8926 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 26 / Wednesday, February 10, 2021 / Notices 

DATES: The OMB will consider all 

written comments that agency receives 

on or before March 12, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments and 

recommendations for the proposed 

information collection should be sent 

within 30 days of publication of this 

notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/ 

PRAMain. Find this particular 

information collection by selecting 

‘‘Currently under 30-day Review—Open 

for Public Comments’’ or by using the 

search function. 

Comments are invited on: (1) Whether 

the collection of information is 

necessary for the proper performance of 

the functions of the Department, 

including whether the information will 

have practical utility; (2) if the 

information will be processed and used 

in a timely manner; (3) the accuracy of 

the agency’s estimates of the burden and 

cost of the collection of information, 

including the validity of the 

methodology and assumptions used; (4) 

ways to enhance the quality, utility and 

clarity of the information collection; and 

(5) ways to minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on those who 

are to respond, including the use of 

automated collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Crystal Rennie by telephone at 202– 

693–0456, or by email at DOL_PRA_

PUBLIC@dol.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

standard requires employers to develop 

a written fire safety plan and written 

statements or policies that contain 

information about fire watches and fire 

response duties and responsibilities. For 

additional substantive information 

about this ICR, see the related notice 

published in the Federal Register on 

November 12, 2020 (85 FR 71949). 

This information collection is subject 

to the PRA. A Federal agency generally 

cannot conduct or sponsor a collection 

of information, and the public is 

generally not required to respond to an 

information collection, unless the OMB 

approves it and displays a currently 

valid OMB Control Number. In addition, 

notwithstanding any other provisions of 

law, no person shall generally be subject 

to penalty for failing to comply with a 

collection of information that does not 

display a valid OMB Control Number. 

See 5 CFR 1320.5(a) and 1320.6. 

DOL seeks PRA authorization for this 

information collection for three (3) 

years. OMB authorization for an ICR 

cannot be for more than three (3) years 

without renewal. The DOL notes that 

information collection requirements 

submitted to the OMB for existing ICRs 

receive a month-to-month extension 

while they undergo review. 

Agency: DOL–OSHA. 

Title of Collection: Fire Protection in 

Shipyard Employment Standard. 

OMB Control Number: 1218–0248. 

Affected Public: Private Sector, 

Businesses or other for-profits. 

Total Estimated Number of 

Respondents: 253. 

Total Estimated Number of 

Responses: 184,921. 

Total Estimated Annual Time Burden: 

16,251 hours. 

Total Estimated Annual Other Costs 

Burden: $0. 

(Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D)) 

Crystal Rennie, 

Senior PRA Analyst. 

[FR Doc. 2021–02696 Filed 2–9–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–26–P 

OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND 

BUDGET 

[Notice–PBS–2019–06; Docket No. 2019– 

0002; Sequence No. 15] 

Publication of Standards, Criteria and 

Recommendations 

AGENCY: Office of Management and 

Budget 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The notice provides the list of 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) recommended Federal real 

property for consideration by the Public 

Buildings Reform Board (PBRB) for 

disposal, consolidation, or co-location 

and the standards and criteria used to 

assess the property. 

ADDRESSES: Recommendations on 

Federal real property to be disposed 

may be submitted online at 

http:www.gsa.gov/fasta. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: U.S. 

Office of Management and Budget, 725 

17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503. 

Contact Bill Hamele by phone at (202) 

395–7583 and by email at whamele@

omb.eop.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background: As required in Section 

11(d)(2) of Public Law 114–287, the 

standards, criteria, and 

recommendations developed pursuant 

to subsection (b) shall be published in 

the Federal Register. OMB asked 

landholding agencies to submit projects 

for consideration through an agency 

recommendation template developed in 

coordination with the General Services 

Administration (GSA) Public Buildings 

Service (PBS). 

II. Standards & Criteria: The agency 

recommendation template allows 

agencies to provide a business-case 

justification for the inclusion of the 

following project types: Disposal (by 

sale as authorized by the Act) and 

consolidation (which could include 

colocation, reconfiguration, and 

redevelopment). The recommendation 

template required agencies to provide 

the following information for each 

project submitted: Agency priority, 

ownership, marketability, agency 

mission impacts, financial return 

(including costs associated with project 

implementation), and utilization rate 

information. OMB and GSA then 

evaluated these submissions based on 

real estate fundamentals, financial 

information, schedule certainty, and 

other factors as required by Public Law 

112–287 Section 11(b)(3). In addition, 

GSA and OMB established a ranking 

scheme of high, medium, and low 

priority to assign relative priority to the 

projects submitted by the agencies. As 

OMB and GSA are working to mature 

the FASTA process, the OMB list was 

limited to less complex property 

disposals with the understanding that 

the Board has access to multiple other 

sources of information to determine its 

next set of disposal recommendations. 

