9292 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

REGULATORY INFORMATION 

SERVICE CENTER 

Introduction to the Unified Agenda of 

Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory 

Actions—Fall 2023 

AGENCY: Regulatory Information Service 

Center. 

ACTION: Introduction to the Unified 

Agenda of Federal Regulatory and 

Deregulatory Actions. 

SUMMARY: Publication of the Fall 2023 

Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory 

and Deregulatory Actions represents a 

key component of the regulatory 

planning mechanism prescribed in 

Executive Order (‘‘E.O.’’) 12866, 

‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review,’’ (58 

FR 51735, as amended) and reaffirmed 

in E.O. 13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation 

and Regulatory Review,’’ (76 FR 3821) 

and E.O. 14094, ‘‘Modernizing 

Regulatory Review,’’ (88 FR 21879). The 

Regulatory Flexibility Act requires that 

agencies publish semiannual regulatory 

agendas in the Federal Register 

describing regulatory actions they are 

developing that may have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities (5 U.S.C. 602). 

The Unified Agenda of Federal 

Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions 

(Unified Agenda), published in the fall 

and spring, helps agencies fulfill all of 

these requirements. All Federal 

regulatory agencies have chosen to 

publish their regulatory agendas as part 

of this publication. The complete 

publication of the Fall 2023 Unified 

Agenda contains the Regulatory Plans of 

29 Federal agencies and 69 Federal 

agency regulatory agendas available to 

the public at www.reginfo.gov. 

The Fall 2023 Unified Agenda 

publication appearing in the Federal 

Register includes the Regulatory Plan 

and agency Regulatory Flexibility 

Agendas, in accordance with the 

publication requirements of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act. Agency 

Regulatory Flexibility Agendas contain 

only those Agenda entries for rules that 

are likely to have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities and entries that have been 

selected for periodic review under 

section 610 of the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act. 

ADDRESSES: Regulatory Information 

Service Center (MV), General Services 

Administration, 1800 F Street NW, 

Washington, DC 20405. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

further information about specific 

regulatory actions, please refer to the 

agency contact listed for each entry. To 

provide comment on or to obtain further 

information about this publication, 

contact: Boris Arratia, Director, 

Regulatory Information Service Center 

(MV), General Services Administration, 

1800 F Street NW, Washington, DC 

20405, 703–795–0816. You may also 

send comments to us by email at: RISC@

gsa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

Introduction to the Regulatory Plan and the 

Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and 

Deregulatory Actions 

I. What are the Regulatory Plan and the 

Unified Agenda? 

II. Why are the Regulatory Plan and the 

Unified Agenda published? 

III. How are the Regulatory Plan and the 

Unified Agenda organized? 

IV. What information appears for each entry? 

V. Abbreviations 

VI. How can users get copies of the Plan and 

the Agenda? 

Introduction to the Fall 2023 Regulatory 

Plan 

Agency Regulatory Plans 

Cabinet Departments 

Department of Agriculture 

Department of Commerce 

Department of Defense 

Department of Education 

Department of Energy 

Department of Health and Human Services 

Department of Homeland Security 

Department of Housing and Urban 

Development 

Department of the Interior 

Department of Justice 

Department of Labor 

Department of Transportation 

Department of the Treasury 

Department of Veterans Affairs 

Other Executive Agencies 

Corporation for National and Community 

Service 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 

General Services Administration 

National Archives and Records 

Administration 

National Archives and Records 

Administration 

National Science Foundation 

Office of Personnel Management 

Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation 

Small Business Administration 

Social Security Administration 

Joint Authority 

Department of Defense/General Services 

Administration/National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration (Federal Acquisition 

Regulation) 

Independent Regulatory Agencies 

Consumer Product Safety Commission 

Federal Trade Commission 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

Regulatory Flexibility Agendas 

Cabinet Departments 

Department of Agriculture 

Department of Commerce 

Department of Defense 

Department of Education 

Department of Energy 

Department of Health and Human Services 

Department of Homeland Security 

Department of the Interior 

Department of Justice 

Department of Labor 

Department of Transportation 

Department of the Treasury 

Other Executive Agencies 

Architectural and Transportation Barriers 

Compliance Board 

Environmental Protection Agency 

General Services Administration 

Small Business Administration 

Joint Authority 

Department of Defense/General Services 

Administration/National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration (Federal Acquisition 

Regulation) 

Independent Regulatory Agencies 

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau 

Consumer Product Safety Commission 

Federal Communications Commission 

Federal Reserve System 

National Labor Relations Board 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

Securities and Exchange Commission 

Surface Transportation Board 

Introduction to the Regulatory Plan and 

Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory 

and Deregulatory Actions 

I. What are the Regulatory Plan and the 

Unified Agenda? 

The Regulatory Plan serves as a 

defining statement of the 

Administration’s regulatory and 

deregulatory policies and priorities. The 

Plan is part of the fall edition of the 

Unified Agenda. Each participating 

agency’s regulatory plan contains: (1) A 

narrative statement of the agency’s 

regulatory and deregulatory priorities, 

and, for the most part; and (2) a 

description of the most important 

significant regulatory and deregulatory 

actions that the agency reasonably 

expects to issue in proposed or final 

form during the upcoming fiscal year. 

This edition includes the regulatory 

plans of 29 agencies. 

The Unified Agenda provides 

information about regulations that the 

Government is considering or 

reviewing. The Unified Agenda has 

appeared in the Federal Register twice 

each year since 1983 and has been 

available online since 1995. The 

complete Unified Agenda is available to 

the public at www.reginfo.gov. The 

online Unified Agenda offers flexible 

search tools and access to the historic 

Unified Agenda database dating back to 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9293 

1995. The complete online edition of 

the Unified Agenda includes regulatory 

agendas from 69 Federal agencies. 

Agencies of the United States Congress 

are not included. 

The Fall 2023 Unified Agenda 

publication appearing in the Federal 

Register consists of the Regulatory Plan 

and Regulatory Flexibility Agendas, in 

accordance with the publication 

requirements of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. Agency Regulatory 

Flexibility Agendas contain only those 

Agenda entries for rules that are likely 

to have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small entities 

and entries that have been selected for 

periodic review under section 610 of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act. Printed 

entries display only the fields required 

by the Regulatory Flexibility Act. 

Complete Unified Agenda information 

for those entries appears online in a 

uniform format at www.reginfo.gov. 

The following agencies have no 

entries identified for inclusion in the 

printed Regulatory Flexibility Agenda. 

An asterisk (*) indicates agencies that 

appear in The Regulatory Plan. The 

regulatory agendas of these agencies are 

available to the public at 

www.reginfo.gov. 

Cabinet Departments 

Department of Housing and Urban 

Development* 

Department of State 

Department of Veterans Affairs* 

Other Executive Agencies 

Agency for International Development 

Committee for Purchase From People Who 

Are Blind or Severely Disabled 

Corporation for National and Community 

Service* 

Council on Environmental Quality 

Court Services and Offender Supervision 

Agency for the District of Columbia 

Equal Employment Opportunity 

Commission* 

Federal Mediation Conciliation Service 

Institute of Museum and Library Services 

Inter-American Foundation 

National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration* 

National Archives and Records 

Administration* 

National Endowment for the Arts 

National Endowment for the Humanities 

National Mediation Board 

National Science Foundation* 

Office of Government Ethics 

Office of Management and Budget 

Office of the National Cyber Director 

Office of Personnel Management* 

Office of the United States Trade 

Representative 

Peace Corps 

Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation* 

Railroad Retirement Board 

Selective Service System 

Social Security Administration* 

U.S. Agency for Global Media 

Independent Agencies 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board 

Farm Credit Administration 

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

Federal Housing Finance Agency 

Federal Maritime Commission 

Federal Mine Safety and Health Review 

Commission 

Federal Permitting Improvement Steering 

Council 

Federal Trade Commission* 

National Credit Union Administration 

National Indian Gaming Commission 

National Transportation Safety Board 

Postal Regulatory Commission 

U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard 

Investigation Board 

The Regulatory Information Service 

Center compiles the Unified Agenda for 

the Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs (OIRA), part of the Office of 

Management and Budget. OIRA is 

responsible for overseeing the Federal 

Government’s regulatory, paperwork, 

and information resource management 

activities, including implementation of 

Executive Order 12866, as amended 

(incorporated in Executive Order 

13563). The Center also provides 

information about Federal regulatory 

activity to the President and his 

Executive Office, the Congress, agency 

officials, and the public. 

The activities included in the Agenda 

are, in general, those that will have a 

regulatory action within the next 12 

months. Agencies may choose to 

include activities that will have a longer 

timeframe than 12 months. Agency 

agendas also show actions or reviews 

completed or withdrawn since the last 

Unified Agenda. Executive Order 12866, 

as amended, does not require agencies 

to include regulations concerning 

military or foreign affairs functions or 

regulations related to agency 

organization, management, or personnel 

matters. 

Agencies prepared entries for this 

publication to give the public notice of 

their plans to review, propose, and issue 

regulations. They have tried to predict 

their activities over the next 12 months 

as accurately as possible, but dates and 

schedules are subject to change. 

Agencies may withdraw some of the 

regulations now under development, 

and they may issue or propose other 

regulations not included in their 

agendas. Agency actions in the 

rulemaking process may occur before or 

after the dates they have listed. The 

Unified Agenda does not create a legal 

obligation on agencies to adhere to 

schedules in this publication or to 

confine their regulatory activities to 

those regulations that appear within it. 

II. Why are the Regulatory Plan and the 

Unified Agenda published? 

The Regulatory Plan and the Unified 

Agenda helps agencies comply with 

their obligations under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act and various Executive 

orders and other statutes. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act 

requires agencies to identify those rules 

that may have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities (5 U.S.C. 602). Agencies meet 

that requirement by including the 

information in their submissions for the 

Unified Agenda. Agencies may also 

indicate those regulations that they are 

reviewing as part of their periodic 

review of existing rules under the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 

610). Executive Order 13272, ‘‘Proper 

Consideration of Small Entities in 

Agency Rulemaking,’’ signed August 13, 

2002 (67 FR 53461), provides additional 

guidance on compliance with the Act. 

Executive Order 12866 

Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory 

Planning and Review,’’ September 30, 

1993 (58 FR 51735), as amended, 

requires covered agencies to prepare an 

agenda of all regulations under 

development or review. The Order also 

requires that certain agencies prepare 

annually a regulatory plan of their 

‘‘most important significant regulatory 

actions,’’ which appears as part of the 

fall Unified Agenda. Executive Order 

13497, signed January 30, 2009 (74 FR 

6113), revoked the amendments to 

Executive Order 12866 that were 

contained in Executive Order 13258 and 

Executive Order 13422. 

Executive Order 14094 

Executive Order (E.O.) 14094, 

‘‘Modernizing Regulatory Review,’’ 

April 6, 2023 (88 FR 21879) sets forth 

specific actions for Federal agencies and 

OIRA designed to modernize the 

regulatory process in order to advance 

policies that promote the public interest 

and address national priorities. E.O. 

14094, among other things, amends 

Section 3(f)(1) of E.O. 12866 (Regulatory 

Planning and Review) to increase the 

monetary threshold for significance 

under that provision, amends Section 

3(f)(4) to clarify what is significant 

under that provision, and encourages 

greater public participation during all 

stages of the regulatory process. 

Executive Order 13563 

Executive Order 13563, ‘‘Improving 

Regulation and Regulatory Review,’’ 

January 18, 2011 (76 FR 3821) 

supplements and reaffirms the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9294 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

principles, structures, and definitions 

governing contemporary regulatory 

review that were established in 

Executive Order 12866, which includes 

the general principles of regulation and 

public participation, and orders 

integration and innovation in 

coordination across agencies; flexible 

approaches where relevant, feasible, and 

consistent with regulatory approaches; 

scientific integrity in any scientific or 

technological information and processes 

used to support the agencies’ regulatory 

actions; and retrospective analysis of 

existing regulations. 

Executive Order 13132 

Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism,’’ 

August 4, 1999 (64 FR 43255), directs 

agencies to have an accountable process 

to ensure meaningful and timely input 

by State and local officials in the 

development of regulatory policies that 

have ‘‘federalism implications’’ as 

defined in the Order. Under the Order, 

an agency that is proposing a regulation 

with federalism implications, which 

either preempt State law or impose nonstatutory unfunded substantial direct 

compliance costs on State and local 

governments, must consult with State 

and local officials early in the process 

of developing the regulation. In 

addition, the agency must provide to the 

Director of the Office of Management 

and Budget a federalism summary 

impact statement for such a regulation, 

which consists of a description of the 

extent of the agency’s prior consultation 

with State and local officials, a 

summary of their concerns and the 

agency’s position supporting the need to 

issue the regulation, and a statement of 

the extent to which those concerns have 

been met. As part of this effort, agencies 

include in their submissions for the 

Unified Agenda information on whether 

their regulatory actions may have an 

effect on the various levels of 

government and whether those actions 

have federalism implications. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4, title II) requires 

agencies to prepare written assessments 

of the costs and benefits of significant 

regulatory actions ‘‘that may result in 

the expenditure by State, local, and 

tribal governments, in the aggregate, or 

by the private sector, of $100,000,000 or 

more in any 1 year.’’ The requirement 

does not apply to independent 

regulatory agencies, nor does it apply to 

certain subject areas excluded by 

section 4 of the Act. Affected agencies 

identify in the Unified Agenda those 

regulatory actions they believe are 

subject to title II of the Act. 

Executive Order 13211 

Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use,’’ May 18, 2001 (66 

FR 28355), directs agencies to provide, 

to the extent possible, information 

regarding the adverse effects that agency 

actions may have on the supply, 

distribution, and use of energy. Under 

the Order, the agency must prepare and 

submit a Statement of Energy Effects to 

the Administrator of the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

Office of Management and Budget, for 

‘‘those matters identified as significant 

energy actions.’’ As part of this effort, 

agencies may optionally include in their 

submissions for the Unified Agenda 

information on whether they have 

prepared or plan to prepare a Statement 

of Energy Effects for their regulatory 

actions. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

The Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act (Pub. L. 104– 

121, title II) established a procedure for 

congressional review of rules (5 U.S.C. 

801 et seq.), which defers, unless 

exempted, the effective date of a 

‘‘major’’ rule for at least 60 days from 

the publication of the final rule in the 

Federal Register. The Act specifies that 

a rule is ‘‘major’’ if it has resulted, or is 

likely to result, in an annual effect on 

the economy of $100 million or more or 

meets other criteria specified in that 

Act. The Act provides that the 

Administrator of OIRA will make the 

final determination as to whether a rule 

is major. 

III. How are the Regulatory Plan and 

the Unified Agenda organized? 

The Regulatory Plan appears in part II 

in a daily edition of the Federal 

Register. The Plan is a single document 

beginning with an introduction, 

followed by a table of contents, followed 

by each agency’s section of the Plan. 

Following the Plan in the Federal 

Register, as separate parts, are the 

Regulatory Flexibility Agendas for each 

agency whose agenda includes entries 

for rules which are likely to have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities or 

rules that have been selected for 

periodic review under section 610 of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act. Each printed 

agenda appears as a separate part. The 

sections of the Plan and the parts of the 

Unified Agenda are organized 

alphabetically in four groups: Cabinet 

departments; other executive agencies; 

the Federal Acquisition Regulation, a 

joint authority (Agenda only); and 

independent regulatory agencies. 

Agencies may in turn be divided into 

subagencies. Each printed agency 

agenda has a table of contents listing the 

agency’s printed entries that follow. 

Each agency’s part of the Agenda 

contains a preamble providing 

information specific to that agency. 

Each printed agency agenda has a table 

of contents listing the agency’s printed 

entries that follow. 

Each agency’s section of the Plan 

contains a narrative statement of 

regulatory priorities and, for most 

agencies, a description of the agency’s 

most important significant regulatory 

and deregulatory actions. Each agency’s 

part of the Agenda contains a preamble 

providing information specific to that 

agency plus descriptions of the agency’s 

regulatory and deregulatory actions. 

Agency regulatory flexibility agendas 

are printed in a single daily edition of 

the Federal Register. A regulatory 

flexibility agenda is printed for each 

agency whose agenda includes entries 

for rules which are likely to have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities or 

rules that have been selected for 

periodic review under section 610 of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act. Each printed 

agenda appears as a separate part. The 

parts are organized alphabetically in 

four groups: Cabinet departments; other 

executive agencies; the Federal 

Acquisition Regulation, a joint 

authority; and independent regulatory 

agencies. Agencies may in turn be 

divided into sub-agencies. Each 

agency’s part of the Agenda contains a 

preamble providing information specific 

to that agency. Each printed agency 

agenda has a table of contents listing the 

agency’s printed entries that follow. 

The online, complete Unified Agenda 

contains the preambles of all 

participating agencies. Unlike the 

printed edition, the online Agenda has 

no fixed ordering. In the online Agenda, 

users can select the particular agencies’ 

agendas they want to see. Users have 

broad flexibility to specify the 

characteristics of the entries of interest 

to them by choosing the desired 

responses to individual data fields. To 

see a listing of all of an agency’s entries, 

a user can select the agency without 

specifying any particular characteristics 

of entries. 

Each entry in the Agenda is 

associated with one of five rulemaking 

stages. The rulemaking stages are: 

1. Prerule Stage—actions agencies 

will undertake to determine whether or 

how to initiate rulemaking. Such actions 

occur prior to a Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (NPRM) and may include 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9295 

Advance Notices of Proposed 

Rulemaking (ANPRMs) and reviews of 

existing regulations. 

2. Proposed Rule Stage—actions for 

which agencies plan to publish a Notice 

of Proposed Rulemaking as the next step 

in their rulemaking process or for which 

the closing date of the NPRM Comment 

Period is the next step. 

3. Final Rule Stage—actions for which 

agencies plan to publish a final rule or 

an interim final rule or to take other 

final action as the next step. 

4. Long-Term Actions—items under 

development but for which the agency 

does not expect to have a regulatory 

action within the 12 months after 

publication of this edition of the Unified 

Agenda. Some of the entries in this 

section may contain abbreviated 

information. 

5. Completed Actions—actions or 

reviews the agency has completed or 

withdrawn since publishing its last 

agenda. This section also includes items 

the agency began and completed 

between issues of the Agenda. 

Long-Term Actions are rulemakings 

reported during the publication cycle 

that are outside of the required 12- 

month reporting period for which the 

Agenda was intended. Completed 

Actions in the publication cycle are 

rulemakings that are ending their 

lifecycle either by Withdrawal or 

completion of the rulemaking process. 

Therefore, the Long-Term and 

Completed RINs do not represent the 

ongoing, forward-looking nature 

intended for reporting developing 

rulemakings in the Agenda pursuant to 

Executive Order 12866, section 4(b) and 

4(c). To further differentiate these two 

stages of rulemaking in the Unified 

Agenda from active rulemakings, LongTerm and Completed Actions are 

reported separately from active 

rulemakings, which can be any of the 

first three stages of rulemaking listed 

above. A separate search function is 

provided on www.reginfo.gov to search 

for Completed and Long-Term Actions 

apart from each other and active RINs. 

A bullet (•) preceding the title of an 

entry indicates that the entry is 

appearing in the Unified Agenda for the 

first time. 

In the printed edition, all entries are 

numbered sequentially from the 

beginning to the end of the publication. 

The sequence number preceding the 

title of each entry identifies the location 

of the entry in this edition. The 

sequence number is used as the 

reference in the printed table of 

contents. Sequence numbers are not 

used in the online Unified Agenda 

because the unique Regulation Identifier 

Number (RIN) is able to provide this 

cross-reference capability. 

Editions of the Unified Agenda prior 

to fall 2007 contained several indexes, 

which identified entries with various 

characteristics. These included 

regulatory actions for which agencies 

believe that the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act may require a Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis, actions selected for periodic 

review under section 610(c) of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act, and actions 

that may have federalism implications 

as defined in Executive Order 13132 or 

other effects on levels of government. 

These indexes are no longer compiled, 

because users of the online Unified 

Agenda have the flexibility to search for 

entries with any combination of desired 

characteristics. The online edition 

retains the Unified Agenda’s subject 

index based on the Federal Register 

Thesaurus of Indexing Terms. In 

addition, online users have the option of 

searching Agenda text fields for words 

or phrases. 

IV. What information appears for each 

entry? 

All entries in the online Unified 

Agenda contain uniform data elements 

including, at a minimum, the following 

information: 

Title of the Regulation—a brief 

description of the subject of the 

regulation. In the printed edition, the 

notation ‘‘Section 610 Review’’ 

following the title indicates that the 

agency has selected the rule for its 

periodic review of existing rules under 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 

610(c)). Some agencies have indicated 

completions of section 610 reviews or 

rulemaking actions resulting from 

completed section 610 reviews. In the 

online edition, these notations appear in 

a separate field. 

Priority—an indication of the 

significance of the regulation. Agencies 

assign each entry to one of the following 

five categories of significance. 

(1) Economically Significant and 

Section 3(f)(1) Significant 

On April 6, 2023, the President issued 

E.O. 14904 entitled ‘‘Modernizing 

Regulatory Review.’’ E.O. 14904 amends 

Section 3(f)(1) of E.O. 12866 to increase 

the monetary threshold for significance 

under this provision from $100 million 

to $200 million in annual effects and 

directs that it be adjusted for GDP 

growth every three years. For 

rulemaking actions that were in 

development prior to the issuance of 

E.O. 14904, the Agenda largely uses the 

previous nomenclature of 

‘‘economically significant’’ to indicate 

rulemaking actions expected to have an 

annual effect on the economy of $100 

million or more, the threshold in E.O. 

12866 prior to April 6, 2023. For 

rulemaking actions which were 

submitted for OIRA review after the 

issuance of the E.O. 14904 on April 6, 

2023 and are expected to have an 

annual effect on the economy of $200 

million or more, the term ‘‘Section 

3(f)(1) Significant’’ is used and will 

continue to be used in future Unified 

Agendas. The amended definition of 

‘‘Section 3(f)(1) Significant’’ under 

Executive Order 12866 is a rulemaking 

action that will ‘‘have an annual effect 

on the economy of $200 million or more 

(adjusted every 3 years by the 

Administrator of OIRA for changes in 

gross domestic product); or will 

adversely affect in a material way the 

economy, a sector of the economy, 

productivity, competition, jobs, the 

environment, public health or safety, or 

State, local, or tribal governments or 

communities.’’ 

(2) Other Significant 

A rulemaking that is not 

Economically Significant but is 

considered Significant by the agency. 

This category includes rules that the 

agency anticipates will be reviewed 

under Executive Order 12866, as 

amended, or rules that are a priority of 

the agency head. These rules may or 

may not be included in the agency’s 

regulatory plan. 

(3) Substantive, Nonsignificant 

A rulemaking that has substantive 

impacts, but is neither Significant, nor 

Routine and Frequent, nor 

Informational/Administrative/Other. 

(4) Routine and Frequent 

A rulemaking that is a specific case of 

a multiple recurring application of a 

regulatory program in the Code of 

Federal Regulations and that does not 

alter the body of the regulation. 

(5) Informational/Administrative/Other 

A rulemaking that is primarily 

informational or pertains to agency 

matters not central to accomplishing the 

agency’s regulatory mandate but that the 

agency places in the Unified Agenda to 

inform the public of the activity. 

Major—whether the rule is ‘‘major’’ 

under 5 U.S.C. 801 (Pub. L. 104–121) 

because it has resulted or is likely to 

result in an annual effect on the 

economy of $100 million or more or 

meets other criteria specified in that 

Act. The Act provides that the 

Administrator of the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs will 

make the final determination as to 

whether a rule is major. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9296 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Unfunded Mandates—whether the 

rule is covered by section 202 of the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

(Pub. L. 104–4). The Act requires that, 

before issuing an NPRM likely to result 

in a mandate that may result in 

expenditures by State, local, and tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector of more than $100 million 

in 1 year, agencies, other than 

independent regulatory agencies, shall 

prepare a written statement containing 

an assessment of the anticipated costs 

and benefits of the Federal mandate. 

Legal Authority—the section(s) of the 

United States Code (U.S.C.) or Public 

Law (Pub. L.) or the Executive order 

(E.O.) that authorize(s) the regulatory 

action. Agencies may provide popular 

name references to laws in addition to 

these citations. 

CFR Citation—the section(s) of the 

Code of Federal Regulations that will be 

affected by the action. 

Legal Deadline—whether the action is 

subject to a statutory or judicial 

deadline, the date of that deadline, and 

whether the deadline pertains to an 

NPRM, a Final Action, or some other 

action. 

Abstract—a brief description of the 

problem the regulation will address; the 

need for a Federal solution; to the extent 

available, alternatives that the agency is 

considering to address the problem; and 

potential costs and benefits of the 

action. 

Timetable—the dates and citations (if 

available) for all past steps and a 

projected date for at least the next step 

for the regulatory action. A date 

displayed in the form 12/00/19 means 

the agency is predicting the month and 

year the action will take place but not 

the day it will occur. In some instances, 

agencies may indicate what the next 

action will be, but the date of that action 

is ‘‘To Be Determined.’’ ‘‘Next Action 

Undetermined’’ indicates the agency 

does not know what action it will take 

next. 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required—whether an analysis is 

required by the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) because the 

rulemaking action is likely to have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities as 

defined by the Act. 

Small Entities Affected—the types of 

small entities (businesses, governmental 

jurisdictions, or organizations) on which 

the rulemaking action is likely to have 

an impact as defined by the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. Some agencies have 

chosen to indicate likely effects on 

small entities even though they believe 

that a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

will not be required. 

Government Levels Affected—whether 

the action is expected to affect levels of 

government and, if so, whether the 

governments are State, local, tribal, or 

Federal. 

International Impacts—whether the 

regulation is expected to have 

international trade and investment 

effects, or otherwise may be of interest 

to the Nation’s international trading 

partners. 

Federalism—whether the action has 

‘‘federalism implications’’ as defined in 

Executive Order 13132. This term refers 

to actions ‘‘that have substantial direct 

effects on the States, on the relationship 

between the national government and 

the States, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government.’’ 

Independent regulatory agencies are not 

required to supply this information. 

Included in the Regulatory Plan— 

whether the rulemaking was included in 

the agency’s current regulatory plan 

published in the fall 2022. 

Agency Contact—the name and phone 

number of at least one person in the 

agency who is knowledgeable about the 

rulemaking action. The agency may also 

provide the title, address, fax number, 

email address, and TDD for each agency 

contact. 

Some agencies have provided the 

following optional information: 

RIN Information URL—the internet 

address of a site that provides more 

information about the entry. 

Public Comment URL—the internet 

address of a site that will accept public 

comments on the entry. 

Alternatively, timely public 

comments may be submitted at the 

Governmentwide e-rulemaking site, 

www.regulations.gov. 

Additional Information—any 

information an agency wishes to include 

that does not have a specific 

corresponding data element. 

Compliance Cost to the Public—the 

estimated gross compliance cost of the 

action. 

Affected Sectors—the industrial 

sectors that the action may most affect, 

either directly or indirectly. Affected 

sectors are identified by North 

American Industry Classification 

System (NAICS) codes. 

Energy Effects—an indication of 

whether the agency has prepared or 

plans to prepare a Statement of Energy 

Effects for the action, as required by 

Executive Order 13211 ‘‘Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use,’’ signed May 18, 

2001 (66 FR 28355). 

Related RINs—one or more past or 

current RIN(s) associated with activity 

related to this action, such as merged 

RINs, split RINs, new activity for 

previously completed RINs, or duplicate 

RINs. 

Statement of Need—a description of 

the need for the regulatory action. 

Summary of the Legal Basis—a 

description of the legal basis for the 

action, including whether any aspect of 

the action is required by statute or court 

order. 

Alternatives—a description of the 

alternatives the agency has considered 

or will consider as required by section 

4(c)(1)(B) of Executive Order 12866. 

Anticipated Costs and Benefits—a 

description of preliminary estimates of 

the anticipated costs and benefits of the 

action. 

Risks—a description of the magnitude 

of the risk the action addresses, the 

amount by which the agency expects the 

action to reduce this risk, and the 

relation of the risk and this risk 

reduction effort to other risks and risk 

reduction efforts within the agency’s 

jurisdiction. 

V. Abbreviations 

The following abbreviations appear 

throughout this publication: 

ANPRM—An Advance Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking is a preliminary 

notice, published in the Federal 

Register, announcing that an agency is 

considering a regulatory action. An 

agency may issue an ANPRM before it 

develops a detailed proposed rule. An 

ANPRM describes the general area that 

may be subject to regulation and usually 

asks for public comment on the issues 

and options being discussed. An 

ANPRM is issued only when an agency 

believes it needs to gather more 

information before proceeding to a 

notice of proposed rulemaking. 

CFR—The Code of Federal 

Regulations is an annual codification of 

the general and permanent regulations 

published in the Federal Register by the 

agencies of the Federal Government. 

The Code is divided into 50 titles, each 

title covering a broad area subject to 

Federal regulation. The CFR is keyed to 

and kept up to date by the daily issues 

of the Federal Register. 

E.O.—An Executive order is a 

directive from the President to 

Executive agencies, issued under 

constitutional or statutory authority. 

Executive orders are published in the 

Federal Register and in title 3 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations. 

FR—The Federal Register is a daily 

Federal Government publication that 

provides a uniform system for 

publishing Presidential documents, all 

proposed and final regulations, notices 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9297 

of meetings, and other official 

documents issued by Federal agencies. 

FY—The Federal fiscal year runs from 

October 1 to September 30. 

NPRM—A Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking is the document an agency 

issues and publishes in the Federal 

Register that describes and solicits 

public comments on a proposed 

regulatory action. Under the 

Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 

553), an NPRM must include, at a 

minimum: A statement of the time, 

place, and nature of the public 

rulemaking proceeding; 

Legal Authority—A reference to the 

legal authority under which the rule is 

proposed; and either the terms or 

substance of the proposed rule or a 

description of the subjects and issues 

involved. 

Public Law—A public law is a law 

passed by Congress and signed by the 

President or enacted over his veto. It has 

general applicability, unlike a private 

law that applies only to those persons 

or entities specifically designated. 

Public laws are numbered in sequence 

throughout the 2-year life of each 

Congress; for example, Public Law 112– 

4 is the fourth public law of the 112th 

Congress. 

RFA—A Regulatory Flexibility 

Analysis is a description and analysis of 

the impact of a rule on small entities, 

including small businesses, small 

governmental jurisdictions, and certain 

small not-for-profit organizations. The 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 

et seq.) requires each agency to prepare 

an initial RFA for public comment when 

it is required to publish an NPRM and 

to make available a final RFA when the 

final rule is published, unless the 

agency head certifies that the rule 

would not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. 

RIN—The Regulation Identifier 

Number is assigned by the Regulatory 

Information Service Center to identify 

each regulatory action listed in the 

Regulatory Plan and the Unified 

Agenda, as directed by Executive Order 

12866 (section 4(b)). Additionally, OMB 

has asked agencies to include RINs in 

the headings of their Rule and Proposed 

Rule documents when publishing them 

in the Federal Register, to make it easier 

for the public and agency officials to 

track the publication history of 

regulatory actions throughout their 

development. 

Seq. No.—The sequence number 

identifies the location of an entry in the 

printed edition of the Regulatory Plan 

and the Unified Agenda. Note that a 

specific regulatory action will have the 

same RIN throughout its development 

but will generally have different 

sequence numbers if it appears in 

different printed editions of the Unified 

Agenda. Sequence numbers are not used 

in the online Unified Agenda. 

U.S.C.—The United States Code is a 

consolidation and codification of all 

general and permanent laws of the 

United States. The U.S.C. is divided into 

50 titles, each title covering a broad area 

of Federal law. 

VI. How can users get copies of the 

Unified Agenda? 

Copies of the Federal Register issue 

containing the printed edition of the 

Unified Agenda (agency regulatory 

flexibility agendas) are available from 

the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. 

Government Publishing Office, P.O. Box 

371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250–7954. 

Telephone: (202) 512–1800 or 1–866– 

512–1800 (toll-free). Copies of 

individual agency materials may be 

available directly from the agency or 

may be found on the agency’s website. 

Please contact the particular agency for 

further information. All editions of The 

Regulatory Plan and the Unified Agenda 

of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory 

Actions since fall 1995 are available in 

electronic form at www.reginfo.gov, 

along with flexible search tools. The 

Government Publishing Office’s GPO 

GovInfo website contains copies of the 

Agendas and Regulatory Plans that have 

been printed in the Federal Register. 

These documents are available at 

www.govinfo.gov. 

Boris Arratia, 

Director. 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Sequence No. Title Regulation 

Identifier No. Rulemaking stage 

1 ........................ Unfair Practices, Undue Preferences, and Harm to Competition Under the Packers and Stockyards Act (AMS–FTPP–21–0046).0581–AE04 Proposed Rule Stage. 

2 ........................ Inclusive Competition and Market Integrity Under the Packers and Stockyards 

Act (AMS–FTPP–21–0045).

0581–AE05 Final Rule Stage. 

3 ........................ Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC): 

Revisions in the WIC Food Packages.

0584–AE82 Final Rule Stage. 

4 ........................ Child Nutrition Programs: Revisions to Meal Patterns Consistent With the 2020 

Dietary Guidelines for Americans.

0584–AE88 Final Rule Stage. 

5 ........................ Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC): 

Implementation of the Access to Baby Formula Act of 2022 and Related Provisions.

0584–AE94 Final Rule Stage. 

6 ........................ Interim Final Rule—Implementing Provisions From the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023: Establishing the Summer EBT Program and Non-Congregate 

Option in the Summer Food Service Program.

0584–AE96 Final Rule Stage. 

7 ........................ Labeling of Meat and Poultry Products Made Using Animal Cell Culture Technology.0583–AD89 Proposed Rule Stage. 

8 ........................ Salmonella Framework ............................................................................................. 0583–AD96 Proposed Rule Stage. 

9 ........................ Revision of the Nutrition Facts Labels for Meat and Poultry Products and Updating Certain Reference Amounts Customarily Consumed.0583–AD56 Final Rule Stage. 

10 ...................... Voluntary Labeling of FSIS-Regulated Products With U.S. Origin Claims .............. 0583–AD87 Final Rule Stage. 

11 ...................... Update and Clarification of the Locatable Minerals Regulations ............................. 0596–AD32 Proposed Rule Stage. 

12 ...................... Higher Blends Infrastructure Incentive Program ...................................................... 0570–AB11 Proposed Rule Stage. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9298 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Sequence No. Title Regulation 

Identifier No. Rulemaking stage 

13 ...................... Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated Fishing; Fisheries Enforcement; High Seas 

Driftnet Fishing Moratorium Protection Act.

0648–BG11 Proposed Rule Stage. 

14 ...................... Amendments to the North Atlantic Right Whale Vessel Strike Reduction Rule ...... 0648–BI88 Final Rule Stage. 

15 ...................... Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Regulations for Listing Species 

and Designating Critical Habitat.

0648–BK47 Final Rule Stage. 

16 ...................... Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revision of Regulations for 

Interagency Cooperation.

0648–BK48 Final Rule Stage. 

17 ...................... Setting and Adjusting Patent Fees ........................................................................... 0651–AD64 Proposed Rule Stage. 

18 ...................... Setting and Adjusting Trademark Fees .................................................................... 0651–AD65 Proposed Rule Stage. 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Sequence No. Title Regulation 

Identifier No. Rulemaking stage 

19 ...................... Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) Program ................................. 0790–AL49 Proposed Rule Stage. 

20 ...................... Department of Defense (DoD)-Defense Industrial Base (DIB) Cybersecurity (CS) 

Activities.

0790–AK86 Final Rule Stage. 

21 ...................... Definitions of Gold Star Family and Gold Star Survivor .......................................... 0790–AL56 Final Rule Stage. 

22 ...................... Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability in Programs or Activities Assisted or 

Conducted by the DoD and in Equal Access to Information and Communication Technology Used by DoD.

0790–AJ04 Long-Term Actions. 

23 ...................... Assessing Contractor Implementation of Cybersecurity Requirements (DFARS 

Case 2019–D041).

0750–AK81 Proposed Rule Stage. 

24 ...................... Modification of Prize Authority For Advanced Technology Achievements (DFARS 

Case 2022–D014).

0750–AL65 Proposed Rule Stage. 

25 ...................... Past Performance of Subcontractors and Joint Venture Partners (DFARS Case 

2018–D055).

0750–AK16 Final Rule Stage. 

26 ...................... Small Business Innovation Research Program Data Rights (DFARS Case 2019– 

D043).

0750–AK84 Final Rule Stage. 

27 ...................... DFARS Buy American Act Requirements (DFARS Case 2022–D019) ................... 0750–AL74 Final Rule Stage. 

28 ...................... Policy and Procedures for Processing Requests to Alter U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works Projects Pursuant to 33 U.S.C. 408.0710–AB22 Proposed Rule Stage. 

29 ...................... Flood Control Cost-Sharing Requirements Under the Ability to Pay Provision ....... 0710–AB34 Proposed Rule Stage. 

