent part-time DoD employee, and must be in attendance for the duration of each and every Board/subcommittee meeting. The public or interested organizations may submit written statements to the Board membership about the Board's mission and functions. Such statements may be submitted at any time or in response to the stated agenda of planned Board meetings. All written statements must be submitted to the Board's DFO who will ensure the written statements are provided to the membership for their consideration.

Full Text of Announcement I. Funding Opportunity Description

Purpose of Program: The purpose of the Pathways to STEM Apprenticeship for High School Career and Technical Education (CTE) Students (Pathways to STEM Apprenticeship grants) demonstration program is to support State efforts to expand and improve the transition of high school CTE Students 1 to postsecondary education and employment through Apprenticeships in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields, including Computer Science, that begin during high school.

Background: Through this initiative, funded under section 114(c) of the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act (Perkins Act), we will award competitive grants to States to support technical assistance, program development, and other capacity-building activities that will strengthen the connections between high school CTE programs and Competency-Based Apprenticeship opportunities in STEM fields and increase the number of high school CTE Students who enter such Apprenticeships during high school.

Combining paid on-the-job learning with related CTE instruction in the classroom, an Apprenticeship offers individuals the opportunity to earn money as they learn and prepare for jobs that pay wages that can support a family. The average income for a worker who has completed an Apprenticeship program is $60,000 a year, according to December 2017 Labor Department data.2 A 2012 study funded by the Department of Labor used a quasi-experimental research design to compare the earnings of Apprenticeship participants in 10 States with the earnings of nonparticipants, adjusting for differences in pre-enrollment earnings and demographic characteristics.3 Researchers found that, in the sixth year after enrollment, individuals who completed an Apprenticeship earned $14,404 more than their counterparts who did not participate in an Apprenticeship. Even individuals who participated in an Apprenticeship but did not complete it earned more than individuals who did not enroll in an Apprenticeship.4 Because employers or Apprenticeship program sponsors often pay the costs of the classroom instruction, as well as pay participants' wages, apprentices incur little or no debt, making an Apprenticeship an attractive career preparation alternative at a time when many college students are graduating deeply in debt. For these reasons, President Trump has challenged the Nation to expand significantly the number of Apprenticeship opportunities, including those available to America's high school students.5

Over the last two decades, the United States has made great progress in creating dual enrollment opportunities that enable students to earn college credit while they are still enrolled in high school. However, we have not been as successful in making Apprenticeships—another important postsecondary option—accessible to students during high school. While youth in Austria, Germany, Switzerland, and other nations are able to begin an Apprenticeship while still in high school, the Apprenticeship system in the United States does not have strong connections to high schools, including to high school CTE programs, and serves very few individuals under the age of 25.6 The U.S. Department of Labor has reported that the average age of Registered Apprenticeship participants nationally is approximately 28 years.7 In the Department of Labor's 10-State study, the average age for apprentices was even higher, 30.3 years for males and 34.9 years for females.8 This suggests that few young people are pursuing Apprenticeship opportunities in high school or immediately following high school graduation. Through the Pathways to STEM Apprenticeship grants, we seek to change this pattern in participating States.

Pathways to STEM Apprenticeship grants will fund State-level efforts that support local or regional approaches to establishing Apprenticeship programs for high school CTE Students or that support efforts to implement or expand coordinated Apprenticeship programming for high school CTE Students. Such efforts may include, for example, multi-State consortia that may be most advantageous in areas where States share an interest in developing Apprenticeships in the same industry sectors and where employers have a presence in those States. We anticipate that States also may identify and address legal or policy barriers to increasing the number of high school CTE Students who enroll in Apprenticeship programs, such as minimum age requirements and safety or liability regulations that limit participation of high school students.

We require that projects be carried out in partnership with at least one employer and at least one postsecondary partner, such as a State Agency for Higher Education or one or more Postsecondary Educational Institutions. Because employers identify the skills that apprentices must learn, sponsor apprentices, pay wages, and provide on-the-job training, collaboration with employers is critical in developing and sustaining Apprenticeship pathways. Involving postsecondary partners, such as aa State Agency for Higher Education or one or more Postsecondary Educational Institutions is essential because most of the related CTE instruction provided in an Apprenticeship is developed and delivered by such entities.9 They also may be helpful in making Apprenticeship programs more attractive to high school students by embedding dual credit opportunities in an Apprenticeship program so that high school students who decide against continuing in an Apprenticeship after graduation will have other postsecondary options. Moreover, in some States, the community and technical college system has taken a lead role in developing and expanding Apprenticeship opportunities as well as in providing postsecondary credit for knowledge acquired during an Apprenticeship that counts towards a degree or other credential.10

High schools can also be an important partner in expanding Apprenticeship opportunities through curriculum alignment, program articulation, and other activities designed to ensure that CTE Students are well positioned to enter and succeed within Apprenticeships. Well-aligned programs at the high school level may allow CTE Students to complete Apprenticeships at a faster pace or at a younger age than their adult peers. When an Apprenticeship is aligned to fit within, or be a natural extension of, a CTE program starting in high school, students may be better positioned to enter an Apprenticeship and persist once enrolled.

In addition, States may also wish to partner with State workforce development agencies, local workforce development boards, nonprofit and community organizations, chambers of commerce, and other industry organizations. State and local workforce development agencies may have existing relationships with employers and programming related to apprenticeships. Other organizations, including nonprofit and community organizations, may also have relationships with employers and may be able to assist in offering other supports, such as assisting CTE Students participating in Apprenticeships in purchasing work clothing or paying for transportation costs.

We further require that the Apprenticeship programs developed by grantees be Competency-Based Apprenticeships, rather than time-based, so that participants progress through the program by demonstrating mastery of the essential knowledge and skills taught in an Apprenticeship, rather than by completing a minimum number of hours. Competency-Based Apprenticeships have several advantages over time-based programs. They support accelerated program completion for some individuals, while also accommodating those individuals, which may include some persons with disabilities, who may need more time to master a skill than a time-based program may allow. Students who have developed knowledge and skills through prior educational or work experience, such as the completion of a related high school or postsecondary CTE course, could enter a competency-based program with advanced standing. Organizing an Apprenticeship program around job functions and competencies also benefits an employer because it enables apprentices to become fully proficient in at least one relevant job function, making them more productive employees more swiftly than would occur in a time-based program.11

We also include an absolute priority that requires that projects be designed to improve student achievement or educational outcomes through the creation or expansion of partnerships to give students access to Apprenticeships in STEM fields, including Computer Science. Connecting high school CTE Students with career opportunities in industries in STEM sectors, such as cybersecurity, information technology, advanced manufacturing, and health care, is a key focus of this initiative. Equipping more students with recognized postsecondary credentials in STEM is essential to promoting innovation and economic growth. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in May 2016, there were 8.8 million STEM jobs, representing 6.3 percent of U.S. employment.12 Half of all STEM jobs do not require a four-year college degree; however, many of these jobs require specialized training. STEM jobs that require less than a bachelor's degree pay higher wages than non-STEM jobs with similar educational requirements.13 For example, an analysis of 2013 entry-level job postings by Burning Glass Technologies found that the average advertised entry-level salary for jobs requiring a sub-baccalaureate credential was $47,856 for STEM jobs and $37,424 for non-STEM jobs.14 Apprenticeships that begin in high school can be used as a tool to help CTE Students learn the skills needed to prepare for these STEM jobs without incurring the full costs of traditional postsecondary education or training.

Applicants are encouraged to align and leverage various sources of funds, including State and local funds as well as other Federal funding streams, for activities that supplement or complement their proposed projects. For example, an applicant could propose to use State leadership funds available to it under the Perkins Act to improve or develop new CTE courses that will be used for the related instruction component of an Apprenticeship or for professional development for the teachers or postsecondary instructors who will provide the related CTE instruction. Similarly, at the local level, funds available under the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Title I Youth program may be used for pre-apprenticeship programs for youth who are eligible for the WIOA Title I Youth program. Applicants should note that selection criterion (a)(2) evaluates the extent to which a proposed project will integrate with or build on similar or related efforts to improve relevant outcomes (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1(c)), using existing funding streams from other programs or policies supported by community, State, and Federal resources. Additionally, selection criterion (c)(3) assesses the potential for continued support of the project after Federal funding ends, including, as appropriate, the demonstrated commitment of appropriate entities to such support.

Priorities: This notice contains one absolute priority and an invitational priority. The absolute priority is from the Secretary's Final Supplemental Priorities and Definitions for Discretionary Grant Programs, published on March 2, 2018 (83 FR 9096) (Secretary's Supplemental Priorities).

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 absolute priority.

The priority is:

Promoting STEM Education, With a Particular Focus on Computer Science.

Projects designed to improve student achievement or other educational outcomes in one or more of the following areas: Science, technology, engineering, math, or Computer Science. These projects must address the following priority area:

Creating or expanding partnerships between schools, local educational agencies, State educational agencies, businesses, not-for-profit organizations, or institutions of higher education to give students access to internships, apprenticeships, or other work-based learning experiences in STEM fields, including Computer Science.

Invitational 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 invitational priority. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(1), we do not give an application that meets this invitational priority any preference over other applications.

This priority is:

Rural Local Educational Agencies (Rural LEAs).

The Secretary is particularly interested in receiving applications that propose a State-wide or regional approach to increasing the number of high school CTE students who begin to participate in Apprenticeships in STEM fields, including Computer Science, during high school in LEAs that are eligible for assistance under the Small Rural School Achievement program or the Rural and Low-Income School program authorized under Title V, Part B of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act.

Requirements: We are establishing the following two program requirements and two application requirements for the FY 2018 grant competition and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this competition, in accordance with section 437(d)(1) of the General Education Provisions Act (GEPA), 20 U.S.C. 1232(d)(1).