More complex options such as 

consolidations and land swaps were not 

included in this list because there are 

other factors, including proposed 

legislative reforms that may impact 

those types of disposal options. This 

approach is intended to build on OMB’s 

recent approval of the PBRB’s highvalue list and the lessons learned from 

actions taken to sell those properties. 

OMB looks forward to continuing to 

refine this process over subsequent 

rounds provided in the statute by 

developing increasingly complex 

transactions, potentially to include 

consolidations or other actions. Agency 

submissions were evaluated by review 

teams from PBS and OMB with priority 

given to projects with strong real estate 

fundamentals, favorable financial data, 

limited complexity, availability of 

information for the public on effected 

buildings, and high schedule certainty. 

A combination of the evaluation of 

submitted data, assessment of the 

evaluation factors required by Public 

Law 112–287 Section 11(b)(3), and 

dialogue with agencies resulted in the 

final high, medium, low rankings. Only 

projects ranked High or Medium were 

recommended to the PBRB. Project in 

the Low category did not provide 

sufficient financial benefit to the 

government or had high risk and high 

cost, generally associated with 

environmental cleanup. 

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 26 / Wednesday, February 10, 2021 / Notices 8927 

It is important to note that while 

OMB, with GSA’s assistance, did 

conduct this evaluation of the agencyidentified properties and is providing a 

list of properties for consideration of the 

PBRB, it is ultimately the responsibility 

of the PBRB to fully vet each property, 

as the PBRB, working with GSA, is 

charged with carrying out the disposals 

and consolidations. Like the High Value 

Asset process, OMB will expect that the 

PBRB provide the necessary financial 

information to weigh the likelihood of 

project by project success. Further, the 

availability of appropriations including 

appropriations of proceeds from the 

High Value Round disposals will be a 

critical determination of what is 

possible to execute, and that is currently 

unknown. 

III. Standard Utilization Rates: In 

2017–2018, GSA and OMB researched 

existing utilization rate standards that 

could potentially be used to evaluate 

Agency Recommendations, in 

accordance with Public Law 114–287, 

Section 11(c), ‘‘Special Rule for 

Utilization Rates.’’ Specifically FASTA 

required that standards developed by 

the Director of OMB pursuant to 

subsection (b) ‘‘shall incorporate and 

apply clear standard utilization rates to 

the extent that such standard rates 

increase efficiency and provide 

performance data. The utilization rates 

shall be consistent throughout each 

applicable category of space and with 

non-government space utilization 

rates.’’ 

This research was conducted by GSA 

with input from OMB. For each Federal 

Real Property Profile (FRPP) 

predominant building use type, 

potential utilization rate approaches 

were identified and evaluated based on 

the criteria established in this section, 

including the ability to identify 

efficiency opportunities, provide 

performance data, and be consistent 

throughout each applicable category of 

space. 

A. Office Buildings 

The results of the study revealed that 

only the FRPP building type ‘‘office’’ 

lends itself to a standard utilization 

metric. Utilization rates for office space 

are used by the private sector and a 

majority of federal agencies to manage 

their space and assess its efficient use. 

OMB and GSA recommends to PBRB 

that buildings reported to the FRPP with 

a building use code of ‘‘office’’ should 

utilize the following utilization rate 

calculation: Total Administrative Office 

Space (useable square feet) divided by 

Total Headcount = administrative Office 

Utilization Rate (usable square feet per 

person). This Administrative Office 

Utilization Rate formula focuses solely 

on that space which is commonly found 

in a commercial office setting: 

Workstations, private offices, 

collaboration areas, meeting spaces, and 

other standard support spaces, and 

associated internal circulation. Any 

space that is unique to the agency and 

does not have a commercial office 

equivalent (termed ‘‘special space’’) is 

removed from the calculation. This 

special space is instead evaluated based 

on its efficiency relative to achieving the 

agency’s programmatic goals and 

established design criteria. 