30 ...................... USACE Implementing Procedures for Principles, Requirements, and Guidelines 

Applicable to Actions Involving Investment in Water Resources.

0710–AB41 Proposed Rule Stage. 

31 ...................... Appendix C Procedures for the Protection of Historic Properties ........................... 0710–AB46 Proposed Rule Stage. 

32 ...................... Natural Disaster Procedures: Preparedness, Response, and Recovery Activities 

of the Corps of Engineers.

0710–AA78 Final Rule Stage. 

33 ...................... Credit Assistance for Water Resources Infrastructure Projects .............................. 0710–AB31 Completed Actions. 

34 ...................... Revised Definition of ‘‘Waters of the United States’’; Conforming .......................... 0710–AB55 Completed Actions. 

35 ...................... TRICARE Coverage of Clinical Trials and Termination of Expanded Access 

Treatments.

0720–AB83 Final Rule Stage. 

36 ...................... Expanding TRICARE Access to Care in Response to the COVID–19 Pandemic .. 0720–AB85 Final Rule Stage. 

37 ...................... Collection From Third Party Payers of Reasonable Charges for Healthcare Services; Amendment.0720–AB87 Final Rule Stage. 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Sequence No. Title Regulation 

Identifier No. Rulemaking stage 

38 ...................... Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex in Education Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance.1870–AA16 Final Rule Stage. 

39 ...................... Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex in Education Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance: Sex-Related Eligibility Criteria For Male 

and Female Athletic Teams.

1870–AA19 Final Rule Stage. 

40 ...................... EDGAR Revisions .................................................................................................... 1875–AA14 Proposed Rule Stage. 

41 ...................... Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act ............................................................. 1875–AA15 Proposed Rule Stage. 

42 ...................... Student Loan Relief .................................................................................................. 1840–AD93 Proposed Rule Stage. 

43 ...................... Gainful Employment ................................................................................................. 1840–AD57 Completed Actions. 

44 ...................... Improving Income Driven Repayment ...................................................................... 1840–AD81 Completed Actions. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9299 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Sequence No. Title Regulation 

Identifier No. Rulemaking stage 

45 ...................... Clean Energy for New Federal Buildings and Major Renovations of Federal Buildings.1904–AB96 Final Rule Stage. 

46 ...................... Energy Conservation Standards for Consumer Water Heaters ............................... 1904–AD91 Final Rule Stage. 

47 ...................... Coordination of Federal Authorizations for Electric Transmission Facilities ............ 1901–AB62 Final Rule Stage. 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Sequence No. Title Regulation 

Identifier No. Rulemaking stage 

48 ...................... Rulemaking on Discrimination on the Basis of Disability in Health and Human 

Services Programs or Activities.

0945–AA15 Proposed Rule Stage. 

49 ...................... Proposed Modifications to the HIPAA Security Rule to Strengthen the Cybersecurity of Electronic Protected Health Information.0945–AA22 Proposed Rule Stage. 

50 ...................... Confidentiality of Substance Use Disorder Patient Records ................................... 0945–AA16 Final Rule Stage. 

51 ...................... Nondiscrimination in Health Programs and Activities .............................................. 0945–AA17 Final Rule Stage. 

52 ...................... Safeguarding the Rights of Conscience as Protected by Federal Statutes ............ 0945–AA18 Final Rule Stage. 

53 ...................... Health and Human Services Grants Regulation ...................................................... 0945–AA19 Final Rule Stage. 

54 ...................... Proposed Modifications to the HIPAA Privacy Rule to Support Reproductive 

Health Care Privacy.

0945–AA20 Final Rule Stage. 

55 ...................... Establishment of Disincentives for Health Care Providers Who Have Committed 

Information Blocking.

0955–AA05 Proposed Rule Stage. 

56 ...................... Control of Communicable Diseases; Foreign Quarantine ....................................... 0920–AA75 Final Rule Stage. 

57 ...................... Tobacco Product Standard for Nicotine Level of Certain Tobacco Products .......... 0910–AI76 Proposed Rule Stage. 

58 ...................... Front-of-Package Nutrition Labeling ......................................................................... 0910–AI80 Proposed Rule Stage. 

59 ...................... Medical Devices; Laboratory Developed Tests ........................................................ 0910–AI85 Proposed Rule Stage. 

60 ...................... Nonprescription Drug Product With an Additional Condition for Nonprescription 

Use.

0910–AH62 Final Rule Stage. 

61 ...................... Nutrient Content Claims, Definition of Term: Healthy .............................................. 0910–AI13 Final Rule Stage. 

62 ...................... Tobacco Product Standard for Characterizing Flavors in Cigars ............................ 0910–AI28 Final Rule Stage. 

63 ...................... Standards for the Growing, Harvesting, Packing, and Holding of Produce for 

Human Consumption Relating to Agricultural Water.

0910–AI49 Final Rule Stage. 

64 ...................... Tobacco Product Standard for Menthol in Cigarettes .............................................. 0910–AI60 Final Rule Stage. 

65 ...................... Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program: COVID–19 Countermeasures 

Injury Table.

0906–AB31 Proposed Rule Stage. 

66 ...................... 340B Drug Pricing Program; Administrative Dispute Resolution ............................. 0906–AB28 Final Rule Stage. 

67 ...................... Healthcare System Resiliency and Modernization (CMS–3426) ............................. 0938–AU91 Proposed Rule Stage. 

68 ...................... Appeal Rights for Certain Changes in Patient Status (CMS–4204) ........................ 0938–AV16 Proposed Rule Stage. 

69 ...................... Contract Year 2025 Policy and Technical Changes to the Medicare Advantage, 

Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit, and Medicare Cost Plan Programs, and 

PACE (CMS–4205).

0938–AV24 Proposed Rule Stage. 

70 ...................... Minimum Staffing Standards for Long-Term Care Facilities and Medicaid Institutional Payment Transparency Reporting (CMS–3442).0938–AV25 Proposed Rule Stage. 

71 ...................... Streamlining the Medicaid, CHIP, and BHP Application, Eligibility Determination, 

Enrollment, and Renewal Processes (CMS–2421).

0938–AU00 Final Rule Stage. 

72 ...................... Short-Term, Limited-Duration Insurance; Independent, Noncoordinated Excepted 

Benefits Coverage; Level-Funded Plan Arrangements; and Tax Treatment of 

Certain Accident and Health Insurance (CMS–9904).

0938–AU67 Final Rule Stage. 

73 ...................... Ensuring Access to Medicaid Services (CMS–2442) .............................................. 0938–AU68 Final Rule Stage. 

74 ...................... Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act (CMS– 

9903).

0938–AU94 Final Rule Stage. 

75 ...................... Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) Managed Care Access, Finance, and Quality (CMS–2439).0938–AU99 Final Rule Stage. 

76 ...................... Disclosures of Ownership and Additional Disclosable Parties Information for 

Skilled Nursing Facilities and Nursing Facilities (CMS–6084).

0938–AU90 Long-Term Actions. 

77 ...................... Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment System: Remedy for 340B-Acquired 

Drugs Purchased in Cost Years 2018–2022 (CMS–1793).

0938–AV18 Completed Actions. 

78 ...................... Strengthening Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) as a Safety Net 

Program.

0970–AC97 Proposed Rule Stage. 

79 ...................... Employment and Training Services for Noncustodial Parents in the Child Support 

Services Program.

0970–AD00 Proposed Rule Stage. 

80 ...................... Supporting the Head Start Workforce and Other Quality Improvements ................ 0970–AD01 Proposed Rule Stage. 

81 ...................... Safe and Appropriate Foster Care Placement Requirements for Titles IV–E and 

IV–B.

0970–AD03 Proposed Rule Stage. 

82 ...................... Improving Child Care Access, Affordability, and Stability in the Child Care and 

Development Fund (CCDF).

0970–AD02 Final Rule Stage. 

83 ...................... Separate Licensing Standards for Relative or Kinship Foster Family Homes ........ 0970–AC91 Completed Actions. 

84 ...................... Adult Protective Services Functions and Grant Programs ...................................... 0985–AA18 Proposed Rule Stage. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9300 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Sequence No. Title Regulation 

Identifier No. Rulemaking stage 

85 ...................... Victims of Qualifying Criminal Activities; Eligibility Requirements for U Nonimmigrant Status and Adjustment of Status.1615–AA67 Proposed Rule Stage. 

86 ...................... Improving the Regulations Governing the Adjustment of Status to Lawful Permanent Residence and Related Immigration Benefits.1615–AC22 Proposed Rule Stage. 

87 ...................... Asylum Eligibility and Public Health ......................................................................... 1615–AC57 Proposed Rule Stage. 

88 ...................... Clarifying Definitions and Analyses for Fair and Efficient Asylum and Other Protection Determinations.1615–AC65 Proposed Rule Stage. 

89 ...................... Procedures for Asylum and Bars to Asylum Eligibility ............................................. 1615–AC69 Proposed Rule Stage. 

90 ...................... Modernizing H–1B Requirements and Oversight, Providing Flexibility in the F–1 

Program, and Program Improvements Affecting Other Nonimmigrant Workers.

1615–AC70 Proposed Rule Stage. 

91 ...................... Modernizing H–2 Program Requirements, Oversight, and Worker Protections ...... 1615–AC76 Proposed Rule Stage. 

92 ...................... Citizenship and Naturalization and Other Related Flexibilities ................................ 1615–AC80 Proposed Rule Stage. 

93 ...................... U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Fee Schedule and Changes to Certain 

Other Immigration Benefit Request Requirements.

1615–AC68 Final Rule Stage. 

94 ...................... Shipping Safety Fairways Along the Atlantic Coast ................................................. 1625–AC57 Proposed Rule Stage. 

95 ...................... Cybersecurity in the Marine Transportation System ................................................ 1625–AC77 Proposed Rule Stage. 

96 ...................... MARPOL Annex VI; Prevention of Air Pollution From Ships ................................... 1625–AC78 Proposed Rule Stage. 

97 ...................... Advance Passenger Information System: Electronic Validation of Travel Documents.1651–AB43 Final Rule Stage. 

98 ...................... Enhancing Surface Cyber Risk Management .......................................................... 1652–AA74 Proposed Rule Stage. 

99 ...................... Flight Training Security Program .............................................................................. 1652–AA35 Final Rule Stage. 

100 .................... Frequency of Renewal Cycle for Indirect Air Carrier Security Programs ................ 1652–AA72 Final Rule Stage. 

101 .................... Minimum Standards for Driver’s Licenses and Identification Cards Acceptable by 

Federal Agencies for Official Purposes; Waiver for Mobile Driver’s Licenses.

1652–AA76 Final Rule Stage. 

102 .................... Clarifying and Revising Custody Determination and Detention Classification Procedures.1653–AA92 Proposed Rule Stage. 

103 .................... National Flood Insurance Program: Standard Flood Insurance Policy, Homeowner Flood Form.1660–AB06 Proposed Rule Stage. 

104 .................... Update of FEMA’s Public Assistance Regulations .................................................. 1660–AB09 Proposed Rule Stage. 

105 .................... Updates to Floodplain Management and Protection of Wetlands Regulations to 

Implement the Federal Flood Risk Management Standard.

1660–AB12 Proposed Rule Stage. 

106 .................... Individual Assistance Program Equity ...................................................................... 1660–AB07 Final Rule Stage. 

107 .................... National Flood Insurance Program’s Floodplain Management Standards for Land 

Management & Use, & an Assessment of the Program’s Impact on Threatened 

and Endangered Species & Their Habitats.

1660–AB11 Long-Term Actions. 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Sequence No. Title Regulation 

Identifier No. Rulemaking stage 

108 .................... ONRR Designation Form for Payment Responsibility ............................................. 1012–AA33 Proposed Rule Stage. 

109 .................... Oil-Spill Response Requirements for Facilities Located Seaward of the Coast 

Line Proposed Rule.

1014–AA44 Proposed Rule Stage. 

110 .................... Revisions to Subpart J—Pipelines and Pipeline Rights-of-Way Proposed Rule ..... 1014–AA45 Proposed Rule Stage. 

111 .................... Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act; Operating in High-Pressure and/or High-Temperature (HPHT) Environments.1014–AA49 Final Rule Stage. 

112 .................... Carbon Sequestration ............................................................................................... 1082–AA04 Proposed Rule Stage. 

113 .................... Department of the Interior Acquisition Regulation Governance Titles ..................... 1090–AB25 Proposed Rule Stage. 

114 .................... Natural Resource Damages for Hazardous Substances ......................................... 1090–AB26 Proposed Rule Stage. 

115 .................... Privacy Act Exemption for INTERIOR/DOI–10, DOI Law Enforcement Records 

Management System (LERMS).

1090–AB28 Proposed Rule Stage. 

116 .................... Privacy Act Exemption for INTERIOR/OIG–02 Investigative Records .................... 1090–AB27 Final Rule Stage. 

117 .................... Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) Rule ........................................................... 1094–AA57 Proposed Rule Stage. 

118 .................... Wildlife and Fisheries; Compensatory Mitigation Mechanisms ................................ 1018–BF63 Proposed Rule Stage. 

119 .................... Migratory Bird Permits; Authorizing the Incidental Take of Migratory Birds, Proposed Rule.1018–BF71 Proposed Rule Stage. 

120 .................... Maintaining the Biological Integrity, Diversity, and Environmental Health of the 

National Wildlife Refuge System, Proposed rule.

1018–BG78 Proposed Rule Stage. 

121 .................... Permits for Incidental Take of Eagles and Eagle Nests, Final Rule ....................... 1018–BE70 Final Rule Stage. 

122 .................... Regulations Pertaining to Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants .......... 1018–BF88 Final Rule Stage. 

123 .................... Regulations for Listing Endangered and Threatened Species and Designating 

Critical Habitat, Final Rule.

1018–BF95 Final Rule Stage. 

124 .................... Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Interagency Cooperation .......... 1018–BF96 Final Rule Stage. 

125 .................... Endangered Species Act Section 10 Regulations; Enhancement of Survival and 

Incidental Take Permits, Final rule.

1018–BF99 Final Rule Stage. 

126 .................... Revision to the Section 4(d) Rule for the African Elephant, Final rule .................... 1018–BG66 Final Rule Stage. 

127 .................... Establishment of a Nonessential Experimental Population of the Gray Wolf in the 

State of Colorado, Final Rule.

1018–BG79 Final Rule Stage. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9301 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR—Continued 

Sequence No. Title Regulation 

Identifier No. Rulemaking stage 

128 .................... National Wildlife Refuge System; Station-Specific Hunting and Sport Fishing Regulations, 2023–24, Final rule.1018–BG71 Completed Actions. 

129 .................... Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act Regulations ................... 1024–AE19 Final Rule Stage. 

130 .................... Alaska; Hunting and Trapping in National Preserves .............................................. 1024–AE70 Final Rule Stage. 

131 .................... Agricultural Leasing of Indian Land .......................................................................... 1076–AF66 Proposed Rule Stage. 

132 .................... Procedures for Federal Acknowledgment of Indian Tribes ...................................... 1076–AF67 Proposed Rule Stage. 

133 .................... Indian Arts and Crafts .............................................................................................. 1076–AF69 Proposed Rule Stage. 

134 .................... Mining of the Osage Mineral Estate for Oil and Gas ............................................... 1076–AF59 Final Rule Stage. 

135 .................... Class III Tribal State Gaming Compact Process ..................................................... 1076–AF68 Final Rule Stage. 

136 .................... Land Acquisitions ..................................................................................................... 1076–AF71 Final Rule Stage. 

137 .................... Fitness to Operate Standards for Oil and Gas Operators and Lessees on the 

Outer Continental Shelf.

1010–AE21 Proposed Rule Stage. 

138 .................... Renewable Energy Modernization Rule ................................................................... 1010–AE04 Final Rule Stage. 

139 .................... Protection of Marine Archaeological Resources ...................................................... 1010–AE11 Final Rule Stage. 

140 .................... Risk Management and Financial Assurance for OCS Lease and Grant Obligations.1010–AE14 Final Rule Stage. 

141 .................... Emergency Preparedness for Impoundments .......................................................... 1029–AC82 Proposed Rule Stage. 

142 .................... Ten-Day Notices ....................................................................................................... 1029–AC81 Final Rule Stage. 

143 .................... Public Conduct on Bureau of Reclamation Facilities, Lands and Waterbodies ...... 1006–AA58 Final Rule Stage. 

144 .................... Closure and Restriction Orders ................................................................................ 1004–AE89 Proposed Rule Stage. 

145 .................... Management and Protection of the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska ........... 1004–AE95 Proposed Rule Stage. 

146 .................... Update of the Communications Uses Program, Right-of-Way Cost Recovery Fee 

Schedules and Section 512 of FLPMA for Rights-of-Way.

1004–AE60 Final Rule Stage. 

147 .................... Rights-of-Way, Leasing and Operations for Renewable Energy ............................. 1004–AE78 Final Rule Stage. 

148 .................... Waste Prevention, Production Subject to Royalties, and Resource Conservation 1004–AE79 Final Rule Stage. 

149 .................... Fluid Mineral Leases and Leasing Process ............................................................. 1004–AE80 Final Rule Stage. 

150 .................... Conservation and Landscape Health ....................................................................... 1004–AE92 Final Rule Stage. 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Sequence No. Title Regulation 

Identifier No. Rulemaking stage 

151 .................... Implementation of the ADA Amendments Act of 2008: Federally Conducted (Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973).1190–AA73 Proposed Rule Stage. 

152 .................... Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability by State and Local Governments; 

Public Right-of-Way.

1190–AA77 Proposed Rule Stage. 

153 .................... Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability by State and Local Governments: 

Medical Diagnostic Equipment.

1190–AA78 Proposed Rule Stage. 

154 .................... Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability: Accessibility of Web Information and 

Services of State and Local Government Entities.

1190–AA79 Final Rule Stage. 

155 .................... Telemedicine Prescribing of Controlled Substances When the Practitioner and 

the Patient Have not had a Prior In-Person Medical Evaluation.

1117–AB40 Proposed Rule Stage. 

156 .................... Import/Export and Domestic Transactions of Tableting and Encapsulating Machines.1117–AB80 Proposed Rule Stage. 

157 .................... Clarifying Definitions and Analyses for Fair and Efficient Asylum and Other Protection Determinations.1125–AB13 Proposed Rule Stage. 

158 .................... Appellate Procedures and Decisional Finality in Immigration Proceedings; Administrative Closure.1125–AB18 Proposed Rule Stage. 

159 .................... Hearing Requirements and Application Procedures for Asylum and Related Protection.1125–AB22 Proposed Rule Stage. 

160 .................... Clarifying and Revising Custody Determination Procedures for Noncitizens Subject to Discretionary Detention (INA 236(a)/8 U.S.C. 1226 detention).1125–AB27 Proposed Rule Stage. 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Sequence No. Title Regulation 

Identifier No. Rulemaking stage 

161 .................... Defining and Delimiting the Exemptions for Executive, Administrative, Professional, Outside Sales, and Computer Employees.1235–AA39 Proposed Rule Stage. 

162 .................... Nondisplacement of Qualified Workers Under Service Contracts ........................... 1235–AA42 Final Rule Stage. 

163 .................... Employee or Independent Contractor Classification Under the Fair Labor Standards Act.1235–AA43 Final Rule Stage. 

164 .................... Improving Protections For Workers in Temporary Agricultural Employment in the 

United States.

1205–AC12 Proposed Rule Stage. 

165 .................... National Apprenticeship System Enhancements ..................................................... 1205–AC13 Proposed Rule Stage. 

166 .................... Wagner-Peyser Act Staffing ..................................................................................... 1205–AC02 Final Rule Stage. 

167 .................... Retirement Security Rule: Definition of an Investment Advice Fiduciary ................ 1210–AC02 Proposed Rule Stage. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9302 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR—Continued 

Sequence No. Title Regulation 

Identifier No. Rulemaking stage 

168 .................... Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act and the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021.1210–AC11 Proposed Rule Stage. 

169 .................... Definition of ’Employer’ Under Section 3(5) of ERISA-Association Health Plans ... 1210–AC16 Proposed Rule Stage. 

170 .................... Coverage of Certain Preventive Services Under the Affordable Care Act .............. 1210–AC13 Final Rule Stage. 

171 .................... Respirable Crystalline Silica ..................................................................................... 1219–AB36 Final Rule Stage. 

172 .................... Safety Program for Surface Mobile Equipment ....................................................... 1219–AB91 Final Rule Stage. 

173 .................... Heat Illness Prevention in Outdoor and Indoor Work Settings ................................ 1218–AD39 Prerule Stage. 

174 .................... Infectious Diseases .................................................................................................. 1218–AC46 Proposed Rule Stage. 

175 .................... Emergency Response .............................................................................................. 1218–AC91 Proposed Rule Stage. 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Sequence No. Title Regulation 

Identifier No. Rulemaking stage 

176 .................... Safety Management Systems .................................................................................. 2120–AL60 Final Rule Stage. 

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

Sequence No. Title Regulation 

Identifier No. Rulemaking stage 

177 .................... Updating VA Adjudication Regulations for Disability or Death Benefit Claims Related to Herbicide Exposure.2900–AR10 Proposed Rule Stage. 

178 .................... Expanding Veterans Cemetery Grant Program (VCGP) Grants to Include Training 

Costs.

2900–AR47 Proposed Rule Stage. 

179 .................... Technical Revisions to Expand Health Care for Certain Toxic Exposure and 

Overseas Contingency Service.

2900–AR73 Proposed Rule Stage. 

180 .................... Updating VA Adjudication Regulations for Disability or Death Benefits Based on 

Toxic Exposure.

2900–AR75 Proposed Rule Stage. 

181 .................... Evidence Requirements for Direct Service Connection of Covered Mental Health 

Conditions Based on In-Service Personal Trauma.

2900–AR91 Proposed Rule Stage. 

182 .................... Amendments to the Caregivers Program ................................................................. 2900–AR96 Proposed Rule Stage. 

183 .................... Revision of Veterans Community Care Program (VCCP) Access Standards ......... 2900–AS00 Proposed Rule Stage. 

184 .................... Modifying Copayments for Veterans at High Risk for Suicide ................................. 2900–AQ30 Final Rule Stage. 

185 .................... Update and Clarify Regulatory Bars to Benefits Based on Character of Discharge 2900–AQ95 Final Rule Stage. 

186 .................... Veteran and Spouse Transitional Assistance Grant Program ................................. 2900–AR68 Final Rule Stage. 

187 .................... Reevaluation of Claims for Dependency and Indemnity Compensation Based on 

Public Law 117–168.

2900–AR76 Final Rule Stage. 

188 .................... Presumptive Service Connection for Respiratory Conditions Due to Exposure to 

Particulate Matter.

2900–AR25 Completed Actions. 

189 .................... Presumptive Service Connection for Rare Respiratory Cancers Due to Exposure 

to Fine Particulate Matter.

2900–AR44 Completed Actions. 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Sequence No. Title Regulation 

Identifier No. Rulemaking stage 

190 .................... Review of the Secondary National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ecological 

Effects of Oxides of Nitrogen, Oxides of Sulfur and Particulate Matter.

2060–AS35 Proposed Rule Stage. 

191 .................... NSPS for GHG Emissions From New, Modified, and Reconstructed Fossil FuelFired EGUs; Emission Guidelines for GHG Emissions From Existing Fossil 

Fuel-Fired EGUs; and Repeal of the ACE Rule.

2060–AV09 Proposed Rule Stage. 

192 .................... Review of Final Rule Reclassification of Major Sources as Area Sources Under 

Section 112 of the Clean Air Act.

2060–AV20 Proposed Rule Stage. 

193 .................... Phasedown of Hydrofluorocarbons: Management of Certain Hydrofluorocarbons 

and Substitutes Under Subsection (h) of the American Innovation and Manufacturing Act of 2020.

2060–AV84 Proposed Rule Stage. 

194 .................... Phasedown of Hydrofluorocarbons: Review and Renewal of Eligibility for Application-specific Allowances.2060–AV98 Proposed Rule Stage. 

195 .................... 1-Bromopropane (1–BP); Regulation Under the Toxic Substances Control Act 

(TSCA).

2070–AK73 Proposed Rule Stage. 

196 .................... Trichloroethylene; Regulation Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) ... 2070–AK83 Proposed Rule Stage. 

197 .................... N-Methylpyrrolidone (NMP); Regulation Under the Toxic Substances Control Act 

(TSCA).

2070–AK85 Proposed Rule Stage. 

198 .................... Procedures for Chemical Risk Evaluation Under the Toxic Substances Control 

Act (TSCA).

2070–AK90 Proposed Rule Stage. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9303 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY—Continued 

Sequence No. Title Regulation 

Identifier No. Rulemaking stage 

199 .................... Revisions to Standards for the Open Burning/Open Detonation of Waste Explosives.2050–AH24 Proposed Rule Stage. 

200 .................... Listing of PFOA, PFOS, PFBS, and GenX as Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Hazardous Constituents.2050–AH26 Proposed Rule Stage. 

201 .................... Definition of Hazardous Waste Applicable to Corrective Action for Solid Waste 

Management Units.

2050–AH27 Proposed Rule Stage. 

202 .................... National Primary Drinking Water Regulations for Lead and Copper: Improvements (LCRI).2040–AG16 Proposed Rule Stage. 

203 .................... National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Ethylene Oxide Commercial Sterilization and Fumigation Operations.2060–AU37 Final Rule Stage. 

204 .................... New Source Performance Standards and Emission Guidelines for Crude Oil and 

Natural Gas Facilities: Climate Review.

2060–AV16 Final Rule Stage. 

205 .................... Revisions to the Air Emission Reporting Requirements (AERR) ............................ 2060–AV41 Final Rule Stage. 

206 .................... Multi-Pollutant Emissions Standards for Model Years 2027 and Later Light-Duty 

and Medium-Duty Vehicles.

2060–AV49 Final Rule Stage. 

207 .................... Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards for Heavy-Duty Vehicles—Phase 3 .......... 2060–AV50 Final Rule Stage. 

208 .................... Reconsideration of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particulate 

Matter.

2060–AV52 Final Rule Stage. 

209 .................... NESHAP: Coal-and Oil-Fired Electric Utility Steam Generating Units-Review of 

the Residual Risk and Technology Review.

2060–AV53 Final Rule Stage. 

210 .................... NSPS for the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry and NESHAP 

for the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry and Group I & II 

Polymers and Resins Industry.

2060–AV71 Final Rule Stage. 

211 .................... Methylene Chloride (MC); Regulation Under the Toxic Substances Control Act 

(TSCA).

2070–AK70 Final Rule Stage. 

212 .................... Carbon Tetrachloride (CTC); Regulation Under the Toxic Substances Control Act 

(TSCA).

2070–AK82 Final Rule Stage. 

213 .................... Perchloroethylene (PCE); Regulation Under the Toxic Substances Control Act 

(TSCA).

2070–AK84 Final Rule Stage. 

214 .................... Asbestos Part 1 (Chrysotile Asbestos); Regulation of Certain Conditions of Use 

Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).

2070–AK86 Final Rule Stage. 

215 .................... Reconsideration of the Dust-Lead Hazard Standards and Dust-Lead Post Abatement Clearance Levels.2070–AK91 Final Rule Stage. 

216 .................... Designating PFOA and PFOS as CERCLA Hazardous Substances ...................... 2050–AH09 Final Rule Stage. 

217 .................... Hazardous and Solid Waste Management System: Disposal of Coal Combustion 

Residuals From Electric Utilities; Legacy Surface Impoundments.

2050–AH14 Final Rule Stage. 

218 .................... Clean Water Act Hazardous Substance Facility Response Plans .......................... 2050–AH17 Final Rule Stage. 

219 .................... Accidental Release Prevention Requirements: Risk Management Program Under 

the Clean Air Act; Safer Communities by Chemical Accident Prevention.

2050–AH22 Final Rule Stage. 

220 .................... Federal Baseline Water Quality Standards for Indian Reservations ....................... 2040–AF62 Final Rule Stage. 

221 .................... Water Quality Standards Regulatory Revisions to Protect Tribal Reserved Rights 2040–AG17 Final Rule Stage. 

222 .................... PFAS National Primary Drinking Water Regulation Rulemaking ............................. 2040–AG18 Final Rule Stage. 

223 .................... Supplemental Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category.2040–AG23 Final Rule Stage. 

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Sequence No. Title Regulation 

Identifier No. Rulemaking stage 

224 .................... Regulations to Implement the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act ............................... 3046–AB30 Final Rule Stage. 

PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY CORPORATION

Sequence No. Title Regulation 

Identifier No. Rulemaking stage 

225 .................... Actuarial Assumptions for Determining an Employer’s Withdrawal Liability ............ 1212–AB54 Final Rule Stage. 

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

Sequence No. Title Regulation 

Identifier No. Rulemaking stage 

226 .................... Omitting Food From In-Kind Support and Maintenance Calculations ..................... 0960–AI60 Final Rule Stage. 

227 .................... Expand the Definition of a Public Assistance (PA) Household ............................... 0960–AI81 Final Rule Stage. 

228 .................... Nationwide Expansion of the Rental Subsidy Policy for SSI Recipients ................. 0960–AI82 Final Rule Stage. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9304 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION—Continued 

Sequence No. Title Regulation 

Identifier No. Rulemaking stage 

229 .................... Intermediate Improvement to the Disability Adjudication Process, Including How 

we Consider Past Work.

0960–AI83 Final Rule Stage. 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

Sequence No. Title Regulation 

Identifier No. Rulemaking stage 

230 .................... Regulatory Options for Table Saws ......................................................................... 3041–AC31 Proposed Rule Stage. 

231 .................... Safety Standard for Residential Gas Furnaces and Boilers .................................... 3041–AD70 Proposed Rule Stage. 

232 .................... Portable Generators ................................................................................................. 3041–AC36 Final Rule Stage. 

Introduction to the Fall 2023 

Regulatory Plan 

Executive Order 12866, issued in 

1993, requires the annual production of 

a Unified Regulatory Agenda and 

Regulatory Plan. It does so in order to 

promote transparency—or in the words 

of the Executive Order itself, ‘‘to have 

an effective regulatory program, to 

provide for coordination of regulations, 

to maximize consultation and the 

resolution of potential conflicts at an 

early stage, to involve the public and its 

State, local, and tribal officials in 

regulatory planning, and to ensure that 

new or revised regulations promote the 

President’s priorities and the principles 

set forth in this Executive order.’’ 

Executive Order 13563, issued in 2011, 

and Executive Order 14094, issued in 

2023, reaffirmed and amended the 

requirements of Executive Order 12866. 

We are now providing the Fall 2023 

Regulatory Plan. The regulatory plans 

and agendas submitted by agencies and 

included here offer a window into how 

the Administration plans to continue 

delivering on the President’s agenda to 

advance economic prosperity and 

equity, tackle the climate crisis, advance 

public health, and much more to 

improve the lives of the American 

people. Agencies will be continuing 

their work to implement landmark 

legislation passed during this 

Administration, including the 

implementation of the PACT Act, (Pub. 

L. 117–168); the Inflation Reduction 

Act, (Pub. L. 117–169); and the CHIPS 

and Science Act, (Pub. L. 117–167); as 

well as ongoing efforts to implement the 

Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act 

(Bipartisan Infrastructure Law), Public 

Law 117–58. Agencies have also 

highlighted in their plans and agendas 

how they have engaged with the public 

in developing regulatory priorities, as 

well as future opportunities for 

engagement. 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Statement of Regulatory Priorities 

In 2024, the U.S. Department of 

Agriculture (USDA) plans to prioritize 

initiatives that promote growth and new 

market opportunity in Rural America for 

our farmers, ranchers, small businesses, 

and communities, particularly among 

historically underserved communities, 

while implementing an expected new 5 

year Farm Bill reauthorization for our 

major agricultural and food programs. 

USDA further anticipates a Farm Bill 

reauthorization as an opportunity to 

strengthen and improve our customer 

service and delivery combined with IT 

modernization that fosters 21st century 

innovation. USDA will use available 

outreach and communication tools to 

seek input and engagement from our 

traditional stakeholders as well as those 

communities whom we may not have 

been able to reach in the past but who, 

like our traditional stakeholders, offer 

critical implementation input and 

feedback. In short, we want to know 

what works, and what doesn’t work, 

from everyone. 

In 2024, USDA will seek and promote 

21st century innovation initiatives like 

carbon capture and storage, addressing 

the effects of climate change such as 

drought and wildfire risks, and other 

climate-smart agriculture initiatives. As 

in the past, USDA will continue to 

tackle food and nutrition insecurity 

while maintaining a safe food supply 

and responding to any disaster and 

emergency threats impacting the 

American Farm economy, schools, 

individual households, and our 

National Forests. Finally, all of USDA’s 

programs, including the priorities 

contained in this Regulatory Plan, will 

be structured to advance the cause of 

equity by removing barriers and opening 

new opportunities for our customers. 

In 2023, the USDA: 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

published the Strengthening Organic 

Enforcement (SOE) final rule (January 

19, 2023, 88 FR 3548) that became 

effective on March 20, 2023. As required 

by the 2018 Farm Bill, SOE protects 

organic integrity and bolsters farmer and 

consumer confidence in the USDA 

organic seal by supporting strong 

organic control systems, improving farm 

to market traceability, increasing import 

oversight authority, and providing 

robust enforcement of the organic 

regulations. Topics addressed in this 

rulemaking include: National Organic 

Program Import Certificates; 

recordkeeping and product traceability; 

certifying agent personnel qualifications 

and training; standardized certificates of 

organic operation; unannounced on-site 

inspections of certified operations; 

oversight of certification activities; 

foreign conformity assessment systems; 

certification of producer group 

operations; labeling of nonretail 

containers; and, calculating organic 

content of multi-ingredient products. 

Forest Service implemented a final 

rule on Special Areas; Roadless Area 

Conservation; National Forest System 

Lands in Alaska (January 27, 2023, 88 

FR 5252) that repealed a final rule 

promulgated in 2020 exempting the 

Tongass National Forest from the 2001 

Roadless Area Conservation Rule (2001 

Roadless Rule). The 2001 Roadless Rule 

prohibited timber harvest and road 

construction or reconstruction within 

designated inventoried Roadless Areas, 

with limited exceptions. The rule is 

consistent with President Biden’s 

Executive Order 13990, Protecting 

Public Health and the Environment and 

Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate 

Crisis. 

In late 2023, the Forest Service plans 

to publish a proposed rule on Carbon 

Capture, Utilization, and Storage that 

would allow exclusive or perpetual 

right of use or occupancy of National 

Forest System lands that will allow for 

permanent carbon dioxide sequestration 

in order to reduce the impacts of climate 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9305 

change. Furthermore, the Forest Service 

plans to publish a Financial Assurance 

for Locatable Minerals Interim Final 

rule that will allow equities and private 

investment-rated securities within trust 

funds as financial assurance for longterm post-closure obligations, which is 

crucial for the stewardship and 

restoration of National Forest System 

lands affected by mining. Finally, the 

Forest Service is making several updates 

to its directives that will strengthen its 

ability to combat climate change and 

improve access to, and delivery of, 

public programs and services by 

reducing administrative burden— 

including equitable access to recreation, 

mitigation of adverse impacts, climate 

resilience, and its Tribal action plan. 

In late 2023, Food and Nutrition 

Service (FNS) plans to publish an 

interim final rule (December 2023) that 

codifies flexibility for rural program 

operators to provide non-congregate 

meal service in the Summer Food 

Service Program (SFSP) and establishes 

a permanent Summer Electronic 

Benefits Transfer for Children Program 

(Summer EBT). To gather information 

for this rulemaking, between April– 

August 2023, FNS hosted more than 100 

listening sessions and information 

meetings with State agencies, advocacy 

groups, program operators, and industry 

partners. For more information about 

this rule, see RIN 0584–AE96. 

In December 2023, FNS also plans to 

publish a final rule codifying the 

provisions of the Access to Baby 

Formula Act of 2022. Amongst other 

things, the rule codifies requirements 

for State agencies to include language in 

their Women, Infants and Children 

(WIC) infant formula rebate contracts 

that describes remedies in the event of 

an infant formula recall. This rule was 

informed by lessons learned and 

feedback received from State and local 

agencies, advocacy organizations, and 

Federal research on the response to 

recent disasters, the COVID–19 

pandemic, and a major WIC product 

recall. For more information about this 

rule, see RIN 0584–AE94. 

Outlined below are some of USDA’s 

most important upcoming regulatory 

actions for 2024. These include efforts 

to restore and expand economic 

opportunity; address the climate crisis; 

and support agricultural markets that 

are free, open, and promote 

competition. This Regulatory Plan also 

reflects USDA’s continued 

commitments to ensuring a safe and 

nutritious food supply and animal 

welfare protections. As always, our 

Semiannual Regulatory Agenda contains 

information on a broad-spectrum of 

USDA’s initiatives and planned 

upcoming regulatory actions. 