The program requirements are:

Program Requirement 1—Partnership.

A grantee must carry out a Pathways to STEM Apprenticeship grant in collaboration with—

(a) At least one employer in the State that has committed to implementing Apprenticeships; and

(b) One or more postsecondary partners, such as the State Agency for Higher Education, or one or more Postsecondary Educational Institutions.

Program Requirement 2—Implementation of a Comprehensive STEM Apprenticeship Pathway Strategy for High School CTE Students.

A grantee must carry out a comprehensive Pathways to STEM Apprenticeship grant strategy that seeks to increase the number of CTE Students who participate in Competency-Based Apprenticeships while enrolled in high school.

(a) Such strategies must be designed to—

(1) Give State, regional, or local employers a leadership role in designing, expanding, and implementing the strategy; and

(2) Address barriers to participation in Competency-Based Apprenticeships for Special Populations, which may include:—

(A) Individuals with disabilities, including students with disabilities receiving services under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 504) (commonly referred to as Section 504-only students), students with disabilities identified as a Child with a Disability under section 602(3) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), and individuals with any disability defined in section 3 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990;

(B) Individuals from economically disadvantaged families, including foster children;

(C) Individuals preparing for occupations or fields of work, including careers in computer science, technology, and other current and emerging high skill occupations, for which individuals from one gender comprise less than 25 percent of the individuals employed in each such occupation or field of work;

(D) Single parents, including single pregnant women;

(E) Displaced homemakers; and

(F) Individuals with limited English proficiency.

(b) Such strategies may include—

(1) Providing technical assistance to entities such as LEAs, postsecondary educational institutions, and employers;

(2) Coordinating State-level or multi-State-level efforts to expand Competency-Based Apprenticeship opportunities for high school CTE Students, such as through coordination with other entities, such as a State Apprenticeship agency, or with industry and labor organizations and businesses to develop Competency-Based Apprenticeship programming in new sectors or industries;

(3) Developing or supporting the development of curricula that can be used for the related CTE instruction component of Competency-Based Apprenticeship programs;

(4) Providing support for professional development for teachers, postsecondary instructors, employers, training providers, and others to promote the development and implementation of new Competency-Based Apprenticeship opportunities;

(5) Supporting the development and implementation of articulation agreements and other processes to award postsecondary credit for the completion of CTE courses and Competency-Based Apprenticeship programs, such as dual credit and transcripted credit;

(6) Providing information about Competency-Based Apprenticeship opportunities to the public, including to students and their families;

(7) Providing subgrants to LEAs and postsecondary educational institutions to assist in creating or expanding opportunities for CTE Students to participate in Competency-Based Apprenticeships beginning in high school; and

(8) Other activities that are designed to increase opportunities for high school CTE Students to participate in Competency-Based Apprenticeships beginning in high school.

The application requirements are:

Application Requirement 1—Letter of Commitment from Postsecondary Partner.

An applicant must identify its postsecondary partner or partners, such as a State Agency for Higher Education, or a Postsecondary Educational Institution or Institutions, in its application and include a letter of commitment from each postsecondary partner.

Application Requirement 2—Employer Partner Letter of Commitment.

An applicant must include a letter of commitment from each employer partner.

Definitions:

The definitions of Career and Technical Education, Institution of Higher Education, and Postsecondary Educational Institution and Special Populations are from section 3 of the Perkins Act (20 U.S.C. 2301 et seq.). The definition of Computer Science is from the Secretary's Supplemental Priorities. The definition of Apprenticeship is from Executive Order 13801. We are establishing the definitions for Apprenticeship, Career and Technical Education Student, Competency-Based Apprenticeship, and State Agency for Higher Education for the FY 2018 grant competition and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this competition, in accordance with section 437(d)(1) of GEPA, 20 U.S.C. 1232(d)(1).

Apprenticeship means an arrangement that includes a paid-work component and an educational or instructional component, wherein an individual obtains workplace-relevant knowledge and skills.

Career and Technical Education means organized educational activities that—

(a) Offer a sequence of courses that—

(1) Provides individuals with coherent and rigorous content aligned with challenging academic standards and relevant technical knowledge and skills needed to prepare for further education and careers in current or emerging professions;

(2) Provides technical skill proficiency, an industry-recognized credential, a certificate, or an associate degree; and

(3) May include prerequisite courses (other than a remedial course) that meet the requirements of this definition; and

(b) Include competency-based applied learning that contributes to the academic knowledge, higher-order reasoning and problem-solving skills, work attitudes, general employability skills, technical skills, and occupation-specific skills, and knowledge of all aspects of an industry, including entrepreneurship, of an individual.

Career and Technical Education (CTE) Student means a student who is enrolled or has been enrolled in at least one CTE course.

Competency-Based Apprenticeship means an Apprenticeship program that enables apprentices to progress through and complete the program by demonstrating mastery of the knowledge and skills taught in the program, rather than complete a minimum number of work or instructional hours.

Computer Science means the study of computers and algorithmic processes and includes the study of computing principles and theories, computational thinking, computer hardware, software design, coding, analytics, and computer applications.

Computer Science often includes computer programming or coding as a tool to create software, including applications, games, websites, and tools to manage or manipulate data; or development and management of computer hardware and the other electronics related to sharing, securing, and using digital information.

In addition to coding, the expanding field of Computer Science emphasizes computational thinking and interdisciplinary problem-solving to equip students with the skills and abilities necessary to apply computation in our digital world.

Computer Science does not include using a computer for everyday activities, such as browsing the internet; use of tools like word processing, spreadsheets, or presentation software; or using computers in the study and exploration of unrelated subjects.

Institution of Higher Education (IHE) means—

(a) An educational institution in any State that—

(1) Admits as regular students only persons having a certificate of graduation from a school providing secondary education, or the recognized equivalent of such a certificate;

(2) Is legally authorized within such State to provide a program of education beyond secondary education;

(3) Provides an educational program for which the institution awards a bachelor's degree or provides not less than a 2-year program that is acceptable for full credit toward such a degree, or awards a degree that is acceptable for admission to a graduate or professional degree program, subject to review and approval by the Secretary;

(4) Is a public or other nonprofit institution; and

(5) Is accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting agency or association or, if not so accredited, is an institution that has been granted pre-accreditation status by such an agency or association that has been recognized by the Secretary of Education for the granting of pre-accreditation status, and the Secretary of Education has determined that there is satisfactory assurance that the institution will meet the accreditation standards of such an agency or association within a reasonable time.

(b) The term also includes—(1) Any school that provides not less than a 1-year program of training to prepare students for gainful employment in a recognized occupation and that meets the provisions of paragraphs (1), (2), (4), and (5) of subsection (a) of this definition; and

(2) A public or nonprofit private educational institution in any State that, in lieu of the requirement in subsection (a)(1) of this definition, admits as regular students individuals—

(A) Who are beyond the age of compulsory school attendance in the State in which the institution is located; or

(B) Who will be dually or concurrently enrolled in the institution and a secondary school.

Postsecondary Educational Institution means—

(a) An IHE that provides not less than a 2-year program of instruction that is acceptable for credit toward a bachelor's degree;

(b) A tribally controlled college or university; or

(c) A nonprofit educational institution offering certificate or Apprenticeship programs at the postsecondary level.

Special Populations means—

(a) Individuals with disabilities;

(b) Individuals from economically disadvantaged families, including foster children;

(c) Individuals preparing for non-traditional fields;

(d) Single parents, including single pregnant women;

(e) Displaced homemakers; and

(f) Individuals with limited English proficiency.

State Agency for Higher Education means any State agency, board, commission, or other entity that coordinates or governs public institutions of higher education in a State.

Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking: Under the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553), the Department generally offers interested parties the opportunity to comment on proposed definitions and requirements. Section 437(d)(1) of GEPA, however, allows the Secretary to exempt from rulemaking requirements, regulations governing the first grant competition under a new or substantially revised program authority. This is the first grant competition to address high school CTE Apprenticeships under section 114(c)(1) of the Perkins Act, and therefore qualifies for this exemption. In order to ensure timely grant awards, the Secretary has decided to forgo public comment on the definitions and requirements under section 437(d)(1) of GEPA. The definitions and requirements will apply to the FY 2018 grant competition and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applications from this competition.

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 2324.

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. (d) Secretary's Supplemental Priorities.

Type of Award: Discretionary grants.

Estimated Available Funds: $3,000,000.

Estimated Range of Awards: $500,000-$750,000 for one 36-month project period.

Estimated Average Size of Awards: $600,000.

Estimated Number of Awards: 5.

Project Period: Up to 36 months. Applicants under this competition are required to provide detailed budget information for each year of the proposed project and for the total grant.

1. Eligible Applicants: The following entities are eligible to apply under this competition:

(a) A State board designated or created consistent with State law as the sole State agency responsible for the administration of CTE in the State or for the supervision of the administration of CTE in the State.

(b) A consortium of entities, individually eligible under (a) above.

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

b. Supplement-not-Supplant: This program is subject to supplement-not-supplant funding requirements. In accordance with section 311(a) of the Perkins Act, 20 U.S.C. 2391(a), funds under this program may not be used to supplant non-Federal funds used to carry out CTE activities. Further, the prohibition against supplanting also means that grantees will be required to use their negotiated restricted indirect cost rates under this program. (34 CFR 75.563)

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: LEAs, postsecondary educational institutions, or State educational agencies. The grantee may also award subgrants to entities it has identified in an approved application.

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. Submission of Proprietary Information: Given the types of projects that may be proposed in applications for the Pathways to STEM Apprenticeship grants competition, your application may include business information that you consider proprietary. In 34 CFR 5.11 we define “business information” and describe the process we use in determining whether any of that information is proprietary and, thus, protected from disclosure under Exemption 4 of the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552, as amended). Because we may make successful applications available to the public, you may wish to request confidentiality of business information. Consistent with Executive Order 12600, please designate in your application any information that you believe is exempt from disclosure under Exemption 4. In the appropriate Appendix section of your application, under “Other Attachments Form,” please list the page number or numbers on which we can find this information. For additional information please see 34 CFR 5.11(c).

