2670 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 8 / Wednesday, January 13, 2021 / Notices 

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

Sunshine Act Meeting 

FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION NOTICE OF

PREVIOUS ANNOUNCEMENT: 86 FR 1970. 

PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED TIME AND DATE OF

THE MEETING: Thursday, January 14, 

2021 at 10:00 a.m. Virtual Meeting. 

CHANGES IN THE MEETING: The matter 

number for the following item has been 

corrected: Audit Division 

Recommendation Memorandum on the 

Mississippi Republican Party (A17–15). 

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

Judith Ingram, Press Officer, Telephone: 

(202) 694–1220. 

Authority: Government in the Sunshine 

Act, 5 U.S.C. 552b. 

Dated: January 11, 2021. 

Laura E. Sinram, 

Acting Secretary and Clerk of the 

Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2021–00695 Filed 1–11–21; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 6715–01–P 

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM 

Privacy Act of 1974; System of 

Records 

Correction 

In notice document 2020–27990 

appearing on pages 83084–83086 in the 

issue of Monday, December 21, 2020, 

make the following correction: 

(1) On page 83084, in the third 

column, in the DATES section, on line 

two, change ‘‘January 20, 2021’’ to read 

‘‘January 21, 2021.’’ 

(2) On page 83084, in the third 

column, in the DATES section, on line 

four, change ‘‘January 20, 2021’’ to read 

‘‘January 21, 2021.’’ 

[FR Doc. C1–2020–27990 Filed 1–12–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1301–00–D 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

[File No. 172 3092] 

Tapjoy, Inc.; Analysis of Proposed 

Consent Order to Aid Public Comment 

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed consent agreement; 

request for comment. 

SUMMARY: The consent agreement in this 

matter settles alleged violations of 

federal law prohibiting unfair or 

deceptive acts or practices. The attached 

Analysis of Proposed Consent Order to 

Aid Public Comment describes both the 

allegations in the draft complaint and 

the terms of the consent order— 

embodied in the consent agreement— 

that would settle these allegations. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before February 12, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: Interested parties may file 

comments online or on paper by 

following the instructions in the 

Request for Comment part of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

below. Please write ‘‘Tapjoy, Inc.; File 

No. 172 3092’’ on your comment, and 

file your comment online at https://

www.regulations.gov by following the 

instructions on the web-based form. If 

you prefer to file your comment on 

paper, mail your comment to the 

following address: Federal Trade 

Commission, Office of the Secretary, 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite 

CC–5610 (Annex D), Washington, DC 

20580, or deliver your comment to the 

following address: Federal Trade 

Commission, Office of the Secretary, 

Constitution Center, 400 7th Street SW, 

5th Floor, Suite 5610 (Annex D), 

Washington, DC 20024. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Matthew H. Wernz (415–848–5125), 

Midwest Regional Office, John C. 

Kluczynski Federal Building, 230 South 

Dearborn Street, Suite 3030, Chicago, IL 

60604. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant 

to Section 6(f) of the Federal Trade 

Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and 

FTC Rule 2.34, 16 CFR 2.34, notice is 

hereby given that the above-captioned 

consent agreement containing a consent 

order to cease and desist, having been 

filed with and accepted, subject to final 

approval, by the Commission, has been 

placed on the public record for a period 

of thirty (30) days. The following 

Analysis to Aid Public Comment 

describes the terms of the consent 

agreement and the allegations in the 

complaint. An electronic copy of the 

full text of the consent agreement 

package can be obtained at https://

www.ftc.gov/news-events/commissionactions. 

You can file a comment online or on 

paper. For the Commission to consider 

your comment, we must receive it on or 

before February 12, 2021. Write 

‘‘Tapjoy, Inc.; File No. 172 3092’’ on 

your comment. Your comment— 

including your name and your state— 

will be placed on the public record of 

this proceeding, including, to the extent 

practicable, on the https://

www.regulations.gov website. 