Foster Sustainable Economic Growth by 

Promoting Innovation, Building 

Resilience to Climate Change, and 

Expanding Renewable Energy 

Higher Blends Infrastructure Incentive 

Program: Rural Business Cooperative 

Service (RBCS) Higher Blends 

Infrastructure Incentive Program 

(HBIIP): HBIIP is a program designed to 

increase the sales and use of higher 

blends of ethanol and biodiesel by 

expanding the infrastructure for 

renewable fuels derived from U.S. 

agricultural products. The program is 

also intended to encourage a more 

comprehensive approach to market 

higher blends by sharing the costs 

related to building out biofuel-related 

infrastructure. The program should 

increase availability of domestic 

biofuels and give Americans additional 

cleaner fuel options at the pump. RBCS 

is proposing a rule to codify the policies 

and procedures for the program in the 

Code of Federal Regulations, as this 

program has a significant impact on 

climate change which is an 

Administration priority. Public 

engagement will occur in early fall of 

2023. A virtual listening session will be 

announced in the Federal Register. For 

more information about this rule, see 

RIN 0570–AB11. 

Foster an Equitable and Competitive 

Marketplace for All Agricultural 

Producers 

Inclusive Competition and Market 

Integrity Rules Under the Packers and 

Stockyards Act: USDA plans to 

supplement a recent revision to 

regulations under the Packers and 

Stockyards (P&S) Act to prohibit certain 

prejudices and disadvantages and 

unjustly discriminatory conduct against 

covered producers in the livestock, 

meat, and poultry markets. The proposal 

(October 3, 2022, 87 FR 60010) set forth 

prohibited discrimination on the bases 

of the producer’s personal 

characteristics and identified as 

prohibited certain retaliatory practices 

that interfere with lawful 

communications, assertion of rights, and 

participation in associations, among 

other protected activities. The proposal 

also identified unlawfully deceptive 

practices that violate the P&S Act with 

respect to contract formation, contract 

performance, contract termination and 

contract refusal. The purpose of the 

final rule is to promote inclusive 

competition and market integrity in the 

livestock, meats, and poultry markets. 

For more information about this rule, 

see RIN 0581–AE05. 

Unfair Practices, Undue Preferences, 

and Harm to Competition under the 

Packers and Stockyards Act: The 

proposal would revise regulations under 

the Packers and Stockyards Act (Act), 

providing clarity regarding conduct that 

may violate the Act, including 

addressing harm to competition. This 

proposal reflects feedback received from 

public input generated by previous 

proposed and interim final rules. On 

June 22, 2010, USDA published in the 

Federal Register (75 FR 35338–35354) a 

proposed rule recommending several 

changes to the regulations issued under 

the Packers and Stockyards Act, 1921, 

as amended (P&S Act). On December 20, 

2016, USDA published a new ‘‘Scope’’ 

paragraph in the Federal Register as an 

Interim Final Rule ‘‘IFR’’ with a request 

for comments (81 FR 92566–92594). On 

October 18, 2017, USDA withdrew the 

IFR (82 FR 48594–01). Though neither 

of these proposed rules became a final 

rule, USDA received, reviewed, and 

considered public comments. For more 

information about this rule, see RIN 

0581–AE04. 

Provide All Americans Safe, Nutritious 

Food 

USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection 

Service (FSIS) continues to ensure that 

meat, poultry, and egg products are safe, 

wholesome and properly marked, 

labeled, and packaged, and prohibits the 

distribution in-commerce of meat, 

poultry, and egg products that are 

adulterated or misbranded. 

Salmonella Framework: One of FSIS’ 

top priorities is to develop a more 

comprehensive and effective strategy to 

reduce Salmonella illnesses associated 

with poultry products. The agency 

gathered data and information and 

solicited stakeholder input on 

Salmonella in poultry. FSIS proposed in 

2023 to declare that not-ready-to- eat 

breaded stuffed chicken products that 

contain Salmonella at levels of 1 colony 

forming unit per gram or higher in the 

chicken components are adulterated 

within the meaning of the Poultry 

Products Inspection Act (April 28, 2023, 

82 FR 26249) and will finalize this 

determination in 2024. FSIS also plans 

to propose a new regulatory framework 

targeted at reducing Salmonella 

illnesses associated with poultry 

products and moving closer to the 

national target of a 25 percent reduction 

in Salmonella illnesses. For more 

information about the proposed new 

regulatory framework, see RIN 0583– 

AD96. 

In addition, FSIS intends to publish 

several rules to improve regulatory 

certainty, which assure consumers that 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9306 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

meat, poultry, and egg products are safe 

and truthfully labeled. 

Voluntary Labeling of Meat Products 

With ‘‘Product of USA’’ and Similar 

Statements: FSIS plans to publish a 

final rule to address concerns that the 

voluntary ‘‘Product of USA’’ label claim 

may confuse consumers about the origin 

of FSIS regulated products. FSIS 

received 3,364 comments on the 

proposed rule during a 60-day comment 

period that FSIS extended to 90 days 

based on requests from stakeholders. In 

response to the Agency’s consumer 

research and comments received on the 

proposed rule, FSIS will define 

voluntary U.S.-origin label claims so 

that they are more meaningful to 

consumers. For more information about 

this rule, see RIN 0583–AD87. 

Labeling of Meat or Poultry Products 

Comprised of or Containing Cultured 

Animal Cells; and Revision of the 

Nutrition Facts Panels for Meat and 

Poultry Products and Updating Certain 

Reference Amounts Customarily 

Consumed: FSIS will propose to 

establish new requirements for the 

labeling of meat and poultry food 

products made using animal cell culture 

technology (i.e., ‘‘cell-cultured’’ food 

products). In advance of the proposed 

rule, FSIS and FDA held a joint public 

meeting in October 2018 to discuss the 

potential hazards, oversight 

considerations, and labeling of cellcultured food products derived from 

livestock and poultry tissue (September 

13, 2018, 83 FR 46476). In addition, 

FSIS published an advanced notice of 

proposed rulemaking in the Federal 

Register, soliciting public input on the 

labeling of cell-cultured seafood, meat, 

and poultry food products (September 3, 

2021, 86 FR 49491). FSIS also plans to 

finalize a labeling rule to update 

nutrition labeling for meat and poultry 

products. The two rules would provide 

additional certainty about what is 

required for meat and poultry labeling 

while ensuring that consumers have 

accurate information about the food 

they buy. For more information about 

these rules, see RINs 0583–AD56 and 

0583–AD89. 

FNS’ Child Nutrition Programs: 

Revisions to Meal Patterns Consistent 

with the 2020 Guidelines for Americans: 

The final rule would revise meal 

patterns in the National School Lunch 

Program and School Breakfast Program 

to make school meals healthier and 

more consistent with the most recent 

Dietary Guidelines for Americans while 

reflecting the nutrient needs of children 

at risk for food insecurity. Throughout 

2022, USDA held over 50 listening 

sessions with State agencies, school 

food authorities, advocacy 

organizations, Tribal dietitians and 

schools, professional associations, food 

manufacturers, and other Federal 

agencies to inform the proposed rule 

(February 7, 2023, 88 FR 8050). USDA 

also received extensive input through 

over 136,000 public comments on the 

proposed rule during a 60-day comment 

period that USDA extended to 90 days 

based on requests from stakeholders. 

Through this stakeholder engagement, 

USDA gained valuable insights into the 

successes and challenges that schools 

experience implementing the school 

meal nutrition standards and will use 

this information to develop a practical 

and durable final rule. For more 

information about this rule, see RIN 

0584–AE88. 

FNS’ Special Supplemental Nutrition 

Program for Women, Infants and 

Children (WIC): Revisions in the WIC 

Food Packages: Consistent with 

recommendations from the National 

Academies of Sciences, Engineering, 

and Medicine and the latest Dietary 

Guidelines for Americans, the final rule 

would provide participants with greater 

choices in variety and food package 

sizes and align the WIC food packages 

with available nutrition science. When 

developing the proposed rule 

(November 21, 2022, 87 FR 71090), FNS 

solicited feedback from WIC 

participants, state and tribal partners, 

and other government agencies. 

FNSpublished the proposed rule with a 

90-day comment period and will 

consider comments received in 

development of this final rule. For more 

information about this rule, see RIN 

0584–AE82. 

National Organic Program; Organic 

Livestock and Poultry Standards: The 

final rule would establish standards that 

support additional practice standards 

for organic livestock and poultry 

production. This final action would add 

provisions to the USDA organic 

regulations to address and clarify 

livestock and poultry living conditions 

(for example, outdoor access, housing 

environment and stocking densities), 

health care practices (for example 

physical alterations, administering 

medical treatment, euthanasia), and 

animal handling and transport to and 

during slaughter. For more information 

about this rule, see RIN 0581–AE06. 

Improve Access to, and Delivery of, 

Public Programs and Services by 

Reducing Administrative Burden 

Forest Service Amendment to 

Locatable Minerals: The locatable 

minerals regulations have remained 

mostly unchanged since they were first 

promulgated in 1974. Court cases, 

government audits, and implementation 

experience have identified many 

shortcomings in the current regulations 

that challenge the agency’s ability to 

efficiently and effectively administer 

locatable mineral activity on National 

Forest System lands. The Forest Service 

is proposing to revise its regulations for 

administering hard-rock mining 

activities on National Forest System 

lands, providing permitting certainty; 

strong, responsible mining standards; 

enhanced community and Tribal 

engagement; and proactive 

environmental management. To gather 

public input into this proposed rule, it 

was preceded by a Locatable Minerals 

advance notice of proposed rulemaking 

(ANPR) (September 13, 2018, 83 FR 

46451). Following the completion of the 

comment period for the ANPR, the 

Forest Service analyzed the comments 

received and used the information to 

draft the proposed regulation. For more 

information about this rule, see RIN: 

0596–AD32. 

USDA—AGRICULTURAL MARKETING 

SERVICE (AMS) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

1. Unfair Practices, Undue Preferences, 

and Harm to Competition Under the 

Packers and Stockyards Act (AMS– 

FTPP–21–0046) [0581–AE04] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 7 U.S.C. 181 to 229c 

CFR Citation: 9 CFR 201. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This action proposes to 

revise regulations issued under the 

Packers and Stockyards Act (Act) (7 

U.S.C. 181 229c), providing clarity 

regarding conduct that may violate the 

Act. Revisions are intended to support 

market growth, assure fair trade 

practices and competition, and protect 

livestock and poultry growers and 

producers. The action addresses longstanding issues related to 

competitiveness and showings of harm 

or likely harm to competition. 

Statement of Need: Revisions to 

regulations pertaining to the Packers 

and Stockyards Act (Act) clarify the 

types of conduct by packers, swine 

contractors, or live poultry dealers that 

the Agricultural Marketing Service 

(AMS) considers unfair practices or 

undue preferences and a violation of 

sections 202(a) or 202(b) of the Act. 

Sections 202(a) and 202(b) of the P&S 

Act are broadly written to prohibit 

unjustly practices and undue 

preferences. Industry members have 

complained that the regulations 

effectuating the Act are too vague and 

do not provide adequate clarity about 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9307 

the types of conduct or action that are 

likely to violate theAct. This rule is 

needed to provide essential clarity about 

what would be considered violations of 

the Act. 

Revisions to regulations pertaining to 

the Packers and Stockyards Act (Act) 

that would also clarify the scope of the 

Act are needed to establish what 

conduct or action, depending on their 

nature and the circumstances, violate 

the Act without a finding of harm or 

likely harm to competition or as they 

may relate to harm or likely harm to 

competition as such terms were 

contemplated under the Act. Such 

revisions reflect the Department of 

Agriculture’s (USDA) longstanding 

position in this regard. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The Packers 

and Stockyards Act (Act) authorizes 

AMS to determine if conduct within the 

poultry and livestock industries 

constitutes unfair practices or undue 

preferences and, therefore a violation of 

the Act. 

The Act provides USDA with the 

authority to assure fair competition and 

trade practices and to safeguard farmers 

against receiving less than the true 

market value of their livestock. Sections 

202(c), (d), and (e) of the Act limit the 

application of those sections to acts or 

practices that have an adverse effect on 

competition, such as acts restraining 

commerce, creating a monopoly, or 

producing another type of antitrust 

injury. However, provisions in sections 

202(a) and (b) restrict practices that are 

deceptive, unfair, unjust, undue, and 

unreasonable; terms that are understood 

to encompass more than anticompetitive 

conduct. USDA’s position is that 

Congress did not intend application of 

sections 202(a) and (b) to be limited to 

instances in which there is harm to 

competition. 

Alternatives: USDA considered doing 

nothing. However, courts are not 

unanimous in their findings. Further, 

several courts disagree with USDA’s 

position. Lack of clarity hinders the 

agency’s ability to consistently 

administer and enforce the Act. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: USDA 

estimate annual costs related to this rule 

of $9 million for the first five years, 

decreasing in subsequent years, for total 

ten-year costs of $66 million. We believe 

the primary benefit of the proposed 

regulation is the increased ability to 

protect producers and growers through 

enforcement of the Act for violations of 

section 202(a) and/or (b) that do not 

result in harm, or a likelihood of harm, 

to competition. 

Risks: Courts have recognized that the 

proper analysis of alleged violations of 

these two sections depends on the facts 

of each case. However, four courts of 

appeals have disagreed with USDA’s 

interpretation of the Act and have 

concluded that plaintiffs could not 

prove their claims under those sections 

without proving harm to competition or 

likely harm to competition. There is a 

risk if future legal challenge of USDA 

interpretation of sections 202(c), (d), 

and (e) of the Act. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 02/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Michael V. Durando, 

Deputy Administrator, Fair Trade 

Practices Program, Department of 

Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing 

Service, 1400 Independence Avenue 

SW, Washington, DC 20250–0237, 

Phone: 202 720–0219. 

RIN: 0581–AE04 

USDA—AMS 

Final Rule Stage 

2. Inclusive Competition and Market 

Integrity Under the Packers and 

Stockyards Act (AMS–FTPP–21–0045) 

[0581–AE05] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 7 U.S.C. 181 to 229c 

CFR Citation: 9 CFR 201. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This final rule would 

supplement a recent revision to 

regulations issued under the Packers 

and Stockyards Act (Act) (7 U.S.C. 181 

229c) that provided criteria for the 

Secretary to consider when determining 

whether certain conduct or action by 

packers, swine contractors, or live 

poultry dealers is unduly or 

unreasonably or advantageous. 

Supplemental amendments clarify the 

conduct the Department considers 

unfair, preferential, unjustly 

discriminatory, or deceptive and a 

violation of sections 202(a) and (b) of 

the Act. The rule would also clarify the 

criteria and types of conduct that would 

be considered unduly or unreasonably 

preferential, advantageous, prejudicial, 

or disadvantageous and violations of the 

Act, including retaliatory practices that 

interfere with lawful communications, 

assertion of rights, and associational 

participation. 

Statement of Need: Revisions to 

regulations pertaining to the Packers 

and Stockyards Act (Act) clarify the 

types of conduct by packers, swine 

contractors, or live poultry dealers that 

the Agricultural Marketing Service 

(AMS) considers unfair, unjustly 

discriminatory, or deceptive and a 

violation of section 202(a) of the Act, 

regardless of whether such action harms 

or is likely to harm competition. The 

rule also clarifies the criteria and/or 

types of conduct that would be 

considered unduly or unreasonably 

preferential, advantageous, prejudicial, 

or disadvantageous and a violation of 

section 202(b) of the Act. 

Sections 202(a) and 202(b) of the P&S 

Act are broadly written to prohibit 

unjustly discriminatory practices and 

undue preferences and prejudices. 

Industry members have complained that 

the regulations effectuating the Act are 

too vague and do not provide adequate 

clarity about the types of conduct or 

action that are likely to violate the Act. 

This rule is needed to provide essential 

clarity about what would be considered 

violations of the Act, regardless of 

whether such violations harm or are 

likely to harm competition. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The Packers 

and Stockyards Act (Act) authorizes 

AMS to determine if conduct within the 

poultry and livestock industries are 

unfair, unjustly discriminatory, or 

deceptive and, therefore a violation of 

the Act. 

Alternatives: AMS considered taking 

no further action, allowing 100 years of 

case law to determine precedent in 

making determinations about whether 

certain behaviors violate the Act. AMS 

also considered revisiting the 

withdrawn 2016 rulemaking approach 

that would have identified criteria with 

which to determine whether certain 

behaviors violate the Act. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: USDA 

estimates first-year costs associated with 

this rule to be $517 thousand, with 

decreased costs each year thereafter, 

resulting in a ten-year total cost of $2.88 

million. AMS expects this rule to 

benefit all segments of the industry, 

providing greater clarity about what 

would be considered violations of the 

Act. AMS expects this rule, coupled 

with a concurrent rule on the scope of 

the Act, to strengthen enforcement of 

the Act, resulting in fairer and more 

competitive markets for producers and 

poultry growers. 

Risks: Industry is divided about 

adding lists or examples of specific 

prohibited conduct to the regulations. 

Some argue such lists would inhibit 

freedom to forge contracts that fit 

individual situations, while others 

contend greater specificity is required so 

that affected parties can more readily 

identify violative behavior. Industry is 

also split on the question of whether 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9308 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

identified prohibited behaviors must be 

found to harm or likely harm 

competition to be considered violations 

of the Act. AMS expects to resolve some 

of the controversy by being proactive 

and transparent with the industry to 

allow for critical discussions and 

decisions on the rule. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 10/03/22 87 FR 60010 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extended.

11/30/22 87 FR 73507 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

12/02/22 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extended End.

01/17/23 

Final Rule ............ 12/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Michael V. Durando, 

Deputy Administrator, Fair Trade 

Practices Program, Department of 

Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing 

Service, 1400 Independence Avenue 

SW, Washington, DC 20250–0237, 

Phone: 202 720–0219. 

RIN: 0581–AE05 

USDA—FOOD AND NUTRITION 

SERVICE (FNS) 

Final Rule Stage 

3. Special Supplemental Nutrition 

Program for Women, Infants and 

Children (WIC): Revisions in the WIC 

Food Packages [0584–AE82] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1786, sec. 

17(f)(11)(C) 

CFR Citation: 7 CFR 246.10. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This final rulemaking will 

amend regulations governing the WIC 

food packages to: (1) incorporate 

recommendations of the National 

Academies of Science, Engineering, and 

Medicine 2017 scientific report, Review 

of WIC Food Packages: Improving 

Balance and Choice; (2) align with 2020 

Dietary Guidelines for Americans; and 

(3) make other administrative revisions 

or clarifications to food package 

requirements. In the development of the 

proposed rule, FNS solicited feedback 

from WIC participants, state and tribal 

partners, and other government 

agencies. FNS published the proposed 

rule with a 90-day comment period and 

will consider comments received in 

development of this final rule. 

Statement of Need: The National 

Academies of Sciences, Engineering, 

and Medicine (NASEM) issued a 2017 

report with recommendations to align 

the WIC food packages with the 

available nutrition science and to reflect 

the supplemental nature of the Program. 

In December 2020, the USDA and the 

Department of Health and Human 

Services released the 2020–2025 Dietary 

Guidelines for Americans (DGAs). 

USDA FNS will propose rulemaking to 

incorporate NASEM recommendations 

and align the food package with the 

latest DGAs. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 42 U.S.C. 

1786, sec. 17(f)(11)(C). 

Alternatives: N/A. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: This is 

discussed in the proposed rulemaking’s 

Regulatory Impact Analysis which was 

published on November 21, 2022 as an 

appendix to the rule, available at 87 FR 

71090. 

Risks: N/A. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 11/21/22 87 FR 71090 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

02/21/23 

Final Action ......... 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State. 

Federalism: This action may have 

federalism implications as defined in 

E.O. 13132. 

Agency Contact: Michael DePiro, 

Specialist, Department of Agriculture, 

Food and Nutrition Service, 1320 

Braddock Place, Alexandria, VA 22314, 

Phone: 703 305–2876, Email: 

michael.depiro@usda.gov. 

Maureen Lydon, Department of 

Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, 

1320 Braddock Place, Alexandria, VA 

22314, Phone: 703 457–7713, Email: 

maureen.lydon@usda.gov. 

RIN: 0584–AE82 

USDA—FNS 

4. Child Nutrition Programs: Revisions 

to Meal Patterns Consistent With the 

2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans 

[0584–AE88] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1758, sec. 

9(f)(1) 

CFR Citation: 7 CFR 210.10; 7 CFR 

210.11; 7 CFR 215.7a; 7 CFR 220.8; 7 

CFR 226.20; . . . 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rule would finalize 

long-term school nutrition standards 

based on the Dietary Guidelines for 

Americans, 2020–2025, and feedback 

that USDA received from child nutrition 

program stakeholders through an 

extensive stakeholder engagement 

campaign. The revisions are expected to 

make school meals more nutritious and 

more consistent with the goals of the 

most recent Dietary Guidelines, as 

required by statute. In addition, this rule 

would address the Buy American 

provision, which requires school food 

authorities to purchase, to the maximum 

extent practicable, domestic 

commodities or products for use in the 

school meal programs. This rulemaking 

would impact schools that participate in 

the school meal programs, and for 

certain rule provisions, facilities and 

institutions that participate in the Child 

and Adult Care Food Program and 

sponsors that participate in the Summer 

Food Service Program. This rulemaking 

would also impact participants who 

receive meals and snacks through the 

child nutrition programs. USDA 

received stakeholder input on this 

rulemaking prior to publishing the 

proposed rule. Throughout 2022, USDA 

held over 50 listening sessions with 

State agencies, school food authorities, 

advocacy organizations, Tribal 

stakeholders, professional associations, 

food manufacturers, and other Federal 

agencies to inform the proposed rule. 

USDA also received extensive input 

through public comments on the 

proposed rule. Through this stakeholder 

engagement, USDA gained valuable 

insights into the successes and 

challenges that schools experience 

implementing the school meal nutrition 

standards and will use this information 

to develop a practical and durable final 

rule. 

Statement of Need: The revisions are 

needed to make school meals more 

nutritious and more consistent with the 

goals of the most recent Dietary 

Guidelines, as required by statute. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 42 U.S.C. 

1758, sec. 9(f)(1). 

Alternatives: In the proposed rule, 

USDA considered two alternative 

proposals for the milk requirements in 

school meals, one that would maintain 

the current requirements and an 

alternative that would not allow 

flavored milk for children in grades K– 

8. USDA also considered two 

alternatives for the grain requirements 

in school meals, one that would 

maintain the current requirements and 

an alternative that would require all 

grains to be whole grain-rich, except 

that one day per week, schools may 

offer enriched grains. In addition, USDA 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9309 

considered proposing product-specific 

total sugars limits (to align with existing 

CACFP requirements) rather than added 

sugars limits. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: USDA 

estimated that the proposed rule would 

cost schools between $0.03 and $0.04 

per breakfast and lunch served or 

between $220 and $274 million 

annually including both the School 

Breakfast Program and National School 

Lunch Program starting in School Year 

2024–2025. The costs to schools would 

mainly be due to a shift in purchasing 

patterns to products with reduced levels 

of added sugars and sodium, 

administrative costs, and increased 

labor costs for continued sodium 

reduction over time. 

Risks: None known at this time. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 02/07/23 88 FR 8050 

NPRM .................. 03/31/23 88 FR 19229 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

04/10/23 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extension.

05/10/23 

Final Rule ............ 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Local, 

State. 

Federalism: Undetermined. 

Agency Contact: Michael DePiro, 

Specialist, Department of Agriculture, 

Food and Nutrition Service, 1320 

Braddock Place, Alexandria, VA 22314, 

Phone: 703 305–2876, Email: 

michael.depiro@usda.gov. 

Maureen Lydon, Department of 

Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, 

1320 Braddock Place, Alexandria, VA 

22314, Phone: 703 457–7713, Email: 

maureen.lydon@usda.gov. 

Related RIN: Merged with 0584–AE91 

RIN: 0584–AE88 

USDA—FNS 

5. Special Supplemental Nutrition 

Program for Women, Infants, and 

Children (WIC): Implementation of the 

Access to Baby Formula Act of 2022 

and Related Provisions [0584–AE94] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: Pub. L. 117–129 

CFR Citation: 7 CFR 246. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rule would amend 7 

CFR 246 to codify the provisions of the 

Access to Baby Formula Act of 2022 

(ABFA). ABFA amends section 17 of the 

Child Nutrition Act of 1966 to (1) add 

requirements to State agency infant 

formula cost containment contracts; (2) 

establish waiver authority to the 

Secretary of Agriculture to address 

certain emergencies, disasters, and 

supply chain disruptions impacting 

WIC; and (3) require WIC State agencies 

to develop a plan of alternate operating 

procedures, commonly referred to as a 

disaster plan. FNS would make other 

related technical corrections and 

updates as necessary to modernize 

applicable WIC Program regulations. 

This rule was informed by lessons 

learned and feedback received from 

State and local agencies, advocacy 

organizations, and Federal research on 

the response to recent disasters, the 

COVID–19 pandemic, and a major WIC 

product recall. 

Statement of Need: This rule would 

codify requirements for State agencies to 

include language in their WIC infant 

formula rebate contracts that describes 

remedies in the event of an infant 

formula recall, including how an infant 

formula manufacturer would protect 

against disruption to program 

participants in the State (i.e., ensure that 

WIC participants can purchase formula 

using WIC benefits). The rule would 

also codify permanent expanded waiver 

authority to aid participants in 

obtaining and redeeming WIC benefits 

during certain emergencies, disasters, 

and supply chain disruptions impacting 

WIC. The required plan of alternate 

operating procedures would ensure WIC 

State agencies have plans in place to 

support the critical need for continuity 

of operations in the event of a 

disruption of WIC services, including 

but not limited to emergency periods, 

supplemental food recalls, and other 

supply chain disruptions. Finally, the 

rule would make other miscellaneous 

technical corrections and updates as 

necessary to update WIC regulations. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The Access 

to Baby Formula Act of 2022 (ABFA, 

Pub. L. 117–129) amends section 17 of 

the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (Pub. L. 

89–642). 

Alternatives: No alternatives have 

been identified at this time. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

costs associated with implementing the 

rule’s regulatory requirements are not 

expected to significantly add to current 

program costs at the State and local 

levels. 

Risks: No risks have been identified at 

this time. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Final Rule With 

Comment.

12/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Local, 

State. 

Agency Contact: Michael DePiro, 

Specialist, Department of Agriculture, 

Food and Nutrition Service, 1320 

Braddock Place, Alexandria, VA 22314, 

Phone: 703 305–2876, Email: 

michael.depiro@usda.gov. 

Maureen Lydon, Department of 

Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, 

1320 Braddock Place, Alexandria, VA 

22314, Phone: 703 457–7713, Email: 

maureen.lydon@usda.gov. 

RIN: 0584–AE94 

USDA—FNS 

6. Interim Final Rule—Implementing 

Provisions From the Consolidated 

Appropriations Act, 2023: Establishing 

the Summer EBT Program and NonCongregate Option in the Summer Food 

Service Program [0584–AE96] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Legal Authority: Pub. L. 117–328 

CFR Citation: 7 CFR 225. 

Legal Deadline: Other, Statutory, 

December 29, 2023, Interim Final Rule. 

The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 

2023 (Pub. L. 117–328) requires FNS to 

promulgate regulations to carry out the 

provisions under section 502 of the Act 

no later than 1 year after the date of 

enactment. Public Law 117–328 was 

enacted on December 29, 2022; 

therefore, FNS is required to publish an 

interim final rule by December 29, 2023. 

However, FNS is aiming for publication 

by December 15, 2023, in order to 

ensure the statutory deadline is met. 

Abstract: This interim final rule (IFR) 

will amend 7 CFR part 225 to codify the 

flexibility for rural program operators to 

provide non-congregate meal service in 

the Summer Food Service program 

(SFSP). This rule will also establish a 

new 7 CFR part and codify a new 

Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer 

(EBT) for Children Program in this part. 

The mandate for these changes is found 

in section 502 of the Consolidated 

Appropriations Act, 2023 (Pub. L. 117– 

328), which added new section 13a of 

the Richard B. Russell Nation School 

Lunch Act (NSLA) to allow rural noncongregate meal service in the SFSP and 

NSLP Seamless Summer Option (SSO) 

and created a new section 13a to 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9310 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

establish a permanent Summer EBT 

Program. 

To gather information in support of 

this rulemaking, between April–August 

2023, FNS has hosted more than 100 

listening sessions and information 

meetings to date with State agencies, 

advocacy groups, Program operators, 

and industry partners. These listening 

sessions focused primarily, but not 

exclusively, on the rural non-congregate 

meal service option. Additional 

listening sessions related to Summer 

EBT are forthcoming. Since the 

enactment of The Consolidated 

Appropriations Act, 2023, FNS 

published guidance that serves as the 

instructions for state agencies and 

program operators on how to implement 

SFSP and SSO rural non-congregate 

meal service during summer 2023, 

including guidance on oversight and 

monitoring pertaining to non-congregate 

operations to assist program operators. 

In addition, FNS has published early 

implementation guidance on Summer 

EBT for Indian Tribal Organizations and 

State agencies. 

Statement of Need: The Consolidated 

Appropriations Act, 2023 (Pub. L. 117– 

328) established a permanent Summer 

EBT Program and authorized a rural 

non-congregate meal service option in 

the Summer Food Service Program 

(SFSP), to be promulgated through 

interim final regulations no later than 1 

year after the date of enactment. 

Accordingly, this interim final 

rulemaking will amend the SFSP 

regulations in 7 CFR part 225 and create 

a new 7 CFR section to allow State 

agencies and program operators to carry 

out the statutory provisions of Public 

Law 117–328. Implementation of this 

legislation will expand the reach of 

FNS’ summer nutrition programs, 

providing greater access for 

communities and families whom the 

traditional SFSP cannot reliably reach, 

which in turn will have a lasting impact 

on how the nutritional needs of children 

are met during the summer months. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Richard B. 

Russell National School Lunch Act 

(NSLA) at 42 U.S.C. 1761 and 1762a. 

Alternatives: The Agency considered 

alternatives pertaining to the noncongregate meal service provisions in 

the Summer Food Service Program 

include the definition of rural, measures 

to ensure program integrity, meal 

service models, and State discretion on 

implementation approaches. For 

Summer EBT, in addition to the policies 

included in the interim final rule, the 

Agency considered alternatives in the 

areas of State administration, 

enrollment, EBT issuance and 

expungement, and program operations 

for Indian Tribal Organizations. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

Implementing the rule’s regulatory 

requirements is expected to add to 

current program costs at the Federal, 

State, and local levels, with the majority 

of costs going towards the establishment 

and implementation a permanent 

Summer EBT program. The 

implementation of this legislation is 

anticipated to benefit families with 

children by enabling more such families 

access to critical nutrition assistance for 

their children. FNS anticipates that 29 

million children currently receiving free 

or reduced price meals will be eligible 

for Summer EBT annually. Participation 

in the SFSP will increase over time by 

4.4 million, lifting the number of meals 

served to children in the summer by 

more than 380 million. 

Risks: Summer EBT will be the first 

new FNS nutrition program in decades 

and will reach millions of children each 

summer. Crafting implementing 

regulations will be a complex process as 

FNS will need to consider and make 

determinations with regards to a large 

number of policy decisions. FNS will 

also need to engage a wide spectrum of 

stakeholders early in this process to 

gather input on best practices and 

effective approaches to implementation. 

Given the short timeframe to promulgate 

this IFR, there is a risk that regulations 

will not publish in time. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Interim Final Rule 12/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: Local, 

State. 

Agency Contact: Michael DePiro, 

Specialist, Department of Agriculture, 

Food and Nutrition Service, 1320 

Braddock Place, Alexandria, VA 22314, 

Phone: 703 305–2876, Email: 

michael.depiro@usda.gov. 

Maureen Lydon, Department of 

Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, 

1320 Braddock Place, Alexandria, VA 

22314, Phone: 703 457–7713, Email: 

maureen.lydon@usda.gov. 

RIN: 0584–AE96 

USDA—FOOD SAFETY AND 

INSPECTION SERVICE (FSIS) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

7. Labeling of Meat and Poultry 

Products Made Using Animal Cell 

Culture Technology [0583–AD89] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 21 U.S.C. 451 et seq. 

CFR Citation: 9 CFR ch. III. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Food Safety and 

Inspection Service (FSIS) is proposing 

to establish new requirements for the 

labeling of meat or poultry products 

made using animal cell-culture 

technology. 

Statement of Need: Many companies, 

both domestic and foreign, are currently 

developing cultured products derived 

from the cells of food animals amenable 

to the Federal Meat Inspection Act 

(FMIA; 21 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) (cattle, 

sheep, swine, goats, and fish of the 

order Siluriformes, e.g., catfish) or the 

Poultry Products Inspection Act (PPIA; 

21 U.S.C. 451 et seq.) (chickens, turkeys, 

ducks, geese, guineas, ratites, and 

squabs). Human food products derived 

from these species fall under FSIS 

jurisdiction. 

Based on FSIS’ review of comments 

on the Advanced Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking, the available literature, and 

the Agency’s ongoing interactions with 

the U.S. Food and Drug Administration 

(FDA) and industry, FSIS has 

determined that new regulatory 

requirements for labeling are necessary 

to ensure that cell-cultured meat and 

poultry products are truthfully and 

accurately labeled. Due to the novel 

method of production utilized to 

produce these products, the biological, 

chemical, nutritional, or organoleptic 

properties of some cell-cultured 

products may substantively differ from 

conventionally produced meat and 

poultry in a manner that is relevant to 

consumers. Moreover, these meat and 

poultry products, unlike any others on 

the U.S. market, are not derived from 

slaughter. It is imperative, therefore, 

that such products display unique 

labeling terminology that enables 

consumers to accurately identify the 

nature and source of such products. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The Federal 

Meat Inspection Act (FMIA; 21 U.S.C. 

601 et seq.) and the Poultry Products 

Inspection Act (PPIA; 21 U.S.C. 451 et 

seq.) require that meat and poultry 

products be truthfully and accurately 

labeled and that their labels be preapproved by FSIS (21 U.S.C. 607(d) and 

457(c), respectively), prior to movement 

in commerce. FSIS issues labeling 

regulations and reviews and approves 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9311 

meat and poultry product labels 

pursuant to these statutory labeling 

requirements. Food products made 

using animal cell culture technology 

and derived from the cells of livestock 

subject to the FMIA or the PPIA are 

subject to the labeling (and other 

applicable) requirements of these Acts 

and the regulations issued thereunder. 

Alternatives: In addition to the option 

proposed, the Agency would consider 

alternatives for the requirements for 

labeling of meat or poultry products 

made using animal cell culture 

technology. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: This 

proposed rule would benefit the public 

by providing truthful and accurate 

labeling of meat and poultry products 

produced using animal cell-culture 

technology. Consumers would be able to 

clearly differentiate cell-cultured 

products from other meat and poultry 

products to make better informed 

choices. The proposed rule would 

benefit industry because all producers 

would have consistent labels for their 

products made using animal cell-culture 

technology. It would also allow 

producers to design their labels with 

more certainty because producers would 

already be aware of FSIS labeling 

requirements for these products, 

reducing potential label modification 

costs. 

FSIS expects its costs to be minimal 

and that current FSIS staffing would 

meet sketch approval needs. 

Risks: None. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

ANPRM ............... 09/03/21 86 FR 49491 

ANPRM Comment 

Period End.

12/02/21 

NPRM .................. 05/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Melissa Hammar, 

Director, Regulations Development 

Staff, Department of Agriculture, Food 

Safety and Inspection Service, 1400 

Independence Avenue SW, Washington, 

DC 20250–3700, Phone: 202 286–2255, 

Email: melissa.hammar@usda.gov. 

RIN: 0583–AD89 

USDA—FSIS 

8. • Salmonella Framework [0583– 

AD96] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 21 U.S.C. 451 et seq. 

CFR Citation: 9 CFR 381.65. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: FSIS is proposing a new 

regulatory framework targeted at 

reducing Salmonella illnesses 

associated with poultry products. First, 

FSIS is proposing final product 

standards that would define whether 

certain raw poultry products 

contaminated with certain Salmonella 

levels and serotypes are adulterated and 

thus prohibited from entering 

commerce. FSIS is also proposing to 

revise the regulations that require that 

all poultry slaughter establishments 

develop, implement, and maintain 

written procedures to prevent 

contamination by enteric pathogens 

throughout the entire slaughter and 

dressing operation, by establishing new 

requirements pertaining to how 

establishments monitor and document 

whether their processes for preventing 

microbial contamination are in control. 

The proposal also focuses on a nonregulatory approach for controlling 

Salmonella on incoming flocks. 

Statement of Need: While the results 

of FSIS’ Salmonella verification 

sampling show that the Agency’s 

current prevalence-based performance 

standards approach has been effective in 

reducing the proportion of poultry 

products contaminated with 

Salmonella, these measures have not 

had an observable impact on human 

illness rates, estimated to be over 1 

million annual Salmonella illnesses 

from all sources. Poultry is the leading 

source of Salmonella foodborne illness 

acquired domestically in the United 

States. Therefore, in October 2021, FSIS 

announced that it was mobilizing a 

stronger, and more comprehensive effort 

to reduce Salmonella illnesses 

associated with poultry products. As 

part of this effort, FSIS initiated several 

activities designed to gather data and 

information to inform and support 

future actions related to this new effort. 