3. Intergovernmental Review: This competition is subject to Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. Information about Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs under Executive Order 12372 is in the application package for this program.

4. Funding Restrictions: Grant funds may not be used for wages or salaries of students in Apprenticeships. We reference additional regulations outlining funding restrictions in the Applicable Regulations section of this notice.

5. Recommended Page Limit: The application narrative 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 35 pages and (2) use the following standards:

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

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

• Use a font that is either 12 point or larger or no smaller than 10 pitch (characters per inch).

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

The recommended page limit does not apply to the cover sheet; the budget section, including the narrative budget justification; the assurances and certifications; or the one-page abstract, the resumes, the bibliography, or the letters of support. However, the recommended page limit does apply to all of the application narrative.

6. Notice of Intent to Apply: The Department will be able to review grant applications more efficiently if we know the approximate number of applicants that intend to apply. Therefore, we strongly encourage each potential applicant to notify us of their intent to submit an application. To do so, please email the program contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT with the subject line “Intent to Apply,” and include the applicant's name and a contact person's name and email address. Applicants that do not submit a notice of intent to apply may still apply for funding; applicants that do submit a notice of intent to apply are not bound to apply or bound by the information provided.

1. Selection Criteria: The selection criteria for this program are from 34 CFR 75.210. The maximum score for all of the selection criteria is 100 points. The maximum score for each criterion is indicated in parentheses. In addressing the criteria, applicants are encouraged to make explicit connections to the priorities and requirements listed elsewhere in this notice. The selection criteria for this competition are as follows:

(a) Quality of the project design. (45 points)

The Secretary considers the quality of the project design. In determining the quality of the project design for the proposed project, the Secretary considers—

(1) The likelihood that the proposed project will result in system change or improvement. (up to 15 points)

(2) The extent to which the proposed project will integrate with or build on similar or related efforts to improve relevant outcomes (as defined in 34 CFR 77.1(c)), using existing funding streams from other programs or policies supported by community, State, and Federal resources. (up to 15 points)

(3) The extent to which the services to be provided by the proposed project involve the collaboration of appropriate partners for maximizing the effectiveness of project services. (up to 15 points)

(b) Quality of the management plan. (25 points)

The Secretary considers the quality of the management plan for the proposed project. In determining the quality of the management plan for the proposed project, the Secretary considers 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.

(c) Adequacy of resources. (30 points)

The Secretary considers the adequacy of resources for the proposed project. In determining the adequacy of resources for the proposed project, the Secretary considers—

(1) The extent to which the budget is adequate to support the proposed project. (up to 10 points)

(2) The relevance and demonstrated commitment of each partner in the proposed project to the implementation and success of the project. (up to 10 points)

(3) The potential for continued support of the project after Federal funding ends, including, as appropriate, the demonstrated commitment of appropriate entities to such support. (up to 10 points)

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 of Education (34 CFR 100.4, 104.5, 106.4, 108.8, and 110.23).

3. Risk Assessment and Specific Conditions: Consistent with 2 CFR 200.205, before awarding grants under this program 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.

4. 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 75.117. 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.

(c) Under 34 CFR 75.250(b), the Secretary may provide a grantee with additional funding for data collection analysis and reporting. In this case, the Secretary establishes a data collection period.

5. Performance Measures: Pursuant to the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993, the Department has established the following performance measures that it will use to evaluate the overall effectiveness of the grantee's project, as well as the Pathways to STEM Apprenticeship grant program as a whole:

(a) The total number and percentage of CTE Students enrolled in project activities during the grant period, including CTE Students in Apprenticeships funded under this project and other grant activities.

(b) The total number and percentage of CTE Students enrolled in high school and participating in Apprenticeships funded under this project.

(c) The total number and percentage of CTE Students enrolled in high school and participating in Apprenticeships funded under this project who are identified as members of a Special Population.15

(d) The total number and percentage of CTE Students enrolled in high school and participating in Apprenticeships funded under this project who complete high school.

(e) The total number and percentage of CTE Students enrolled in high school and participating in Apprenticeships funded under this project who earn postsecondary credits during enrollment in the project.

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) on request to the program contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 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 Department of Education (ED), in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), provides the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps the Department assess the impact of its information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand the Department's information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. ED is soliciting comments on the proposed information collection request (ICR) that is described below. The Department of Education is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.

Title of Collection: Graduate Assistance in Areas of National Need (GAANN) Performance Report.

OMB Control Number: 1840-0748.

Type of Review: A revision of an existing information collection.

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

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 291.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 3,274.

Abstract: GAANN grantees must submit a performance report annually. In addition, grantees are required to submit a supplement to the final performance report two years after submission of their final report. The reports are used to evaluate grantee performance. Further, the data from the reports will be aggregated to evaluate the accomplishments and impact of the GAANN Program as a whole. Results will be reported to the Secretary in order to respond to GPRA requirements.

Minor changes have been made to the collection to clarify the intent of the questions and update the areas of national need. These changes did not alter the anticipated burden hours associated with this collection. There was a small increase in total burden hours based on the recalculation of the burden on public respondents.

Background

The cesium and strontium capsules were produced at Hanford during the 1970s and 1980s. Cesium and strontium isotopes were separated from other radioactive tank waste, converted to cesium chloride and strontium fluoride, and then encapsulated for long-term storage. There are 1,335 cesium capsules and 601 strontium capsules stored under water in a pool at WESF.

The final TC&WM EIS was issued in December 2012. It analyzed a number of alternatives for retrieving waste from Hanford's single-shell tanks, treating that waste, and closing the tanks. It also analyzed alternatives for managing other types of wastes at Hanford, and for decommissioning the Fast Flux Test Facility.1 Three alternatives for managing the cesium and strontium capsules now stored in WESF were evaluated: (1) The no action alternative, which was continued storage in WESF; (2) shipment of the capsules from WESF to new facilities where the capsules would be opened and their contents made into a slurry for processing in the Waste Treatment Plant; and (3) transfer of the capsules from WESF to a new interim dry storage facility where they would remain until their contents were treated and sent to a geologic repository. The third alternative was included in the final EIS in response to comments from the state of Oregon and the Yakama Nation.

The first ROD, published on December 13, 2013 (78 FR 75913), contained no decisions regarding the interim storage, treatment, or final disposition of the capsules or their contents.2 Accordingly, the capsules continue to be stored in WESF.

Since issuance of the ROD, completion of the Waste Treatment Project has been delayed and WESF is experiencing degradation of key structures and safety systems, including the concrete walls of the storage pool due to gamma radiation emitted by the capsules. The degradation of WESF has increased the risk that a beyond design basis natural event (e.g. an earthquake) could cause the walls to fail, resulting in loss of the water that provides shielding of the capsules. Due to this concern and the realization that the capsules would likely need to stay in WESF for a period longer than its design life, DOE has concluded that interim dry storage of the capsules in a new facility would significantly reduce the potential risk of onsite radiological exposures and airborne releases from a failure of WESF.

Because of the delays in completing the Waste Treatment Plant and the ongoing degradation of WESF, DOE has now concluded that its preferred alternative for interim storage of the capsules is in a new dry storage facility. This is also the environmentally preferred alternative for interim storage of the capsules as it would reduce the risks posed by a failure of WESF.

DOE evaluated the transfer of the cesium and strontium capsules from WESF to dry storage in Appendix E of the final TC&WM EIS (Section E 1.2.3.4.5.) in response to comments from the state of Oregon's Department of Energy and the Yakama Nation (Final TC&WM EIS at 3-29 to 3-30 and 3-437 to 3-440). This evaluation identified the potential impacts from construction and operation of a new dry storage facility in the 200-East Area of Hanford, which would be deactivated upon final disposition of the capsules. These impacts included those from the construction of an approximately 6,500-square-meter (70,000-square-feet) dry storage facility and disturbance of 13,000-square-meters (140,000-square-feet) of ground. They also included the operational impacts from retrieval of the capsules from WESF and their placement into containers; transfer of the containers to the new storage facility; and maintaining and monitoring of the facility for up to 145 years (the maximum storage time under all of the Tank Closure Alternatives analyzed in the TC & WM EIS). The potential impacts from deactivation of the dry storage facility included those resulting from putting the facility into a stable configuration after removal of the capsules for treatment, disposition, or both.

The capsules would be transported and stored in casks similar to the casks analyzed in the TC&WM EIS; they would be passively ventilated to dissipate heat produced by radioactive decay within the capsules. The current design of the dry storage facility, which would be located approximately 400 meters (440 yards) from the existing WESF, calls for a storage pad of 753 square meters (8,100 square feet) within the facility on which the casks would be placed. The new facility would be a “dangerous waste management unit” under the Hanford Facility Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Permit; it would be added to the permit through a modification issued by the state of Washington pursuant to its delegated RCRA authority.

The potential environmental impacts from interim dry storage of the capsules would be less than those identified in the TC&WM EIS for this alternative, primarily due to the decay of radioactivity in the capsules. In June 2017, DOE estimated that the radioactivity in the capsules had decayed to 46 million curies; the final TC&WM EIS assumed the capsules contained about 68 million curies.

DOE's decision is to continue interim storage of the capsules, but in a new dry storage facility rather than in WESF. DOE is not making any decisions at this time on treatment or final disposition of the cesium and strontium capsules.

Moving the capsules from WESF to a dry storage facility will mitigate potential impacts resulting from a potential failure of WESF. This decision will allow DOE to eliminate the potential for releases to groundwater and the atmosphere from a structural failure of WESF.