Due to the COVID–19 pandemic and 

the agency’s heightened security 

screening, postal mail addressed to the 

Commission will be subject to delay. We 

strongly encourage you to submit your 

comments online through the https://

www.regulations.gov website. 

If you prefer to file your comment on 

paper, write ‘‘Tapjoy, Inc.; File No. 172 

3092’’ on your comment and on the 

envelope, and mail your comment to the 

following address: Federal Trade 

Commission, Office of the Secretary, 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite 

CC–5610 (Annex D), Washington, DC 

20580; or deliver your comment to the 

following address: Federal Trade 

Commission, Office of the Secretary, 

Constitution Center, 400 7th Street SW, 

5th Floor, Suite 5610 (Annex D), 

Washington, DC 20024. If possible, 

submit your paper comment to the 

Commission by courier or overnight 

service. 

Because your comment will be placed 

on the publicly accessible website at 

https://www.regulations.gov, you are 

solely responsible for making sure your 

comment does not include any sensitive 

or confidential information. In 

particular, your comment should not 

include sensitive personal information, 

such as your or anyone else’s Social 

Security number; date of birth; driver’s 

license number or other state 

identification number, or foreign 

country equivalent; passport number; 

financial account number; or credit or 

debit card number. You are also solely 

responsible for making sure your 

comment does not include sensitive 

health information, such as medical 

records or other individually 

identifiable health information. In 

addition, your comment should not 

include any ‘‘trade secret or any 

commercial or financial information 

which . . . is privileged or 

confidential’’—as provided by Section 

6(f) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and 

FTC Rule 4.10(a)(2), 16 CFR 4.10(a)(2)— 

including in particular competitively 

sensitive information such as costs, 

sales statistics, inventories, formulas, 

patterns, devices, manufacturing 

processes, or customer names. 

Comments containing material for 

which confidential treatment is 

requested must be filed in paper form, 

must be clearly labeled ‘‘Confidential,’’ 

and must comply with FTC Rule 4.9(c). 

In particular, the written request for 

confidential treatment that accompanies 

the comment must include the factual 

and legal basis for the request, and must 

identify the specific portions of the 

comment to be withheld from the public 

record. See FTC Rule 4.9(c). Your 

comment will be kept confidential only 

if the General Counsel grants your 

request in accordance with the law and 

the public interest. Once your comment 

has been posted on the https://

www.regulations.gov website—as legally 

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 8 / Wednesday, January 13, 2021 / Notices 2671 

1Ben Gilbert, Video-game industry revenues grew 

so much during the pandemic that they reportedly 

exceeded sports and film combined, Business 

Insider (Dec. 23, 2020), https://

www.businessinsider.com/video-game-industryrevenues-exceed-sports-and-film-combined-idc2020-12. 

2Robert Williams, Mobile gaming surges as 

pandemic drives 45% jump in app installs, 

Marketing Drive (Dec. 2, 2020), https://

www.marketingdive.com/news/mobile-gamingsurges-as-pandemic-drives-45-jump-in-app-installs/ 

591417/. Gaming expert Joost van Dreunen recently 

offered helpful analysis about emerging trends in 

this growing industry. The Prof G Show with Scott 

Galloway, Pandemic Learnings with Dr. Abdul ElSayed (Dec. 15, 2020), https://

westwoodonepodcasts.com/pods/the-prof-g-showwith-scott-galloway/. 

3See, e.g., Gil Kaufman, Here’s How Many People 

Tuned Into Lil Nas X’s Roblox Show, Billboard 

(Nov. 17, 2020), https://www.billboard.com/ 

articles/columns/hip-hop/9485495/lil-nas-x-robloxshow-viewers; see also Joost van Dreunen, The 

future is user-generated, SuperJoost Playlist (Nov. 