FSIS also held a public meeting in 

November 2022 to solicit stakeholder 

input on a draft regulatory framework 

that the Agency was considering for a 

new strategy to control Salmonella in 

poultry products and provided an 

opportunity for stakeholders to submit 

written comments. After carefully 

evaluating the written comments and 

other stakeholder input, along with 

studies and information that have 

become available after FSIS made the 

framework under consideration 

available to the public, FSIS is 

proposing a new regulatory framework 

targeted at reducing Salmonella 

illnesses associated with poultry 

products. 

Summary of Legal Basis: FSIS 

regulates the production of poultry 

prepared for distribution in interstate 

commerce under the authority of the 

Poultry Products Inspection Act (PPIA) 

(21 U.S.C. 451 et seq.). 21 U.S.C. 455(b) 

provides that the Secretary shall cause 

to be made by inspector’s post-mortem 

inspection of the carcass of each bird 

processed, and at any time reinspection 

as he deems necessary of poultry and 

poultry products capable of use as 

human food. 21 U.S.C. 455(c) requires 

that all poultry carcasses and other 

poultry products found to be 

adulterated be condemned. Under the 

PPIA, a poultry product is adulterated, 

among other circumstances, if it bears or 

contains any poisonous or deleterious 

substance that may render it injurious to 

health; it is unhealthful, unwholesome, 

or otherwise unfit for human 

consumption; or it was prepared, 

packaged, or held under unsanitary 

conditions whereby it may have been 

rendered injurious to health (21 U.S.C. 

453(g)(1), (3), and (4)). Finally, 21 U.S.C. 

463(b) provides that the Secretary shall 

promulgate such other rules and 

regulations as are necessary to carry out 

the provisions of the PPIA. 

Alternatives: In addition to the 

proposed option, FSIS considered an 

alternative that would keep the current 

Salmonella performance standards. The 

Agency also considered alternatives for 

various Salmonella levels and serotypes 

for the proposed final product 

standards. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: FSIS 

estimates this proposal would benefit 

society by preventing Salmonella 

illnesses associated with poultry 

products. The proposal is also estimated 

to benefit industry by reducing the risk 

of illness outbreak-related recalls. The 

main cost associated with this proposal 

is the cost to industry associated with 

maintaining control of products 

sampled by FSIS for adulterants 

pending test results. 

Risks: FSIS estimates this proposal 

would benefit society by preventing 

Salmonella illnesses associated with 

poultry products. The proposal is also 

estimated to benefit industry by 

reducing the risk of out-break- related 

recalls. The main cost associated with 

this proposal is the cost to industry 

associated with maintaining control of 

products sampled by FSIS for 

adulterants pending test results. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 02/00/24 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
9312 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Melissa Hammar, 

Director, Regulations Development 

Staff, Department of Agriculture, Food 

Safety and Inspection Service, 1400 

Independence Avenue SW, Washington, 

DC 20250–3700, Phone: 202 286–2255, 

Email: melissa.hammar@usda.gov. 

RIN: 0583–AD96 

USDA—FSIS 

Final Rule Stage 

9. Revision of the Nutrition Facts Labels 

for Meat and Poultry Products and 

Updating Certain Reference Amounts 

Customarily Consumed [0583–AD56] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 21 U.S.C. 601 et seq.; 

21 U.S.C. 451 et seq. 

CFR Citation: 9 CFR 317; 9 CFR 381; 

9 CFR 413. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: Consistent with the changes 

that the Food and Drug Administration 

(FDA) finalized, the Food Safety and 

Inspection Service (FSIS) is amending 

the Federal meat and poultry products 

inspection regulations to update and 

revise the nutrition labeling 

requirements for meat and poultry 

products to reflect recent scientific 

research and dietary recommendations 

and to improve the presentation of 

nutrition information to assist 

consumers in maintaining healthy 

dietary practices. 

Statement of Need: On May 27, 2016, 

the Food and Drug Administration 

(FDA) published two final rules: (1) 

‘‘Food Labeling: Revision of the 

Nutrition and Supplement Facts Labels’’ 

(81 FR 33742); and (2) ‘‘Food Labeling: 

Serving Sizes of Foods that Can 

Reasonably be Consumed at One Eating 

Occasion; Dual-Column Labeling; 

Updating, Modifying, and Establishing 

Certain Reference Amounts Customarily 

Consumed; Serving Size for Breath 

Mints; and Technical Amendments’’ (81 

FR 34000). FDA finalized these rules to 

update the Nutrition Facts label to 

reflect new nutrition and public health 

research, to reflect recent dietary 

recommendations from expert groups, 

and to improve the presentation of 

nutrition information to help consumers 

make more informed choices and 

maintain healthy dietary practices. FSIS 

has reviewed FDA’s analysis and, to 

ensure that nutrition information is 

presented consistently across the food 

supply, FSIS is amending the nutrition 

labeling regulations for meat and 

poultry products to parallel, to the 

extent possible, FDA’s regulations. This 

approach will help increase clarity of 

information for consumers and will 

improve efficiency in the marketplace. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Under the 

Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA) (21 

U.S.C. 601–695, at 607), the Poultry 

Products Inspection Act (PPIA) (21 

U.S.C. 451–470, at 457), and the Egg 

Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 

1031–1056, at 1036) (the Acts), the 

labels of meat, poultry, and egg products 

must be approved by the Secretary of 

Agriculture, who has delegated this 

authority to FSIS, before these products 

can enter commerce. The Acts prohibit 

the sale or offer for sale by any person, 

firm, or corporation of any article in 

commerce under any name or other 

marking or labeling that is false or 

misleading or in any container of a 

misleading form or size (21 U.S.C. 

607(d); 21 U.S.C. 457(c)). The Acts also 

prohibit the distribution in commerce of 

meat or poultry products that are 

adulterated or misbranded. The FMIA 

and PPIA give FSIS broad authority to 

promulgate such rules and regulations 

as are necessary to carry out the 

provisions of the Acts (21 U.S.C. 621 

and 463(b)). 

To prevent meat and poultry products 

from being misbranded, the meat and 

poultry product inspection regulations 

require that the labels of meat and 

poultry products include specific 

information, such as nutrition labels, 

and that such information be displayed 

as prescribed in the regulations (9 CFR 

parts 317 and 381). The nutrition 

labeling requirements for meat and meat 

food products are in 9 CFR 317.300– 

317.400, and the nutrition labeling 

requirements for poultry products are in 

9 CFR 381.400–381.500. 

Alternatives: FSIS considered three 

alternatives for the final rule: (1) No 

action; (2) A 24-month compliance 

period for large businesses and a 36- 

month compliance period for small 

businesses (as proposed); or (3) A 12- 

month compliance period for large 

businesses and a 24-month compliance 

period for small businesses for faster 

label harmonization. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: These 

regulations are expected to benefit 

consumers by increasing and improving 

dietary information available in the 

market. Firms will incur a one-time cost 

for relabeling, recordkeeping costs, and 

costs associated with voluntary 

reformulation. Many firms have 

voluntarily begun using the FDA format, 

which will reduce costs. 

Risks: None. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 01/19/17 82 FR 6732 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

04/19/17 

Final Action ......... 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Melissa Hammar, 

Director, Regulations Development 

Staff, Department of Agriculture, Food 

Safety and Inspection Service, 1400 

Independence Avenue SW, Washington, 

DC 20250–3700, Phone: 202 286–2255, 

Email: melissa.hammar@usda.gov. 

RIN: 0583–AD56 

USDA—FSIS 

10. Voluntary Labeling of FSISRegulated Products With U.S. Origin 

Claims [0583–AD87] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 21 U.S.C. 601 et seq.; 

21 U.S.C. 451 et seq.; 21 U.S.C. 1031 et 

seq.; 7 U.S.C. 1622 and 1624 

CFR Citation: 9 CFR 412.3. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Food Safety and 

Inspection Service (FSIS) is amending 

its regulations to define the conditions 

under which the labeling of meat, 

poultry, and egg products, as well as 

voluntarily-inspected products, can bear 

voluntary statements indicating that the 

product is of United States (U.S.) origin. 

Statement of Need: FSIS conducted a 

comprehensive review of the Agency’s 

current voluntary Product of USA 

labeling policy to help determine what 

the Product of USA label claim means 

to consumers of FSIS-regulated products 

in the U.S. marketplace. FSIS started 

this review after receiving several 

petitions stating that the voluntary label 

claim Product of USA is confusing to 

consumers. FSIS’ review of the policy 

included a consumer survey on Product 

of USA labeling on beef and pork 

products. Based on the consumer survey 

results, reviews of consumer research, 

and comments received on the petitions, 

FSIS is revising its regulations to reduce 

consumer confusion surrounding 

current voluntary U.S.-origin labeling 

policy. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Under the 

Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA) (21 

U.S.C. 601–695, at 607), the Poultry 

Products Inspection Act (PPIA) (21 

U.S.C. 451–470, at 457), and the Egg 

Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 

1031–1056, at 1036), the labels of meat, 

poultry, and egg products must be 

approved by the Secretary of 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9313 

Agriculture, who has delegated this 

authority to FSIS, before these products 

can enter commerce. FSIS also provides 

voluntary reimbursable inspection 

services, including label approval, 

under the Agricultural Marketing Act 

(AMA) (7 U.S.C. 1622 and 1624) for 

eligible products not requiring 

mandatory inspection under the FMIA, 

PPIA, and EPIA. Under the mandates of 

the FMIA, PPIA, and EPIA, any meat, 

poultry, or egg product is misbranded if 

its labeling is false or misleading in any 

particular (21 U.S.C. 601(n)(1); 21 U.S.C. 

453(h)(1); 21 U.S.C. 1036(b)). FSIS has 

similar authority under the AMA 

concerning labels of products receiving 

voluntary inspection services (7 U.S.C. 

1622(h)(1)). 

Alternatives: In addition to the option 

proposed, the Agency considered the 

following alternatives: (1) Keeping the 

current regulatory requirements for 

U.S.-origin product labeling and taking 

no proposed regulatory action; and (2) 

Taking the proposed regulatory action 

but extending the compliance period for 

the regulatory changes after publication 

of the final rule. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

Establishments may incur costs 

associated with voluntarily changing 

their labels as a result of any revised 

regulatory requirements. The finale rule 

is expected to result in quantified 

industry relabeling, recordkeeping, and 

market testing costs, which combined 

are estimated to cost approximately $3 

million, annualized at a 7 percent 

discount rate over 10 years. The changes 

will benefit consumers by matching the 

voluntary Product of USA and Made in 

the USA label claims with the definition 

that consumers’ likely expected, i.e., as 

product being derived from animals 

born, raised, slaughtered, and processed 

in the United States. The final rule will 

reduce false or misleading U.S. origin 

labeling and will reduce the market 

failures associated with incorrect and 

imperfect information. 

Risks: N/A. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 03/13/23 88 FR 15290 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

06/11/23 

Final Action ......... 03/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Melissa Hammar, 

Director, Regulations Development 

Staff, Department of Agriculture, Food 

Safety and Inspection Service, 1400 

Independence Avenue SW, Washington, 

DC 20250–3700, Phone: 202 286–2255, 

Email: melissa.hammar@usda.gov. 

RIN: 0583–AD87 

USDA—FOREST SERVICE (FS) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

11. Update and Clarification of the 

Locatable Minerals Regulations [0596– 

AD32] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 30 U.S.C. 612 

CFR Citation: 36 CFR 228 (A). 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Forest Service proposes 

the revision of its locatable mineral 

regulations to better reflect the needs of 

our national defense, economic 

prosperity, and environmental 

stewardship. The agency has identified 

many challenges in the current 

regulations, and revising the regulations 

to address these would allow the Forest 

Service to better implement its mining 

regulations. Specifically, the Forest 

Service is considering in this proposed 

rule to (1) better meet the purpose of the 

rule, which is to minimize, to the fullest 

extent practicable, adverse impacts to 

surface resources which may result from 

locatable mineral operations; (2) 

increase efficiency and transparency in 

the review process for proposed mineral 

operations; and (3) increase consistency 

with the Department of the Interior, 

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) 

surface management regulations. This 

rule will meet the Administration’s 

goals of improving environmental 

stewardship while also providing more 

timely response, especially to proposed 

critical minerals operations. 

Statement of Need: The Forest Service 

proposes the amendment of its locatable 

mineral regulations to better reflect the 

needs of both the Forest Service and 

mining industry. Despite major changes 

in the mining industry and many 

lessons learned through administering 

minerals activity on National Forest 

System (NFS) lands, the Forest Service 

locatable mineral regulations at 36 CFR 

228 subpart A (228A) have remained 

largely unchanged since first published 

in 1974. Moreover, specific 

recommendations to revise and update 

the 228A regulations have been made in 

two prominent external reports: the 

1999 National Research Council 

publication Hard Rock Mining on 

Federal Lands and the 2016 Government 

Accountability Office report Hardrock 

Mining: BLM and Forest Service Have 

Taken Some Actions to Expedite the 

Mine Plan Review Process but Could Do 

More (GAO–16–165). By addressing 

recent issues and remedying existing 

weakness in current regulations that 

have been identified, the Forest Service 

would be consistent with the BidenHarris Administration Fundamental 

Principles for Domestic Mining Reform 

by establishing strong responsible 

mining standards, increasing efficiency 

in permitting times, and improving 

environmental, social, and economic 

outcomes. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The Mining 

Law of 1872, as amended, confers a 

statutory right to enter upon certain 

National Forest System lands to search 

for locatable minerals. The Organic Act 

of 1897 authorized the Forest Service to 

make rules to regulate occupancy and 

use of the land and preserve the forests 

from destruction. The Forest Service’s 

existing regulations for administering 

locatable minerals activity on National 

Forest System (NFS) lands are found at 

36 CFR part 228 subpart A. These rules 

govern prospecting, exploration, 

development, mining, and processing 

operations conducted on National 

Forest System lands. Under these rules, 

the Forest Service requires operators 

proposing to conduct locatable mineral 

activity which would likely cause 

significant disturbance of surface 

resources to obtain prior approval file a 

plan of operations. 

Alternatives: Proposed Action: 

Publish a proposed rule and seek public 

comment on updates to 228A that will 

significantly improve and clarify 

requirements related to processing plans 

of operation, reclamation, and operator 

financial assurance in the event of 

default. These changes would support 

the following Administration priorities: 

• Provide Permitting Certainty: The 

proposed rule will modernize Forest 

Service administration of surface use 

and occupancy of NFS lands for 

locatable mining operations, provide 

additional clarity for operators subject 

to these regulations, continue to 

minimize adverse impacts to surface 

resources on NFS lands, and increase 

alignment with BLM’s mining law 

regulations which will facilitate 

coordination for projects that span both 

agency jurisdictions. Increased detail 

and clarity in agency regulations will 

reduce the need for time consuming, 

back-and-forth information requests to 

obtain a complete operating plan from 

proponents. 

• Climate: The proposed rule requires 

more detail in operating plan submittals 

to put greater emphasis on up-front 

planning and subsequent operational 

monitoring of mining activity to address 

potential environmental and public 

safety impacts of more frequent extreme 

weather events, and decrease the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
9314 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

likelihood of catastrophic events, such 

as tailings impoundment failures. 

• Critical Minerals and American 

Supply Chains: The demand for 

minerals produced from federal lands is 

expected to increase to address green 

energy and carbon-neutral goals. Many 

critical minerals are only economic to 

recover when combined with the 

recovery of a host mineral. The 

proposed rule clarifies many aspects of 

administering locatable mining activity 

on NFS land which is expected to 

increase agency efficiency, reduce 

processing time, and facilitate 

sustainable exploration and 

development of all locatable mineral 

deposits, including those containing 

critical minerals. 

• Meaningful Consultation with 

Tribal Nations: The proposed rule’s 

detailed requirements for operating plan 

submittals will enhance consultation 

with Tribal Nations through the 

availability of more information earlier 

in the process to better assess potential 

impacts to sacred sites and treaty rights. 

• Conserving Lands and Waters (30 

by 30): The proposed rule expands 

surface resource protection 

requirements, agency enforcement 

options, and financial guarantee 

provisions to minimize the impact of 

hardrock mining activity to NFS land 

and water and will reduce the risk and 

consequences of legacy pollution. 

• Economy: Hardrock exploration and 

mining activity generates jobs in many 

rural communities adjacent to NFS 

lands. Mining companies pay income 

and many other taxes to federal and 

state governments. For every job at a 

mine, there’s another job in the regional 

economy that exists because of the 

mining operation. The locatable mining 

industry in 2018 supported more than 

7,800 direct and indirect jobs. Through 

more efficient administration of 

hardrock activity, the Forest Service can 

better implement federal policy to foster 

and encourage private enterprise in the 

sustainable development of domestic 

resources which would benefit local 

economies as well as decrease 

vulnerability to national supply chains. 

No Action: A no action alternative 

would leave the regulations unchanged, 

thus maintaining the status-quo. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

Anticipated costs include increased 

costs to industry in providing more 

detail in submitting plans of operation. 

However, a substantial cost savings for 

the Forest Service is expected from 

more modern and efficient agency 

review and approval of plans of 

operations. 

Anticipated benefits of the updates to 

228A would stem from more modern 

and efficient agency review and 

approval of plans of operations. The 

benefits to industry derive from timelier 

development of, access to, and use of 

locatable minerals on National Forest 

System lands. Expedited access and 

development of locatable mineral 

resources is expected to result in an 

increase in the time value of revenues 

generated by locatable operations. A 

potential benefit to the public of 

facilitating access to National Forest 

System lands is the increased 

opportunity to develop domestic 

sources of strategic and critical minerals 

which would decrease vulnerability to 

American supply chains. Most 

importantly, benefits to the public from 

the proposed rule are the continued 

protection, and in some cases, increased 

assurance about protection of 

ecosystems and corresponding goods 

and services from the potential damages 

of locatable mining activities. 

Risks: Not applicable. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

ANPRM ............... 09/13/18 83 FR 46451 

ANPRM Comment 

Period End.

10/15/18 

NPRM .................. 08/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal. 

Agency Contact: Nathan Morris, 

Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, 1400 Independence Avenue 

SW, Washington, DC 20250, Phone: 202 

205–0833, Email: nathan.morris@

usda.gov. 

RIN: 0596–AD32 

USDA—RURAL BUSINESS— 

COOPERATIVE SERVICE (RBS) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

12. • Higher Blends Infrastructure 

Incentive Program [0570–AB11] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 7 U.S.C. 

1989 

CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Higher Blends 

Infrastructure Program (HBIIP) is a 

program designed to increase the sales 

and use of higher blends of ethanol and 

biodiesel by expanding the 

infrastructure for renewable fuels 

derived from U.S. agricultural products. 

The program is also intended to 

encourage a more comprehensive 

approach to market higher blends by 

sharing the costs related to building out 

biofuel-related infrastructure. The 

program should increase availability of 

domestic biofuels and give Americans 

additional cleaner fuel options at the 

pump. 

RBCS is proposing a rule to codify the 

policies and procedures for the program 

in the Code of Federal Regulations, as 

this program has a significant impact on 

climate change which is an 

administration priority. The proposed 

rule is intended to seek comment on 

codification of existing authorities 

provided through statutory language on 

eligibility requirements, types and terms 

of funding, program requirements and 

processing procedures. 

RBCS intends to conduct public 

engagement to hear from stakeholders 

and potential applicants about what 

they would like to see in the regulation 

as well as what has worked and what 

has not worked in the past. This 

program has been implemented for 

multiple years, so the public should 

have some input on what has worked 

and what has not in the past. RBCS is 

looking for suggestions and input both 

from those who have applied in the past 

and those that did not, why they opted 

not to and if the program could do 

anything to encourage new applicants. 

Targeted primary stakeholders 

include owners of fueling station 

owners, convenience store, and fleets, 

including auto, truck, rail and marine, 

and their industry associations. 

Secondary stakeholders include 

equipment manufacturers, distributors, 

and installers; State Energy Offices and 

State Departments of Agriculture; 

biofuel producers and farmers/ 

agricultural producers and their 

industry associations; EPA, DOT, DOE, 

and other Federal agencies; and other 

stakeholders and groups with related 

interests such as environmental and 

health. 

Statement of Need: The purpose 

HBIIP is to increase significantly the 

sales and use of higher blends of ethanol 

and bio diesel by expanding the 

infrastructure for renewable fuels 

derived from U.S. agricultural products. 

The program is also intended to 

encourage a more comprehensive 

approach to market higher blends by 

sharing the costs related to building out 

biofuel-related infrastructure. Currently, 

the Rural Business-Cooperative Service 

(RBCS) implements the program 

through a Notice of Funding 

Opportunity. This program was initially 

implemented in fiscal year 2020 through 

a Notice of Funding Opportunity and 

under the Commodity Credit 

Corporation (CCC) authority. In fiscal 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9315 

year 2023 this was included in IRA and 

under RBCS authority and a Notice of 

Funding Opportunity was yet again 

issued. RBCS is proposing a rule to 

codify the policies and procedures for 

the program in the Code of Federal 

Regulations as this program has a 

significant impact on climate change 

which is an administration priority. 

Summary of Legal Basis: This 

regulatory action is not required by 

statute or court order; however, the 

underlying statutes authorizing RBCS to 

create these regulations are 5 U.S.C. 301 

and 7 U.S.C. 1989. 

Alternatives: The alternative to 

rulemaking is to continue to operate the 

program through issuance of a Notice of 

Funding Opportunity to announce 

application windows and applicable 

requirements for the program. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

Agency does not expect the new 

regulation to result in additional costs to 

applicants or the government. 

Risks: At this time, the Agency has 

not completed risk analysis for this 

action. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Proposed Rule .... 06/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Jeffrey Carpenter, 

HBIIP Program Manager, Department of 

Agriculture, Rural Business– 

Cooperative Service, 1400 

Independence Avenue SW, Washington, 

DC 20250, Phone: 402 437–5554, Email: 

jeff.carpenter@usda.gov. 

RIN: 0570–AB11 

BILLING CODE 3410–90–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Statement of Regulatory Priorities 

Established in 1903, the Department 

of Commerce (Commerce or 

Department) is one of the oldest 

Cabinet-level agencies in the Federal 

Government. Commerce’s mission is to 

create the conditions for economic 

growth and opportunity across all 

American communities by promoting 

innovation, entrepreneurship, 

competitiveness, and environmental 

stewardship. Commerce has 12 

operating units, which manage a diverse 

portfolio of programs and services 

ranging from trade promotion and 

economic development assistance to 

improved broadband access and the 

National Weather Service, and from 

standards development and statistical 

data production, including the 

decennial census, to patents and 

fisheries management. Across these 

varied activities, the Department seeks 

to provide a foundation for a more 

equitable, resilient, and globally 

competitive economy. 

To fulfill its mission, Commerce 

works in partnership with businesses, 

educational institutions, community 

organizations, government agencies, and 

individuals to: 

• Innovate by supporting the creation 

of new ideas through cutting-edge 

science and technology, from advances 

in nanotechnology to ocean exploration 

to broadband deployment, and by 

protecting American innovations 

through the patent and trademark 

system; 

• Support entrepreneurship and 

commercialization by enabling 

community development and 

strengthening opportunities for minority 

and other underserved businesses and 

small businesses; 

• Maintain U.S. economic 

competitiveness in the global 

marketplace by promoting exports and 

foreign direct investment, ensuring a 

level playing field for U.S. businesses, 

and ensuring that technology transfer is 

consistent with our nation’s economic 

and security interests; 

• Provide effective management and 

stewardship of our nation’s resources 

and assets to ensure sustainable 

economic opportunities; and 

• Make informed policy decisions 

and enable better understanding of the 

economy and our communities by 

providing timely, accessible, and 

accurate economic and demographic 

data. 

Commerce’s Regulatory Plan tracks 

the most important regulations that the 

Department anticipates issuing to 

implement these policy and program 

priorities and foster sustainable and 

equitable growth. Of Commerce’s 12 

primary operating units, three bureaus— 

the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA), the United 

States Patent and Trademark Office 

(USPTO), and the Bureau of Industry 

and Security (BIS)—issue the vast 

majority of the Department’s 

regulations, and these three bureaus 

account for all the planned actions that 

are considered the Department’s highest 

priority pre-regulatory or regulatory 

actions for FY 2024. 

Consistent with Executive Order 

14094, moreover, the Department and 

its bureaus routinely seek to inform 

their rulemaking with meaningful 

opportunities for public input. The 

efforts of NOAA, USPTO, and BIS to 

promote public engagement are 

discussed in their respective sections, 

below. 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

NOAA’s mission is built on three 

pillars: science, service, and 

stewardship—to understand and predict 

changes in climate, weather, oceans, 

and coasts; to share that knowledge and 

information with others; and to 

conserve and manage coastal and 

marine ecosystems and resources. 

At its core, NOAA is a scientific 

agency. It observes, measures, monitors, 

and collects data from the depths of the 

ocean to the surface of the sun, and it 

does so following principles of scientific 

integrity. These data are turned into 

weather and climate models and 

forecasts that are then used for 

everything from local weather forecasts 

to predicting the movement of wildfire 

smoke to identifying the impacts of 

climate change on fisheries and living 

marine resources. 

With respect to service, NOAA not 

only collects data but seeks to make it 

operational. By providing Federal, State, 

local, Tribal government partners, the 

private sector, and the public with 

actionable environmental information, 

NOAA can facilitate decision-making in 

the face of climate change. Such 

decisions can range from businesses 

planning the location of offices; 

insurance companies trying to 

incorporate climate risk into their 

insurance policies; and municipalities 

looking to ensure that plans for 

construction of new housing 

developments will be resilient to the 

effects of climate change. 

The final pillar of NOAA’s mission is 

stewardship. NOAA seeks to conserve 

our lands, waters, and natural resources, 

protecting people and the environment 

now and for future generations. As part 

of Commerce, moreover, NOAA 

recognizes that economic growth must 

go hand-in-hand with environmental 

stewardship. For example, the nation’s 

fisheries enhance the nation’s 

productivity and long-term economic 

growth while ensuring sustainability. 

Similarly, national marine sanctuaries 

both protect important natural resources 

and are significant drivers of ecotourism and local recreation. 

Within NOAA, the National Marine 

Fisheries Services (NMFS) and the 

National Ocean Service (NOS) are the 

components that most often exercise 

regulatory authority to implement 

NOAA’s mission. NMFS oversees the 

management and conservation of the 

nation’s marine fisheries; protects 

marine mammals and Endangered 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9316 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Species Act (ESA)-listed marine and 

anadromous species; and promotes 

economic development of the U.S. 

fishing industry. NOS assists the coastal 

states in their management of land and 

ocean resources in their coastal zones, 

including estuarine research reserves; 

manages national marine sanctuaries; 

monitors marine pollution; and directs 

the national program for deep-seabed 

minerals and ocean thermal energy. 

Many of NOAA’s rulemakings are 

issued pursuant to the following key 

statutes: 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation 

and Management Act 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act 

(Magnuson-Stevens Act) rulemakings 

concern the conservation and 

management of fishery resources in the 

U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone 

(generally 3–200 nautical miles from 

shore). As itemized in the Unified 

Agenda, NOAA plans to take several 

hundred actions in FY 2024 under 

Magnuson-Stevens Act authority. With 

certain exceptions, rulemakings under 

the Magnuson-Stevens Act are usually 

initiated by the actions of eight regional 

Fishery Management Councils 

(Councils). The Magnuson-Stevens Act 

provides a robust public process for 

managing our nation’s fisheries through 

the work of the Councils. Throughout 

the Council process, there is significant 

opportunity for public engagement, 

including participating on advisory 

panels, providing testimony at public 

hearings, and commenting on Council 

actions. These Councils are comprised 

of representatives from the commercial 

and recreational fishing sectors, 

environmental groups, academia, and 

Federal and State government, and they 

are responsible for preparing fishery 

management plans (FMPs) and FMP 

amendments, and for recommending 

implementing regulations for each 

managed fishery. This unique 

management system gives fishery 

managers the flexibility to use local 

level input to develop management 

strategies appropriate for each region’s 

unique fisheries, challenges, and 

opportunities. FMPs address a variety of 

issues, including maximizing fishing 

opportunities on healthy stocks, 

rebuilding overfished stocks, and 

addressing gear conflicts. After 

considering the Councils’ 

recommendations in light of the 

standards and requirements set forth in 

the Magnuson-Stevens Act and in other 

applicable laws, NOAA may issue 

regulations to implement the proposed 

FMPs and FMP amendments. 

Marine Mammal Protection Act 

The Marine Mammal Protection Act 

of 1972 (MMPA) provides authority for 

the conservation and management of 

marine mammals under U.S. 

jurisdiction. It expressly prohibits, with 

certain exceptions, the intentional take 

of marine mammals. The MMPA allows, 

upon request and subsequent 

authorization, the incidental take of 

marine mammals by U.S. citizens who 

engage in a specified activity (e.g., oil 

and gas development, pile driving) 

within a specified geographic region. 

NMFS authorizes incidental take under 

the MMPA if it finds that the taking 

would be of small numbers, have no 

more than a ‘‘negligible impact’’ on 

those marine mammal species or stock, 

and would not have an ‘‘unmitigable 

adverse impact’’ on the availability of 

the species or stock for ‘‘subsistence’’ 

uses. NMFS also initiates rulemakings 

under the MMPA to establish a 

management regime to reduce marine 

mammal mortalities and injuries as a 

result of interactions with fisheries. In 

addition, the MMPA allows NMFS to 

permit the take or import of wild 

animals for scientific research or public 

display or to enhance the survival of a 

species or stock. 

Endangered Species Act 

The Endangered Species Act of 1973 

(ESA) provides for the conservation of 

species that are determined to be 

‘‘endangered’’ or ‘‘threatened,’’ and the 

conservation of the ecosystems on 

which these species depend. NMFS and 

the Department of Interior’s Fish and 

Wildlife Service (FWS) jointly 

administer the provisions of the ESA: 

NMFS manages marine and several 

anadromous species, and FWS manages 

land and freshwater species. Together, 

NMFS and FWS work to protect 

critically imperiled species from 

extinction. NMFS rulemaking actions 

under the ESA are focused on 

determining whether any species under 

its responsibility is an endangered or 

threatened species and whether those 

species must be added to the list of 

protected species. NMFS is also 

responsible for designating, reviewing 

and revising critical habitat for any 

listed species. In addition, as indicated 

in the list of highlighted actions below, 

NMFS and FWS may also issue rules 

clarifying how particular provisions of 

the ESA will be implemented. 

The National Marine Sanctuaries Act 

The National Marine Sanctuaries Act 

(NMSA) authorizes the Secretary of 

Commerce to designate and protect as 

national marine sanctuaries areas of the 

marine environment with special 

national significance due to their 

conservation, recreational, ecological, 

historical, scientific, cultural, 

archeological, educational, or aesthetic 

qualities. The primary objective of the 

NMSA is to protect marine resources, 

such as coral reefs, sunken historical 

vessels, or unique habitats. 

NOAA’s Office of National Marine 

Sanctuaries (ONMS), within NOS, has 

responsibility for management of 

national marine sanctuaries. ONMS 

regulations, issued pursuant to NMSA, 

prohibit specific kinds of activities, 

describe and define the boundaries of 

the designated national marine 

sanctuaries, and set up a system of 

permits to allow the conduct of certain 

types of activities that would otherwise 

not be allowed. 

These regulations can, among other 

things, regulate and restrict activities 

that may injure natural resources, 

including all extractive and destructive 

activities, consistent with communityspecific needs and NMSA’s purpose to 

‘‘facilitate to the extent compatible with 

the primary objective of resource 

protection, all public and private uses of 

the resources of these marine areas.’’ In 

FY 2024, NOAA is expected to have at 

least three regulatory actions under 

NMSA. 

Coastal Zone Management Act 

The Coastal Zone Management Act 

(CZMA) was passed in 1972 to preserve, 

protect, and develop and, where 

possible, to restore and enhance the 

resources of the nation’s coastal zone. 

The CZMA creates a voluntary statefederal partnership, where coastal states 

(States in, or bordering on, the Atlantic, 

Pacific or Arctic Ocean, the Gulf of 

Mexico, Long Island Sound, or one or 

more of the Great Lakes), may elect to 

develop comprehensive programs that 

meet federal approval standards. 

Currently, 34 of the 35 eligible entities 

are implementing a federally approved 

coastal management plan approved by 

the Secretary of Commerce. 

NOAA’s Regulatory Plan Actions 

Of the numerous regulatory actions 

that NOAA is planning for this year, of 

which approximately 21 are expected to 

be determined to be significant 

rulemaking under E.O. 12866, there are 

four, described below, that the 

Department considers to be of particular 

importance. 

1. Illegal, Unreported, and 

Unregulated Fishing; Fisheries 

Enforcement; High Seas Driftnet Fishing 

Moratorium Protection Act (0648– 

BG11): This proposed rule makes 

conforming amendments to regulations 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9317 

implementing various statutes amended 

by the Illegal, Unreported and 

Unregulated Fishing Enforcement Act of 

2015. The Act provides the authority to 

implement two new international 

agreements under the Antigua 

Convention and the United Nations 

Food and Agriculture Organization 

Agreement on Port State Measures to 

Prevent, Deter, and Eliminate Illegal, 

Unreported and Unregulated Fishing 

(Port State Measures Agreement, or 

PMSA) The PMSA is aimed at 

combating illegal, unreported and 

unregulated (IUU) fishing activities 

through increased port inspection of 

foreign fishing vessels and thereby 

closing seafood markets to IUU fish and 

fish products. This proposed rule would 

require the collection of certain 

information from foreign fishing vessels 

requesting permission to use U.S. ports. 

It will also include procedures to 

designate and publicize the ports to 

which foreign fishing vessels may seek 

entry and procedures for conducting 

inspections of these foreign vessels 

accessing U.S. ports. In addition, this 

proposed rule will identify and certify 

nations for IUU fishing and other 

adverse fishing activities, bycatch of 

protected living marine resources, and 

shark catch under the authority of the 

High Seas Driftnet Fishing Moratorium 

Protection Act that need to be updated 

in light of amendments made by the 

James M. Inhofe National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023. 

2. Amendments to the North Atlantic 

Right Whale Vessel Strike Reduction 

Rule (0648–BI88): This final rule makes 

changes to existing vessel speed 

regulations in an effort to further reduce 

the likelihood of mortalities and serious 

injuries to endangered North Atlantic 

right whales from vessel collisions and 

prevent the species’ extinction. Vessel 

collisions are a leading cause of the 

species’ decline and contributor to the 

ongoing Unusual Mortality Event (2017– 

present). The North Atlantic right whale 

(Eubalaena glacialis) was severely 

depleted by commercial whaling and, 

despite protection from commercial 

harvest since 1935, has not recovered. 

Following two decades of growth 

between 1990 and 2010, the species has 

been in decline over the past decade 

with a best population estimate of fewer 

than 350 individuals. 

3. Endangered and Threatened 

Wildlife and Plants; Regulations for 

Listing Species and Designating Critical 

Habitat (0648–BK47): The Secretaries of 

Interior and Commerce share 

responsibility for implementing most of 

the provisions of the Endangered 

Species Act (ESA). Together, the 

Department of Interior’s Fish and 

Wildlife Service and the Department of 

Commerce’s National Marine Fisheries 

Services (collectively, the Services) have 

promulgated regulations that implement 

aspects of the listing and critical habitat 

designation provisions of section 4 of 

the ESA. Pursuant to the January 20, 

2021 Executive Order on Protecting 

Public Health and the Environment and 

Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate 

Crisis (E.O. 13990), the Services 

initiated a review of a 2019 rule that 

revised the regulations for adding and 

removing species from the Lists of 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants and clarified procedures for 

designating critical habitat. Following 

the review, the Services issued a 

proposed rule and now seek to finalize 

a rule that revises the regulations to 

clarify, interpret, and implement 

portions of the Act concerning the 

procedures and criteria used for listing, 

reclassifying, and delisting species on 

the Lists of Endangered and Threatened 

Wildlife and Plants and designating 

critical habitat. 

4. Endangered and Threatened 

Wildlife and Plants; Revision of 

Regulations for Interagency Cooperation 

(0648–BK48): Pursuant to E.O. 13990, 

the Services also initiated a review of a 

2019 rule that implemented the 

interagency consultation provisions in 

section 7 of the ESA. Following the 

review, the Services issued a proposed 

rule and now seek to finalize a rule that 

revises the regulations to further clarify 

and improve the interagency 

consultation process, while continuing 

to provide for the conservation of listed 

species. 

The United States Patent and 

Trademark Office 

The USPTO’s mission is to foster 

innovation, competitiveness, and 

economic growth, domestically and 

abroad, by delivering high quality and 

timely examination of patent and 

trademark applications, guiding 

domestic and international intellectual 

property policy, and delivering 

intellectual property information and 

education worldwide. 