Exports of electricity from the United States to a foreign country are regulated by the Department of Energy (DOE) pursuant to sections 301(b) and 402(f) of the Department of Energy Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7151(b), 7172(f)) and require authorization under section 202(e) of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 824a(e)).

On May 1, 2018, DOE received an application from Matador for authority to transmit electric energy from the United States to Mexico as a power marketer for a five-year term using existing international transmission facilities.

In its application, Matador states that it does not own or control any electric generation or transmission facilities, and it does not have a franchised service area. The electric energy that the Applicant proposes to export to Mexico would be surplus energy purchased from third parties such as electric utilities and Federal power marketing agencies pursuant to voluntary agreements. The existing international transmission facilities to be utilized by the Applicant have previously been authorized by Presidential Permits issued pursuant to Executive Order 10485, as amended, and are appropriate for open access transmission by third parties.

Procedural Matters: Any person desiring to be heard in this proceeding should file a comment or protest to the application at the address provided above. Protests should be filed in accordance with Rule 211 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (FERC) Rules of Practice and Procedures (18 CFR 385.211). Any person desiring to become a party to these proceedings should file a motion to intervene at the above address in accordance with FERC Rule 214 (18 CFR 385.214). Five copies of such comments, protests, or motions to intervene should be sent to the address provided above on or before the date listed above.

Comments and other filings concerning Matador's application to export electric energy to Mexico should be clearly marked with OE Docket No. EA-452. An additional copy is to be provided to both Ruta Kalvaitis Skučas, Pierce Atwood LLC, 1875 K St. NW, Suite 700, Washington, DC 20006 and Diana Stoica, Matador Power Marketing, Inc., 523 Soudan Avenue, Toronto, ON M4S 1X1.

A final decision will be made on this application after the environmental impacts have been evaluated pursuant to DOE's National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Procedures (10 CFR part 1021) and after a determination is made by DOE that the proposed action will not have an adverse impact on the sufficiency of supply or reliability of the U.S. electric power supply system.

Copies of this application will be made available, upon request, for public inspection and copying at the address provided above, by accessing the program website at http://energy.gov/node/11845, or by emailing Angela Troy at [email protected].

What does this correction do?

FR Doc. 2018-09774 published in the Federal Register of May 8, 2018 (83 FR 20182) (FRL-9973-40) is corrected in the DATES section to read as follows:

Comments must be received on or before July 9, 2018.

At the June 12th meeting, the FCC Technological Advisory Council will discuss progress on and issues involving its work program agreed to at its initial meeting on April 12th, 2018. The FCC will attempt to accommodate as many people as possible. However, admittance will be limited to seating availability. Meetings are also broadcast live with open captioning over the internet from the FCC Live web page at http://www.fcc.gov/live/. The public may submit written comments before the meeting to: Walter Johnston, the FCC's Designated Federal Officer for Technological Advisory Council by email: [email protected] or U.S. Postal Service Mail (Walter Johnston, Federal Communications Commission, Room 2-A665, 445 12th Street SW, Washington, DC 20554). Open captioning will be provided for this event. Other reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities are available upon request. Requests for such accommodations should be submitted via email to [email protected] or by calling the Office of Engineering and Technology at 202-418-2470 (voice), (202) 418-1944 (fax). Such requests should include a detailed description of the accommodation needed. In addition, please include your contact information. Please allow at least five days advance notice; last minute requests will be accepted, but may not be possible to fill.

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. In exercising this delegated authority, the Board is directed to take every reasonable step to solicit comment. In determining whether to approve a collection of information, the Board will consider all comments received from the public and other agencies.

The Board invites public comment on the following information collection, which is being reviewed under authority delegated by the OMB under the PRA. Comments are invited on the following:

a. Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the Federal Reserve's functions; including whether the information has practical utility;

b. The accuracy of the Federal Reserve's estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

c. Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected;

d. Ways to minimize the burden of information collection on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and

e. Estimates of capital or startup costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information.

At the end of the comment period, the comments and recommendations received will be analyzed to determine the extent to which the Federal Reserve should modify the proposal prior to giving final approval.

Report title: Report of Selected Money Market Rates.

Agency form number: FR 2420.

OMB control number: 7100-0357.

Frequency: Daily.

Respondents: Commercial banks, savings associations, U.S. branches and agencies of foreign banks, International Banking Facilities, and significant banking organizations representing entities actively participating in the federal funds and/or other money markets.

Estimated number of respondents: 99 commercial banks and savings associations, 84 U.S. branches and agencies of foreign banks, 82 International Banking Facilities, and 1 significant banking organization.

Estimated average hours per response: 1.8 commercial banks and savings associations, 1.8 U.S. branches and agencies of foreign banks, 1.0 International Banking Facilities, and 1.8 significant banking organization.

Estimated annual burden hours: 44,550 commercial banks and savings associations, 37,800 U.S. branches and agencies of foreign banks, 20,500 International Banking Facilities, and 450 significant banking organization.

General description of report: The FR 2420 is a transaction-based report that collects daily liability data on federal funds purchased, selected borrowings from non-exempt entities, Eurodollar transactions, and time deposits and certificates of deposits (CDs) from (1) domestically chartered commercial banks and savings associations that have $18 billion or more in total assets as well as those that have total assets above $5 billion but less than $18 billion and meet the activity threshold, (2) U.S. branches and agencies of foreign banks with total third-party assets of $2.5 billion or more, and (3) significant banking organizations that are active participants in money markets. The FR 2420 also collects daily data on Eurodollar transactions from International Banking Facilities (IBFs) of the above-referenced institutions.1 The FR 2420 data are used in the publication of the effective federal funds rate (EFFR) and overnight bank funding rate (OBFR) and in analysis of current money market conditions.

Proposed revisions: The Board proposes to revise the FR 2420 by adding Selected Deposits (Part D) and removing Selected Borrowings from Non-Exempt Entities (Part AA). Other minor edits in the reporting instructions are proposed to improve clarity. The first report for the proposed revisions to FR 2420 would be as of October 1, 2018.

The Board proposes adding a new section, Part D, to the FR 2420, intended to capture short-term wholesale unsecured deposits that are economically equivalent to federal funds purchased in Part A or Eurodollars in Part B. The primary target for this collection would be reporting institutions that, in recent years, shifted deposits from branches in the Caribbean Islands 2 to the U.S., which has caused this borrowing to fall outside the scope of the current FR 2420. The proposed Part D would also collect data from institutions that have historically booked all or a portion of such deposits in their U.S. offices.

Since June 2016, some Eurodollar activity from Cayman and Nassau branches of foreign banks has shifted to U.S. branches of those banks, causing Eurodollar volume reported on the FR 2420 to decline significantly, obscuring vision into the wholesale funding market and reducing the robustness of the data used in calculating the OBFR. Federal Reserve staff are aware of at least roughly $35 billion in overnight Eurodollar transactions that have moved from the Cayman Islands to New York. The motivation has been described as the simplification of corporate structure for the drafting of living wills. Accordingly, the Board proposes to add Part D to the FR 2420 to capture these short-term, wholesale, domestic deposits.

To capture the intended data, a selected deposit is defined as a deposit denominated in U.S. dollars, in an amount of $1 million or more, that is issued in a U.S. office of the reporting institution on the report date. A selected deposit is a deposit issued with an original specified term to maturity of six or less days such that the dollar amount of the deposit is payable as follows:

(a) On a certain calendar date that is six or less days after the settlement date of the deposit, or

(b) At the end of a specified period of time that is six or less days after the settlement date of the deposit.

Selected deposits include deposits issued for which the terms were negotiated at arm's length on the report date, which have interest rates specified as part of the terms that were negotiated, with an original maturity of six or less days and are issued to either a personal or a non-personal counterparty.

Selected deposits exclude deposits that do not have a specified term to maturity and are payable immediately on demand and deposits that are issued as collateral for another transaction (e.g., a deposit issued as collateral for a loan).

The data elements collected for Selected Deposits are identical to the elements collected for Federal Funds Purchased (Part A) and Eurodollars (Part B), with the exception of `office identifier.' The reporting deadline is the same as the deadline for Parts A and B.

The Board proposes deleting Selected Borrowings from Non-Exempt Entities, Part AA, from the FR 2420 to offset additional reporting burden resulting from the proposal to add Part D. There are two additional reasons for the Board's proposed deletion. First, Part AA does not capture data currently used or expected to be used in the calculation of reference rates. Second, Part AA currently collects very little data and the Part AA instructions sometimes cause confusion among FR 2420 respondents. Currently, respondents are instructed to include borrowings from non-exempt entities in Part AA, and are also instructed to exclude deposits as defined in Regulation D (Section 204.2(a)(1)) from Part AA. However, borrowings from non-exempt entities are typically defined as deposits under Regulation D, which has caused confusion for respondents reporting data on Part AA and limited the amount of useful data captured on this part of the report form.

The Board proposes some wording changes throughout the FR 2420 instructions to help clarify reporting expectations for respondents. As an example, the Board proposes to amend the definition of federal funds purchased applicable to the FR 2420 to explicitly exclude borrowings from a Federal Reserve Bank. While borrowings from Federal Reserve Banks were never meant to be included in the definition of federal funds purchased for the purpose of the FR 2420, respondents frequently reported such borrowings in Part A of the report form. Adding explicit instructions to exclude borrowings from Federal Reserve Banks from Part A of the FR 2420 should help to clarify the type of data to be reported. There are several other instances of these types of clarifications in the proposed FR 2420 instructions.