23, 2020), https://superjoost.substack.com/p/thefuture-is-user-generated. 

required by FTC Rule 4.9(b)—we cannot 

redact or remove your comment from 

that website, unless you submit a 

confidentiality request that meets the 

requirements for such treatment under 

FTC Rule 4.9(c), and the General 

Counsel grants that request. 

Visit the FTC website at http://

www.ftc.gov to read this Notice and the 

news release describing the proposed 

settlement. The FTC Act and other laws 

that the Commission administers permit 

the collection of public comments to 

consider and use in this proceeding, as 

appropriate. The Commission will 

consider all timely and responsive 

public comments that it receives on or 

before February 12, 2021. For 

information on the Commission’s 

privacy policy, including routine uses 

permitted by the Privacy Act, see 

https://www.ftc.gov/site-information/ 

privacy-policy. 

Analysis of Proposed Consent Order to 

Aid Public Comment 

The Federal Trade Commission 

(‘‘Commission’’) has accepted, subject to 

final approval, an agreement containing 

a consent order from Tapjoy, Inc. 

(‘‘Tapjoy’’). The proposed consent order 

has been placed on the public record for 

thirty (30) days for receipt of comments 

from interested persons. Comments 

received during this period will become 

part of the public record. After 30 days, 

the Commission will again review the 

agreement and the comments received, 

and will decide whether it should 

withdraw from the agreement and take 

appropriate action or make final the 

agreement’s proposed order. 

Tapjoy operates an advertising 

platform within mobile gaming 

applications. On the platform, Tapjoy 

promotes offers of in-app rewards (e.g., 

virtual currency) to consumers who 

complete an action, such as taking a 

survey or otherwise engaging with thirdparty advertising. To induce consumers 

to engage with third-party advertisers, 

Tapjoy offers in-app rewards in the form 

of a specified amount of virtual 

currency that can be used in the in-app 

games. However, in many instances, 

Tapjoy never issued the promised 

reward to consumers who complete an 

action as instructed, or only issued the 

currency after a substantial delay. 

Consumers who attempt to contact 

Tapjoy to complain about missing 

rewards have found it difficult to do so, 

and even consumers who have been 

able to submit a complaint nevertheless 

did not receive the promised reward. 

The Commission’s proposed 

complaint alleges that Tapjoy has 

violated Section 5 of the FTC Act. In 

particular, the proposed complaint 

alleges that Tapjoy has represented that 

consumers will receive a reward of 

virtual currency upon completion of a 

specific action when, in many instances, 

that representation was false, 

misleading, or not substantiated at the 

time the representation was made. 

The proposed order contains 

injunctive provisions addressing the 

alleged deceptive conduct. Part I.A of 

the proposed order prohibits Tapjoy 

from making the misrepresentations 

alleged in the complaint. Part I.B 

requires Tapjoy to make certain 

disclosures, specifically that its 

advertisers determine whether rewards 

are likely to issue, and when consumers 

are likely to receive rewards. Part I.C 

requires Tapjoy to obtain specified 

agreements from the associated 

advertiser before a reward is promoted 

or offered. Part I.D of the proposed order 

requires Tapjoy, before a reward is 

promoted or offered, to obtain the 

materials used to promote or offer the 

reward, to use those materials to attempt 

to obtain the reward, to validate the 

accuracy of those materials, and to 

validate that the reward is delivered 

promptly or that any delay is disclosed. 

Part I.E requires Tapjoy to provide a 

prominently disclosed and easy-to-use 

method by which consumers may 

submit support requests. Part I.F 

requires Tapjoy to investigate patterns 

of customer support requests or other 

information indicating that a particular 

promotion or offer of a reward has 

inaccurate instructions or is failing to 

deliver the reward. 