Major Programs and Activities 

The USPTO is responsible for 

granting U.S. patents and registering 

trademarks. This system of secured 

property rights, which has its 

foundation in Article I, Section 8, 

Clause 8, of the Constitution (providing 

that Congress shall have the power to 

‘‘promote the Progress of Science and 

useful Arts, by securing for limited 

Times to Authors and Inventors the 

exclusive Right to their respective 

Writings and Discoveries’’) has enabled 

American industry to flourish. New 

products have been invented, new uses 

for old ones discovered, and 

employment opportunities created for 

millions of Americans. The continued 

demand for patents and trademarks 

underscores the importance to the U.S. 

economy of effective mechanisms to 

protect new ideas and investments in 

innovation, as well as the ingenuity of 

American inventors and entrepreneurs. 

In addition to granting patents and 

trademarks, the USPTO advises the 

President of the United States, the 

Secretary of Commerce, and U.S. 

government agencies on intellectual 

property (IP) policy, protection, and 

enforcement; and promotes strong and 

effective IP protection around the world. 

The USPTO furthers effective IP 

protection for U.S. innovators and 

entrepreneurs worldwide by working 

with other agencies to secure strong IP 

provisions in free trade and other 

international agreements. It also 

provides training, education, and 

capacity building programs designed to 

foster respect for IP and encourage the 

development of strong IP enforcement 

regimes by U.S. trading partners. 

As part of its work, the USPTO 

administers regulations located at title 

37 of the Code of Federal Regulations 

concerning its patent and trademark 

services and the other functions it 

performs. In the development of its 

regulations, the USPTO seeks to 

increase participation and engagement 

from members of the public affected by 

our regulations, including in the 

development of our regulatory 

priorities. During the past year, we have 

increased our engagement efforts to help 

inform our priorities to date, as well as 

future priorities. We have held public 

hearings, as well as published requests 

for comments, on several of our 

regulatory actions not only to better 

understand our stakeholders’ needs, but 

to ensure robust and transparent 

engagement throughout the rulemaking 

process. For example, public hearings 

were held in two rulemakings where the 

USPTO will be setting and adjusting 

patent and trademark fees. See ‘‘Setting 

and Adjusting Patent Fees’’ (0651– 

AD64) and ‘‘Setting and Adjusting 

Trademark Fees’’ (0651–AD65). In 

addition, the USPTO published notices 

requesting comments on several 

rulemakings to inform the agency as it 

develops its proposals. See ‘‘Changes 

Under Consideration to Discretionary 

Institution Practices, Petition Wordcount Limits, and Settlement Practices 

for America Invents Act Trial 

Proceedings Before the Patent Trial and 

Appeal Board’’ (0651–AD47); ‘‘Motion 

to Amend Practice and Procedures in 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9318 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Trial Proceedings Under the America 

Invents Act Before the Patent Trial and 

Appeal Board’’ (0651–AD50); ‘‘Changes 

to the Representation of Others in 

Design Patent Matters Before the United 

States Patent and Trademark Office’’ 

(0651–AD67), and ‘‘Rules Governing 

Pre-Issuance Internal Circulation and 

Review of Decisions Within the Patent 

Trial and Appeal Board’’ (0651–AD68). 

More information about the specific 

public engagement activity conducted 

by the USPTO for each of these 

rulemakings is found in their respective 

abstract. The USPTO is currently 

considering all public feedback as it 

develops its rulemakings. Throughout 

our engagement, the USPTO is ensuring 

that in the regulatory process, we hear 

from a wide array of members of the 

public to help the USPTO shape the 

provisions proposed in its proposed rule 

or ultimately implemented in the final 

rule. 

Outlined below are the USPTO’s most 

important upcoming regulatory actions 

for this year. 

The USPTO’s Regulatory Plan Actions 

1. Setting and Adjusting Patent Fees 

(0651–AD64): This proposed rule would 

set and adjust Patent fee amounts to 

provide USPTO with sufficient 

aggregate revenue to recover its 

aggregate cost of operations thereby 

maintaining a sustainable funding 

model. The new fee amounts would 

provide USPTO with additional 

resources to decrease patent pendency 

and ensure robust and reliable patents 

are granted while continuing to promote 

access to the patent system for 

underresourced individuals. The 

proposed fee amounts reflect feedback 

received from members of the Patent 

Public Advisory Committee and the 

public, including organizations, 

practitioners, and independent 

inventors, during a public hearing held 

on May 18, 2023. 

2. Setting and Adjusting Trademark 

Fees (0651–AD65): This proposed rule 

would set and adjust Trademark fee 

amounts to provide USPTO with 

sufficient aggregate revenue to recover 

its aggregate cost of operations thereby 

maintaining a sustainable funding 

model. The new fee amounts would 

provide USPTO with additional 

resources to ensure the integrity of the 

Trademark register and promote 

efficiency of processes while continuing 

to offer affordable options to 

stakeholders. The proposed fee amounts 

reflect feedback received from members 

of the Trademark Public Advisory 

Committee and the public, including 

organizations, practitioners, and small 

business owners, during a public 

hearing held on June 5, 2023. 

Bureau of Industry and Security 

BIS advances U.S. national security, 

foreign policy, and economic objectives 

by maintaining and strengthening 

adaptable, efficient, and effective export 

control and treaty compliance systems 

as well as by administering programs to 

prioritize certain contracts to promote 

the national defense and to protect and 

enhance the defense industrial base. 

BIS Public Engagement 

BIS seeks to increase participation 

and engagement from members of the 

public affected by our regulations, 

including in the development of our 

regulatory priorities. Within the 

regulatory process itself, BIS often 

requests public comments even when 

not legally required to do so. BIS’s 

acceptance of comments submitted 

anonymously or accompanied by 

requests for protection of business 

confidential information helps bolster 

public trust. For nearly all rules, even 

those that do not include requests for 

public comment, BIS obtains input from 

its Technical Advisory Committees 

(TACs), constituted under the Federal 

Advisory Committee Act. The TACs are 

composed of industry experts from a 

variety of fields. In addition to 

providing technical and compliance 

advice on draft rules, the TACs provide 

technical guidance on developing 

proposals to multilateral export control 

regimes, thereby supporting control 

policy development even prior to 

rulemaking. 

BIS also engages with the public 

outside of the rulemaking process. BIS 

has an Office of Exporter Services 

(OExS), with a Division of Outreach and 

Educational Services and a Regulatory 

Policy Division, which support public 

compliance with and understanding of 

BIS regulations, including by interacting 

personally in meetings or on phone calls 

and responding to written inquiries. BIS 

itself puts on multiple training seminars 

per year, many of them outside of the 

Washington, DC area or online. In 

addition to these smaller seminars, BIS 

has a large annual conference (called 

‘‘Update’’), at which it provides an 

overview of changes to policies and 

regulations over the past year. The 

Update Conference involves review and 

discussion of large, complex regulatory 

concepts pertaining to BIS, inviting 

follow-on discussion and interaction 

from participants, which in turn informs 

BIS’s deliberations. Many BIS staffers 

also participate in seminars and 

conferences hosted by other government 

agencies or private partners. Public 

engagement is a vital part of BIS’s 

operations. 

Major Programs and Activities 

BIS administers four sets of 

regulations: 

• The Export Administration 

Regulations (EAR) regulate exports and 

reexports to protect national security, 

foreign policy, and short supply 

interests. The EAR includes the 

Commerce Control List, which describes 

commodities, software, and technology 

that are subject to licensing 

requirements for specific reasons for 

control. The EAR also regulates U.S. 

persons’ participation in certain 

boycotts administered by foreign 

governments. 

• The National Security Industrial 

Base Regulations provide for 

prioritization of certain contracts and 

allocations of resources to promote the 

national defense, require reporting of 

foreign government-imposed offsets in 

defense sales, provide for surveys to 

assess the capabilities of the industrial 

base to support the national defense, 

and address the effect of imports on the 

defense industrial base. 

• The Chemical Weapons Convention 

Regulations implement declaration, 

reporting, and on-site inspection 

requirements in the private sector 

necessary to meet United States treaty 

obligations under the Chemical 

Weapons Convention treaty. 

• The Additional Protocol 

Regulations implement similar 

requirements for certain civil nuclear 

and nuclear-related items with respect 

to an agreement between the United 

States and the International Atomic 

Energy Agency. 

BIS also has an enforcement 

component with nine offices covering 

the United States, as well as BIS export 

control officers stationed at several U.S. 

embassies and consulates abroad. BIS 

works with other U.S. Government 

agencies to promote coordinated U.S. 

Government efforts in export controls 

and other programs. BIS participates in 

U.S. Government efforts to strengthen 

multilateral export control regimes and 

promote effective export controls 

through cooperation with other 

governments. 

In FY 2024, BIS plans to publish a 

number of proposed and final rules 

amending the EAR. These rules will 

cover a range of issues, including 

countering Russia’s ongoing aggression 

against Ukraine and China’s military 

modernization; imposing controls on 

military, intelligence, and security end 

uses and end users that are contrary to 

the national security or foreign policy 

interests of the United States, including 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9319 

human rights values; and increasing the 

effectiveness of U.S. actions by 

substantially aligning controls with ally 

and partner countries. BIS also 

continues to identify and propose 

controls for emerging and foundational 

technologies. 

Outlined below are BIS’s most 

important upcoming regulatory actions 

for this year. 

BIS’s Regulatory Plan Actions 

1. Implementation of Additional 

Export Controls: Certain Advanced 

Computing and Semiconductor 

Manufacturing Items; Supercomputer 

and Semiconductor End Use (0694– 

AI94): The interim final rule (IFR), 

Implementation of Additional Export 

Controls: Certain Advanced Computing 

and Semiconductor End Use; Entity List 

Modification, which went into effect on 

October 7, 2022, amended the EAR to 

implement controls on advanced 

computing integrated circuits (ICs), 

computer commodities that contain 

such ICs, and certain semiconductor 

manufacturing items. This interim final 

rule addresses comments received and 

makes changes to the original October 7 

IFR in response to those comments 

related to advanced computing 

integrated circuits and computer 

commodities that contain such ICs. 

2. Section 1758 Technology Export 

Controls on Instruments for the 

Automated Chemical Synthesis of 

Peptides (0694–AI84): Section 1758 of 

the Export Control Reform Act of 2018 

authorizes BIS to establish appropriate 

controls on the export, reexport or 

transfer (in-country) of emerging and 

foundational technologies essential to 

the national security of the United 

States. Certain instruments for the 

automated synthesis of peptides 

(automated peptide synthesizers) have 

been identified by BIS for evaluation as 

a Section 1758 emerging and 

foundational technology. This final rule 

implements controls for these 

automated peptide synthesizers. 

3. Authorization of Certain ‘‘Items’’ to 

Entities on the Entity List in the Context 

of Specific Standards Activities (0694– 

AI06): This final rule amends the EAR 

to authorize the release of specified 

items subject to the EAR without a 

license when that release occurs in the 

context of a ‘‘standards-related activity.’’ 

BIS published an interim final rule in 

September 2022 that revised the terms 

used in the EAR to describe the actions 

permissible under the authorization 

rather than defining the organizations to 

which it applies. This final rule 

responds to comments received in 

response to the interim final rule. 

DOC—NATIONAL OCEANIC AND 

ATMOSTPHERIC ADMINISTRATION 

(NOAA) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

13. Illegal, Unreported, and 

Unregulated Fishing; Fisheries 

Enforcement; High Seas Driftnet Fishing 

Moratorium Protection Act [0648– 

BG11] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: Pub. L. 114–81 

CFR Citation: 50 CFR 300. 

Legal Deadline: Final, Statutory, 

December 31, 2023, National Defense 

Authorization Act, 2023 amended the 

Moratorium Protection Act and requires 

that not later than 1 year after the date 

of enactment of this Act all other 

updates be enacted. 

Abstract: This proposed rule would 

make conforming amendments to 

regulations implementing the various 

statutes amended by the Illegal, 

Unreported and Unregulated Fishing 

Enforcement Act of 2015 (Pub. L. 114– 

81). The Act amends several regional 

fishery management organization 

implementing statutes as well as the 

High Seas Driftnet Fishing Moratorium 

Protection Act. It also provides 

authority to implement two new 

international agreements under the 

Antigua Convention, which amends the 

Convention for the establishment of an 

Inter-American Tropical Tuna 

Commission, and the United Nations 

Food and Agriculture Organization 

Agreement on Port State Measures to 

Prevent, Deter, and Eliminate Illegal, 

Unreported and Unregulated Fishing 

(Port State Measures Agreement), which 

restricts the entry into U.S. ports by 

foreign fishing vessels that are known to 

be or are suspected of engaging in 

illegal, unreported, and unregulated 

fishing. This proposed rule would also 

implement the Port State Measures 

Agreement. To that end, this proposed 

rule would require the collection of 

certain information from foreign fishing 

vessels requesting permission to use 

U.S. ports. It also includes procedures to 

designate and publicize the ports to 

which foreign fishing vessels may seek 

entry and procedures for conducting 

inspections of these foreign vessels 

accessing U.S. ports. Further, the rule 

would establish procedures for 

notification of: the denial of port entry 

or port services for a foreign vessel, the 

withdrawal of the denial of port services 

if applicable, the taking of enforcement 

action with respect to a foreign vessel, 

or the results of any inspection of a 

foreign vessel to the flag nation of the 

vessel and other competent authorities 

as appropriate. 

Statement of Need: The United States 

is a signatory to the Port State Measures 

Agreement (PSMA). The agreement is 

aimed at combating illegal, unreported 

and unregulated (IUU) fishing activities 

through increased port inspection of 

foreign fishing vessels and thereby 

closing seafood markets to IUU fish and 

fish products. In addition, regulations to 

identify and certify nations for IUU 

fishing and other adverse fishing 

activities, bycatch of protected living 

marine resources, and shark catch under 

the authority of the High Seas Driftnet 

Fishing Moratorium Protection Act must 

be updated in light of amendments 

made by the James M. Inhofe National 

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

year 2023. NMFS proposes to streamline 

the Moratorium Protection Act 

regulations by removing provisions that 

only repeat statutory text, including 

those provisions regarding 

identification, notification, and 

consultation with identified nations. 

Summary of Legal Basis: This action 

is required under several statutes: 

Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated 

Fishing Enforcement Act of 2015 (Pub. 

L. 114–81); Ensuring Access to Pacific 

Fisheries Act (Pub. L. 114–327); High 

Seas Driftnet Fishing Moratorium 

Protection Act (Pub. L. 104–43); and, the 

James M. Inhofe National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023 

(Pub. L. 117–263). The Secretary of 

Commerce is authorized to issue 

regulations to implement the statutory 

obligations to counter IUU fishing by 

foreign fishing vessels and to prevent 

the importation of illegally harvested 

seafood. 

Alternatives: Alternatives to taking 

action at the port would include taking 

action at sea against IUU fishing vessels 

and in the supply chain against detected 

IUU fish or fish products. At-sea 

monitoring and inspection is part of an 

overall strategy to combat IUU fishing, 

but it is extremely expensive, resources 

are limited, and the United States has 

limited jurisdiction to board foreign flag 

vessels at sea. Likewise, tracing and 

removing illegal products already 

released into the U.S. seafood market 

would be difficult and resource 

intensive. Preventing entry of IUU 

fishing vessels into ports or 

investigating fishing vessels at the port 

is an efficient and effective approach to 

combat illegal activity and to prevent 

illegal products from entering the 

supply chain. There are no alternatives 

to the conforming amendments to the 

High Seas Driftnet Fishing Moratorium 

Protection Act. Without these changes, 

the implementing regulations would not 

be consistent with the revised statute. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9320 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

anticipated costs will be minimal in that 

foreign vessels requesting permission to 

visit U.S. ports are already required to 

report. Under this rule, fishing vessel 

masters will have to include more 

information about the vessel and its 

fishing activities directly to the National 

Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Office 

of Law Enforcement after they submit an 

electronic notice of arrival to the U.S. 

Coast Guard. Based on the information 

submitted, NMFS may deny port 

privileges for vessels known to have 

engaged in IUU fishing or may meet the 

vessel in port to conduct an inspection. 

The minimal additional data elements 

required of foreign fishing vessels will 

be collected through an email to the 

NMFS Office of Law Enforcement. The 

additional reporting costs are not 

anticipated to affect shipping patterns, 

port usage, or international commerce. 

In addition, vessel inspections will be 

coordinated and planned based on the 

advance notice of arrival information 

submitted to the U.S. Coast Guard prior 

to entry into port, thus delays for 

inspection will be minimal and not 

result in significant costs to legitimate 

vessels. Benefits of the rule will accrue 

when IUU fishing vessels are denied 

entry, and illegal seafood products are 

precluded from the U.S. supply chain, 

thereby maintaining higher prices and 

market share for legitimate producers of 

fishery products. In addition, benefits 

will accrue from reduced costs of 

inspection and monitoring at ports of 

entry due to the advance notice 

provided and the ability of NMFS and 

Coast Guard to take a risk- management 

approach to vessel inspection. Should 

the United States impose trade 

restrictions on foreign nations due to the 

amendments to the High Seas Driftnet 

Fishing Moratorium Protection Act, 

some costs would be borne by U.S. 

importers who would have to adjust 

their supply chains. However, many 

U.S. importers and seafood dealers are 

already adjusting supply chains to 

respond to consumer demand for 

lawfully-acquired, sustainable and 

environmentally responsible seafood. 

The benefits of additional steps to 

counter IUU fishing will accrue to lawabiding harvesters, processors and 

traders as fish stocks are recovered and 

they no longer must compete with 

illegitimate products in the supply 

chain. 

Risks: If the port entry reporting and 

inspection provisions of this rule were 

not implemented, there is an increased 

risk of IUU fishing vessels entering U.S. 

ports and/or the products of IUU fishing 

infiltrating the U.S. supply chain. In 

addition, the United States would be out 

of compliance with its international 

obligations under the PSMA. If the 

revisions to the High Seas Driftnet 

Fishing Moratorium Protection Act are 

not implemented through conforming 

amendments to the regulations, nations 

might not be identified under the 

statute, therefore diminishing the 

likelihood of corrective actions to 

counter IUU fishing and to address the 

bycatch of protected living marine 

resources and the catch of sharks. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 07/08/22 87 FR 40763 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

09/06/22 

Supplemental 

NPRM.

11/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal. 

International Impacts: This regulatory 

action will be likely to have 

international trade and investment 

effects, or otherwise be of international 

interest. 

Agency Contact: Alexa Cole, Director, 

Office of International Affairs, Trade, 

and Commerce, Department of 

Commerce, National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration, 1315 EastWest Highway, Silver Spring, MD 

20910, Phone: 301 427–8286, Email: 

alexa.cole@noaa.gov. 

RIN: 0648–BG11 

DOC—NOAA 

Final Rule Stage 

14. Amendments to the North Atlantic 

Right Whale Vessel Strike Reduction 

Rule [0648–BI88] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361 et 

seq.; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. 

CFR Citation: 50 CFR 224. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: NMFS published a proposed 

rule to amend the North Atlantic Right 

Whale Vessel Strike Reduction Rule (per 

50 CFR 224.105; 87 FR 46921, August 1, 

2022). NMFS proposed this action to 

further reduce the likelihood of 

mortalities and serious injuries to 

endangered right whales from vessel 

collisions, which are a leading cause of 

the species’ decline and a primary factor 

in an ongoing Unusual Mortality Event. 

The proposed rule would (1) modify the 

spatial and temporal boundaries of 

current speed restriction areas, currently 

referred to as Seasonal Management 

Areas (SMAs), (2) include most vessels 

greater than or equal to 35 ft (10.7 m) 

and less than 65 ft (19.8 m) in length in 

the vessel size class subject to speed 

restriction, (3) create a Dynamic Speed 

Zone framework to implement 

mandatory speed restrictions when 

whales are known to be present outside 

active SMAs, and (4) update the speed 

rule’s safety deviation provision. The 

proposed amendments to current speed 

regulations reduce vessel strike risk 

based on a coast wide collision 

mortality risk assessment and updated 

information on right whale distribution, 

vessel traffic patterns, and vessel strike 

mortality and serious injury events. 

NMFS solicited public comment on the 

proposed action and received over 

90,000 public comments. The agency 

plans to take final action on the 

proposed rule in 2023. 

Statement of Need: This action is 

needed to further reduce the likelihood 

of mortalities and serious injuries to 

endangered North Atlantic right whales 

from vessel collisions, which are a 

leading cause of the species’ decline and 

contributing to the ongoing Unusual 

Mortality Event (2017-present). 

Following two decades of growth, the 

species has been in decline over the past 

decade with a best population estimate 

of fewer than 350 individuals. 

Entanglement in fishing gear and vessel 

strikes are the two primary causes of 

North Atlantic right whale mortality and 

serious injury across their range, and 

human-caused mortality to adult 

females, in particular, is limiting 

recovery of the species. 

Summary of Legal Basis: NMFS is 

implementing this rule pursuant to its 

rulemaking authority under MMPA 

section 112(a) (16 U.S.C. 1382(a)), and 

ESA section 11(f) (16 U.S.C. 1540(f)). 

Alternatives: In January 2021, NMFS 

released, and solicited public comment 

on, an assessment of the current right 

whale vessel speed rule (50 CFR 

224.105). The assessment highlighted 

the need to address collision risk from 

vessels less than 65 ft in length and 

modify the boundaries and timing of 

Seasonal Management Areas (SMAs) to 

better reflect current whale and vessel 

traffic distribution, along with other 

recommendations to improve vessel 

strike mitigation efforts. In 2022, NMFS 

completed a coastwide right whale 

vessel strike risk model (Garrison et al. 

2022), which informed development of 

proposed modifications to the existing 

speed rule. The proposed rule 

considered number of alternatives in the 

draft Regulatory Impact Review and 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9321 

draft Environmental Assessment. The 

Preferred Alternative would modify the 

spatial and temporal boundaries of the 

existing SMAs to create newly proposed 

Seasonal Speed Zones (SSZs), add 

smaller vessels down to 35 ft in length, 

and establish a mandatory Dynamic 

Speed Zone program. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Under 

the Preferred Alternative, NMFS 

estimated modifications to the speed 

rule would cost just over $46 million 

per year. Estimated costs would be 

borne primarily by the owners and 

operators of vessels currently transiting 

within newly expanded portions of 

SSZs along the U.S. East Coast. Owners 

and operators of vessels of applicable 

size classes that regularly transit within 

active SSZs at speeds in excess of 10 

knots would be most affected. Vessels 

operating in the Northeast and MidAtlantic regions are expected to bear the 

majority of costs (89 percent) if the 

proposed modifications are finalized. 

Potential benefits stemming from this 

action include a reduction in North 

Atlantic right whale mortalities and 

serious injuries resulting from collisions 

with vessels, with potential reduction in 

vessel strike risk for other large whale 

species. 

Risks: This action is essential to 

ensure long-term recovery of North 

Atlantic right whales. The proposed 

modifications to the current speed rule 

are designed to: (1) address a 

misalignment between existing Seasonal 

Management Areas and places/times 

with elevated strike risk, and (2) 

mitigate currently unregulated lethal 

strike risk from vessels 35–65 ft in 

length. Given the endangered status of 

the North Atlantic right whale, the large 

geographic area, and the number of 

stakeholders and potentially regulated 

entities, final modifications to the 

current speed rule is of high interest. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 08/01/22 87 FR 46921 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

09/30/22 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extension.

09/16/22 87 FR 56925 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extension End.

10/31/22 

Final Action ......... 12/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Kim Damon-Randall, 

Director, Office of Protected Resources, 

Department of Commerce, National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration, 1315 East-West 

Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910, 

Phone: 301 427–8400, Email: 

kimberly.damon-randall@noaa.gov. 

Related RIN: Related to 0648–AS36 

RIN: 0648–BI88 

DOC—NOAA 

15. Endangered and Threatened 

Wildlife and Plants; Regulations for 

Listing Species and Designating Critical 

Habitat [0648–BK47] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. 

CFR Citation: 50 CFR 424. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: Per section 2 of the 

Executive Order on Protecting Public 

Health and the Environment and 

Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate 

Crisis (E.O. 13990), and subsequent Fact 

Sheet: List of Agency Actions for 

Review, the Departments of Commerce 

and the Interior (the Departments) 

initiated a review of the previous 

rulemaking action with the title, 

‘‘Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Regulations for Listing 

Species and Designating Critical 

Habitat’’ (84 FR 45020; August 27, 2019) 

that revised the regulations for adding 

and removing species from the Lists of 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants and clarified procedures for 

designating critical habitat. As a result 

of that review, the Departments 

proposed to revise those regulations (88 

FR 40764, June 22, 2023), and after 

publication of that proposal, delivered a 

series of informational sessions to 

stakeholders including: Federal 

agencies, State agencies, Federally 

recognized tribes, Native Hawaiian 

community leaders, Non-governmental 

organizations, conservation partners, 

Industry groups, and Pacific Islander 

community leaders. FAQs and a 

recording of the presentation can be 

viewed on the website https://fws.gov/ 

project/endangered-species-actregulation-revisions. 

Statement of Need: This action 

responds to the Executive Order on 

Protecting Public Health and the 

Environment and Restoring Science to 

Tackle the Climate Crisis (E.O. 13990) 

and the associated Fact Sheet (List of 

Agency Actions for Review). 

Summary of Legal Basis: This action 

is authorized under 16 U.S.C. 1531 et 

seq. 

Alternatives: This is a joint 

rulemaking by the National Marine 

Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS; the 

Services) to revise joint regulations 

implementing the Endangered Species 

Act (ESA). Pursuant to E.O. 13990, the 

Services reviewed the 2019 final rule 

with the title, ‘‘Endangered and 

Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 

Regulations for Listing Species and 

Designating Critical Habitat’’ (84 FR 

45020; August 27, 2019), which revised 

the regulations for adding and removing 

species from the Lists of Endangered 

and Threatened Wildlife and Plants and 

clarified procedures for designating 

critical habitat. Following a review of 

the 2019 rule, the Services proposed to 

revise portions of the regulations that 

the 2019 rule addressed (see 88 FR 

40764, June 22, 2023). The Services 

have since held a series of seven 

informational webinars for stakeholders 

and are seeking public comment on the 

proposed rule as well as all aspects of 

the 2019 final rule. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

Potential costs directly stemming from 

this rule would be borne by the Services 

and would be non-significant. Potential 

benefits stemming from this rule would 

be improved clarity and effectiveness of 

the implementing regulations that guide 

the Services when classifying species 

and designating critical habitat under 

the ESA. 

Risks: This action addresses several 

different provisions in the Services’ 

joint ESA-implementing regulations. 

Overall, the proposed changes will 

reduce the risk associated with making 

listing, delisting, and reclassification 

decisions; however, those actions will 

continue to have independent levels of 

risk that vary depending on the 

particular species. The proposed 

changes will also reduce risk associated 

with some but not necessarily all, 

critical habitat determinations and 

designations, which will continue to 

have independent risk levels that vary 

based on the particular species and 

habitats involved. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 06/22/23 88 FR 40764 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

08/21/23 

Final Action ......... 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal. 

Agency Contact: Kim Damon-Randall, 

Director, Office of Protected Resources, 

Department of Commerce, National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration, 1315 East-West 

Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9322 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Phone: 301 427–8400, Email: 

kimberly.damon-randall@noaa.gov. 

Related RIN: Related to 0648–BH42, 

Related to 1018–BC88 

RIN: 0648–BK47 

DOC—NOAA 

16. Endangered and Threatened

Wildlife and Plants; Revision of

Regulations for Interagency

Cooperation [0648–BK48]

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. 

CFR Citation: 50 CFR 402. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: Per section 2 of the 

Executive Order on Protecting Public 

Health and the Environment and 

Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate 

Crisis (E.O. 13990), and subsequent Fact 

Sheet: List of Agency Actions for 

Review, the Departments of Commerce 

and the Interior (the Departments) 

initiated a review of the previous 

rulemaking action with the title, 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Regulations for Interagency 

Cooperation’’ (84 FR 44976; August 27, 

2019) that revised portions of the 

regulations that implement section 7 of 

the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended. As a result of that review, the 

Departments proposed to revise those 

regulations (88 FR 40753; June 22, 

2023), and after publication of that 

proposal, delivered a series of 

informational sessions to stakeholders 

including: Federal agencies, State 

agencies, Federally recognized tribes, 

Native Hawaiian community leaders, 

Non-governmental organizations, 

conservation partners, industry groups, 

and Pacific Islander community leaders. 

FAQs and a recording of the 

presentation can be viewed on the 

website https://fws.gov/project/ 

endangered-species-act-regulationrevisions. 

Statement of Need: This action 

responds to the Executive Order on 

Protecting Public Health and the 

Environment and Restoring Science to 

Tackle the Climate Crisis (E.O. 13990) 

and the associated Fact Sheet (List of 

Agency Actions for Review). 

Summary of Legal Basis: This action 

is authorized under 16 U.S.C. 1531 et 

seq. 

Alternatives: This is a joint 

rulemaking by the National Marine 

Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS; the 

Services) to revise joint regulations 

implementing the Endangered Species 

Act (ESA). Pursuant to E.O. 13990, the 

Services reviewed the 2019 final rule 

with the title, Endangered and 

Threatened Wildlife and Plants: 

Regulations for Interagency Cooperation 

(84 FR 44976; August 27, 2019), which 

revised portions of the regulations that 

implement section 7 of the Endangered 

Species Act of 1973, as amended. 

Following a review of the 2019 rule, the 

Services proposed to revise portions of 

the regulations that the 2019 rule 

addressed (see 88 FR 40753; June 22, 

2023). The Services have since held a 

series of seven informational webinars 

for stakeholders and are seeking public 

comments on the proposed rule as well 

as all aspects of the 2019 finale rule. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

rulemaking revises and clarifies existing 

requirements for Federal agencies, 

including the Services, under section 7 

of the ESA. Federal agencies are the 

only entities affected by this rule. We do 

not anticipate significant costs 

associated with the rule. This rule is 

meant to provide clarity to the standards 

with which we evaluate proposed 

Federal agency actions pursuant to 

section 7 of the ESA, which will be a 

benefit to the Services and Federal 

action agencies. 

Risks: This action addresses the ESA 

Interagency Cooperation provisions in 

the Services’ joint ESA-implementing 

regulations. Overall, the proposed 

changes will reduce the risk to ESAlisted species and designated critical 

habitat associated with ensuring Federal 

action agencies do not jeopardize the 

continued existence of listed species or 

destroy or adversely modify designated 

critical habitat by clarifying and 

improving the interagency consultation 

process and continuing to provide for 

the conservation of ESA resources. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 06/22/23 88 FR 40753 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

08/21/23 

Final Action ......... 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Kim Damon-Randall, 

Director, Office of Protected Resources, 

Department of Commerce, National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration, 1315 East-West 

Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910, 

Phone: 301 427–8400, Email: 

kimberly.damon-randall@noaa.gov. 

Related RIN: Related to 0648–BH41, 

Related to 1018–BC87 

RIN: 0648–BK48 

DOC—PATENT AND TRADEMARK 

OFFICE (PTO) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

17. Setting and Adjusting Patent Fees

[0651–AD64]

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Legal Authority: Pub. L. 112–29 

CFR Citation: 37 CFR 1; 37 CFR 41. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The United States Patent 

and Trademark Office (USPTO or 

Office) takes this action to set and adjust 

Patent fee amounts to provide the Office 

with a sufficient aggregate revenue to 

recover its aggregate cost of operations 

thereby maintaining a sustainable 

funding model. The new fee amounts 

will provide the Office with additional 

resources to decrease patent pendency 

and ensure robust and reliable patents 

are allowed while continuing to 

promote access to the patent system for 

underresourced individuals. This 

proposal reflects feedback we have 

received from members of the Patent 

Public Advisory Committee and the 

public, including organizations, 

practitioners, and independent 

inventors, during a public hearing held 

on May 18, 2023. As we develop this 

regulation, we will be seeking 

additional public comment through the 

rulemaking process. 

Statement of Need: The purpose of 

this rule is to set and adjust patent fee 

amounts to provide sufficient aggregate 

revenue to cover the agency’s aggregate 

cost of operations. To this end, this rule 

creates new or changes existing fees for 

patent services, and does so without 

imposing any new costs. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The LeahySmith America Invents Act (AIA), 

enacted in 2011, provided USPTO with 

the authority to set and adjust its fees 

for patent and trademark services. Since 

then, USPTO has conducted an internal 

biennial fee review, in which it 

undertook internal consideration of the 

current fee structure, and considered 

ways that the structure might be 

improved, including rulemaking 

pursuant to the USPTO’s fee setting 

authority. This fee review process 

involves public outreach, including, as 

required by the Act, public hearings 

held by the USPTO’s Public Advisory 

Committees, as well as public comment 

and other outreach to the user 

community and public in general. 

Alternatives: This rulemaking action 

is currently in development and 

alternatives have not yet been 

determined. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: This 

rulemaking action is currently in 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9323 

development and aggregate annual 

economic impacts have not yet been 

determined. The user fees charged by 

the USPTO for its services are 

considered transfer payments that do 

not affect the total resources available to 

society, and therefore the changes to 

patent fees being developed by this 

rulemaking are transfers, and are not 

costs of this rulemaking. It is anticipated 

that the final rule would become 

effective with the new fee schedule in 

2024. 

Risks: The USPTO will set and adjust 

Patent fee amounts to provide the Office 

with a sufficient amount of aggregate 

revenue to recover its aggregate cost of 

operations while helping the Office 

maintain a sustainable funding model, 

reduce the current patent application 

backlog, decrease patent pendency, and 

improve the reliability of issued patents. 

Therefore, one risk of taking no action 

could be that USPTO might not be able 

to recover its aggregate costs of 

operations in the long run. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Notice of Public 

Hearing and 

Request for 

Comments.

04/20/23 88 FR 24392 

Comment Period 

End.

05/25/23 

NPRM .................. 01/00/24 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

04/00/24 

Final Action ......... 10/00/24 

Final Action Effective.11/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses, 

Organizations. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Brendan Hourigan, 

Director, Office of Planning and Budget, 

Department of Commerce, Patent and 

Trademark Office, P.O. Box 1450, 

Alexandria, VA 22313–1450, Phone: 571 

272–8966, Fax: 571 273–8966, Email: 

brendan.hourigan@uspto.gov. 

RIN: 0651–AD64 

DOC—PTO 

18. Setting and Adjusting Trademark 

Fees [0651–AD65] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Legal Authority: Pub. L. 112–29 

CFR Citation: 37 CFR 2. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The United States Patent 

and Trademark Office (USPTO or 

Office) takes this action to set and adjust 

Trademark fee amounts to provide the 

Office with a sufficient aggregate 

revenue to recover its aggregate cost of 

operations thereby maintaining a 

sustainable funding model. The new fee 

amounts will provide the Office with 

additional resources to ensure the 

integrity of the Trademark register and 

promote efficiency of processes while 

continuing to offer affordable options to 

stakeholders. This proposal reflects 

feedback we have received from 

members of the Trademark Public 

Advisory Committee and the public, 

including organizations, practitioners, 

and small business owners, during a 

public hearing held on June 5, 2023. As 

we develop this regulation, we will be 

seeking additional public comment 

through the rulemaking process. 

Statement of Need: The purpose of 

this rule is to set and adjust trademark 

fee amounts to provide sufficient 

aggregate revenue to cover the agency’s 

aggregate cost of operations. To this end, 

this rule creates new or changes existing 

fees for trademark services. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The LeahySmith America Invents Act (AIA), 

enacted in 2011, provided USPTO with 

the authority to set and adjust its fees 

for patent and trademark services. This 

authority was extended by the Study of 

Underrepresented Classes Chasing 

Engineering and Science Success 

(SUCCESS) Act of 2018. Since then, 

USPTO has conducted an internal 

biennial fee review, in which it 

undertook internal consideration of the 

current fee structure, and considered 

ways that the structure might be 

improved, including rulemaking 

pursuant to the USPTO’s fee-setting 

authority. This fee review process 

involves public outreach, including, as 

required by the Act, a public hearing 

held by the USPTO’s Trademark Public 

Advisory Committee, as well as public 

comment and other outreach to the user 

community and public in general. 

Alternatives: This rulemaking action 

is currently in development and 

alternatives have not yet been 

determined. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: This 

rulemaking action is currently in 

development and aggregate annual 

economic impacts have not yet been 

determined. The user fees charged by 

the USPTO for its services are 

considered transfer payments that do 

not affect the total resources available to 

society, and therefore the changes to 

trademark fees proposed by this 

rulemaking are transfers, and are not 

costs of this rulemaking. 

Risks: The USPTO will set and adjust 

trademark fee amounts to provide the 

Office with a sufficient amount of 

aggregate revenue to recover its 

aggregate cost of operations while 

helping the Office maintain a 

sustainable funding model, ensure the 

integrity of the Trademark register, and 

promote efficiency of processes. 

Therefore, one risk of taking no action 

could be that USPTO might not be able 

to recover its aggregate costs of 

operations in the long run. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Notice of Public 

Hearing and 

Request for 

Comments.

04/27/23 88 FR 25623 

Comment Period 

End.