Legal authorization and confidentiality: The FR 2420 is authorized by section 11(a)(2) of the Federal Reserve Act, which authorizes the Board to require depository institutions to make such reports of their liabilities and assets as the Board may determine to be necessary or desirable to enable the Board to discharge its responsibility to monitor and control monetary and credit aggregates (12 U.S.C. 248(a)(2)). The FR 2420 is also authorized pursuant to section 7(c)(2) of the International Banking Act (IBA), which provides that Federal branches and agencies of foreign banks are subject to section 11(a) of the Federal Reserve Act as if they were a state member bank (12 U.S.C. 3105(c)(2)). Section 7(c)(2) of the IBA also provides that state-licensed branches and agencies of foreign banks are subject to the requirement in section 9 of the Federal Reserve Act that they file reports of condition with the appropriate Federal Reserve Bank (12 U.S.C. 324). The obligation to comply with the reporting requirements of FR 2420 is mandatory.

The individual financial institution information provided by each respondent would not be otherwise available to the public. The proposed revisions, as well as information currently collected, would be accorded confidential treatment under the authority of exemption 4 of the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4)). Exemption 4 protects from disclosure trade secrets and privileged or confidential commercial or financial information.

Consultation outside the agency: A representative group of large FR 2420 respondents was consulted in December 2016 to better understand the reasons banks were shifting Eurodollar deposits from Caribbean Islands to deposits at their U.S. branches. Additionally, large commercial banks were also consulted in late 2017 about the proposed changes to the FR 2420. The comments from the large FR 2420 respondents and the representative group were considered and incorporated into this proposal. Outreach was also done to the major federal funds and Eurodollar deposit brokers to better understand the extent to which new institutions would be required to report in the FR 2420. These brokers reported that there may be a few additional institutions, but that institutions actively negotiating deposits in their U.S. offices are the same institutions actively funding through Eurodollar deposits, or those that formerly were actively funding through Eurodollars. The banks consulted confirmed that the deposits intended to be captured in the new Part D could be an important wholesale funding source for reporting institutions. To ensure that the instructions have captured the key potential elements of transactions in this wholesale funding source, the characteristics listed for deposits reportable in the new Part D will be available for public comment.

1. Type of Information Collection: Revision/Renewal of a currently approved collection.

2. Title of the Collection—Construction Wage Rate Requirements-Price Adjustment (Actual Method).

3. Agency form number, if any:—N/A.

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

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

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

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

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

Government contracting officers may include Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) clause 52.222-32, Construction Wage Rate Requirements-Price Adjustment (Actual Method), in fixed-price solicitations and contracts subject to the Construction Wage Rate Requirements statute under certain conditions. The conditions are that the solicitation or contract contains option provisions to extend the term of the contract and the contracting officer determines that the most appropriate method to adjust the contract price at option exercise is to use a computation method based on the actual increase or decrease from a new or revised Department of Labor Construction Wage Rate Requirements statute wage determination.

The clause requires that a contractor submit at the exercise of each option to extend the term of the contract, a statement of the amount claimed for incorporation of the most current wage determination by the Department of Labor, and any relevant supporting data, including payroll records, that the contracting officer may reasonably require. The information is used by Government contracting officers to establish the contract price adjustment for the construction requirements of a contract, generally if the contract requirements are predominantly services subject to the Service Contract Labor Standards statute.

The Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) indicates that 5,309 construction contractors in FY 2017 could potentially have had contracts with recurring options. However, we believe there are only approximately 10% of these that would contain the subject clause, since most would not have a price adjustment clause, and there are other FAR prescribed price adjustment clauses. The estimated total burden is as follows:

Respondents: 531.

Responses per Respondent: 1.

Total Annual Responses: 531.

Hours per Response: 40.

Total Burden Hours: 21,240.

Affected Public: Businesses or other for-profit and not-for-profit institutions.

Frequency: Annually.

Obtaining Copies: Requesters may obtain a copy of the information collection documents from the General Services Administration, Regulatory Secretariat Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW, Washington, DC 20405, telephone 202-501-4755. Please cite OMB Control No. 9000-0154, Construction Wage Rate Requirements-Price Adjustment (Actual Method), in all correspondence.

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. The term “collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires federal agencies to publish a 30-day notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension or reinstatement of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, CMS is publishing this notice that summarizes the following proposed collection(s) of information for public comment:

1. Type of Information Collection Request: Extension of a currently approved collection; Title of Information Collection: Survey of Retail Prices; Use: This information collection request provides for a survey of the average acquisition costs of all covered outpatient drugs purchased by retail community pharmacies. CMS may contract with a vendor to conduct monthly surveys of retail prices for covered outpatient drugs. Such prices represent a nationwide average of consumer purchase prices, net of discounts and rebates. The contractor shall provide notification when a drug product becomes generally available and that the contract include such terms and conditions as the Secretary shall specify, including a requirement that the vendor monitor the marketplace. CMS has developed a National Average Drug Acquisition Cost (NADAC) for states to consider when developing reimbursement methodology. The NADAC is a pricing benchmark that is based on the national average costs that pharmacies pay to acquire Medicaid covered outpatient drugs. This pricing benchmark is based on drug acquisition costs collected directly from pharmacies through a nationwide survey process. This survey is conducted on a monthly basis to ensure that the NADAC reference file remains current and up-to-date. Form Number: CMS-10241 (OMB control number 0938-1041); Frequency: Monthly; Affected Public: Private sector (Business or other for-profits); Number of Respondents: 30,000; Total Annual Responses: 30,000; Total Annual Hours: 15,000. (For policy questions regarding this collection contact: Lisa Shochet at 410-786-5445).

This notice sets out a summary of the use and burden associated with the following information collections. More detailed information can be found in each collection's supporting statement and associated materials (see ADDRESSES).

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

1. Type of Information Collection Request: Revision of a currently approved collection; Title of Information Collection: Quality Improvement Strategy Implementation Plan and Progress Form; Use: Section 1311(c)(1)(E) of the Affordable Care Act requires qualified health plans (QHPs) offered through an Exchange must implement a quality improvement strategy (QIS) as described in section 1311(g)(1). Section 1311(g)(3) of the Affordable Care Act specifies the guidelines under Section 1311(g)(2) shall require the periodic reporting to the applicable Exchange the activities that a qualified health plan has conducted to implement a strategy as described in section 1311(g)(1). CMS intends to have QHP issuers complete the QIS Plan and Reporting Template annually for initial certification and subsequent annual updates of progress in implementation of their strategy. The template will include topics to assess an issuer's compliance in creating a payment structure that provides increased reimbursement or other incentives to improve the health outcomes of plan enrollees, prevent hospital readmissions, improve patient safety and reduce medical errors, promote wellness and health, and reduce health and health care disparities, as described in Section 1311(g)(1) of the Affordable Care Act.

The Quality Improvement Strategy Plan and Reporting Template will allow: (1) The Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) to evaluate the compliance and adequacy of QHP issuers' quality improvement efforts, as required by Section 1311(c) of the Affordable Care Act, and (2) HHS will use the issuers' validated information to evaluate the issuers' quality improvement strategies for compliance with the requirements of Section 1311(g) of the Affordable Care Act. Form Number: CMS-10540 (OMB control number: 0938-1286); Frequency: Annually; Affected Public: Public sector (Individuals and Households); Private sector (Business or other for-profits and Not-for-profit institutions); Number of Respondents: 250 respondents; Total Annual Responses: 250 responses; Total Annual Hours: 12,000 hours. (For policy questions regarding this collection, contact Nidhi Singh Shah at 301-492-5110.)

Notice is hereby given that the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) has taken final action in the following case:

Maria Cristina Miron Elqutub, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center: Based on Respondent's admission, the report of an inquiry conducted by MDACC, and analysis conducted by ORI in its oversight review, ORI found that Ms. Maria Cristina Miron Elqutub, Research Interviewer, MDACC, engaged in research misconduct in research supported by NIDCR, NIH, grant U01 DE019765-01.

ORI found that Respondent engaged in research misconduct by intentionally and knowingly falsifying and/or fabricating data that were included in the following two (2) published papers and two (2) grant progress reports submitted to NIDCR, NIH:

• PLoS One 10(6):e0128753, 2015 Jun 2 (hereafter referred to as “PLoS One 2015”).

• Cancer 121(14):2367-74, 2015 Jul 15 (hereafter referred to as “Cancer 2015”) Retracted in: Cancer 124(4):869, 2018 Feb 15.

• 5 U01 DE019765-04.

• 5 U01 DE019765-05.

Specifically, ORI found that Respondent engaged in research misconduct by recording dates and providing her own blood samples to cause these samples to be falsely labeled as samples from ninety-eight (98) study subjects in a cancer genetics study involving human blood samples. This resulted in the reporting of false data in Tables 1, 2, 3, and 4 in PLoS One 2015, in Figure 1 and Tables 1, 2, 3, and 4 in Cancer 2015, and in the Results sections of Project 2 progress reports for NIDCR, NIH, grants 5 U01 DE019765-04 and 5 U01 DE019765-05.

Ms. Elqutub entered into a Voluntary Settlement Agreement and voluntarily agreed, beginning on April 26, 2018:

(1) To have her research supervised for a period of three (3) years; Respondent agreed to ensure that prior to the submission of an application for U.S. Public Health Service (PHS) support for a research project on which Respondent's participation is proposed and prior to Respondent's participation in any capacity on PHS-supported research, the institution employing her must submit a plan for supervision of Respondent's duties to ORI for approval; the supervision plan must be designed to ensure the scientific integrity of Respondent's research contribution; Respondent agreed that she will not participate in any PHS-supported research until a supervision plan is submitted to and approved by ORI; Respondent agreed to maintain responsibility for compliance with the agreed upon supervision plan;

(2) that for a period of three (3) years, any institution employing her must submit, in conjunction with each application for PHS funds, or report, manuscript, or abstract involving PHS-supported research in which Respondent is involved, a certification to ORI that the data provided by Respondent are based on actual experiments or are otherwise legitimately derived and that the data, procedures, and methodology are accurately reported in the application, report, manuscript, or abstract;

(3) if no supervisory plan is provided to ORI, to provide certification to ORI on an annual basis for a period of three (3) years that she has not engaged in, applied for, or had her name included on any application, proposal, or other request for PHS funds without prior notification to ORI;

(4) to exclude herself voluntarily from serving in any advisory capacity to PHS including, but not limited to, service on any PHS advisory committee, board, and/or peer review committee, or as a consultant for a period of three (3) years; and

(5) to the correction or retraction of PLoS One 10(6):e0128753, 2015 Jun 2.