Parts II through V of the proposed 

order are reporting and compliance 

provisions. Part II requires 

acknowledgments of the order. Part III 

requires Tapjoy to notify the 

Commission of changes in corporate 

status and mandates that the company 

submit an initial compliance report to 

the Commission. Part IV requires the 

company to create certain documents 

relating to its compliance with the order 

for 10 years and to retain those 

documents for a 5-year period. Part V 

mandates that the company make 

available to the Commission 

information or subsequent compliance 

reports, as requested. 

Finally, Part VI states that the 

proposed order will remain in effect for 

20 years, with certain exceptions. 

The purpose of this analysis is to aid 

public comment on the proposed order. 

It is not intended to constitute an 

official interpretation of the complaint 

or proposed order, or to modify in any 

way the proposed order’s terms. 

By direction of the Commission. 

April J. Tabor, 

Acting Secretary. 

Statement of Commissioner Rohit 

Chopra Joined by Commissioner 

Rebecca Kelly Slaughter Summary 

• The explosive growth of mobile 

gaming has led to mounting concerns 

about harmful practices, including 

unlawful surveillance, dark patterns, 

and facilitation of fraud. 

• Tapjoy’s failure to properly police 

its mobile gaming advertising platform 

cheated developers and gamers out of 

promised compensation and rewards. 

• The Commission must closely 

scrutinize today’s gaming gatekeepers, 

including app stores and advertising 

middlemen, to prevent harm to 

developers and gamers. 

The video game business has 

solidified its place as a fixture of 

America’s entertainment industry. 

During the pandemic, revenues in the 

sector have reportedly eclipsed those of 

the sports and film businesses 

combined.1 This period has brought 

about a massive increase in mobile 

gaming app installs and spending, 

cementing gaming as a major magnet for 

Americans’ attention.2 The latest 

industry offerings rely on deeper social 

connectivity features and facilitate 

content creation by players. Americans 

are hosting birthday parties through 

gaming apps, and tens of millions have 

attended concerts by major artists on 

Fortnite and Roblox.3

Mobile gaming is the fastest growing 

segment of the market, where revenues 

are primarily generated through in-app 

purchases and advertising. Importantly, 

this segment is characterized by a 

unique market structure dominated by 

new gatekeepers, particularly app stores 

2672 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 8 / Wednesday, January 13, 2021 / Notices 

4This matter is another example where the lack 

of clarity regarding the scope of immunities 

conferred by Section 230 of the Communications 

Decency Act has given legal ammunition to 

platforms seeking to shirk responsibility for their 

commercial activity, including sales and advertising 

practices. This lack of clarity undermines the ability 

of the FTC and other regulators to obtain adequate 

monetary relief for misconduct. 

5 In other instances, users can receive rewards 

directly through the game. 

6Compl. In the Matter of Tapjoy, Inc., ¶¶ 21–29. 

7Compl., id. ¶¶ 8, 15–29. 

8Compl., id. ¶¶ 30–40. 

9The Commission’s proposed complaint charges 

Tapjoy with deception, but fails to include a charge 

of unfairness. However, the settlement includes 

injunctive relief that addresses Tapjoy’s failure to 

police fraud. 

10 I respectfully disagree with the proposed order 

provision requiring Tapjoy to disclose that 

advertisers are responsible for issuing rewards. This 

disclaimer undermines the goal of ensuring that 

Tapjoy takes adequate responsibility for its business 

partners’ practices. 

11See Omer Kaplan, Mobile gaming is a $68.5 

billion global business, and investors are buying in, 

TechCrunch (Aug. 22, 2019), https://

techcrunch.com/2019/08/22/mobile-gaming-mintsmoney/. 

12See Staff of H. Comm. On the Judiciary, 116th 

Cong., Investigation of Competition in Digital 

Markets: Majority Staff Report and 

Recommendations at 221 (Google); 339 (Apple). 

Although Google allows users to ‘‘sideload’’ apps 

from outside the Play Store, it has been alleged that 

Google makes this process ‘‘technically complex, 

confusing and threatening[.]’’ Id. at 220 (quoting 

Epic lawsuit). 