06/12/23 

NPRM .................. 11/00/23 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

01/00/24 

Final Action ......... 07/00/24 

Final Action Effective.09/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses, 

Organizations. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Brendan Hourigan, 

Director, Office of Planning and Budget, 

Department of Commerce, Patent and 

Trademark Office, P.O. Box 1450, 

Alexandria, VA 22313–1450, Phone: 571 

272–8966, Fax: 571 273–8966, Email: 

brendan.hourigan@uspto.gov. 

RIN: 0651–AD65 

BILLING CODE 3410–12–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Statement of Regulatory Priorities 

Background 

The Department of Defense (DoD) is 

the largest Federal department, 

employing over 1.6 million military 

personnel and 750,000 civilians with 

operations all over the world. DoD’s 

enduring mission is to provide combatcredible military forces needed to deter 

war and protect the security of our 

nation. To guide this mission, the 

Secretary of Defense has outlined three 

top priorities, which are to defend the 

nation, take care of our people, and 

succeed through teamwork. In addition, 

the National Defense Strategy sets out 

how DoD will contribute to advancing 

and safeguarding vital U.S. national 

interests—protecting the American 

people, expanding America’s prosperity, 

promoting global security, seizing new 

strategic opportunities, and realizing 

and defending our democratic values. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9324 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Because of this expansive and 

diversified mission and reach, DoD 

regulations can address a broad range of 

matters and have an impact on varied 

members of the public, as well as other 

federal agencies. 

Pursuant to Executive Order 12866, 

‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review’’ 

(September 30, 1993) and Executive 

Order 13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation 

and Regulatory Review’’ (January 18, 

2011), the DoD issues this Regulatory 

Plan and Agenda to provide notice 

about the DoD’s regulatory and 

deregulatory actions. 

Retrospective Review of Existing 

Regulations 

Pursuant to section 6 of Executive 

Order 13563 ‘‘Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review’’ (January 18, 2011), 

the Department continues to review 

existing regulations with a goal to 

eliminate outdated, unnecessary, or 

ineffective regulations; account for the 

currency and legitimacy of each of the 

Department’s regulations; and 

ultimately reduce regulatory burden and 

costs. 

Public Participation and Community 

Outreach 

As the DoD develops our regulations, 

we seek to increase public participation 

and community outreach to be better 

informed of and address issues from 

members of the public affected by our 

regulations. The following provides 

examples of our specific outreach and 

public participation efforts. 

The Office of the Assistant to the 

Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs/ 

Community Engagement Directorate, via 

its Opinion Leader Engagement 

portfolio, provides public affairs 

support to leaders throughout the Office 

of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) who 

are responsible for regulatory activities. 

This support includes convening 

roundtables and similar engagements for 

national stakeholder organizations to 

meet with OSD leaders to discuss and 

share information about DoD policies 

and programs that are governed by 

Federal regulations. For example, 

regular engagements with leaders of 

national military and veteran supporting 

organizations include topics such as 

military benefits, housing, healthcare, 

compensation, and sexual assault 

prevention and response, which are 

governed by law and Federal regulation. 

These meetings allow the regulating 

authorities in OSD an opportunity to 

dialogue with national organizations 

with a stakeholder interest in the impact 

and effect of DoD regulations. 

DoD engages with the public on 

procurement-related regulations that 

will affect the Defense Federal 

Acquisition Regulation Supplement 

(DFARS) in several ways. In addition to 

publishing abstracts of and anticipated 

publication dates for upcoming rules in 

the biannual Unified Agenda, members 

of the public can track the progress of 

any open and pending DFARS 

regulation via the Open DFARS Cases 

Report, which is publicly available at 

https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/dars/ 

case_status.html. The report is updated 

on a weekly basis and includes the 

following information: a case number, 

title, DFARS parts anticipated to be 

impacted by the regulation, a summary 

of the basis for the regulation, and the 

status of the regulation. Members of the 

public who are interested in a particular 

DFARS case are encouraged to monitor 

the Open DFARS Cases Report to track 

the progress of a particular regulation 

through the rulemaking process. 

DoD also meets with industry 

associations on a quarterly basis. 

Industry associations that regularly 

participate in these quarterly 

discussions include the Council of 

Defense and Space Industry 

Associations, the Professional Services 

Council, the Aerospace Industries 

Association, and the National Defense 

Industrial Association. During these 

meetings, DoD often provides updates 

on open DFARS cases. 

While developing certain DFARS 

regulations, DoD may seek input from 

the public by publishing in the Federal 

Register an early engagement 

opportunity, an advance notice of 

proposed rulemaking (ANPR), or a 

general request for information (RFI). 

Notices for early engagement 

opportunities usually pertain to a recent 

law, such as the annual National 

Defense Authorization Act, and request 

input on implementation of the law in 

the DFARS. ANPRs and RFIs may 

include a summary of the overarching 

policy objectives of the regulation and a 

list of questions seeking input that will 

help DoD develop a proposed 

regulation. Information on whether DoD 

plans to publish an ANPR or RFI is 

included in both the Open DFARS Cases 

Report and the biannual Unified 

Agenda. 

Occasionally, while an ANPR, 

proposed DFARS regulation, or interim 

DFARS regulation is out for public 

comment, DoD may hold a public 

meeting to allow the public to provide 

feedback to the Government in an open 

forum. Information about whether DoD 

plans on holding a public meeting for an 

ANPR or a regulation is normally 

included in the ANPR, proposed 

regulation, or interim regulation when it 

is published for public comment. 

Presentations made during the public 

meeting are made publicly available. 

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

(USACE) often utilizes listening 

sessions prior to proposing a rule to 

obtain public input that is then used to 

inform the contents of the proposed 

rule. Additionally, Federal Register 

notices, website postings, press releases, 

and social media releases are used to 

notify the public of the dates and times 

for the listening sessions. When a 

Federal Register notice is used to 

provide notification of the listening 

sessions, the use of an open docket is 

employed for the submission public 

comments in addition to receipt of 

public comments during the listening 

sessions. Also, the USACE may publish 

an advanced notice of proposed 

rulemaking to engage the public on the 

development of a proposed rule. 

Federal Register notices, website 

postings, press releases, and social 

media releases are used to notify the 

public of the publication of the 

proposed rule and how they can provide 

comments and engage in the rulemaking 

effort. 

Finally, the USACE has meetings with 

industry associations, NGOs, or similar 

stakeholders to provide updates on 

proposed policies or actions to solicit 

informal feedback that is used to help 

inform the path forward for the 

development of a proposed rule. 

DOD Priority Regulatory Actions 

The regulatory and deregulatory 

actions identified in this Regulatory 

Plan embody the core of DoD’s 

regulatory priorities for Fiscal Year (FY) 

2024 and help support President 

Biden’s regulatory priorities, the 

Secretary of Defense’s top priorities, and 

those priorities set out in the National 

Defense Strategy. The DoD regulatory 

prioritization is focused on initiatives 

that: 

• Promote the country’s economic 

resilience, including by addressing 

COVID-related and other healthcare 

issues. 

• Support underserved communities 

and improve small business 

opportunities. 

• Promote competition in the 

American economy. 

• Promote diversity, equity, 

inclusion, and accessibility in the 

Federal workforce. 

• Support national security efforts, 

especially safeguarding Federal 

Government information and 

information technology systems. 

• Tackle the climate crisis and protect 

the environment. 

• Address military family matters. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9325 

Rules That Promote the Country’s 

Economic Resilience 

Pandemic COVID–19 Rules 

Pursuant to Executive Order 13987, 

‘‘Organizing and Mobilizing the United 

States Government to Provide a Unified 

and Effective Response to Combat 

COVID–19 and to Provide United States 

Leadership on Global Health and 

Security,’’ January 20, 2021; Executive 

Order 13995, ‘‘Ensuring an Equitable 

Pandemic Response and Recovery,’’ 

January 21, 2021; Executive Order 

13997, ‘‘Improving and Expanding 

Access to Care and Treatments for 

COVID–19,’’ January 21, 2021; and 

Executive Order 13999, ‘‘Protecting 

Worker Health and Safety,’’ January 21, 

2021, the Department temporarily 

modified its TRICARE regulation so 

TRICARE beneficiaries have access to 

the most up-to-date care required for the 

diagnosis and treatment of COVID–19. 

TRICARE continues to reimburse like 

Medicare, to the extent practicable, as 

required by statute. The Department is 

researching the impacts of making some 

of those modifications permanent and 

may pursue such future action. These 

modifications include: 

TRICARE Coverage of National Institute 

of Allergy and Infectious Disease— 

Coronavirus Disease 2019 Clinical 

Trials. RIN 0720–AB83 

The Department of Defense is 

finalizing an interim final rule to amend 

32 CFR part 199 to include coverage that 

was temporarily added for National 

Institute of Allergy and Infectious 

Disease-sponsored clinical trials for the 

treatment or prevention of COVID–19. 

This rule will also finalize the 

temporary addition of the treatment use 

of investigation drugs under U.S. Food 

and Drug Administration-approved 

expanded access programs for the 

treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 

(COVID–19) from the interim final rule 

titled ‘‘TRICARE Coverage of Certain 

Medical Benefits in Response to the 

COVID–19 Pandemic’’ (32 CFR part 199, 

0720–AB82), which published in the 

Federal Register on September 3, 2020 

(85 FR 54914–54924). 

Expanding TRICARE Access to Care in 

Response to the COVID–19 Pandemic. 

RIN 0720–AB85 

This rule finalizes an interim final 

rule that amended 32 CFR part 199 by: 

(1) adding freestanding End Stage Renal 

Disease (ESRD) facilities as a category of 

TRICARE-authorized institutional 

provider and modifying the 

reimbursement for such facilities; and 

(2) temporarily adopting Medicare’s 

New COVID–19 Treatments Add-on 

Payment (NCTAP). The ESRD 

provisions are permanent, and the 

temporary NCTAP provisions expire at 

the end of the fiscal year in which the 

Secretary of Health and Human 

Services’ declared coronavirus disease 

2019 (COVID- 19) public health 

emergency ends. 

Medical Debt Relief 

Medical Billing for Healthcare Services 

Provided by Department of Defense 

Medical Treatment Facilities to Civilian 

Non-Beneficiaries. RIN 0720–AB87 

This rule is aimed at preventing 

severe financial harm to civilians who 

are not covered beneficiaries of the 

Military Health System, and who 

receive healthcare services at military 

medical treatment facilities. The rule 

implements the requirement to apply a 

sliding fee and/or a catastrophic waiver 

to medical invoices of non-beneficiaries; 

to accept payments from health insurers 

as full payment; to not balance bill nonbeneficiaries except for copays, 

coinsurance, deductibles, nominal fees, 

and non-covered services; and grants 

the Director of Defense Health Agency 

(DHA) discretionary authority to waive 

medical debts of non-beneficiaries when 

the healthcare provided enhances the 

knowledge, skills, and abilities of 

healthcare providers, as determined by 

the Director of DHA. 

Rules That Promote Diversity, Equity, 

Inclusion, and Accessibility in the 

Federal Workforce 

Nondiscrimination on the Basis of 

Disability in Program or Activities 

Assisted or Conducted by the DoD and 

in Equal Access to Information and 

Communication Technology Used by 

DoD, and Procedures for Resolving 

Complaints. RIN: 0790–AJ04 

Revisions to this regulation: (1) 

update and clarify the obligations that 

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 

1973 (section 504) imposes on 

recipients of Federal financial assistance 

and the Military Departments and 

Components (DoD Components); (2) 

reflect the most current Federal statutes 

and regulations, as well as 

developments in Supreme Court 

jurisprudence, regarding unlawful 

discrimination on the basis of disability 

and promotes consistency with 

comparable provisions implementing 

title II of the Americans with 

Disabilities Act (ADA); (3) implement 

section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 

1973 (section 508), requiring DoD make 

its electronic and information 

technology accessible to individuals 

with disabilities; (4) establish and 

clarify obligations under the 

Architectural Barriers Act of 1968 

(ABA), which requires that DoD make 

facilities accessible to individuals with 

disabilities; and (5) Provide complaint 

resolution and enforcement procedures 

pursuant to section 504 and the 

complaint resolution and enforcement 

procedures pursuant to section 508. 

These revisions incorporate the 

directive of Executive Order 14035, 

‘‘Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and 

Accessibility in the Federal Workforce’’ 

by defining, clarifying, advancing 

accessibility throughout DoD programs 

and activities. 

Executive Order 13985, ‘‘Advancing 

Racial Equity and Support for 

Underserved Communities Through the 

Federal Government’ January 20, 2021 

USACE Implementing Procedures for 

Principles, Requirements, and 

Guidelines Applicable to Actions 

Involving Investment in Water 

Resources. RIN 0710–AB41 

Section 2031 of the Water Resources 

Development Act of 2007 (Pub. L. 110– 

114) called for revisions to the 1983 

Principles and Guidelines for Water and 

Land Related Resources Implementation 

Studies, resulting in the issuance of the 

Principles and Requirements (P&R) 

guidance document in March 2013 and 

the Interagency Guidelines in December 

2014, which together comprise the 

Principles, Requirements, and 

Guidelines (PR&G). The PR&G are 

intended to provide a common 

framework and comprehensive policy 

and guidance for analyzing a diverse 

range of water resources projects, 

programs, activities, and related actions 

involving Federal investment in water 

resources. The U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers (Corps) proposes a regulation 

to show how it would apply the PR&G 

to the Corps’ mission and authorities. In 

this proposed regulation, the Corps 

intends to increase consistency and 

compatibility in Federal water resources 

investment decision making to include 

considerations such as analyzing a 

broader range of long-term costs and 

benefits, enhancing collaboration, 

including a more thorough and 

transparent risk and uncertainty 

analyses, and improving resilience for 

dealing with emerging challenges, 

including climate change. 

Flood Control Cost-Sharing 

Requirements Under the Ability To Pay 

Provision. RIN: 0710–AB34 

Section 103(m) of the Water 

Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 

1986, as amended (33 U.S.C. 2213(m)), 

authorizes the USACE to reduce the 

non-Federal share of the cost of a study 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9326 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

or project for certain communities that 

are not able financially to afford the 

standard cost-share. Part 241 of title 33 

in the Code of Federal Regulations 

provides the criteria that the USACE 

uses in making these determinations 

where the primary purpose of the study 

or project is flood damage reduction. 

The proposed rule would update this 

regulation, by broadening its 

applicability to include projects with 

other purposes (instead of just flood 

damage reduction) and the feasibility 

study of a project (instead of just design 

and construction). The WRDA 2000 

modified section 103(m) to include 

projects with the following purposes: 

environmental protection and 

restoration, flood control, navigation, 

storm damage protection, shoreline 

erosion, hurricane protection, and 

recreation or an agricultural water 

supply project which have not yet been 

added to the regulation. It also included 

the opportunity to cost share all phases 

of a USACE project to also include 

feasibility studies in addition to the 

already covered design and 

construction. This rule would update 

the framework for determining whether 

a project is eligible for consideration for 

a reduction in the non-Federal cost 

share based on ability to pay. 

Rules That Support Underserved 

Communities and Improve Small 

Business Opportunities Rules of 

Particular Interest to Small Business 

Small Business Innovation Research 

Program Data Rights (DFARS Case 

2019–D043). RIN 0750–AK84 

This rule implements changes made 

by the Small Business Administration 

(SBA) related to data rights in the Small 

Business Innovation Research (SBIR) 

Program and Small Business 

Technology Transfer (STTR) Program 

Policy Directive, published in the 

Federal Register on April 2, 2019 (84 FR 

12794). The SBIR and STTR programs 

fund a diverse portfolio of startups and 

small businesses across technology 

areas and markets to stimulate 

technological innovation, meet Federal 

research and development (R&D) needs, 

and increase commercialization to 

transition R&D into impact. The final 

SBA Policy Directive includes several 

revisions to clarify data rights, which 

require corresponding revisions to the 

Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation 

Supplement (DFARS). These changes 

include harmonizing definitions, 

lengthening the SBIR/STTR protection 

period from 5 years to 20 years, and 

providing for the granting of 

Government-purpose rights license in 

place of an unlimited rights license 

upon expiration of the SBIR/STTR 

protection period. DoD hosted public 

meetings to obtain the views of 

interested parties regarding the advance 

notice of proposed rulemaking and the 

proposed rule published in the Federal 

Register on August 31, 2020 (85 FR 

53758) and December 19, 2022 (87 FR 

77680), respectively. 

Executive Order 14036, ‘‘Promoting 

Competition in the American Economy’’ 

July 9, 2021 Rule That Promotes 

Competition in the American Economy 

Past Performance of Subcontractors and 

Joint Venture Partners (DFARS Case 

2018–D055). RIN 0750–AK16 

This rule implements section 823 of 

the National Defense Authorization Act 

for Fiscal Year 2019, which establishes 

a requirement for use of the best 

available information regarding past 

performance of subcontractors and joint 

venture partners when awarding DoD 

construction and architect-engineer 

contracts. Section 823 requires annual 

performance evaluations for first-tier 

subcontractors and individual parties to 

joint ventures performing construction 

and architect-engineer contracts valued 

at either $750,000 or more, or 20 percent 

of the value of the prime contract 

(whichever is higher), in accordance 

with specified conditions. In addition, 

processes for exceptions from the 

annual evaluation requirement will be 

established for construction and 

architect-engineer contracts where 

submission of annual evaluations would 

not provide the best representation of 

the performance of a contractor, 

including subcontractors and joint 

venture partners under specified 

conditions. This rule will make it easier 

for subcontractors and individual 

parties to joint ventures to establish a 

record of their past performance. These 

entities will be able to take credit for the 

work they performed on contracts and 

subcontracts, which will help them be 

more competitive when bidding on 

future DoD contracts. This will help 

increase competition for DoD contracts. 

Modification of Prize Authority for 

Advanced Technology Achievements 

(DFARS Case 2022–D014). RIN 0750– 

AL65 

This rule implements section 822 of 

the National Defense Authorization Act 

for Fiscal Year 2022 (Pub. L. 117–81). 

Section 822 revises 10 U.S.C. 2374a, 

redesignated as 10 U.S.C. 4025, 

regarding the award of prizes for 

advanced technology achievement to: 

(1) authorize the award of procurement 

contracts and other agreements ‘‘as 

another type of prize’’ (as in other than 

cash prizes); (2) permit the award of 

prizes, including procurement contracts 

and other agreements, in excess of 

$10,000,000 with the approval of the 

Under Secretary of Defense for Research 

and Engineering; and (3) require DoD 

provide Congress with notice of an 

award of a procurement contract or 

other agreement under this program that 

exceeds $10 million. This rule will help 

to expand the Defense Industrial Base, 

thereby increasing competition for 

future DoD contracts. 

DFARS Buy American Act 

Requirements (DFARS Case 2022– 

D019). RIN 0750–AL74 

This rule implements the 

requirements of Executive Order 14005, 

Ensuring the Future Is Made in All of 

America by All of America’s Workers. 

Changes to the Federal Acquisition 

Regulation (FAR) were made via RIN 

9000–AO22 (FAR Case 2021–008, 

Amendments to the FAR Buy American 

Act Requirements). This rule makes 

conforming changes to the DFARS. 

Rules That Support National Security 

Efforts 

Assessing Contractor Implementation of 

Cybersecurity Requirements (DFARS 

Case 2019–D041). RIN 0750–AK81 

The purpose of this rule is to ensure 

that Defense Industrial Base (DIB) 

contractors will adequately protect 

sensitive unclassified information at a 

level commensurate with the risk, 

accounting for information flow down 

to its subcontractors in a multi-tier 

supply chain. 

Cybersecurity Maturity Model 

Certification (CMMC) Program. RIN 

0790–AL49 

This rule establishes a requirement for 

Defense Industrial Base (DIB) 

contractors to be assessed against the 

Cybersecurity Maturity Model 

Certification (CMMC) requirements at 

Level 1, 2 or 3 to be eligible for award 

of designated future DoD contracts. The 

CMMC Program is designed to provide 

increased assurance to the DoD that 

defense contractors and subcontractors 

are compliant with information 

protection requirements for Federal 

Contract Information (FCI) and 

Controlled Unclassified Information 

(CUI) and are protecting such 

information at a level commensurate 

with risk from cybersecurity threats. 

Department of Defense (DoD)-Defense 

Industrial Base (DIB) Cybersecurity (CS) 

Activities. RIN: 0790–AK86 

This rule will allow a broader 

community of defense contractors to 

access to relevant cyber threat 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9327 

information the Department believes is 

critical in defending unclassified 

networks and information systems and 

protecting DoD warfighting capabilities. 

These revisions seek to address the 

increasing cyber threat targeting all 

defense contractors by expanding 

eligibility to defense contractors that 

process, store, develop, or transmit DoD 

Controlled Unclassified Information 

(CUI). This rule is part of DoD’s 

approach to collaborate with industry to 

counter cyber threats through 

information sharing. 

Rules That Tackle the Climate Crisis 

and Protect the Environment 

Policy and Procedures for Processing 

Requests To Alter U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers Civil Works Projects Pursuant 

to 33 U.S.C. 408. RIN: 0710–AB22 

Where a party other than the USACE 

seeks to use or alter a Civil Works 

project that USACE constructed, the 

proposed use or alteration is subject to 

the prior approval of the USACE. Some 

examples of such alterations include an 

improvement to the project; relocation 

of part of the project; or installing 

utilities or other non-project features. 

These alterations may be proposed by 

local or state governments, other federal 

agencies, private corporations, or 

private citizens, for example. This 

requirement was established in section 

14 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 

and is codified at 33 U.S.C. 408 (section 

408). Section 408 provides that the 

USACE may grant permission for 

another party to alter a Civil Works 

project, upon a determination that the 

alteration proposed will not be injurious 

to the public interest and will not 

impair the usefulness of the Civil Works 

project. The USACE is proposing to 

convert its policy that governs the 

section 408 program to a binding 

regulation. This policy, Engineer 

Circular 1165–2–220, Policy, and 

Procedural Guidance for Processing 

Requests to Alter U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers Civil Works Projects Pursuant 

to 33 U.S.C. 408, was issued in 

September 2018. 

Natural Disaster Procedures: 

Preparedness, Response, and Recovery 

Activities of the Corps of Engineers. RIN 

0710–AA78 

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

(Corps) is proposing to update the 

Federal regulation that covers the 

procedures that the Corps uses under 

section 5 of the Flood Control Act of 

1941, as amended (33 U.S.C. 701n), 

commonly referred to as Public Law 84– 

99. The Corps relies on this program to 

prepare for, respond to, and help 

communities recover from a flood, 

hurricane, or other natural disaster, 

including the repair of damage to 

eligible flood risk reduction 

infrastructure. The Corps initiated this 

rulemaking process through an 

advanced notice of proposed 

rulemaking (ANPRM) on February 13, 

2015. As a next step, the Corps issued 

a notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM) on November 11, 2022, which 

proposed to repeal the existing 

regulation and replace it with a new 

regulation that addresses statutory 

changes under various Water Resources 

Development Act provisions, reflects 

lessons learned over the past 20 years, 

and incorporates agency policies now in 

guidance relating to natural disaster 

procedures. Hurricane Katrina (2005), 

Hurricane Sandy (2012), flooding on the 

Mississippi and Missouri Rivers (2008, 

2011, and 2013), and Hurricanes 

Harvey, Irma, and Maria (2017) have 

provided a more detailed understanding 

of the nature and severity of risk 

associated with flood control projects. 

In addition, the maturation of riskinformed decision-making approaches 

and technological advancements 

influenced the outlook on the 

implementation of Public Law 84–99 

activities, with a shift toward better 

alignment with Corps Levee Safety and 

National Flood Risk Management 

Programs, as well as the National 

Preparedness and Response 

Frameworks. Through these programs, 

the Corps works with non-Federal 

sponsors and stakeholders to assess, 

communicate, and manage the risks to 

people, property, and the environment 

associated with levee systems and flood 

risks. 

Appendix C Procedures for the 

Protection of Historic Properties. RIN 

0710–AB46 

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

(Corps) considers the effects of its 

actions on historic properties pursuant 

to section 106 of the National Historic 

Preservation Act (NHPA). The Corps’ 

Regulatory Program’s regulations for 

complying with the NHPA are outlined 

at 33 CFR 325 Appendix C. Since these 

regulations were promulgated in 1990, 

there have been amendments to the 

NHPA and revisions to the Advisory 

Council on Historic Preservation’s 

(ACHP) regulations at 36 CFR part 800. 

In response, the Corps issued interim 

guidance until rulemaking could be 

completed in order to ensure full 

compliance with the NHPA and ACHP’s 

regulations. To demonstrate the greatest 

possible consistency between the 

procedures used by the Corps 

Regulatory Program to comply with 

NHPA when processing permit 

applications and the ACHP’s NHPA 

implementing regulations, the Corps is 

proposing to remove the Regulatory 

Program’s implementing regulations 

from its permitting regulations. The 

Corps will instead follow the ACHP’s 

NHPA implementing regulations, 

relying on the flexibility in those 

regulations. The Corps is also proposing 

to make conforming changes to its 

nationwide permit program regulations. 

Amendments to the Revised Definition 

of ‘‘Waters of the United States’’. RIN: 

0710–AB55 

In April 2020, the EPA and the 

Department of the Army (‘‘the 

agencies’’) published the Navigable 

Waters Protection Rule that revised the 

previously codified definition of 

‘‘waters of the United States’’ (85 FR 

22250, April 21, 2020). The Navigable 

Waters Protection Rule was vacated by 

courts. On January 18, 2023, the 

agencies issued a final rule, ‘‘Revised 

Definition of ’Waters of the United 

States’’’ (88 FR 3004) which became 

effective on March 20, 2023. On May 25, 

2023, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its 

decision in the case of Sackett v. 

Environmental Protection Agency. In 

light of this decision, the agencies are 

interpreting the phrase waters of the 

United States consistent with the 

Supreme Court’s decision in Sackett. 

The agencies are developing a rule to 

amend the final ‘‘Revised Definition of 

’Waters of the United States’’’ rule, 

published in the Federal Register on 

January 18, 2023, consistent with the 

U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in 

Sackett. 

Rules That Address Military Family 

Matters 

Definitions of Gold Star Family and 

Gold Star Survivor. RIN 0790–AL56 

This rule implements section 626 of 

the FY 2022 NDAA to define the terms 

‘‘gold star family’’ and ‘‘gold star 

survivor’’ for consistent use across all 

military departments. The Defense 

Department treats all surviving family 

members equally and survivor benefits 

are the same across the board unless 

their Service member is killed or dies 

from causes under dishonorable 

conditions. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9328 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

DOD—OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY 

(OS) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

19. Cybersecurity Maturity Model 

Certification (CMMC) Program [0790– 

AL49] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; Pub. L. 

116–92, sec. 1648 

CFR Citation: 32 CFR 170. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: DoD is proposing to 

implement the Cybersecurity Maturity 

Model Certification (CMMC) 

Framework, to help assess a Defense 

Industrial Base (DIB) contractor’s 

compliance with implementation of 

cybersecurity requirements to safeguard 

Federal Contract Information (FCI) and 

Controlled Unclassified Information 

(CUI) transiting non-federal systems to 

help mitigate the treats posed by 

Advanced Persistent Threats— 

adversaries with sophisticated levels of 

expertise and significant resources. 

Office of the DoD CIO/CMMC 

Program Management Office plans to 

host a public meeting on the 32 CFR 

CMMC Program proposed rule after it is 

published in the Federal Register for 

public review and comment. 

Statement of Need: CMMC is 

designed to provide increased assurance 

to the DoD that a DIB contractor can 

adequately protect sensitive unclassified 

information (i.e., FCI and CUI) at a level 

commensurate with the risk, and 

accounting for necessary information 

flow down to its subcontractors in a 

multi-tier supply chain. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 5 U.S.C. 301 

authorizes the head of an Executive 

department or military department to 

prescribe regulations for the government 

of his or her department, the conduct of 

its employees, the distribution and 

performance of its business, and the 

custody, use, and preservation of its 

records, papers, and property. 

41 U.S.C 1303; Public Law 116–92, 

sec. 1648 directs the Secretary of 

Defense to develop a consistent, 

comprehensive framework to enhance 

cybersecurity for the U.S. defense 

industrial base. Developing the CMMC 

Program was as an important first step 

toward meeting these requirements. * 

Alternatives: DoD considered and 

adopted several alternatives during the 

development of this rule that reduce the 

burden on the DIB community and still 

meet the objectives of the rule. These 

alternatives include: (1) maintaining 

status quo, leveraging only the current 

requirements implemented in DFARS 

provision 252.204–7019 and DFARS 

clause 252.204–7020 requiring DIB 

contractors and offerors to self-assess 

utilizing the DoD Assessment 

Methodology and entering a Basic 

Summary Score; (2) revising CMMC to 

reduce the burden for small businesses 

and contractors who do not process, 

store or transmit critical CUI by 

eliminating the requirement to hire a 

C3PAO and instead allow selfassessment with affirmation to maintain 

compliance at CMMC Level 1, and 

allowing triennial self-assessment with 

annual affirmation to maintain 

compliance for some CMMC Level 2 

programs; (3) exempting contracts and 

orders exclusively for the acquisition of 

commercially available off-the-shelf 

items; and, (4) implementing a phased 

implementation for CMMC. 

In addition, the Department took into 

consideration the timing of the 

requirement to achieve a specified 

CMMC level: (1) at time of proposal or 

offer submission, (2) after contract 

award, (3) at the time of contract award, 

or (4) permitting government program 

managers to seek approval to waive 

inclusion of a CMMC requirement in a 

solicitation, subject to DoD internal 

policies, procedures, and waiver 

approval requirements. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

theft of intellectual property and 

sensitive information, including FCI and 

CUI, from all U.S. industrial sectors due 

to malicious cyber activity threatens 

U.S. economic and national security. 

The Council of Economic Advisors 

estimates that malicious cyber activity 

cost the U.S. economy between $57 

billion and $109 billion in 2016. By 

incorporating heightened cybersecurity 

standards into acquisition programs, the 

CMMC Program provides the 

Department assurance that contractors 

and subcontractors are meeting DoD’s 

cybersecurity requirements and 

provides a key mechanism to adapt to 

an evolving threat landscape. 

Risks: The aggregate loss of 

intellectual property and certain 

unclassified information from the DoD 

supply chain can undercut U.S. 

technical advantages and innovation, as 

well as significantly increase risk to 

national security. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 11/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal. 

Agency Contact: Diane L. Knight, 

Senior Management and Program 

Analyst, Department of Defense, Office 

of the Secretary, 4800 Mark Center 

Drive, Suite 12E08, Alexandria, VA 

22350, Phone: 202 770–9100, Email: 

diane.l.knight10.civ@mail.mil. 

RIN: 0790–AL49 

DOD—OS 

Final Rule Stage 

20. Department of Defense (DOD)- 

Defense Industrial Base (DIB) 

Cybersecurity (CS) Activities [0790– 

AK86] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 10 U.S.C. 391; 10 

U.S.C. 2224; 44 U.S.C. 3541; 10 U.S.C. 

393 

CFR Citation: 32 CFR 236. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The DIB CS Program 

currently provides cyber threat 

information to cleared defense 

contractors. Proposed revisions would 

allow all defense contractors who 

process, store, develop, or transit DoD 

controlled unclassified information to 

be eligible for the program and to 

receive cyber threat information. 

Expanding participation will allow a 

broader community of defense 

contractors to participate in the DIB CS 

Program and is in alignment with the 

National Defense Strategy. 

Statement of Need: The unauthorized 

access and compromise of DoD 

unclassified information and operations 

poses an imminent threat to U.S. 

national security and economic security 

interests and contractors are being 

targeted on a daily basis. Many of these 

contractors are small and medium size 

contractors that can benefit from 

partnering with DoD to enhance and 

supplement their cybersecurity 

capabilities. 

Summary of Legal Basis: This revised 

regulation supports the 

Administration’s effort to promote 

public-private cyber collaboration by 

expanding eligibility for the DIB CS 

voluntary cyber threat information 

sharing program to all defense 

contractors contractors who process, 

store, develop, or transmit DoD 

controlled unclassified information. 

This regulation aligns with DoD’s 

statutory responsibilities for 

cybersecurity engagement with those 

contractors supporting the Department. 

Alternatives: (1) No action alternative: 

Maintain status quo with the ongoing 

voluntary cybersecurity program for 

cleared contractors. (2) Next best 

alternative: DoD posts generic cyber 

threat information and cybersecurity 

best practices on a public accessible 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9329 

website without directly engaging 

participating companies. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

Participation in the voluntary DIB CS 

Program enables DoD contractors to 

access Government Furnished 

Information and collaborate with the 

DoD Cyber Crime Center (DC3) to better 

respond to and mitigate cyber threats. In 

order to join the DIB CS Program, there 

is an initial labor burden to apply to the 

program and provide point of contact 

information which is estimated to take 

20 minutes per company. In addition, 

there is a cost for defense contractors to 

voluntarily share cyber indicator 

information. DoD estimates that each 

response will take a respondent two 

hours to complete. The costs are under 

review as part of 0704–0489 and 0704– 

0490. For DIB participants, this program 

provides cyber threat information and 

technical assistance through analyst-toanalyst exchanges, mitigation and 

remediation strategies, and 

cybersecurity best practices in a 

collaborative environment for 

participating companies. 

Risks: Threats to unclassified 

information systems represent a risk of 

compromise of DoD information and 

mission. This threat is particularly acute 

for small and medium size companies 

with less mature cybersecurity 

capabilities. Through collaboration with 

DoD and the sharing with other 

contractors in the DIB CS Program, 

defense contractors will be better 

prepared to mitigate the cyber risk they 

face today and in the future. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 05/03/23 88 FR 27832 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

06/20/23 

Final Action ......... 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal. 

Agency Contact: Ms. Stacy Bostjanick, 

Director of CMMC, Department of 

Defense, Office of the Secretary, 1550 

Cystal Drive, Suite 1000–A, Arlington, 

VA 22202, Phone: 703 604–3167, Email: 

osd.dibcsia@mail.mil. 

RIN: 0790–AK86 

DOD—08 

21. Definitions of Gold Star Family and 

Gold Star Survivor [0790–AL56] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: Pub. L. 117–81 

CFR Citation: 32 CFR 46. 

Legal Deadline: Final, Statutory, 

December 27, 2022, Sec. 626 of the 

NDAA 2022 (Pub. L. 117–81). Section 

626 of the NDAA 2022 (Pub, L. 117–81) 

requires publication of an interim final 

rule no later than one year after the date 

of the enactment of this Act. 

Abstract: This rule implements 

section 626 of the National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022 

(Pub. L. 117–81) to establish standard 

definitions, for use across the military 

departments, of the terms ‘‘gold star 

family’’ and ‘‘gold star survivor.’’ 

Statement of Need: The objective of 

the rule is to establish standard 

definitions, for use across the military 

departments, of the terms gold star 

family and gold star survivor. 

Summary of Legal Basis: This rule is 

proposed under the authorities of 

section 626(c) of Public Law 117–81, FY 

2022 NDAA. 

Alternatives: The alternative is to take 

no action. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

cost to publish this new rule and update 

the Defense Department’s policies is 

estimated at $900,000. This includes the 

public’s time to review the proposed 

rule and resources needed to respond to 

any public comments, publish the 

interim rule, revise policies, and 

possibly revamp the Navy and Coast 

Guard’s long-term case management 

programs. 

Risks: This action does not reduce 

risks to public health, safety, or the 

environment, or effect other risks within 

the jurisdiction of the Defense 

Department. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Interim Final Rule 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Lisiane Valentine, 

Department of Defense, Office of the 

Secretary, 4000 Defense Pentagon, Room 

1C546, Washington, DC 20301, Phone: 

571 372–5319, Email: 

lisiane.m.valentine.civ@mail.mil 

RIN: 0790–AL56 

DOD—OS 

Long-Term Actions 

22. Nondiscrimination on the Basis of 

Disability in Programs or Activities 

Assisted or Conducted by the DOD and 

in Equal Access to Information and 

Communication Technology Used by 

DOD [0790–AJ04] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

CFR Citation: 32 CFR 56. 

Abstract: The Department of Defense 

(DoD) is finalizing revisions to 

implement Section 504 of the 

Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which 

prohibits discrimination on the basis of 

disability in programs or activities 

receiving Federal financial assistance 

from DoD and those programs or 

activities conducted by DoD. The 

regulation also implements section 508 

of the Rehabilitation Act, which 

requires DoD make its electronic and 

information technology accessible to 

individuals with disabilities. 

Additionally, the regulation implements 

the Architectural Barriers Act of 1968, 

which requires that DoD make facilities 

accessible to individuals with 

disabilities. Finally, the regulation 

updates the complaint resolution and 

enforcement procedures pursuant to 

section 504 and the complaint 

resolution and enforcement procedures 

pursuant to section 508. 