This proposed information collection was previously published in the Federal Register on March 12, 2018, pages 10734-10736 (83 FR 10734) and allowed 60 days for public comment. No public comments were received.

The National Institute of Nursing Research (NINR), National Institutes of Health, 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.

In compliance with Section 3507(a)(1)(D) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a request for review and approval of the information collection listed below.

Proposed Collection: Generic Clearance for the Collection of Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service Delivery, 0925-0653, Expiration Date 4/30/2018, REINSTATEMENT WITHOUT CHANGE, National Institute of Nursing Research (NINR), National Institutes of Health (NIH).

Need and Use of Information Collection: There are no changes being requested for this submission. The information collection activity will continue to garner qualitative customer and stakeholder feedback in an efficient, timely manner, in accordance with the Administration's commitment to improving service delivery. By qualitative feedback we mean information that provides useful insights on perceptions and opinions but are not statistical surveys that yield quantitative results that can be generalized to the population of study. This feedback will provide insights into customer or stakeholder perceptions, experiences and expectations, provide an early warning of issues with service, or focus attention on areas where communication, training or changes in operations might improve delivery of products or services. These collections will allow for ongoing, collaborative and actionable communications between the Agency and its customers and stakeholders. It will also allow feedback to contribute directly to the improvement of program management.

Improving agency programs requires ongoing assessment of service delivery, by which we mean systematic review of the operation of a program compared to a set of explicit or implicit standards, as a means of contributing to the continuous improvement of the program. The Agency will collect, analyze, and interpret information gathered through this generic clearance to identify strengths and weaknesses of current services and make improvements in service delivery based on feedback. The solicitation of feedback will target areas such as: Timeliness, appropriateness, accuracy of information, courtesy, efficiency of service delivery, and resolution of issues with service delivery. Responses will be assessed to plan and inform efforts to improve or maintain the quality of service offered to the public. If this information is not collected, vital feedback from customers and stakeholders on the Agency's services will be unavailable.

Feedback collected under this generic clearance will provide useful information, but it will not yield data that can be generalized to the overall population. This type of generic clearance for qualitative information will not be used for quantitative information collections that are designed to yield reliably actionable results, such as monitoring trends over time or documenting program performance. Such data uses require more rigorous designs that address: The target population to which generalizations will be made, the sampling frame, the sample design (including stratification and clustering), the precision requirements or power calculations that justify the proposed sample size, the expected response rate, methods for assessing potential non-response bias, the protocols for data collection, and any testing procedures that were or will be undertaken prior to fielding the study. Depending on the degree of influence the results are likely to have, such collections may still be eligible for submission for other generic mechanisms that are designed to yield quantitative results.

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

The Navigation Safety Advisory Council is a federal advisory committee authorized by 33 U.S.C. 2073 and chartered under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Title 5, U.S.C., and Appendix).

The Navigation Safety Advisory Council provides advice and recommendations to the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, through the Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard, on matters relating to maritime collisions, rammings, and groundings; Inland Rules of the Road; International Rules of the Road; navigation regulations and equipment, routing measures, marine information, diving safety; and aids to navigation systems.

The Navigation Safety Advisory Council normally meets twice a year. All members serve at their own expense and receive no salary or other compensation from the Federal Government. The only exception to this policy is when attending the Navigation Safety Advisory Council meetings members may be reimbursed for travel and per diem in accordance with federal travel regulations.

The U.S. Coast Guard will consider applications for seven positions that will be vacant on November 4, 2018, in the following membership categories only:

a. Commercial vessel owners and operators; and

b. Professional mariners.

Each member will be appointed to represent the viewpoints and interests of one of the groups or organizations, and at least one member will be appointed to represent each membership category. All members serve as representatives and are not Special Government Employees as defined in Section 202(a), Title 18, U.S.C.

To be eligible, you should have experience in one of the categories listed above. Members serve terms of office of up to three (3) years. Members may be considered to serve up to two (2) consecutive terms. In the event the Navigation Safety Advisory Council terminates, all appointments to the Council terminate.

The Department of Homeland Security does not discriminate in selection of Council members on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, political affiliation, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, disabilities and genetic information, age, membership in an employee organization, or any other non-merit factor. The Department of Homeland Security strives to achieve a widely diverse candidate pool for all of its recruitment actions.

If you are interested in applying to become a member of the Council, send your cover letter and resume to Mr. George Detweiler, the Navigation Safety Advisory Council, Alternate Designated Federal Officer via one of the transmittal methods in the ADDRESSES section by the deadline in the DATES section of this notice. All email submittals will receive email receipt confirmation.

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

Title: Application for Foreign-Trade Zone Admission and/or Status Designation, and Application for Foreign-Trade Zone Activity Permit.

OMB Number: 1651-0029.

Form Numbers: 214, 214A, 214B, 214C, and 216.

Type of Review: Extension (without change).

Action: CBP proposes to extend the expiration date of this information collection with no change to the burden hours or to CBP Forms 214, 214A, 214B, 214C, and 216.

Affected Public: Businesses.

Abstract: Foreign trade zones (FTZs) are geographical enclaves located within the geographical limits of the United States but for tariff purposes are considered to be outside the United States. Imported merchandise may be brought into FTZs for storage, manipulation, manufacture or other processing and subsequent removal for exportation, consumption in the United States, or destruction. A company bringing goods into an FTZ has a choice of zone status (privileged/non-privileged foreign, domestic, or zone-restricted), which affects the way such goods are treated by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and treated for tariff purposes upon entry into the customs territory of the U.S.

CBP Forms 214, 214A, 214B, and 214C, which make up the Application for Foreign-Trade Zone Admission and/or Status Designation, are used by companies that bring merchandise into an FTZ to register the admission of such merchandise into FTZs and to apply for the appropriate zone status. CBP Form 216, Foreign-Trade Zone Activity Permit, is used by companies to request approval to manipulate, manufacture, exhibit, or destroy merchandise in an FTZ.

These FTZ forms are authorized by 19 U.S.C. 81 and provided for by 19 CFR 146.22, 146.32, 146.39, 146.40, 146.41, 146.44, 146.52, 146.53, and 146.66. These forms are accessible at: http://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/publications/forms.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 6,749.

Estimated Number of Annual Responses per Respondent: 25.

Estimated Total Annual Responses: 168,725.

Estimated Time per Response: 15 minutes.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 42,181.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 2,500.

Estimated Number of Annual Responses per Respondent: 10.

Estimated Total Annual Responses: 25,000.

Estimated Time per Response: 10 minutes.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 4,167.

TSA created the Third-Party Canine-Cargo (3PK9-C) Program, under TSA's regulations for Certified Cargo Screening Programs (CSSP), see 49 CFR part 1549, to provide an efficient and effective method for screening air cargo to TSA's standards. Under this program, third-party canine teams trained in explosives detection can be certified by a non-governmental entity, acting under the approval of TSA, as meeting TSA's certification standards. Certified 3PK9-C teams can be deployed to screen air cargo for aircraft operators, foreign air carriers, and other TSA-regulated parties operating under a TSA-approved or accepted security program.

TSA is seeking applications from qualified persons interested in becoming an approved 3PK9-C Certifier under the 3PK9-C Program. All applicants must meet the minimal qualifications before their application will be evaluated to determine whether the applicant meets TSA's requirements.

The evaluation process will assess whether the applicant meets TSA's requirements. Applications received between 12:01 a.m. (EDT) on May 21, 2018 and 11:59 p.m. (EDT) on August 19, 2018, will be reviewed on a rolling basis. If the agency determines that an applicant meets TSA's requirements, TSA will provide the applicant with a copy of a binding Order 1 that must be signed before the applicant becomes a participant in the program as a 3PK9-C Certifier. Failure to comply with the 3PK9-C Certifier Order may result in removal from the program and/or enforcement action against the 3PK9-C Certifier. TSA may require the 3PK9-C Certifier to submit additional information under the Order and complete orientation before being approved by TSA to commence operations.

Under this program, 3PK9-C Certifiers are authorized to conduct certifications and make determinations as to whether canine teams meet TSA's standards as specified in the Order. Selection as a 3PK9-C Certifier does not indicate any of the following:

• An award of a government-issued contract or financial support from TSA (no Federal funding will be expended for certification of canine teams under the 3PK9-C program).

• A guarantee of any minimum work or funding.

TSA must ensure the certification of canine teams under the 3PK9-C Program will be conducted in an appropriate, consistent and verifiable manner. In general, TSA will review applications to determine whether:

• The applicant demonstrates expert knowledge of critical test and evaluation concepts to certify canine teams for the detection of explosives (for example, management of certification data, explosives training aids, use and safety, etc.).

• The applicant demonstrates sufficient past performance and expertise in performing explosive detection canine team certifications.

TSA will make its determinations based on the information submitted by the applicant in its application. Therefore, applicants are encouraged to ensure they provide complete information related to all requirements. TSA may contact the applicant with questions and/or requests for clarification during the review of submitted materials.

Applicants will be required to attest that they meet or will be able to meet the minimal qualification standards identified below. These minimum requirements must be sustained throughout the applicant's participation in the 3PK9-C Program.

1. Has or can obtain permission from TSA to receive, store, and protect SSI in accordance with TSA regulations and policies (see footnote 1).