13 Developers have alleged retaliatory practices by 

both Google and Apple, such as when they have 

tried to circumvent these gatekeepers’ preferred 

monetization tools. Id. at 222, 348–349. 

14Press Release, Fed. Trade Comm’n, FTC Staff 

Issue Perspective Paper on Video Game Loot Boxes 

Workshop (Aug. 14, 2020), https://www.ftc.gov/ 

news-events/press-releases/2020/08/ftc-staff-issueperspective-paper-video-game-loot-boxes-workshop. 

15Press Release, Fed. Trade Comm’n, Developer 

of Apps Popular with Children Agrees to Settle FTC 

Allegations It Illegally Collected Kids’ Data without 

Parental Consent (June 4, 2020), https://

www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2020/06/ 

developer-apps-popular-children-agrees-settle-ftcallegations-it. 

16 Mobile ads: the key to monetizing gaming apps, 

Google AdMob, https://admob.google.com/home/ 

resources/monetize-mobile-game-with-ads/ (last 

visited on Jan. 5, 2021). 

and advertising middlemen. This 

structure is rightfully under more 

intense scrutiny, given the challenges 

facing developers and the downstream 

practices that can harm gamers. 

Against this backdrop, the Federal 

Trade Commission evaluates an 

appropriate remedy to address conduct 

of Tapjoy, a mobile advertising platform 

that connects gamers, game developers, 

and advertisers. As detailed in the 

Commission’s complaint, Tapjoy’s 

practices allowed users to be cheated of 

promised rewards, and developers to be 

cheated of promised compensation. The 

proposed settlement does not remedy 

these past harms, but will require 

Tapjoy to better police its platform to 

prevent abuses going forward.4

Tapjoy’s Middleman Misconduct 

Tapjoy is a major mobile advertising 

platform that acts as a middleman 

between advertisers, gamers, and game 

developers. The platform woos 

developers into integrating its 

technology by promising payments for 

user activity. In a mobile gaming 

experience where developers use 

Tapjoy’s advertising platform, Tapjoy 

displays ‘‘offers.’’ When gamers 

complete these ‘‘offers,’’ such as by 

signing up for subscriptions or making 

purchases, Tapjoy credits the user’s 

account with coins or other currency for 

use in the game, and developers receive 

a percentage of Tapjoy’s advertising 

revenue.5

However, according to the FTC’s 

complaint, many players jumped 

through hoops—and even spent money 

and turned over sensitive data—to 

complete Tapjoy’s offers, only to receive 

nothing in return.6 It appears Tapjoy 

amplified false offers by its business 

partners, who baited gamers with big 

rewards only to cheat them when it was 

time to pay up.7 Tapjoy did little to 

clean up the mess, even when hundreds 

of thousands of gamers filed 

complaints.8 This also harmed 

developers of mobile games, who were 

cheated of advertising revenue they 

were entitled to. 

In my view, Tapjoy’s conduct violated 

the FTC Act’s prohibition on unfair 

practices, as well as the prohibition on 

deceptive practices.9 The FTC’s 

proposed settlement requires the 

platform to implement screening and 

testing procedures to weed out 

advertisers that cheat gamers and 

developers. This provision will help 

ensure Tapjoy takes more responsibility 

for fraud, rather than facilitating it.10

Gaming Gatekeepers and Trickle-Down 

Abuse 

Tapjoy is not the only platform 

squeezing developers. In fact, the firm is 

a minnow next to the gatekeeping 

whales of the mobile gaming industry, 

Apple and Google. By controlling the 

dominant app stores, these firms enjoy 

vast power to impose taxes and 

regulations on the mobile gaming 

industry, which was generating nearly 

$70 billion annually even before the 

pandemic.11

We should all be concerned that 

gatekeepers can harm developers and 

squelch innovation. The clearest 

example is rent extraction: Apple and 

Google charge mobile app developers on 

their platforms up to 30 percent of sales, 

and even bar developers from trying to 

avoid this tax through offering 

alternative payment systems.12 While 

larger gaming companies are pursuing 

legal action against these practices, 

developers and small businesses risk 

severe retaliation for speaking up, 

including outright suspension from app 

stores—an effective death sentence.13

This market structure also has 

cascading effects on gamers and 

consumers. Under heavy taxation by 

Apple and Google, developers have 

been forced to adopt alternative 

monetization models that rely on 

surveillance, manipulation, and other 

harmful practices. 