B. Non-Office Buildings 

For all other FRPP building types 

other than ‘‘office’’, the study revealed 

that a clear and reliable utilization rate 

is not in common use within the 

government or the private sector, and 

that it is currently not feasible to create 

such rates without extensive and close 

collaboration among the government 

and the private sector. In some building 

types, there exist significant variations 

in programmatic purpose that prevent 

reliable comparisons between them. 

Creating a standard utilization rate for 

non-office building types would often 

provide a misleading and inaccurate 

efficiency measurements, particularly if 

comparison was made among agencies. 

Based on this, GSA recommends that 

non-office buildings identified in 

Agency Recommendations be evaluated 

individually by real estate professionals, 

based on the building’s unique ability to 

meet mission requirements of the 

agency at that specific location, to assess 

how efficiently the building is being 

utilized. 

IV. Agency Recommendations: In 

accordance with 11(d)(2) of Public Law 

114–287, the list of recommendations 

was submitted by OMB and GSA and 

has been provided to the Committee on 

Transportation and Infrastructure of the 

House of Representatives; the 

Committee on Oversight and 

Government Reform of the House of 

Representatives; the Committee on 

Homeland Security and Governmental 

Affairs of the Senate; the Committee on 

Environment and Public Works of the 

Senate; and the Committees on 

Appropriations of the House of 

Representatives and the Senate; the 

Government Accountability Office; and 

the Public Buildings Reform Board. 

OMB believes that to fully utilize the 

authority provided by FASTA, the next 

round of PBRB recommendations 

should include 100 or more properties 

and that projects already identified by 

the agencies as priorities are likely to be 

strong candidates for that list. 

Deidre A. Harrison, 

Deputy Controller (Acting). 

Agency Agency Property name City State Priority Annual 

O&M costs 

Total 

improvements 

Total square 

footage Total acres 

VA .................... VHA ................. Menlo Park VA Medical 

Center—NW Parcel.

Menlo Park ...... CA ...... Medium ...... $4,302 1 15,200 2.24 

Agriculture ........ ARS ................. Portion of ARS Glen Dale Glen Dale ........ MD ..... Medium ...... 2,500,000 24 31,242 70 

Energy ............. ANL ................. Argonne National Lab— 

Vacant Land/2 Parking 

Structures.

Argonne ........... IL ........ Medium ...... .................... 0 0 8.4 

EPA .................. EPA ................. Lakes & Rivers Forecasting Research Station.Grosee Ile ....... MI ....... Medium ...... 239,196 4 35,547 3.1 

Labor ................ Job Corps ........ Earle C Clements Job 

Corps Center—Vacant 

Land.

Morgansfield .... KY ...... Medium ...... .................... 0 0 600 

VA .................... VHA ................. Sepulveda North Parcel Sepulveda ....... CA ...... Medium ...... .................... 18 35,316 3.53 

VA .................... VHA ................. Portion of Manchester VA 

Medical Center.

Manchester ..... NH ...... Medium ...... 33,661 1 2,776 2.8 

VA .................... VHA ................. Portion of VA Campus— 

Baseball Fields.

Walla Walla ..... WA ..... Medium ...... .................... 0 0 13 

VA .................... VHA ................. Tomah Quarters Buildings.Tomah ............. WI ...... Medium ...... 12,401 3 30,823 2 

Labor ................ Job Corps ........ Portion of Atterbury Job 

Corps Center.

Edinburgh ........ IN ....... Medium ...... .................... 8 62,840.00 93.00 

8928 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 26 / Wednesday, February 10, 2021 / Notices 

Agency Agency Property name City State Priority Annual 

O&M costs 

Total 

improvements 

Total square 

footage Total acres 

Labor ................ Job Corps ........ Gary Job Corps Center 

Staff Housing.

San Marcos ..... TX ...... Medium ...... 558,677 59 142,622.00 60.00 

VA .................... VHA ................. Portion of FDR Campus Montrose ......... NY ...... Medium ...... .................... 0 0 5.10 

VA .................... VHA ................. Portion of VA New Jersey HCS.Lyons ............... NJ ...... Medium ...... .................... 0 0 0.10 

3,348,237 118 356,366 863.27 

[FR Doc. 2021–02695 Filed 2–9–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3110–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[NRC–2021–0038] 

Safety-Related Steel Structures and 

Steel-Plate Composite Walls for Other 

Than Reactor Vessels and 

Containments 

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Draft regulatory guide; request 

for comment. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) is issuing for public 

comment a draft regulatory guide (DG), 

DG–1304, ‘‘Safety-Related Steel 

Structures and Steel-Plate Composite 

Walls for other than Reactor Vessels and 

Containments.’’ DG–1304 is a new guide 

that proposes guidance to meet 

regulatory requirements for safetyrelated steel structures and steel-plate 

composite walls for other than reactor 

vessels. DG–1304 endorses, with 

exceptions and clarifications, the 2018 

edition of American National Standards 

Institute/American Nuclear Society 

(ANSI/AISC) N690, ‘‘Specification for 

Safety-Related Steel Structures for 

Nuclear Facilities.’’ 