2. All proprietors, general partners, officers, directors, or owners of the applicant, as well as all employees who will perform activities pursuant to this application or the 3PK9-C Certifier Order, have successfully completed or are able to successfully complete a security threat assessment (STA) identified in 49 CFR part 1540, subpart C.

3. Has necessary resources and personnel to implement and sustain the certification plan submitted with the application.

4. Can comply with applicable Federal, state and local regulations regarding the safe handling and storage of explosives.

5. For each 3PK9-C Certifier employee who will be conducting certification activities, ensure the individual has a minimum of five years of explosives and/or narcotics detection experience in conducting certifications with one or more of the following organizations:

a. United States Police Canine Association (USPCA),

b. North American Police Working Dog Association (NAPWDA),

c. International Police Working Dog Association (IPWDA),

d. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), Department of Defense (DoD), or other Federal government agencies,

e. TSA, or

f. Similar organization that TSA approves as having a commensurate level of certifications for the purpose of the 3PK9-CP.

6. Can provide 3PK9-C certifications at air cargo/shipping locations throughout the United States as defined in 49 CFR part 1500.3.

7. Must have capability to video record certification events and maintain recordings in digital format for a minimum of two years.

8. Must ensure the applicant will not conduct assessments for which there exists a conflict of interest as defined in the 3PK9-C Certifier Order.

Interested persons can obtain a copy of the application instructions by submitting a request for information to the email address noted under ADDRESSES.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is considering an application under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668a-d; Eagle Act) for a bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) take permit from Northern States Power Company—Minnesota, doing business as Xcel Energy (applicant), for a 5-year take permit for bald eagles under the 2009 regulations (74 FR 46836, September 11, 2009). The Service published changes to eagle permitting regulations (81 FR 91494, December 16, 2016), which took effect on January 15, 2017. Applicants who submitted permit applications before July 14, 2017, may choose to be considered for issuance of an eagle take permit under either the original 2009 regulations or the 2016 revised regulations (81 FR 91494). The applicant submitted the permit application on April 11, 2016, and has chosen to be considered under the 2009 regulations. The project is an existing operational wind facility in Stutsman County, North Dakota. The application includes an Eagle Conservation Plan (ECP) as the foundation of the applicant's permit application. The ECP describes actions that have been taken, as well as proposed future actions, to avoid and minimize adverse effects on eagles.

We have prepared this DEA to evaluate the impacts of issuing or not issuing the eagle take permit for compliance with our Eagle Act permitting regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 50 CFR 22.26, as well as impacts of implementing the supporting ECP, which is included as an appendix to the DEA.

The Eagle Act allows us to authorize bald eagle take “for the protection . . . of agricultural or other interests in any particular locality.” The 2009 regulations authorize the limited take of bald eagles under the Eagle Act, where the take to be authorized is associated with otherwise lawful activities (74 FR 46836). The Eagle Act's implementing regulations define “take” as to “pursue, shoot, shoot at, poison, wound, kill, capture, trap, collect, destroy, molest, or disturb” individuals, their nests and eggs (50 CFR 22.3); and “disturb” is further defined as “to agitate or bother a bald or golden eagle to a degree that causes . . . (1) injury to an eagle, . . . (2) a decrease in its productivity, . . . or (3) nest abandonment” (50 CFR 22.3). The project is predicted to result in recurring bald eagle mortalities over the life of the project, so the appropriate type of take permit is the permit under 50 CFR 22.26.

We may consider issuance of eagle take permits if (1) the incidental take is necessary to protect legitimate interests; (2) the take is compatible with the preservation standard of the Eagle Act—providing for stable or increasing breeding populations; and (3) the take has been avoided and minimized to the degree achievable through implementation of Advanced Compensation Practices, and the remaining take is unavoidable. The Service must determine that the direct and indirect effects of the take, together with the cumulative effects of other permitted take and additional factors affecting eagle populations, are compatible with the preservation of bald eagles and golden eagles.

The permit applicant, Northern States Power Company—Minnesota, doing business as Xcel Energy, is operating an approximately 200.5-megatwatt commercial wind energy facility in Stutsman County, North Dakota. The 100-turbine project, sited entirely on private land, became operational on December 1, 2016.

The applicant developed an ECP based on our guidance contained in the Eagle Conservation Plan Guidance Module 1: Land-Based Wind Energy Version 2 (Service 2013) (ECP Guidance) (https://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/pdf/management/eagleconservationplanguidance.pdf).

As recommended in the Service's ECP Guidance, the applicant's plan outlines avoidance and minimization measures, contains a risk assessment, and includes advanced conservation practices and adaptive management. The applicant submitted the ECP as part of the permit application, and if we issue the permit, then the conservation commitments would become conditions of the permit.

The Service independently evaluated the risk of bald eagle fatalities from project operations and compared that risk to the conservation measures to which the applicant committed. We used our Collision Risk Model to estimate the number of annual bald eagle fatalities resulting from operation and maintenance of the project. This is an essential step in the Service's evaluation of an application for a permit for take of eagles because issuing criteria require permitted take to comply with the Eagle Act's preservation standard. In the DEA, we evaluate the risk and offsetting conservation measures, and the implications for direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of issuing a permit and a No Action alternative.

Our consideration of whether or not to issue a 5-year ETP is an action subject to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Our DEA analyzes the risk of bald eagle take associated with operation and maintenance of the project, and assesses the potential effects of permit issuance and a No Action alternative (i.e., do not issue an ETP) on the human and natural environment.

We invite public comment on the proposed DEA. If you wish, you may submit comments by any one of the methods discussed in ADDRESSES. We will consider public comments on the DEA when making the final determination on NEPA compliance and permit issuance.

All comments and materials we receive become part of the public record associated with this action. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. All submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, will be made available for public disclosure in their entirety.

The public process for the proposed Federal permit action will be completed after the public comment period, at which time we will evaluate the permit application and comments submitted thereupon to determine whether the application meets the permitting requirements under the Eagle Act, applicable regulations, and NEPA requirements. Upon completion of that evaluation, we will select our course of action.

We provide this notice under section 668a of the Eagle Act (16 U.S.C. 668-668d) and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and its implementing regulations (40 CFR 1506.6 and 43 CFR 46.300).

Under the authority of section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.; ESA), we have issued permits to conduct activities that provide a conservation benefit for endangered or threatened species, or for unlisted species should they become listed in the future, in response to permit applications that we received in conjunction with a CCAA or SHA.

Under section 10(a)(1)(B), we may issue permits for any taking otherwise prohibited by section 9 if such taking is incidental to, and not the purpose of, carrying out an otherwise lawful activity (known as an incidental take permit (ITP)) and the permit applicant submits a habitat conservation plan (HCP) that meets the permit issuance criteria under section 10(a)(2)(B). Typically, applicants seek an ITP to conduct activities such as residential and commercial development, infrastructure development or maintenance, and energy development projects that range in scale from small to landscape-level planning efforts.

We issued the permits listed below between January 17 and December 27, 2017. Under section 10(a)(1)(A), we issued each permit only after we determined that it was applied for in good faith, that granting the permit would not be to the disadvantage of the listed species, that the proposed activities would benefit the recovery or the enhancement of survival of the species, and that the terms and conditions of the permits were consistent with the purposes and policy set forth in the ESA. Under section 10(a)(1)(B), we issued permits only after we determined that the applicant is eligible and has submitted a complete application and HCP that fully meets the permit issuance criteria consistent with section 10(a)(2)(B).

The following permits were applied for and issued in Region 1. For more information about any of the following permits, contact the field office that issued the permit by telephone at:

The following permits were applied for and issued in Region 2. For more information about any of the following permits, contact the HCP, CCAA, or SHA Permit Coordinator by email at [email protected] or by telephone at 505-248-6651.

The following permit was applied for and issued in Region 3. For more information about the permit, contact the field office that issued the permit by telephone at: Illinois-Iowa Ecological Services Field Office, 309-757-5800.

The following permits were applied for and issued in Region 4. For more information about any of the following permits, contact the HCP or CCAA Permit Coordinator by email at [email protected] or by telephone at 404-679-7140.

The following permit was applied for and issued in Region 5. For more information about the permit, contact the HCP Permit Coordinator by email at [email protected] or by telephone at 413-253-8615.

The following permits were applied for and issued in Region 6. For more information about any of the following permits, contact the HCP or CCAA Permit Coordinator by email at [email protected] or by telephone at 303-236-4211.

No ITPs or enhancement of survival permits for CCAAs or SHAs were applied for in Region 7.

The following permits were applied for and issued in Region 8. For more information about any of the following permits, contact the HCP Permit Coordinator by email at [email protected].

Executive Order 13817, “A Federal Strategy to Ensure Secure and Reliable Supplies of Critical Minerals” (82 FR 60835, December 26, 2017), addressed the United States' dependency on vulnerable limited and foreign supply chains of mineral commodities that are vital to the Nation's security and economic prosperity. The Executive Order directed the Secretary of the Interior, in coordination with the Department of Defense and in consultation with other executive branch agencies, to produce a list of critical minerals. The Secretary of the Interior in turn directed the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in coordination with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), to provide technical input to a draft critical minerals list, and to incorporate Federal interagency input through the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy's National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) Subcommittee on Critical and Strategic Mineral Supply Chains. The NSTC Subcommittee has representation from a wide range of Federal Departments including, but not limited to, Defense, Interior, Energy, State, Commerce, and Homeland Security.

The USGS used as a starting point for developing the draft critical mineral list the NSTC Mineral Criticality Screening Tool, which was first published by the Executive Office of the President in 2016 and updated in 2017. The tool is a quantitative methodology for identifying and ranking mineral commodities based on widely accepted criteria published in the mineral commodity literature. Using that methodology, and several other sources of data, the USGS applied two principal criteria to evaluate minerals for inclusion on the draft list of critical minerals: The Hirfindal-Hirschmann index, which measures country concentration of production, and the USGS net import reliance metric based on USGS's annual Mineral Commodities Summaries. The methodology used by the USGS to develop the draft list is described in USGS Open-File Report 2018-1021 (https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2018/1021/ofr20181021.pdf).