For example, many developers are 

turning to ‘‘loot boxes’’ to squeeze more 

revenue out of gamers. These loot boxes 

deploy dark patterns and other 

deceptions to lure gamers—often 

children—into purchasing in-app 

rewards of randomly assigned value, 

turning videogames into virtual casinos. 

As detailed in a recent FTC report, this 

addictive phenomenon emerged as a 

direct consequence of changing 

monetization models in the industry, as 

developers increasingly rely on 

recurring revenue, such as through inapp purchases, rather than upfront 

sales.14

Mobile gaming’s market structure is 

also forcing developers to create 

revenue streams that are not subject to 

app store taxation, including through 

intrusive behavioral advertising. Last 

year, for example, the FTC brought an 

action against Hyperbeard, a developer 

of child-directed games charged with 

allowing major ad networks to surveil 

users—including children—in order to 

serve behavioral advertising.15 This type 

of conduct violates the Children’s 

Online Privacy Protection Act, but 

Hyperbeard’s surveillance practices are 

not unique. In fact, Google encourages 

game developers on its platform to 

adopt this monetization model, claiming 

‘‘users expect free games.’’ 16

Today’s action against Tapjoy reveals 

another monetization model developers 

turn to in the face of fees and 

restrictions imposed by app stores. By 

offering a platform connecting 

advertisers, gamers, and game 

developers, Tapjoy allows these 

developers to generate advertising 

revenue that Apple and Google do not 

tax. But this monetization model also 

creates opportunities for fraud, and the 

Commission’s complaint details how 

Tapjoy allowed this fraud to fester. 

Monitoring the Middlemen 

Developers of mobile games deliver 

creative content that keeps Americans 

entertained and engaged, but face many 

middlemen, even beyond the dominant 

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 8 / Wednesday, January 13, 2021 / Notices 2673 

app stores. Game developers relied on 

Tapjoy to generate revenue for 

themselves and offer gamers a way to 

earn currency to enhance their play. 

However, Tapjoy’s failure to screen 

fraudulent offers left both gamers and 

developers holding the bag. 

The settlement proposed today should 

help reverse the lax policing practices 

that led hundreds of thousands of 

gamers to file complaints. But when it 

comes to addressing the deeper 

structural problems in this marketplace 

that threaten both gamers and 

developers, the Commission will need 

to use all of its tools—competition, 

consumer protection, and data 

protection—to combat middlemen 

mischief, including by the largest 

gaming gatekeepers. 

[FR Doc. 2021–00568 Filed 1–12–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6750–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

GENERAL SERVICES 

ADMINISTRATION 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND 

SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

[OMB Control No. 9000–0200; Docket No. 

2020–0053; Sequence No. 19] 

Submission for OMB Review; 

Protecting Life in Global Health 

Assistance 

Correction 

In notice document 2020–28152 

appearing on pages 83086–83087 in the 

issue of Monday, December 21, 2020, 

make the following correction: 

On page 83087, in the first column, in 

the DATES section, change ‘‘January 20, 

2021’’ to read ‘‘January 21, 2021.’’ 

[FR Doc. C1–2020–28152 Filed 1–12–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1301–00–D 

GENERAL SERVICES 

ADMINISTRATION 

[Notice-MG–2021–01; Docket No. 2021– 

0002; Sequence No. 1] 

Office of Federal High-Performance 

Buildings; Green Building Advisory 

Committee; Notification of Upcoming 

Web Meeting 

AGENCY: Office of Government-Wide 

Policy, General Services Administration 

(GSA). 