Statement of Need: Finalization of 

this Department-wide rule will clarify 

the longstanding policy of the 

Department. It will modernize the 

Department’s practices in addressing 

issues of discrimination. This rule 

amends the Department’s prior 

regulation to include updated 

accessibility standards for recipients of 

Federal financial assistance to be more 

user-friendly and to support individuals 

with disabilities. This update 

incorporates the directive of Executive 

Order 14035, Diversity, Equity, 

Inclusion, and Accessibility in the 

Federal Workforce by defining, 

clarifying, advancing accessibility 

throughout DoD programs and activities. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Title 28, 

Code of Federal Regulations, part 41, 

implementing Executive Order 12250, 

assigns the DOJ responsibility to 

coordinate implementation of section 

504 of the Rehabilitation Act. 

This rule is being finalized under the 

authorities of title 29, U.S.C., chapter 

16, subchapter V, sections 794 through 

794d, codifying legislation prohibiting 

discrimination on the basis of disability 

under any program or activity receiving 

Federal financial assistance or under 

any program or activity conducted by 

any Federal agency, including 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
9330 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

provisions establishing the United 

States Access Board and requiring 

Federal agencies to ensure that 

information and communication 

technology is accessible to and usable 

by individuals with disabilities. 

Alternatives: The Department 

considered taking no new action and 

continuing to rely on the existing 

regulation. The Department considered 

issuing sub-regulatory guidance to 

clarify existing regulation. Both options 

were rejected because of the need to 

update and clarify the Department’s 

obligations pursuant to section 504 and 

section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 

1973, as amended. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: TBD. 

Risks: Without this final rule, the 

Department’s current regulation is 

inconsistent with current Federal 

statutes and regulations, as well as 

developments in Supreme Court 

jurisprudence, regarding unlawful 

discrimination on the basis of disability. 

Consistent with congressional intent, 

the provisions in the final rule are 

consistent with the nondiscrimination 

provisions in DOJ regulations 

implementing title II of the ADA 

Amendments Act (applicable to state 

and local government entities). 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 07/16/20 85 FR 43168 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

09/14/20 

Final Action ......... 11/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Dr. Lisa Arfaa, 

Department of Defense, Office of the 

Secretary, 9999 Joint Staff Pentagon, 

Washington, DC 20318, Phone: 703 692– 

6878, Email: lisa.l.arfaa.civ@mail.mil. 

RIN: 0790–AJ04 

DOD—DEFENSE ACQUISITION 

REGULATIONS COUNCIL (DARC) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

23. Assessing Contractor 

Implementation of Cybersecurity 

Requirements (DFARS Case 2019–D041) 

[0750–AK81] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303; Pub. 

L. 116–92, sec. 1648 

CFR Citation: 48 CFR 204; 48 CFR 

212; 48 CFR 217; 48 CFR 252. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: DoD is amending an interim 

rule to implement the CMMC 

framework 2.0 in order to protect 

against the theft of intellectual property 

and sensitive information from the 

Defense Industrial Base (DIB) sector. 

The CMMC framework, as defined in 

Title 32 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR), assesses compliance 

with applicable information security 

requirements. This rule provides the 

Department with assurances that a DIB 

contractor can adequately protect 

sensitive unclassified information at a 

level commensurate with the risk, 

accounting for information flow down 

to its subcontractors in a multi-tier 

supply chain. 

Statement of Need: The purpose of 

this DFARS rule is to ensure that 

Defense Industrial Base (DIB) 

contractors will adequately protect 

sensitive unclassified information at a 

level commensurate with the risk, 

accounting for information flow down 

to its subcontractors in a multi-tier 

supply chain. 

Summary of Legal Basis: This rule is 

being implemented under the authority 

of 41 U.S.C. 1303 and section 1648 of 

the National Defense Authorization Act 

for Fiscal Year (FY) 2020 (Pub. L. 116– 

92). The USD (A&S) has the authority 

and responsibility for promulgating DoD 

procurement rules under the OFPP 

statute, codified at title 41 of the U.S. 

Code. Section 1648 of the National 

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2020 (Pub. L. 116–92) directs the 

Secretary of Defense to develop a riskbased cybersecurity framework for the 

DIB sector, such as CMMC, as the basis 

for a mandatory DoD standard. 

Alternatives: DoD considered and 

adopted several alternatives during the 

development of the interim rule that 

reduced the burden on small entities 

and still meet the objectives of the rule. 

DoD will consider similar alternatives 

for the amendment rule. One alternative 

considered includes exempting 

contracts and orders exclusively for the 

acquisition of commercially available 

off-the-shelf items. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

annualized value of costs beginning in 

fiscal year 2021 (calculated in 

perpetuity in 2016 dollars at a 7 percent 

discount rate) associated with 

implementing the CMMC Framework in 

the published interim rule is $4 billion. 

The cost analysis for CMMC 2.0 is being 

handled in the Title 32 CFR rule (RIN 

0790–AL49). The primary benefit of this 

rule is improving the protection of the 

Department’s sensitive information and 

reducing the threat to DIB sector 

intellectual property by: 

• Enabling assessments at the entitylevel of contractor implementation of 

cyber security processes and practices 

that should already be in place; 

• Requiring comprehensive 

implementation of cybersecurity 

requirements rather than plans of action 

to accomplish implementation; 

• Verifying DIB sector contractor and 

subcontractor cybersecurity postures; 

and 

• Reducing duplicative or repetitive 

assessments of our industry partners 

through standardization. 

Risks: The theft of intellectual 

property and sensitive information from 

all U.S. industrial sectors due to 

malicious cyber activity threatens 

economic security and national security. 

Malicious cyber actors have and 

continue to target the DIB sector and the 

supply chain of the Department of 

Defense. These attacks not only focus on 

the large prime contractors, but also 

target subcontractors that make up the 

lower tiers of the DoD supply chain. 

Many of these subcontractors are small 

entities that provide critical support and 

innovation. The aggregate loss of 

intellectual property and certain 

unclassified information from the DoD 

supply chain can undercut U.S. 

technical advantages and innovation, as 

well as significantly increase risk to 

national security. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Interim Final Rule ... 09/29/20 85 FR 

48513 

Interim Final Rule 

Effective.

11/30/20 

NPRM ..................... 03/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal. 

Public Compliance Cost: Base Year for 

Dollar Estimates: $2,021. 

Agency Contact: Jennifer D. Johnson, 

Office of the Under Secretary of Defense 

for Acquisition and Sustainment, 

Department of Defense, Defense 

Acquisition Regulations Council, 

Defense Pricing and Contracting, 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System, Room 3B938, 3060 Pentagon, 

Washington, DC 20301–3060, Phone: 

703 717–8226, Email: 

jennifer.d.johnson1.civ@mail.mil. 

Related RIN: Split from 0750–AL68, 

Related to 0790–AL49 

RIN: 0750–AK81 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9331 

DOD—DARC 

24. Modification of Prize Authority for 

Advanced Technology Achievements 

(DFARS Case 2022–D014) [0750–AL65] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303; 10 

U.S.C. 4025; Pub. L. 117–81, sec. 822 

CFR Citation: 48 CFR 235. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: DoD is proposing to amend 

the Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement to implement 

section 822 of the National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022, 

which revises 10 U.S.C. 2374a, 

redesignated as 10 U.S.C. 4025, 

regarding the award of prizes for 

advanced technology achievement to: 

(1) authorize the award of procurement 

contracts and other agreements ‘‘as in 

other type of prize’’ (as in other than 

cash prizes); (2) permit the award of 

prizes, including procurement contracts 

and other agreements, in excess of 

$10,000,000 with the approval of the 

Under Secretary of Defense for Research 

and Engineering; and (3) require DoD 

provide Congress with notice of an 

award of a procurement contract or 

other agreement under this program that 

exceeds $10 million. 

Statement of Need: This rule is 

necessary to implement section 822 of 

the National Defense Authorization Act 

for Fiscal Year 2022 (Pub. L. 117–81). 

Section 822 revises 10 U.S.C. 2374a, 

redesignated as 10 U.S.C. 4025, 

regarding the award of prizes for 

advanced technology achievement to: 

(1) authorize the award of procurement 

contracts and other agreements as an 

other type of prize (as in other than cash 

prizes); (2) permit the award of prizes, 

including procurement contracts and 

other agreements, in excess of 

$10,000,000 with the approval of the 

Under Secretary of Defense for Research 

and Engineering; and (3) require DoD 

provide Congress with notice of an 

award of a procurement contract or 

other agreement under this program that 

exceeds $10 million. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The legal 

basis for this rule is 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 

section 822 of Public Law 117–81. 

Alternatives: There are no alternatives 

that would meet the requirements of 

section 822 of Public Law 117–81. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: This 

rule will help to expand the Defense 

Industrial Base, thereby increasing 

competition for future DoD contracts. 

Risks: The difficulty of accessing 

advanced technologies creates a risk for 

DoD with regard to finding solutions 

and obtaining products and services that 

meet the Department’s needs. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 05/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal. 

Agency Contact: Jennifer D. Johnson, 

Office of the Under Secretary of Defense 

for Acquisition and Sustainment, 

Department of Defense, Defense 

Acquisition Regulations Council, 

Defense Pricing and Contracting, 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System, Room 3B938, 3060 Pentagon, 

Washington, DC 20301–3060, Phone: 

703 717–8226, Email: 

jennifer.d.johnson1.civ@mail.mil. 

RIN: 0750–AL65 

DOD—DARC 

Final Rule Stage 

25. Past Performance of Subcontractors 

and Joint Venture Partners (DFARS 

Case 2018–D055) [0750–AK16] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303; Pub. 

L. 115–232, sec. 823 

CFR Citation: 48 CFR 215; 48 CFR 

236; 48 CFR 242; 48 CFR 252. 

Legal Deadline: Final, Statutory, 

February 9, 2019, 180 days after 

enactment. 

Abstract: DoD is issuing a final rule to 

amend the Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to 

implement section 823 of the National 

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2019, which establishes a 

requirement for use of the best available 

information regarding past performance 

of subcontractors and joint venture 

partners when awarding DoD 

construction and architect-engineer 

(A&E) contracts. Section 823 requires 

annual performance evaluations for 

first-tier subcontractors and individual 

partners of joint venture construction 

and A&E contracts valued at either 

$750,000 or more, or 20 percent of the 

value of the prime contract (whichever 

is higher), in accordance with specified 

conditions. In addition, processes for 

exceptions from the annual evaluation 

requirement will be established for 

construction and A&E contracts where 

submission of annual evaluations would 

not provide the best representation of 

the performance of a contractor, 

including subcontractors and joint 

venture partners under specified 

conditions. This rule will amend 

DFARS part 242 to incorporate these 

new requirements and processes. 

Statement of Need: This rule is 

necessary to implement section 823 of 

the National Defense Authorization Act 

for Fiscal Year 2019 (Pub. L. 115–232), 

which establishes a requirement for use 

of the best available information 

regarding past performance of 

subcontractors and joint venture 

partners when awarding DoD 

construction and architect-engineer 

contracts. Section 823 requires annual 

performance evaluations for first-tier 

subcontractors and individual parties to 

joint ventures performing construction 

and architect-engineer contracts valued 

at either $750,000 or more, or 20 percent 

of the value of the prime contract 

(whichever is higher), in accordance 

with specified conditions. In addition, 

processes for exceptions from the 

annual evaluation requirement will be 

established for construction and 

architect-engineer contracts where 

submission of annual evaluations would 

not provide the best representation of 

the performance of a contractor, 

including subcontractors and joint 

venture partners under specified 

conditions. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The legal 

basis for this rule is 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 

section 823 of Public Law 115–232. 

Alternatives: There are no alternatives 

that would meet the requirements of 

section 823 of Public Law 115–232. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: This 

rule will make it easier for 

subcontractors and individual parties to 

joint ventures to establish a record of 

their past performance. These entities 

will be able to take credit for the work 

they performed on contracts and 

subcontracts, which will help them be 

more competitive when bidding on 

future DoD contracts. This will help 

increase competition for DoD contracts. 

Risks: Due to the difficulty of 

establishing a record of past 

performance on DoD contracts, there is 

a risk of reduced competitiveness for 

subcontractors and individual parties to 

joint ventures. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 05/20/21 86 FR 27358 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

07/19/21 

Final Action ......... 07/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal. 

Agency Contact: Jennifer D. Johnson, 

Office of the Under Secretary of Defense 

for Acquisition and Sustainment, 

Department of Defense, Defense 

Acquisition Regulations Council, 

Defense Pricing and Contracting, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9332 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System, Room 3B938, 3060 Pentagon, 

Washington, DC 20301–3060, Phone: 

703 717–8226, Email: 

jennifer.d.johnson1.civ@mail.mil. 

RIN: 0750–AK16 

DOD—DARC 

26. Small Business Innovation Research 

Program Data Rights (DFARS Case 

2019–D043) [0750–AK84] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 

CFR Citation: 48 CFR 227; 48 CFR 

252. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: DoD is issuing a final rule to 

amend the Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to 

implement changes related to data rights 

in the Small Business Administration’s 

Policy Directive for the Small Business 

Innovation Research (SBIR) Program, 

published in the Federal Register on 

April 2, 2019 (84 FR 12794). The final 

SBA Policy Directive includes several 

revisions to clarify data rights, which 

require corresponding revisions to the 

DFARS. 

Statement of Need: This rule is 

necessary to implement the Small 

Business Administration (SBA) policies 

related to data rights in the Small 

Business Innovation Research (SBIR) 

Program and Small Business 

Technology Transfer (STTR) Program 

Policy Directive, published in the 

Federal Register on April 2, 2019 (84 FR 

12794). The final SBA Policy Directive 

includes several revisions to clarify data 

rights, which require corresponding 

revisions to the DFARS. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The legal 

basis for this rule is 15 U.S.C. 638, 

which provides the authorization, 

policy, and framework for SBIR/STTR 

programs. 

Alternatives: There are no alternatives 

that would meet the stated objective of 

this rule. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: While 

specific costs and savings have not been 

quantified, this rule is expected to have 

significant benefit for small businesses 

participating in the DoD SBIR and STTR 

programs. SBIR and STTR enable small 

businesses to explore their technological 

potential and provide the incentive to 

profit from its commercialization. By 

including qualified small businesses in 

the nation’s research and development 

arena, high-tech innovation is 

stimulated, and the United States gains 

entrepreneurial spirit as it meets its 

specific research and development 

needs. 

Risks: The continuous protection of a 

contractor’s SBIR/STTR data while 

actively pursuing or commercializing its 

technology with the Federal 

Government, provides a significant 

incentive for innovative small 

businesses to participate in these 

programs. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

ANPRM ............... 08/31/20 85 FR 53758 

Correction ............ 09/21/20 85 FR 59258 

ANPRM Comment 

Period End.

10/30/20 

Comment Period 

Extended.

12/04/20 85 FR 78300 

ANPRM Comment 

Period End.

01/31/21 

NPRM .................. 12/19/22 87 FR 77680 

Correction ............ 12/23/22 87 FR 78911 

Comment Period 

Extended.

02/14/23 88 FR 9420 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

02/17/23 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

03/20/23 

Final Action ......... 02/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal. 

Agency Contact: Jennifer D. Johnson, 

Office of the Under Secretary of Defense 

for Acquisition and Sustainment, 

Department of Defense, Defense 

Acquisition Regulations Council, 

Defense Pricing and Contracting, 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System, Room 3B938, 3060 Pentagon, 

Washington, DC 20301–3060, Phone: 

703 717–8226, Email: 

jennifer.d.johnson1.civ@mail.mil. 

RIN: 0750–AK84 

DOD—DARC 

27. DFARS Buy American Act 

Requirements (DFARS Case 2022–D019) 

[0750–AL74] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 

CFR Citation: 48 CFR 225; 48 CFR 

252. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: DoD is issuing a final rule 

amending the Defense Federal 

Acquisition Regulation Supplement 

(DFARS) to implement the requirements 

of Executive Order 14005, Ensuring the 

Future Is Made in All of America by All 

of America’s Workers. Changes to the 

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 

are being made via RIN 9000–AO22 

(FAR Case 2021–008, Amendments to 

the FAR Buy American Act 

Requirements). This rule makes 

conforming changes to the DFARS. 

Statement of Need: This rule is 

necessary to implement Executive Order 

14005, Ensuring the Future Is Made in 

All of America by All of America’s 

Workers, which increases the required 

percentage of domestic content for end 

products and construction material. 

Changes to the Federal Acquisition 

Regulation (FAR) are being made via 

RIN 9000–AO22 (FAR Case 2021–008, 

Amendments to the FAR Buy American 

Act Requirements). This rule proposes 

conforming changes to the DFARS. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The legal 

basis for this rule is 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 

Executive Order 14005, Ensuring the 

Future Is Made in All of America by All 

of America’s Workers. 

Alternatives: There are no alternatives 

that would meet the requirements of 

Executive Order 14005. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: This 

rule increases the percentage for use in 

the domestic content text applied to 

offers of end products and construction 

materials to determine domestic or 

foreign origin. The rule will strengthen 

domestic preferences under the Buy 

American statute. It is expected that this 

rule will benefit large and small U.S. 

manufacturers supplying domestic end 

products and materials. 

Risks: There is a risk that U.S. 

manufacturers would experience a 

competitive disadvantage without the 

increase in the required domestic 

content. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 06/09/23 88 FR 37942 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

08/08/23 

Final Action ......... 12/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal. 

Agency Contact: Jennifer D. Johnson, 

Office of the Under Secretary of Defense 

for Acquisition and Sustainment, 

Department of Defense, Defense 

Acquisition Regulations Council, 

Defense Pricing and Contracting, 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System, Room 3B938, 3060 Pentagon, 

Washington, DC 20301–3060, Phone: 

703 717–8226, Email: 

jennifer.d.johnson1.civ@mail.mil. 

RIN: 0750–AL74 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9333 

DOD—U.S. ARMY CORPS OF 

ENGINEERS (COE) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

28. Policy and Procedures for 

Processing Requests To Alter U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers Civil Works Projects 

Pursuant to 33 U.S.C. 408 [0710–AB22] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 33 U.S.C. 408 

CFR Citation: 33 CFR 350. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: Where a party other than the 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) 

seeks to use or alter a Civil Works 

project that the Corps constructed, the 

proposed use or alteration is subject to 

the prior approval of the Corps. Some 

examples of such alterations include an 

improvement to the project; relocation 

of part of the project; or installing 

utilities or other non-project features. 

This requirement was established in 

section 14 of the Rivers and Harbors Act 

of 1899 and is codified at 33 U.S.C. 408 

(section 408). Section 408 provides that 

the Corps may grant permission for 

another party to alter a Civil Works 

project upon a determination that the 

alteration proposed will not be injurious 

to the public interest and will not 

impair the usefulness of the Civil Works 

project. The Corps is proposing to 

convert its policy that governs the 

section 408 program to a binding 

regulation. This policy, Engineer 

Circular 1165–2–220, Policy and 

Procedural Guidance for Processing 

Requests to Alter U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers Civil Works Projects Pursuant 

to 33 U.S.C. 408, was issued in 

September 2018. 

The Corps conducted six virtual 

listening sessions in the summer of 2022 

to solicit feedback on the Section 408 

program from Section 408 applicants 

and Non-federal partners. The feedback 

was helpful to understanding the 

challenges, best practices, and future 

opportunities with the Section 408 

program and helped inform 

development of the proposed rule. 

Additional sessions will be conducted 

once the draft rule is published in the 

Federal Register. The Corps will widely 

publicize the dates and times of the 

additional listening sessions to Section 

408 applicants, non-federal sponsors 

and partners by posting on Corps 

websites (the Corps HQ website can be 

found here: https://

www.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/Section408/) and utilize existing 

email distribution lists of interested 

parties. 

Statement of Need: Through the Civil 

Works program, the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers (Corps), in partnership with 

stakeholders, has constructed many 

Civil Works projects across the Nation’s 

landscape. Given the widespread 

locations of these projects, others 

outside of the Corps sometimes want to 

alter or occupy these projects or the 

associated lands. Reasons for alterations 

could include activities such as 

improvements to the project; relocation 

of part of the project; or installing 

utilities or other non-project features. In 

order to ensure that these projects 

continue to provide their intended 

benefits to the public, Congress 

provided that any use or alteration of a 

Civil Works project by another party is 

subject to the prior approval of the 

Corps. This requirement was established 

in section 14 of the Rivers and Harbors 

Act of 1899 and is codified at 33 U.S.C. 

408 (section 408). Specifically, section 

408 provides that the Corps may grant 

permission for another party to alter a 

Civil Works project upon a 

determination that the alteration 

proposed will not be injurious to the 

public interest and will not impair the 

usefulness of the Civil Works project. 

The Corps is proposing to convert its 

policy that governs the section 408 

program to a binding regulation. 

Engineer Circular 1165–2–220, Policy 

and Procedural Guidance for Processing 

Requests to Alter U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers Civil Works Projects Pursuant 

to 33 U.S.C. 408 was issued in 

September 2018. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The Corps 

operates the section 408 program under 

33 U.S.C. 408. 

Alternatives: The preferred alternative 

is to conduct rulemaking to issue the 

requirements governing the section 408 

review process in the form of a binding 

regulation. The current Corps policy 

appears in an Engineer Circular that has 

expired. The next best alternative would 

involve issuing these requirements in 

the form of an Engineer Regulation. That 

alternative would not fulfill the intent of 

the law because it would not be binding 

on the regulated public. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

proposed rule would reduce costs to the 

regulated public by clarifying the 

applicable requirements and providing 

consistent implementation of these 

requirements nationwide across the 

Corps program. It is anticipated that a 

form would be developed for 

submission of requests which could 

help to reduce the cost to prepare a 

section 408 request. 

Risks: The proposed action is not 

anticipated to affect the risk to public 

health, safety, or the environment. It 

would outline the procedures the Corps 

will follow when evaluating requests for 

section 408 permissions. The Corps will 

comply with all statutory requirements 

when reviewing requests. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 01/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Virginia Rynk, 

Department of Defense, U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers, Attn: CECW–EC, 

441 G Street NW, Washington, DC 

20314, Phone: 202 761–4741. 

RIN: 0710–AB22 

DOD–COE 

29. Flood Control Cost-Sharing 

Requirements Under the Ability To Pay 

Provision [0710–AB34] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 33 U.S.C. 2213(m) 

CFR Citation: 33 CFR 241. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: Section 103(m) of the Water 

Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 

1986, as amended (33 U.S.C. 2213(m)), 

authorizes the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers (Corps) to reduce the nonFederal share of the cost of a study or 

project for certain communities that are 

not able financially to afford the 

standard non-Federal cost-share. Part 

241 of Title 33 in the Code of Federal 

Regulations provides the criteria that 

the Corps uses in making these 

determinations where the primary 

purpose of the study or project is flood 

damage reduction. The proposed rule 

would update this regulation, by 

broadening its applicability to include 

projects with other purposes (instead of 

just flood damage reduction) and the 

feasibility study of a project (instead of 

just design and construction). 

Statement of Need: The Corps will 

conduct rulemaking to propose 

amendments to the Corps’ regulations at 

33 CFR part 241 for Corps projects. The 

WRDA 2000 modified section 103(m) to 

include the projects with the following 

purposes: environmental protection and 

restoration, flood control, navigation, 

storm damage protection, shoreline 

erosion, hurricane protection, and 

recreation or an agricultural water 

supply project which have not yet been 

added to the regulation. It also included 

the opportunity to cost share all phases 

of a USACE project to also include 

feasibility studies in addition to the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9334 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

already covered design and 

construction. This rule would update 

the framework for determining whether 

a project is eligible for consideration for 

a reduction in the non-Federal cost 

share based on ability to pay. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 33 U.S.C. 

2213(m). 

Alternatives: The preferred alternative 

is to conduct rulemaking to amend 33 

CFR 241 by broadening the project 

purposes for which the Corps could 

reduce the non-Federal cost-share based 

on ability to pay and by allowing such 

a reduction for feasibility studies. The 

next best alternative would be to 

provide additional guidance instead of 

amending the existing regulation. This 

alternative could lead to confusion for 

the regulated public. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

proposed rule would add Corps 

procedures on the ability to pay 

provision allowing for consistent 

implementation across the Corps and 

clear understanding of the program and 

its requirements by the regulated public. 

Risks: The proposed action is not 

anticipated to affect risk to public 

health, safety, or the environment. It 

would outline the procedures the Corps 

will follow when evaluating the ability 

to pay provision for cost-sharing with 

the non-Federal sponsor. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 01/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Amy Frantz, Program 

Manager, Department of Defense, U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers, CECW–P, 441 

G Street NW, Washington, DC 20314, 

Phone: 202 761–0106, Email: 

amy.k.frantz@usace.army.mil. 

Related RIN: Previously reported as 

0710–AA91 

RIN: 0710–AB34 

DOD—COE 

30. USACE Implementing Procedures 

for Principles, Requirements, and 

Guidelines Applicable to Actions 

Involving Investment in Water 

Resources [0710–AB41] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined. 

Legal Authority: sec. 2031 of Pub. L. 

110–114 

CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: Section 2031 of the Water 

Resources Development Act of 2007 

(Pub. L. 110–114) called for revisions to 

the 1983 Principles and Guidelines for 

Water and Land Related Resources 

Implementation Studies, resulting in the 

issuance of the Principles and 

Requirements (P&R) guidance document 

in March 2013 and the Interagency 

Guidelines in December 2014, which 

together comprise the Principles, 

Requirements, and Guidelines (PR&G). 

The PR&G are intended to provide a 

common framework and policy 

guidance for analyzing a diverse range 

of water resources projects, programs, 

activities, and related actions involving 

Federal investment in water resources. 

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

(Corps) plans to propose a regulation to 

show how it would apply the PR&G to 

the Corps’ civil works program and 

authorities. In this proposed regulation, 

the Corps intends to increase 

consistency and compatibility in its 

Federal water resources investment 

decision making to include 

considerations such as analyzing a 

broader range of long-term costs and 

benefits, enhancing collaboration, 

including a more thorough and 

transparent risk and uncertainty 

analyses, and improving resilience for 

dealing with emerging challenges, 

including climate change. 

The Department of the Army 

completed an outreach strategy and 

engagement effort through publication 

of a Federal Register notice in June 

2022 on the PR&G. This engagement 

effort included an open docket for 

submission of comments, a series of 

virtual meetings with the public, and a 

series of virtual meetings with Tribes to 

solicit early input prior to embarking on 

a rulemaking action on agency specific 

procedures outlining how the Corps can 

best meet the policy goals of PR&G. The 

Corps will consider the input received 

during these engagements to inform the 

development of the proposed rule. 

Statement of Need: The Corps is 

developing implementing procedures 

for the Principles, Requirements, and 

Guidelines (PR&G) under section 110 of 

the Water Resources Development Act 

of 2020. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Section 110 

of the Water Resources Development 

Act of 2020 provided for the Secretary 

of the Army to issue agency specific 

guidelines to implement the PR&G. Also 

see section 2031 of Public Law 110–114. 

Alternatives: The Corps could 

implement PR&G with guidance rather 

than through rulemaking; however, such 

procedures would not be binding. As an 

alternative, the Corps could seek to rely 

solely on the PR&G documents to 

implement PR&G in lieu of developing 

its own procedures. This could result in 

confusion and a lack of consistency for 

the Corps as to how and when it would 

apply the PR&G in the Civil Works 

program. The Corps decided to conduct 

this rulemaking to ensure the PR&G 

implementing procedures are clear for 

the Corps and the public as well as 

binding. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: As this 

rulemaking is developing procedures for 

the Corps to implement to ensure 

compliance with the PR&G, there may 

be some administrative costs incurred to 

the Corps for implementation-related 

training. There also would be benefits 

that accrue to the public in some cases 

in the form of improved outcomes in 

Corps decisions related to proposed and 

ongoing water resource development 

projects. 

Risks: The proposed action is not 

anticipated to increase risk to public 

health, safety, or the environment, but 

could potentially help to reduce such 

risks in some cases. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 11/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Stacey M. Jensen, 

Office of the Assistant Secretary of the 

Army, Department of Defense, U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers, 108 Army 

Pentagon, Washington, DC 22202, 

Phone: 703 695–6791, Email: 

stacey.m.jensen.civ@army.mil. 

RIN: 0710–AB41 

DOD—COE 

31. Appendix C Procedures for the 

Protection of Historic Properties [0710– 

AB46] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 33 U.S.C. 401; 33 

U.S.C. 1344; 33 U.S.C. 1413 

CFR Citation: 33 CFR 325. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers (Corps) considers the effects 

of its actions on historic properties 

pursuant to section 106 of the National 

Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). The 

Corps’ Regulatory Program’s regulations 

for complying with the NHPA are 

outlined at 33 CFR 325 appendix C. 

Since these regulations were 

promulgated in 1990, there have been 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9335 

amendments to the NHPA and revisions 

to the Advisory Council on Historic 

Preservation’s (ACHP) regulations at 36 

CFR part 800. In response, the Corps 

issued interim guidance until 

rulemaking could be completed in order 

to ensure full compliance with the 

NHPA and ACHP’s regulations. The 

Corps proposes to revise its regulations 

to conform to the ACHP regulations. 

The Department of the Army 

completed an outreach strategy and 

engagement effort through publication 

of a Federal Register notice in June 

2022 to solicit comment on the best 

approach to modernize Appendix C. 

This engagement effort included an 

open docket for submission of 

comments, a series of virtual meetings 

with the public, and a series of virtual 

meetings with Tribes to solicit early 

input prior to embarking on a 

rulemaking action on Appendix C. The 

input received from these efforts will 

help inform this action. 

Statement of Need: Appendix C 

provides the implementing procedures 

for the Regulatory Program’s compliance 

with section 106 of the National Historic 

Preservation Act. Rulemaking is 

required to ensure the Regulatory 

Program is compliant with the NHPA 

and ACHP’s implementing regulations 

at 36 CFR 800 for federal agency 

compliance with Section 106. The 

NHPA and the ACHP regulations have 

been revised since Appendix C was 

promulgated. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Appendix C 

was promulgated through an APA 

rulemaking process intended to provide 

compliance with section 106 of the 

NHPA specific to the Regulatory 

Program. 

Alternatives: The preferred alternative 

is to remove the Regulatory Program’s 

implementing regulations (i.e., 

appendix C) from its permitting 

regulations and instead follow the 

ACHP’s NHPA implementing 

regulations. Other alternatives 

considered include retaining the current 

appendix C, which does not reflect the 

current versions of the NHPA or the 

ACHP implementing regulations for 

federal agencies or current Federal 

policies regarding Tribal Nations. 

Another alternative is to modify 

Appendix C by incorporating changes 

made since 1990 to the NHPA and the 

ACHP implementing regulations. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: As this 

rulemaking action is implementing 

procedures for the Corps to ensure 

compliance with the NHPA, there may 

be some administrative costs incurred to 

the Corps for training. There would be 

benefits accrued to the public in the 

form of reduced confusion and 

assurance of consideration of potential 

adverse effects to historic properties and 

items and areas of cultural/religious 

significance. 

Risks: The proposed action is not 

anticipated to increase risk to public 

health, safety, or the environment 

because it outlines the procedures the 

Corps will follow for implementing a 

federal statutory requirement. The Corps 

will comply with all statutory 

requirements when reviewing permit 

applications. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 12/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Federalism: Undetermined. 

Agency Contact: Margaret GaffneySmith, Regulatory Program Manager, 

Department of Defense, U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers, Attn: CECW–CO, 

441 G Street NW, Washington, DC 

20314, Phone: 202 761–4229. 

RIN: 0710–AB46 

DOD—COE 

Final Rule Stage 

32. Natural Disaster Procedures: 

Preparedness, Response, and Recovery 

Activities of the Corps of Engineers 

[0710–AA78] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 33 U.S.C. 701n 

CFR Citation: 33 CFR 203. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers (Corps) is finalizing an update 

to the Federal regulation that covers the 

procedures that the Corps uses under 

section 5 of the Flood Control Act of 

1941, as amended (33 U.S.C. 701n), 

commonly referred to as Public Law 84– 

99. The Corps relies on this program to 

prepare for, respond to, and help 

communities recover from a flood, 

hurricane, or other natural disaster, 

including the repair of damage to 

eligible flood risk reduction 

infrastructure. The Corps initiated this 

rulemaking process through an 

advanced notice of proposed 

rulemaking (ANPRM) on February 13, 

2015. The Corps published a notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on 

November 15, 2022. The NPRM 

included a summary of the comments to 

the ANPRM. The NPRM proposed to 

repeal the existing regulation and 

replace it with a new regulation that 

addresses statutory changes under 

various Water Resources Development 

Act provisions, reflects lessons learned 

over the past 20 years, and incorporates 

agency policies now in guidance 

relating to natural disaster procedures. 

In 2015, the Corps published an 

Advance Notice of Proposed Rule 

Making (ANPR) in the Federal Register 

for a 60 day public comment period on 

policy revision concepts being 

considered for 33 CFR part 203. The 

Corps then published proposed 

revisions to 33 CFR part 203 in the 

Federal Register with a public comment 

period from November 15, 2022 to 

January 17, 2023. The Corps hosted nine 

regional workshops in Kansas City, MO; 

Fort Worth, TX; Seattle, WA; 

Sacramento, CA; Chicago, IL; Rock 

Island, IL; New Orleans, LA; and 

Wilmington, NC; Concord, MA; and two 

webinars to solicit input from interested 

parties. The Corps also met with two 

Tribal Nations for direct consultation 

and input. The final rule will address 

the input received by the Corps through 

the comment and public engagement 

process. 

Statement of Need: Since the last 

revision in 2003, significant disasters, 

including Hurricane Katrina (2005), 

Hurricane Sandy (2012), flooding on the 

Mississippi and Missouri Rivers (2008, 

2011, and 2013), and Hurricanes 

Harvey, Irma, and Maria (2017) led to a 

great understanding of the nature and 

severity of risk associated with flood 

and storm damage reduction projects. In 

addition, the maturation of riskinformed decision making approaches 

and technological advancements have 

influenced the outlook on the 

implementation of Public Law 84–99 

activities, with a shift toward better 

alignment with Corps Levee Safety and 

National Flood Risk Management 

Programs, as well as the National 

Preparedness and Response 

Frameworks. Through these programs, 

the Corps works with non-Federal 

sponsors and stakeholders to assess, 

communicate, and manage the risks to 

people, property, and the environment 

associated with levee systems and flood 

risks. Revisions to part 203 also would 

implement certain statutes that 

amended or otherwise affected Public 

Law 84–99, as explained in the next 

section. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Public Law 

84–99 authorizes an emergency fund to 

be expended at the discretion of the 

Chief of Engineers for preparation for 

natural disasters, flood fighting, rescue 

operations, repairing or restoring flood 

control works, emergency protection of 

federally authorized hurricane or shore 

protection projects, and the repair and 

restoration of federally authorized 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9336 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

hurricane and shore protection projects 

damaged or destroyed by wind, wave, or 

water of other than ordinary nature. 

1. Subsection 3029(a) of the Water 

Resources Reform and Development Act 

of 2014 (WRRDA 2014) (Pub. L. 113– 

121) authorized the Chief of Engineers, 

under certain circumstances, to make 

modifications to flood control and 

hurricane or shore protections works 

damaged during flood or coastal storms 

events, as well as the authority to 

implement nonstructural alternatives in 

the repair and restoration of hurricane 

or shore protection works. 

2. Subsection 3029(b) of WRRDA 2014 

authorized the Secretary of the Army to 

undertake a review of implementation 

of Public Law 84–99 to improve the 

safety of affected communities to future 

flooding and storm events; the 

resiliency of water resources 

development projects to future flooding 

and storm events; the long-term costeffectiveness of water resources 

development projects that provide flood 

control and hurricane and storm damage 

reduction benefits; and achieve certain 

other policy goals and objectives. 

3. Section 3011 of WRRDA 2014 states 

that a levee system shall remain eligible 

for rehabilitation assistance under 

Public Law 84–99, as long as the system 

sponsor continues to make satisfactory 

progress, as determined by the Secretary 

of the Army, on an approved system 

wide improvement framework or letter 

of intent. 

4. Section 1176 of the Water 

Resources Development Act of 2016 

(WRDA 2016) (Pub. L. 114–322, title I) 

provided an express definition of 

nonstructural alternatives, as that term 

is used in Public Law 84–99, and 

authorized the Chief of Engineers, under 

certain circumstances, to increase the 

level of protection of flood control or 

hurricane or shore protection works or 

increase the capacity of a pumping 

station when conducting repair or 

restoration activities to such works 

under Public Law 84–99. 

Alternatives: 

1. No rule update: Continue to 

implement all changes through agency 

guidance documents and agency 

discretion. 

2. Modify: Incorporate in the rule only 

those changes related to changes in the 

program that the Congress has mandated 

in law. 

3. Repeal and replace (Selected 

Alternative): Incorporate and integrate 

the current state of practice for flood 

risk management principles and 

concepts through the provision of 

agency policy codified in a federal rule. 