Federal interagency feedback to Interior on the initial draft list highlighted one mineral, uranium, with both fuel and non-fuel uses, and for which Energy Information Administration data indicated high production concentration and significant import reliance. Based on those data, the USGS agreed that it would be consistent with the methodology to include uranium on the draft list for public comment.

Pursuant to Executive Order 13817, on February 16, 2018, the Secretary of the Interior published the draft list of critical minerals in the Federal Register (83 FR 7065). The draft list consisted of 35 minerals or mineral material groups deemed critical under the definition provided in the Executive Order: Aluminum (bauxite), antimony, arsenic, barite, beryllium, bismuth, cesium, chromium, cobalt, fluorspar, gallium, germanium, graphite (natural), hafnium, helium, indium, lithium, magnesium, manganese, niobium, platinum group metals, potash, the rare earth elements group, rhenium, rubidium, scandium, strontium, tantalum, tellurium, tin, titanium, tungsten, uranium, vanadium, and zirconium.

The Federal Register notice included a 30-day public comment period, which closed on March 19, 2018. The comments are available for public viewing at www.regulations.gov under docket DOI-2018-0001. DOI received 453 comments, including 118 comments made anonymously, 273 from individuals, and 62 submitted on behalf of organizations (20 from industry organizations, 18 from mining companies, ten from consultants and other businesses, six from non-governmental environmental organizations, five from government agencies, and three from elected officials). The comments included 147 requests to add a total of 13 minerals to the list, with seven minerals (copper, silver, nickel, gold zinc, molybdenum and lead) each receiving over 10 requests for addition to the list. There were 183 requests to delete one mineral (uranium) from the list.

After considering all comments received, the Department of the Interior believes that the methodology described in USGS Open-File Report 2018-1021 remains valid. Therefore, the Department of the Interior is hereby finalizing the draft list of 35 critical minerals as the final list. This list of critical minerals, while “final,” is not a permanent list, but will be dynamic and updated periodically to reflect current data on supply, demand, and concentration of production, as well as current policy priorities. This final list will serve as the initial focus for the Department of Commerce report, currently in development pursuant to Executive Order 13817.

This final list is based on the definition of a “critical mineral” provided in Executive Order 13817. The U.S. Government and other organizations may also use other definitions and rely on other criteria to identify a material or mineral as “critical” or otherwise important. This final list is not intended to replace those related terms and definitions for minerals or materials that are deemed strategic, critical or otherwise important (e.g., National Defense Stockpile). The Department of the Interior recognizes the economic significance and indispensable nature of other minerals that are produced domestically in large quantities such as copper, zinc, molybdenum, gold, silver, and industrial minerals such as phosphate, sand, gravel, and aggregate. Given current levels of domestic production, the U.S. is not highly reliant on imports for these minerals and typically has a combination of domestic reserves and reliable foreign sources adequate to meet foreseeable domestic consumption requirements. While these minerals do not currently meet the definition of critical, they are similar to critical minerals in that they are indispensable to a modern society for the purposes of national security, technology, infrastructure, and energy production (both fossil fuels and renewables). It should be noted that some potential supply chain vulnerabilities relating to critical minerals, such as high import reliance and limited domestic capability for production of refined metals and processed alloys, extend beyond what is described here and will be addressed within the Department of Commerce report to be submitted to the President as required by Executive Order 13817. The Department of the Interior also recognizes that many public comments addressed issues not directly associated with the development of the critical minerals list. Instead, they addressed regulatory and policy issues more appropriately considered as part of the Department of Commerce report.

Those comments will be available to help inform the development of the Commerce report.

Finally, the Department of the Interior recognizes that a significant number of comments requested the removal of uranium from the list. As noted above and in USGS Open-File Report 2018-1021, input from other agencies represented on the NSTC Subcommittee on Critical and Strategic Mineral Supply Chains emphasized that uranium, while primarily known as a fuel mineral, also has important non-fuel uses, and otherwise meets the criteria for inclusion.

The NSTC Mineral Criticality Screening Tool was designed as an early warning screening tool that identifies potentially critical minerals using regularly-reported and publicly-available data. The screening tool was designed so that potential mineral criticality could be evaluated in a repeatable and transparent manner, on an ongoing basis. This tool is updated annually by the USGS on behalf of the NSTC Subcommittee when USGS releases a new year of mineral production and price data. This systematic, annual collection, analysis, and publication of mineral information is the foundation for the analysis of present-day security of supply for minerals and mineral materials and of changes in the security of supply over time. With this basis, the finalized list of critical minerals provides a starting point for developing a new Federal strategy and a continuing process to strengthen supply chains. The finalized list does not foreclose later addition of minerals that become critical in the future due to advances in technology, natural disasters, world events, and other factors influencing the security of supply and demand.

As part of developing the new Federal strategy, Executive Order 13817 and Secretary's Order 3359, “Critical Mineral Independence and Security” (December 21, 2017), direct further efforts to assess potential domestic critical mineral resources above ground and below ground, and to examine Federal leasing and permitting processes to expedite access to these potential resources. Because the critical minerals on the final list are administered under existing mineral disposal laws and regulations, any recommendations to improve permitting processes for those critical minerals will improve permitting processes for all minerals administered under the same laws and regulations by the Bureau of Land Management and other Federal land management agencies.

The Department of the Interior recognizes that many commodities are not mined directly, but are instead recovered during the processing, smelting, or refining of a host material and are, therefore, deemed “byproducts.” Of the 35 minerals deemed critical, 12 are byproducts. Therefore, strategies to increase the domestic supply of these commodities must necessarily consider the mining and processing of the host materials because enhanced recovery of byproducts alone may be insufficient to meet U.S. consumption.

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we provide the general public and other Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on new, proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public understand our information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format.

A Federal Register notice with a 60-day public comment period soliciting comments on this collection of information was published on May 25, 2015 (80 FR 30485). No comments were received in response to that notice.

We are again soliciting comments on the proposed ICR that is described below. We are especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues: (1) Is the collection necessary to the proper functions of the OST; (2) will this information be processed and used in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate of burden accurate; (4) how might the OST enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (5) how might the OST minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology.

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

Abstract: The Office of the Special Trustee for American Indians (OST) is responsible for overseeing the implementation of trust reforms, trust accounting and coordination of trust policies intra-bureau-wide related to the management of Indian trust funds and assets; see 25 U.S.C. 4041. The OST, Office of Trust Review and Audit (OTRA) is responsible for performing trust examinations, evaluations and assessments of Indian trust programs and functions, pursuant to executive direction by the Secretary of the Interior. In addition, OTRA has a congressional mandate to conduct Annual Tribal Trust Evaluations for Tribes that compact trust programs, functions, services, and/or activities under Public Law 93-638 Self-Governance Compacts on behalf of the Secretary of the Interior. This authority is in 25 U.S.C. 5363(d)(1) & (2) and the enabling regulations in 25 CFR 1000.350. OTRA currently collects Indian trust data and documentation from Tribes and Agencies in fulfillment of performing the Indian trust examinations on Federal Agencies and Tribal trust evaluations for compacted Tribes. This collection is enabled by performing desk reviews (via email electronic questionnaires), and on-site visits to Tribes and Federal agencies (although Federal agencies are exempt from the provisions of the PRA).

Under 25 CFR 1000.355, the Secretary's designated representative will conduct trust evaluations for each self-governance tribe that has an annual funding agreement. The end result is the issuance of a report, which is required by 25 CFR 1000.365. Currently, Department of the Interior, OST-OTRA, conducts an on-site review of trust operations where a tribe has compacted a trust program. During that review, under current methodology, interviews are conducted and documents are requested on-site. Information collected is then brought back to the Albuquerque office and analyzed. A draft report is written and provided to the tribe for comment where applicable, comments received back are incorporated into the report, and a final report is issued to the tribe.

OTRA is changing the method of collecting information from an on-site manual audit data collection method to a web-based automated audit data collection and audit management tool, called the Trust Evaluation System (TES). Currently OTRA travels to the audit location and uses a Thomas Reuters audit software solution called Auto Audit to manage the data collected in the field and the audit. TES, a web-based tool, will be cloud hosted and will be interactive with the Auditor, Tribes and Agencies throughout the evaluation process in conducting the trust examinations, tribal trust evaluations, and trust records assessments, via the web, as desktop reviews.

OST will be collecting the same data it currently collects manually, but will utilize electronic questionnaires and document uploads from Tribes and Federal agencies, via the web in TES, to complete the evaluations and examinations it currently conducts. This method will be implemented to replace the desktop reviews and/or traveling to each location to conduct these audits. Some audits will be still be conducted on-site, but only for high-risk locations. OTRA's audit universe consists of up to 300 audits on 3-5 year audit cycle for OST and Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) offices throughout the greater United States and Alaska.

Title of Collection: Trust Evaluation System.

OMB Control Number: 1035-New.

Form Number: None.

Type of Review: Existing collection in use without OMB approval.

Respondents/Affected Public: Tribes that have an annual funding agreement in place to compact Indian trust programs.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Respondents: 80 Tribes. Federal agencies are exempt from the PRA and are not included in the total annual respondents/responses/burden hours estimates.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 1,280.

Estimated Completion Time per Response: 2 hours for reporting and 1 hour for recordkeeping.

Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 3,840.

Respondent's Obligation: Mandatory.

Frequency of Collection: Once per fiscal or calendar year (year the respective tribe operates under).

Total Estimated Annual Non-hour Burden Cost: None.

An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

The authority for this action is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).