ACTION: Meeting notice. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

requirements of the Federal Advisory 

Committee Act, this notice provides the 

agenda for the January 28, 2021 Web 

meeting of the Green Building Advisory 

Committee (the Committee). Interested 

individuals must register to attend as 

instructed below under Supplementary 

Information. 

DATES: The Committee’s Web meeting 

will be held on Thursday, January 28, 

2021, from 11:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. 

Eastern time (ET). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

Ken Sandler, Designated Federal 

Officer, Office of Federal HighPerformance Buildings, Office of 

Government-wide Policy, General 

Services Administration, 1800 F Street 

NW, (Mail-code: MG), Washington, DC 

20405, at ken.sandler@gsa.gov or 202– 

219–1121. Additional information about 

the Committee, including meeting 

materials and agendas, will be available 

on-line at http://www.gsa.gov/gbac. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Procedures for Attendance and Public 

Comment 

Contact Dr. Ken Sandler at 

ken.sandler@gsa.gov or 202–219–1121 

to register to attend the Committee 

meeting. To attend, submit your full 

name, organization, email address, and 

phone number. Requests to attend the 

meeting must be received by 5:00 p.m. 

ET, on Monday, January 25, 2021. (GSA 

will be unable to provide technical 

assistance to any listener experiencing 

technical difficulties. Testing access to 

the Web meeting site before the calls is 

recommended.) 

Contact Dr. Sandler to register to 

comment during the meeting public 

comment period. Registered speakers/ 

organizations will be allowed a 

maximum of five minutes each and will 

need to provide written copies of their 

presentations. Requests to comment at 

the meeting must be received by 5:00 

p.m., ET, on Monday, January 25, 2021. 

Background 

The Administrator of GSA established 

the Committee on June 20, 2011 

(Federal Register/Vol. 76, No. 118) 

pursuant to Section 494 of the Energy 

Independence and Security Act of 2007 

(EISA, 42 U.S.C. 17123). Under this 

authority, the Committee provides 

independent policy advice and 

recommendations to GSA to advance 

federal building innovations in 

planning, design, and operations to 

reduce costs, enable agency missions, 

enhance human health and 

performance, and minimize 

environmental impacts. 

January 28, 2021 Meeting Agenda 

• Updates and introductions 

• Embodied energy task group findings 

& recommendations 

• Election for Committee Chair 

• Sustainable response to COVID–19 

task group findings & 

recommendations 

• Energy storage task group findings & 

recommendations 

• New committee directions & topics to 

explore 

• Public comment 

• Next steps and closing comments 

Kevin Kampschroer, 

Federal Director, Office of Federal HighPerformance Buildings, General Services 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2021–00515 Filed 1–12–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6820–14–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Food and Drug Administration 

[Docket No. FDA–2008–N–0312] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Submission for Office of 

Management and Budget Review; 

Comment Request; Extralabel Drug 

Use in Animals 

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, 

HHS. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA or we) is 

announcing that a proposed collection 

of information has been submitted to the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) for review and clearance under 

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. 

DATES: Submit written comments 

(including recommendations) on the 

collection of information by February 

12, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: To ensure that comments on 

the information collection are received, 

OMB recommends that written 

comments be submitted to https://

www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. 

Find this particular information 

collection by selecting ‘‘Currently under 

Review—Open for Public Comments’’ or 

by using the search function. The OMB 

control number for this information 

collection is 0910–0325. Also include 

the FDA docket number found in 

brackets in the heading of this 

document. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Domini Bean, Office of Operations, 

Food and Drug Administration, Three 

White Flint North, 10A–12M, 11601 

Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 

20852, 301–796–5733, PRAStaff@

fda.hhs.gov.