DATES: Submit comments by March 29, 

2021. Comments received after this date 

will be considered if it is practical to do 

so, but the NRC is able to ensure 

consideration only for comments 

received on or before this date. 

Although a time limit is given, 

comments and suggestions in 

connection with items for inclusion in 

guides currently being developed or 

improvements in all published guides 

are encouraged at any time. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by any of the following methods, 

however, the NRC encourages electronic 

comment submission through the 

Federal Rulemaking website: 

• Federal Rulemaking website: Go to 

https://www.regulations.gov and search 

for Docket ID NRC–2021–0038. Address 

questions about Docket IDs in 

Regulations.gov to Stacy Schumann; 

telephone: 301–415–0624; email: 

Stacy.Schumann@nrc.gov. For technical 

questions, contact the individuals listed 

in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section of this document. 

• Mail comments to: Office of 

Administration, Mail Stop: TWFN–7– 

A60M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 

0001, ATTN: Program Management, 

Announcements, and Editing Staff. 

For additional direction on obtaining 

information and submitting comments, 

see ‘‘Obtaining Information and 

Submitting Comments’’ in the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this document. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Edward O’Donnell, telephone: 301–415– 

3317, email: Edward.ODonnell@nrc.gov 

and Marcos Rolon Acevedo, telephone: 

301–415–2208, email: Marcos.Rolon@

nrc.gov. Both are staff of the Office of 

Nuclear Regulatory Research, U.S. 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 

Washington, DC 20555–0001. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Obtaining Information and 

Submitting Comments 

A. Obtaining Information 

Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2021– 

0038 when contacting the NRC about 

the availability of information for this 

action. You may obtain publicly 

available information related to this 

action by any of the following methods: 

• Federal Rulemaking website: Go to 

https://www.regulations.gov and search 

for Docket ID NRC–2021–0038. 

• NRC’s Agencywide Documents 

Access and Management System 

(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly 

available documents online in the 

ADAMS Public Documents collection at 

https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ 

adams.html. To begin the search, select 

‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.’’ For 

problems with ADAMS, please contact 

the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR) 

reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, at 

301–415–4737, or by email to 

pdr.resource@nrc.gov. DG–1304, 

‘‘Safety-Related Steel Structures and 

Steel-Plate Composite Walls for other 

than Reactor Vessels and Containments’’ 

is available in ADAMS under Accession 

No. ML20339A558. 

• Attention: The PDR, where you may 

examine and order copies of public 

documents, is currently closed. You 

may submit your request to the PDR via 

email at pdr.resource@nrc.gov or call 1– 

800–397–4209 or 301–415–4737, 

between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. (EST), 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. 

B. Submitting Comments 

The NRC encourages electronic 

comment submission through the 

Federal Rulemaking website (https://

www.regulations.gov). Please include 

Docket ID NRC–2021–0038 in your 

comment submission. 

The NRC cautions you not to include 

identifying or contact information that 

you do not want to be publicly 

disclosed in your comment submission. 

The NRC will post all comment 

submissions at https://

www.regulations.gov as well as enter the 

comment submissions into ADAMS. 

The NRC does not routinely edit 

comment submissions to remove 

identifying or contact information. 

If you are requesting or aggregating 

comments from other persons for 

submission to the NRC, then you should 

inform those persons not to include 

identifying or contact information that 

they do not want to be publicly 

disclosed in their comment submission. 

Your request should state that the NRC 

does not routinely edit comment 

submissions to remove such information 

before making the comment 

submissions available to the public or 

entering the comment into ADAMS. 

II. Additional Information 

The NRC is issuing for public 

comment a DG in the NRC’s ‘‘Regulatory 

Guide’’ series. This series was 

developed to describe and make 

available to the public information 

regarding methods that are acceptable to 

the NRC staff for implementing specific 

parts of the NRC’s regulations, 

techniques that the staff uses in 

evaluating specific issues or postulated 

events, and data that the staff needs in 

its review of applications for permits 

and licenses.