The intended benefit is to encourage 

broader community flood risk 

management activities, as undertaken by 

non-Federal project sponsors. The rule 

alternative also consolidates recent 

Public Law 84–99 amendments into one 

comprehensive rule, ensuring the public 

understands how the Corps would 

implement them. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

Overall, the purpose of the proposed 

changes to this regulation is to improve 

the effectiveness of Federal and local 

investments to reduce flood risks in 

both riverine and coastal settings. These 

proposed changes take advantage of our 

increased understanding of flood and 

storm risks, moving from an assessment 

of how the project is expected to 

perform to a focus on a broader set of 

actions to reduce risk to life, including 

operations, maintenance, planning, and 

execution actions to improve emergency 

warning and evacuation and other 

activities to improve the ability of 

communities and individuals to 

understand and manage project-related 

risks. Informed by more detailed 

understanding of risk for levee systems, 

the Federal Government and nonFederal sponsors should be able to 

apply the available resources to the risk 

management activities that most 

effectively reduce riverine flood risk 

and avoid expenditures that have little 

risk reduction benefit. 

Risks: The rule would repeal and 

replace the current 33 CFR 203 in order 

to reflect the current state of practice for 

flood risk management principles and 

concepts. It would also amend and 

clarify the current role of the Corps in 

preparing for, and responding a natural 

disaster, and in helping in the recovery 

effort. The rule may also encourage 

broader community flood risk 

management activities, as undertaken by 

non-Federal project sponsors. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

ANPRM ............... 02/13/15 80 FR 8014 

ANPRM Comment 

Period End.

04/14/15 

NPRM .................. 11/15/22 87 FR 68386 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

02/16/23 

Final Action ......... 02/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Willem Helms, 

Department of Defense, U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers, CECW–HS, 441 G 

Street NW, Washington, DC 20314, 

Phone: 202 761–5909, Email: 

willem.h.helms@usace.army.mil. 

RIN: 0710–AA78 

DOD—COE 

Completed Actions 

33. Credit Assistance for Water 

Resources Infrastructure Projects 

[0710–AB31] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: Pub. L. 114–94; Pub. 

L. 114–322; Pub. L. 115–270; 33 U.S.C. 

3901 

CFR Citation: 33 CFR 386. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers (Corps) issued a final rule to 

implement a new credit assistance 

program for dam safety work at nonFederal dams. The program is 

authorized under the Water 

Infrastructure Finance and Innovation 

Act of 2014 (WIFIA) and Division D, 

title 1 of the Consolidated 

Appropriations Act of 2020. WIFIA 

authorizes the Corps to provide secured 

(direct) loans and loan guarantees 

(Federal Credit instruments) to eligible 

water resources infrastructure projects 

and to charge fees to recover all or a 

portion of the Corps’ cost of providing 

credit assistance and the costs of 

conducting engineering reviews and 

retaining expert firms, including 

financial and legal services, to assist in 

the underwriting and servicing of 

Federal credit instruments. Projects will 

be evaluated and selected by the 

Secretary of the Army (the Secretary) 

based on the requirements and the 

criteria described in this rule. 

Statement of Need: The Corps’ WIFIA 

program is focused on providing Federal 

loans, and potentially to also include 

loan guarantees, to projects for 

maintaining, upgrading, and repairing 

dams identified in the National 

Inventory of Dams owned by nonfederal entities. These loans will be 

repaid with non-Federal funding. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The Corps 

WIFIA program was authorized under 

subtitle C of title V of the Water 

Resources Reform and Development Act 

of 2014 (WRRDA 2014), which 

authorizes the Corps to provide secured 

(direct) loans, and potentially to also 

include loan guarantees, to eligible 

water resources infrastructure projects 

(needed further authorization was 

provided by Division D, title 1 of the 

Consolidated Appropriations Act of 

2020). The statute also authorizes the 

Corps to charge fees to recover all or a 

portion of the Corps’ cost of providing 

credit assistance and the costs of 

conducting engineering reviews and 

retaining expert firms, including 

financial and legal services, to assist in 

the underwriting and servicing of 

Federal credit instruments. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9337 

The Fiscal 2021 Consolidated 

Appropriations Act, provided the Corps 

WIFIA appropriations of $2.2M admin, 

and $12M credit subsidy and a loan 

volume limit of $950M. These 

appropriated funds are limited to fund 

projects focused on maintaining, 

upgrading, and repairing dams 

identified in the National Inventory of 

Dams owned by non-federal entities, 

essentially dams where the primary 

owner is a state, local government, 

public utility, or private owner. 

Alternatives: The preferred alternative 

would be to conduct proposed 

rulemaking to implement a new credit 

program for dam safety work at nonFederal dams in the form of a binding 

regulation in compliance with the Water 

Infrastructure Finance and Innovation 

Act of 2014 (WIFIA) and Division D, 

title 1 of the Consolidated 

Appropriations Act of 2020. The next 

best alternative would involve issuing 

these implementing procedures in the 

form of an Engineer Regulation. That 

alternative would not fulfill the intent of 

the law because it would not be binding 

on the regulated public. The no action 

alternative would be to not conduct 

rulemaking which would not fulfill the 

authorization provided by Congress. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

rule adds Corps procedures to the CFR 

on the implementation of a new credit 

program for dam safety work at nonFederal dams to allow for consistent 

implementation across the Corps and 

clear understanding of the program and 

its requirements by the regulated public. 

The USACE will incur costs to 

administer the loan program while 

benefits are expected for the public in 

the form of benefits from projects 

enabled by WIFIA loans. WIFIA 

compliance costs will likely include 

costs associated with application and 

transaction processing fees, which are 

waived or reduced for small and 

disadvantaged communities, obtaining a 

credit rating letter, any consultant fees 

(not required), completing applications, 

reporting requirements, and record 

keeping. These costs are not anticipated 

to represent a significant economic 

impact, especially given that 

participation in the program is 

voluntary. 

Risks: The action is not anticipated to 

increase risk to public health, safety, or 

the environment because it outlines the 

procedures the Corps will follow for 

implementing a federal loan program. 

The Corps will comply with all 

statutory requirements when reviewing 

requests. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 06/10/22 87 FR 35473 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

08/09/22 

Final Action ......... 05/22/23 88 FR 32661 

Final Action Effective.06/21/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Aaron Snyder, 

Department of Defense, U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers, 441 G Street NW, 

Washington, DC 20314, Phone: 651 290– 

5489, Email: aaron.m.snyder@

usace.army.mil. 

Related RIN: Merged with 0710–AB32 

RIN: 0710–AB31 

DOD—COE 

34. • Revised Definition of ‘‘Waters of 

the United States’’; Conforming [0710– 

AB55] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq. 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR part 120; 33 

CFR part 328. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: On September 8, 2023, the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

and the Department of the Army (the 

agencies’’) finalized a rule to amend the 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) to 

conform the definition of ‘‘waters of the 

United States’’ to a 2023 Supreme Court 

decision. This conforming rule amends 

the provisions of the agencies’ 

definition of ‘‘waters of the United 

States’’ that are invalid under the 

Supreme Court’s interpretation of the 

Clean Water Act in the 2023 decision. 

Statement of Need: In April 2020, the 

EPA and the Department of the Army 

(‘‘the agencies’’) published the 

Navigable Waters Protection Rule that 

revised the previously codified 

definition of ‘‘waters of the United 

States (85 FR 22250, April 21, 2020). 

The Navigable Waters Protection Rule 

was vacated by courts. On January 18, 

2023, the agencies issued a final rule, 

‘‘Revised Definition of ‘‘Waters of the 

United States’ ’’ (88 FR 3004) which 

became effective on March 20, 2023. On 

May 25, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court 

issued its decision in the case of Sackett 

v. Environmental Protection Agency. In 

light of this decision, the agencies are 

interpreting the phrase waters of the 

United States consistent with the 

Supreme Court’s decision in Sackett. 

The agencies are developing a rule to 

amend the final ‘‘Revised Definition of 

‘Waters of the United States’ ’’ rule, 

published in the Federal Register on 

January 18, 2023, consistent with the 

U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in 

Sackett. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The Clean 

Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.). 

Alternatives: Please see EPA’s 

alternatives. EPA is the lead for this 

rulemaking action. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Please 

see EPA’s statement of anticipated costs 

and benefits. EPA is the lead for this 

rulemaking action. 

Risks: Please see EPA’s risks. EPA is 

the lead for this rulemaking action. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Final Action ......... 09/08/23 88 FR 61964 

Final Action Effective.09/08/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Stacey M. Jensen, 

Office of the Assistant Secretary of the 

Army, Department of Defense, U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers, 108 Army 

Pentagon, Washington, DC 22202, 

Phone: 703 695–6791, Email: 

stacey.m.jensen.civ@army.mil. 

Related RIN: Related to 2040–AG32 

RIN: 0710–AB55 

DOD—OFFICE OF ASSISTANT 

SECRETARY FOR HEALTH AFFAIRS 

(DODOASHA) 

Final Rule Stage 

35. TRICARE Coverage of Clinical 

Trials and Termination of Expanded 

Access Treatments [0720–AB83] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 10 

U.S.C. ch 55 

CFR Citation: 32 CFR 199. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Department of Defense 

is finalizing an interim final rule to 

amend 32 CFR part 199 to include 

coverage that was temporarily added for 

National Institute of Allergy and 

Infectious Disease-sponsored clinical 

trials for the treatment or prevention of 

COVID–19. This rule will also finalize 

the temporary addition of the treatment 

use of investigation drugs under U.S. 

Food and Drug Administrationapproved expanded access programs for 

the treatment of coronavirus disease 

2019 (COVID–19) from the interim final 

rule titled ‘‘TRICARE Coverage of 

Certain Medical Benefits in Response to 

the COVID–19 Pandemic’’ (32 CFR part 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I 
9338 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

199, 0720–AB82), which published in 

the Federal Register on September 3, 

2020 (85 FR 54914–54924). 

Statement of Need: This final rule is 

required to finalize certain temporary 

flexibilities enacted in interim final 

rules published in 2020 in response to 

the COVID–19 pandemic. 

Pursuant to the President’s national 

emergency declaration and as a result of 

the worldwide COVID–19 pandemic, 

the Assistant Secretary of Defense for 

Health Affairs hereby temporarily 

modified the regulation at 32 CFR 

199.4(e)(26) to permit TRICARE 

coverage for National Institute of 

Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID)- 

sponsored COVID–19 phase I, II, III, and 

IV clinical trials for the treatment or 

prevention of coronavirus disease 2019 

(COVID–19). This provision supports 

increased access to emerging therapies 

for TRICARE beneficiaries. 

Summary of Legal Basis: This rule is 

issued under 10 U.S.C. 1073(a)(2) giving 

authority and responsibility to the 

Secretary of Defense to administer the 

TRICARE program. 

Alternatives: 

(1) No action. 

(2) The second alternative the DoD 

considered was implementing a more 

limited benefit change for COVID–19 

patients by not covering phase I clinical 

trials. Although this would have the 

benefit of reimbursing only care that has 

more established evidence in its favor, 

this alternative is not preferred because 

early access to treatments is critical for 

TRICARE beneficiaries given the rapid 

progression of the disease and the lack 

of available approved treatments. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Any 

cost to beneficiaries would be consistent 

with existing costs under the TRICARE 

Program (such as cost-shares and 

copayments). Finalizing TRICARE 

coverage of clinical trials will benefit 

TRICARE beneficiaries by ensuring they 

continue to have access to emerging 

therapies in the safest setting possible. 

In the interim final rule, DoD 

estimated the total cost for TRICARE 

participation in NIAID-sponsored 

COVID–19 clinical trials would be 

$3.2M for the duration of the national 

emergency, with an additional $4.0M 

for continued care for beneficiaries 

enrolled in clinical trials prior to 

termination of the national emergency. 

There were several assumptions we 

made in developing this estimate. The 

duration of the COVID–19 national 

emergency is uncertain; however, for 

the purposes of this estimate, we 

assumed the national emergency would 

expire on September 30, 2021. As of the 

drafting of the IFR, there were 27 

NIAID-sponsored COVID–19 clinical 

trials begun since the start of the 

national emergency. We assumed 6.2 

new trials every 30 days, for a total of 

126 trials by September 2021. We 

assumed, based on average trial 

enrollment and that TRICARE 

beneficiaries would participate in trials 

at the same rate as the general 

population, that 4,549 TRICARE 

beneficiaries would participate through 

September 2021. Each of the 

assumptions in this estimate is highly 

uncertain, and our estimate could be 

higher or lower depending on real world 

events (more or fewer trials, a longer or 

shorter national emergency, and/or 

higher or lower participation in clinical 

trials by TRICARE beneficiaries). 

Benefits: These changes expand the 

therapies available to TRICARE 

beneficiaries in settings that ensure 

informed consent of the beneficiary, and 

where the benefits of treatment 

outweigh the potential risks. 

Participation in clinical trials may 

provide beneficiaries with benefits such 

as reduced hospitalizations and/or use 

of a mechanical ventilator. Although we 

cannot estimate the value of avoiding 

these outcomes quantitatively, the 

potential long-term consequences of 

serious COVID–19 illness, including 

permanent cardiac or lung damage, are 

not insignificant. Beneficiary access to 

emerging therapies that reduce these 

long-term consequences or even death 

can be considered to be high-value for 

those able to participate. 

TRICARE providers will be positively 

affected by being able to provide their 

patients with a broader range of 

treatment options. The general public 

will benefit from an increased pool of 

available participants for the 

development of treatments and vaccines 

for COVID–19, as well as the evidence 

(favorable or otherwise) that results 

from this participation. 

Risks: None. This rule will not 

directly affect the efficient functioning 

of the economy or private markets. 

However, increasing the pool of 

available participants for clinical trials 

may help speed the development of 

treatments or vaccines for COVID–19. 

Once effective treatments or vaccines for 

COVID–19 exist, individuals are likely 

to be more confident interacting in the 

public sphere, resulting in a positive 

impact on the economy and private 

markets. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Interim Final Rule 10/30/20 85 FR 68753 

Interim Final Rule 

Effective.

10/30/20 

Action Date FR Cite 

Interim Final Rule 

Comment Period End.

11/30/20 

Final Action ......... 02/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: 

Undetermined. 

Additional Information: The interim 

final rule was titled ‘‘TRICARE Coverage 

of National Institute of Allergy and 

Infectious Disease Coronavirus Disease 

2019 Clinical Trials.’’ The final rule will 

be titled ‘‘TRICARE Coverage of Clinical 

Trials and Termination of Expanded 

Access Treatments.’’ 

Agency Contact: Jennifer Stankovic, 

Department of Defense, Office of 

Assistant Secretary for Health Affairs, 

16401 E Centretech Parkway, Aurora, 

CO 80011–9066, Phone: 303 676–3742, 

Email: jennifer.l.stankovic.civ@

health.mil. 

Related RIN: Related to 0720–AB81, 

Related to 0720–AB82 

RIN: 0720–AB83 

DOD—DODOASHA 

36. Expanding TRICARE Access to Care 

in Response to the COVID–19 Pandemic 

[0720–AB85] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 10 

U.S.C. ch. 55 

CFR Citation: 32 CFR 199. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rule finalizes an 

interim final rule that amended 32 CFR 

part 199 by: (1) adding freestanding End 

Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) facilities as 

a category of TRICARE-authorized 

institutional provider and modifying the 

reimbursement for such facilities; and 

(2) temporarily adopting Medicare’s 

New COVID–19 Treatments Add-on 

Payment (NCTAP). The ESRD 

provisions are permanent, and the 

temporary NCTAP provisions expire at 

the end of the fiscal year in which the 

Secretary of Health and Human 

Services’ declared coronavirus disease 

2019 (COVID–19) public health 

emergency ends. 

Statement of Need: Pursuant to the 

President’s emergency declaration and 

as a result of the COVID–19 pandemic, 

the Assistant Secretary of Defense for 

Health Affairs is temporarily modifying 

the following regulations (except for the 

modifications to paragraphs 

199.6(b)(4)(xxi) and 

199.14(a)(1)(iii)(E)(7), which will not 

expire), but, in each case, only to the 

extent necessary to ensure that 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I 

I I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9339 

TRICARE beneficiaries have access to 

the most up-to-date care required for the 

prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of 

COVID–19, and that TRICARE continues 

to reimburse like Medicare, to the extent 

practicable, as required by statute. 

The modifications to paragraphs 

199.6(b)(4)(xxi) and 

199.14(a)(1)(iii)(E)(7) establish 

freestanding End Stage Renal Disease 

(ESRD) facilities as a category of 

TRICARE-authorized institutional 

provider and modify TRICARE 

reimbursement of freestanding ESRD 

facilities. These provisions will improve 

TRICARE beneficiary access to 

medically necessary dialysis and other 

ESRD services and supplies. These 

provisions also support the requirement 

that TRICARE reimburse like Medicare, 

and will help to alleviate regional health 

care shortages due to the COVID–19 

pandemic by ensuring access to dialysis 

care in freestanding ESRD facilities 

rather than hospital outpatient 

departments. 

The modification to paragraph 

199.14(a)(iii)(E) adopts Medicare’s New 

COVID–19 Treatments Add-on Payment 

(NCTAP) for COVID–19 cases that meet 

Medicare’s criteria. This provision 

increases access to emerging COVID–19 

treatments and supports the 

requirement that TRICARE reimburse 

like Medicare. 

Summary of Legal Basis: This rule is 

issued under 10 U.S.C. 1073 (a)(2) 

giving authority and responsibility to 

the Secretary of Defense to administer 

the TRICARE program. 

Alternatives: (1) No action. 

(2) The second alternative the 

Department of Defense considered was 

to adopt Medicare’s ESRD 

reimbursement methodology, the ESRD 

Prospective Payment System (PPS), in 

total. While this would have been 

completely consistent with the statutory 

provision to pay institutional providers 

using the same reimbursement 

methodology as Medicare, this 

alternative is not preferred because 

there is still a relatively low volume of 

TRICARE beneficiaries who receive 

dialysis services from freestanding 

ESRDs and who are not enrolled to 

Medicare. The cost of implementing the 

full ESRD PPS system is estimated to be 

at least $600,000.00 in start-up costs, 

plus ongoing administrative costs, to 

ensure all adjustments were made for 

each claim, plus additional special 

pricing software or algorithms. In 

contrast, we estimate that the option 

provided in this IFR can be 

implemented relatively quickly (within 

six months of publication), and for 

approximately $300,000.00 in start-up 

costs with lower ongoing administrative 

costs. Further, the flat rate will provide 

the ESRD facilities with predictability 

with regard to TRICARE payments and 

will reduce uncertainty and specialized 

coding or case-mix documentation 

requirements that may be required by 

the ESRD PPS, reducing the 

administrative burden on the provider. 

To summarize, adopting the ESRD 

PPS was considered, but was deemed 

impracticable and overly burdensome to 

both the Government and providers due 

to the relative low volume of claims that 

will be priced and paid by TRICARE as 

primary under this system. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: $8.08 

million. Only the ESRD provisions are 

expected to result in recurring 

incremental health care costs; the 

remaining two provisions are expected 

to result in one-time cost increases. 

This estimate includes approximately 

$0.9M in administrative costs and 

$5.9M in direct health care costs. $1.8M 

of the total cost impact is expected to be 

a one-time start-up cost for both the 

temporary and permanent provisions, 

while the permanent ESRD provisions 

are expected to result in $5M in 

incremental annual costs. 

Risks: None. This rule will promote 

the efficient functioning of the economy 

and markets by modifying the 

regulations to better reimburse health 

care providers for care provided during 

the COVID–19 pandemic, particularly as 

strain on the health care economy is 

being felt due to reductions in higher 

cost elective procedures. Additionally, 

this rule will increase the access of 

TRICARE beneficiaries to more 

providers administering COVID–19 

vaccinations, which promotes the 

efficient functioning of the U.S. 

economy by quickening the pace at 

which the public receives COVID–19 

vaccinations. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Interim Final Rule 01/12/23 88 FR 1992 

Interim Final Rule 

Effective.

01/12/23 

Interim Final Rule 

Comment Period End.

03/13/23 

Final Action ......... 06/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Elan Green, 

Department of Defense, Office of 

Assistant Secretary for Health Affairs, 

16401 East Centretech Parkway, Aurora, 

CO 80011, Phone: 303 676–3907, Email: 

elan.p.green.civ@mail.mil. 

RIN: 0720–AB85 

DOD—DODOASHA 

37. Collection From Third Party Payers 

of Reasonable Charges for Healthcare 

Services; Amendment [0720–AB87] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: NDAA 2021, sec. 716 

CFR Citation: 32 CFR 220. 

Legal Deadline: NPRM, Statutory, 

June 21, 2023. 

Abstract: The Department of Defense, 

Defense Health Agency (DHA), is 

proposing a rule to implement Section 

716 of the Fiscal Year 2023 National 

Defense Authorization Act (Pub. L. 117– 

263). Section 716, which provides new 

statutory language that supersedes 

language previously enacted in Section 

702 of the Fiscal Year 2021 National 

Defense Authorization Act (Pub. L. 116– 

283), directs the Director of the DHA to 

implement a modified payment plan for 

certain civilians (who are not covered 

beneficiaries). This Section also 

provides the Director with the authority 

to waive fees for medical care provided 

to such civilians, when the provision of 

care enhances the knowledge, skills and 

abilities of health care providers. 

Statement of Need: Due to the high 

cost of healthcare in the United States 

and the mandate to aggressively pursue 

collection of debts, some civilian nonbeneficiaries who were provided 

emergency or trauma healthcare services 

in DoD MTFs have incurred financial 

harm after receiving MTF medical 

invoices. Other than the requirements of 

FCCS, the DoD did not have authority 

to provide FAPs like those offered by 

for-profit and non-profit hospitals 

which include elements such as sliding 

fees and catastrophic waivers. In 

consequence, Congress wholly amended 

10 U.S.C. 1079b via section 716 of the 

FY 2023 NDAA. Section 716 directs 

DoD to apply a sliding fee and/or a 

catastrophic waiver to medical invoices 

of non-beneficiaries. For nonbeneficiaries who have health 

insurance, section 716 directs DoD to 

accept payments from health insurers as 

full payment and to not balance bill 

non-beneficiaries except for copays, 

coinsurance, deductibles, nominal fees, 

and non-covered services. It also grants 

the Director of DHA discretionary 

authority, to waive medical debts of 

non-beneficiaries when the healthcare 

provided enhances the knowledge, 

skills, and abilities of healthcare 

providers, as determined by the Director 

of DHA. 

Summary of Legal Basis: DoD’s 

authority to compute reasonable charges 

for inpatient and ambulatory 

(outpatient) care provided by MTFs, 

including charges for pharmaceuticals, 

durable medical equipment, supplies, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9340 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

immunizations, injections or other 

medications, is found at 32 CFR part 

220, last updated on August 20, 2020 

(55 FR 21742–21750). Medical billing is 

structured under three existing 

healthcare cost recovery programs: 

Third Party Collections (10 U.S.C. 

1095); Medical Services Account (10 

U.S.C. 1079b, 1085, and 1104); and 

Medical Affirmative Claims (42 U.S.C. 

26512653). The rates used for billing are 

modeled after the rates published by the 

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid 

Services. The rates are approved 

annually by the Assistant Secretary of 

Defense for Health Affairs (ASD(HA)) 

and published on the DoD Comptroller’s 

website at https://

comptroller.defense.gov/FinancialManagement/Reports/rates2023/. Funds 

collected through the healthcare cost 

recovery programs are used to enhance 

healthcare delivery at MTFs. 

In carrying out the DoD’s healthcare 

cost recovery programs, DoD abides by 

the Federal Claims Collection Standards 

(FCCS), under 31 CFR parts 900–904, 

which are published jointly by the 

Department of the Treasury and the 

Department of Justice. The FCCS require 

that Federal agencies aggressively 

collect all debts arising out of activities 

of that agency. Collection activities must 

be undertaken promptly with follow-up 

action taken as necessary. Accordingly, 

DoD MTFs generate medical claims and 

invoices for care rendered within MTFs 

and execute the FCCS requirements. 

Other Applicable Authority: In 

accordance with 26 CFR 1.6050P– 

1(b)(2)(G), if DoD waives fees under 10 

U.S.C. 1079b(b), then it would trigger 

information reporting requirements to 

the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and 

the furnishing of Form 1099–C, 

Cancellation of Debt, to the patient since 

the discharge of indebtedness under 10 

U.S.C. 1079b(b) qualifies as an 

identifiable event. Consequently, the 

waived medical fees could result in the 

debt being attributed to the patient as 

taxable income; and have the effect of 

causing severe financial harm. 

Therefore, DHA will consider a waiver 

of fees under 10 U.S.C. 1079b(b), only 

after any discounts according to the 

sliding scale and catastrophic cap have 

been applied. Any fees waived will be 

from the discounted amount, which will 

mitigate some of the financial impact of 

attributing the waived amount as 

income. Additionally, the DoD will seek 

to use that authority judiciously, on a 

case-by-case basis, and when other 

efforts such as application of a sliding 

and catastrophic waiver fail to mitigate 

the risk of severe financial harm to the 

civilian non-beneficiary. 

Alternatives: The amended 10 U.S.C. 

1079b mandates that DoD implement 

the amended statute within 180 days of 

the amendment being enacted. With this 

constrained timeline, the Department 

launched research efforts to discern 

whether private sector hospitals offered 

programs similar to what the statute 

mandates and which could potentially 

serve as a model for the Department. 

This research was necessary because 

prior to enactment of the amended 10 

U.S.C. 1079b, the DoD did not have the 

authority to apply sliding scale or 

catastrophic waiver discounts to 

medical bills generated by MTFs, nor 

did the Director of DHA have 

discretionary authority to waive medical 

bills. Market research on charity care 

and FAPs offered by both for-profit and 

non-profit hospitals throughout the 

United States and eligibility 

requirements for those programs were 

reviewed. Of note, while for-profit and 

non-profit hospitals derive a tax benefit 

from the provision of charity care and 

FAPs, the DoD’s hospitals do not. 

Research conducted yielded that while 

there are generally accepted accounting 

standards applicable to the financial 

reporting of charity and FAPs, there is 

no single standard, statute, or regulation 

that outlines the content and structure 

of those programs. Programs vary 

widely. The market research also 

included a review of the rules 

pertaining to eligibility for Federal and 

State FAPs such as Medicaid. The 

research provided a few alternatives for 

consideration in establishing the MHS 

FAP, including: 

• Alternative #1: Generally, for-profit 

and non-profit hospitals determine a 

patient’s eligibility for FAPs by 

measuring the applicant’s annual 

household income against the Federal 

Poverty Guidelines (FPGs). The FPGs 

are published annually by the 

Department of Health and Human 

Services pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 9902(2). 

There is one set of FPGs for the 

contiguous 48 states and Washington 

DC, one set for Alaska, and another for 

Hawaii. The Census Bureau annually 

publishes FPG thresholds. The 

threshold is a statistical calculation 

used to identify the number of people 

living in poverty. There is no geographic 

variation; the same figures are used for 

all 50 states and Washington, DC. The 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) designates the Census Bureau 

poverty thresholds as the Federal 

Government’s official statistical 

definition of poverty. The FPGs are also 

used by State and Federal agencies for 

determining an individual’s eligibility 

for Federal programs such as Medicaid. 

• Alternative #2: Both for-profit and 

non-profit hospitals typically offer a 

sliding fee discount based upon the 

patient’s household income when 

compared to the FPGs. Predominantly, 

discounts are offered to individuals 

whose household income falls within 

the range of 125% to 400% of the FPGs, 

with most hospitals offering discounts 

to patients whose income is at or below 

200% of the FPGs. 

• Alternative #3: Most private sector 

hospitals do not offer a catastrophic 

waiver policy, but a few will limit a 

patient’s bill to a maximum percentage 

of the patient’s household income 

(range of 10 to 20 percent of monthly 

income). In addition, we examined the 

Department of the Treasury’s 

Administrative Wage Garnishment 

policy to determine the maximum 

percentage that the Treasury garnishes 

from an individual’s monthly income 

(15 percent). 

The three alternatives uncovered 

through market research represent fair 

and reasonable approaches that could 

readily be adopted for use in the 

administration of the MHS FAP, with 

some modifications, and without 

incurring significant costs to implement. 

Specifically: 

Alternative #1: Adopted. Since 10 

U.S.C. 1079b mandates the application 

of a sliding scale and catastrophic 

waivers, the FPGs will be used as the 

measure to determine a patient’s 

eligibility for these discounts. 

Alternative #2: Adopted. The FPG 

range for eligibility for the sliding scale 

discount will be set annually by policy 

issued by the ASD(HA). The range will 

be published on the DoD Comptroller’s 

Reimbursement Rates website. 

Reserving the ability to set the range via 

policy gives DoD maximum flexibility to 

mitigate financial harm. 

Alternative #3: Adopted. The 

catastrophic waiver will be limited to a 

percentage of a patient’s monthly 

household income. The percentage will 

be established by policy issued annually 

by the ASD(HA). The percentage will be 

published on the DoD Comptroller’s 

Reimbursement Rates website. 

Reserving the ability to set the 

percentage via policy gives DoD 

maximum flexibility to mitigate 

financial harm. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

Benefit Cost Analysis: The anticipated 

costs for the MHS Financial Assistance 

and Waiver Program include only the 

time required for a patient’s application 

to be reviewed. This includes time 

required for a civilian non-beneficiary 

patient to complete the associated DD 

Form 3857, Application for Military 

Health System Financial Assistance 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9341 

Program/Waiver Program, declaring 

their income, DHA UBO and associated 

agencies to receive and assess the 

application, followed by the 

determination of the eligibility for a 

sliding scale discount, catastrophic 

waiver, or debt cancellation waiver, and 

the response time for the decision. The 

total estimated time is less than 90 days. 

Risks: Currently, Federal debt 

collection legislation and policies can 

lead to serious financial harm to some 

civilian non-beneficiary patients who 

receive treatment at MTFs. Delays in 

implementation of this rule could 

potentially exacerbate these problems. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Interim Final Rule 03/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: DeLisa Prater, DHA 

Uniform Business Office Program 

Manager, Department of Defense, Office 

of Assistant Secretary for Health Affairs, 

8111 Gatehouse Road, Suite #221, Falls 

Church, VA 22042–5101, Phone: 703 

275–6380, Email: delisa.e.prater.civ@

mail.mil. 

RIN: 0720–AB87 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Statement of Regulatory Priorities 

I. Introduction 

The U.S. Department of Education 

(Department) supports States, local 

communities, institutions of higher 

education, and families in improving 

education and other services nationwide 

to ensure that all Americans, including 

those with disabilities and who have 

been underserved, receive a high-quality 

and safe education and are prepared for 

employment that provides a livable 

wage. We provide leadership and 

financial assistance pertaining to 

education and related services at all 

levels to a wide range of stakeholders 

and individuals, including State 

educational and other agencies, local 

school districts, providers of early 

learning programs, elementary and 

secondary schools, institutions of higher 

education, career and technical schools, 

nonprofit organizations, students, 

members of the public, families, and 

many others. These efforts are helping 

to advance equity, recover from the 

COVID–19 pandemic, and ensure that 

all children and students from prekindergarten through grade 12 will be 

ready for, and succeed in, 

postsecondary education and 

employment, and that students 

attending postsecondary institutions, or 

participating in other postsecondary 

education options, are prepared for a 

profession or career. 

We also vigorously monitor and 

enforce the implementation of Federal 

civil rights laws in educational 

programs and activities that receive 

Federal financial assistance from the 

Department, and support innovative and 

promising programs, research and 

evaluation activities, technical 

assistance, and the dissemination of 

data, research, and evaluation findings 

to improve the quality of education. 

In developing and implementing 

regulations, guidance, technical 

assistance, evaluations, data gathering 

and reporting, and monitoring related to 

our programs, we are committed to 

working closely with affected persons 

and groups. Our core mission includes 

serving the most vulnerable, and 

facilitating equal access for all, to ensure 

all students receive a high-quality and 

safe education and complete it with a 

well-considered and attainable path to a 

sustainable career. Toward these ends, 

we work with a broad range of 

interested parties and the general 

public, including families, students, and 

educators; State, local, and Tribal 

governments; other Federal agencies; 

and neighborhood groups, communitybased early learning programs, 

elementary and secondary schools, 

postsecondary institutions, 

rehabilitation service providers, adult 

education providers, professional 

associations, civil rights organizations, 

nonprofits, advocacy organizations, 

businesses, and labor organizations. 

If we determine that it is necessary to 

develop regulations, we can seek public 

participation at the key stages in the 

rulemaking process. We invite the 

public to submit comments on all 

proposed regulations through the 

internet or by regular mail. We also 

continue to seek greater public 

participation in our rulemaking 

activities through the use of transparent 

and interactive rulemaking procedures 

and new technologies. For example, on 

June 7–11, 2021, we sought public input 

through a virtual public hearing on Title 

IX of the Education Amendments of 

1972. We hosted this hearing to provide 

a forum for all of our stakeholders and 

other members of the public, including 

those from underserved communities, to 

share their experiences, insights, and 

expertise on Title IX. The information 

shared during this helped us determine 

changes to propose to the regulations 

regarding Title IX. Additionally, on 

January 11, 2023, we published a 

Request for Information (RFI) on 

Regarding Public Transparency for LowFinancial-Value Postsecondary 

Programs. For this RFI, we solicited 

public comments from stakeholders and 

members of the public, including those 

from underserved communities, on how 

to identify the best ways to calculate the 

metrics that may be used to identify 

low-financial-value programs and 

inform technical considerations. We 

also note that the Higher Education Act 

of 1965 requires the Department to use 

the negotiated rulemaking process for a 

majority of its higher education 

rulemakings, which is a process that 

necessitates public participation from a 

broad range of stakeholders. 

Additionally, at the end of each day 

during the negotiated rulemaking 

sessions, the Department provides an 

opportunity for members of the public 

who are not at the negotiating table to 

speak and provide input. The 

Department has exclusively used virtual 

negotiated rulemaking sessions for these 

higher education regulations since 2021. 

Hosting virtual meetings instead of inperson sessions has significantly 

expanded the ability to draw in robust 

public comment from across the 

country, as the time commitment is 

more manageable and does not require 

traveling in order to participate. 

The Department has also taken steps 

to seek public input on the development 

of guidance documents. On February 15, 

2023, we announced that we would 

conduct a review of existing guidance 

related to a statutory provision about 

how institutions of higher education 

may compensate recruiters. To engage 

public participation we held a virtual 

public hearing on this topic on March 

8 and 9, 2023. This gave dozens of 

members of the public a chance to 

express their opinions before the 

Department took any formal steps 

through guidance. We also sought 

public comment on this topic, which 

yielded nearly 270 comments. This 

approach allowed the Department to get 

thoughts from the public at the predrafting stage and will assist in gauging 

what changes, if any, to make to this 

guidance. 

To facilitate the public’s involvement, 

we participate in the Federal Docket 

Management System (FDMS), an 

electronic single Government-wide 

access point (www.regulations.gov) that 

enables the public to submit comments 

on different types of Federal regulatory 

documents and read and respond to 

comments submitted by other members 

of the public during the public comment 

period. This system provides the public 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9342 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

with the opportunity to submit 

comments electronically on any notice 

of proposed rulemaking or interim final 

regulations open for comment as well as 

read and print any supporting 

regulatory documents. 

II. Regulatory Priorities 

The following are the key rulemaking 

actions the Department is planning for 

the coming year. These rulemaking 

actions advance the Department’s 

mission of ‘‘promot[ing] student 

achievement and preparation for global 

competitiveness by fostering 

educational excellence and ensuring 

equal access.’’ These rulemaking actions 

also advance the President’s priorities of 

ensuring that every American has access 

to a high-quality education, regardless 

of background, and that government 

should affirmatively work to expand 

educational opportunities for 

underserved communities. During his 

time in office, the President has 

repeatedly made clear the importance of 

advancing equity and opportunity for 

those who have historically been 

underserved, both as a general matter 

and with regard to the education system 

in particular. See Executive Order 13985 

(On Advancing Racial Equity and 

Support for Underserved Communities 

Through the Federal Government); 

Executive Order 14021 (Guaranteeing an 

Educational Environment Free From 

Discrimination on the Basis of Sex, 

Including Sexual Orientation or Gender 

Identity); Executive Order 14041 (White 

House Initiative on Advancing 

Educational Equity, Excellence, and 

Economic Opportunity Through 

Historically Black Colleges and 

Universities); Executive Order 14045 

(White House Initiative on Advancing 

Educational Equity, Excellence, and 

Economic Opportunity for Hispanics); 

Executive Order 14049 (White House 

Initiative on Advancing Educational 

Equity, Excellence, and Economic 

Opportunity for Native Americans and 

Strengthening Tribal Colleges and 

Universities); and Executive Order 

14050 (White House Initiative on 

Advancing Educational Equity, 

Excellence, and Economic Opportunity 

for Black Americans). The rulemaking 

actions on the Department’s agenda seek 

to advance the President’s priorities, as 

set out in these executive orders and 

more broadly. Our regulatory agenda 

covers a wide range of topics, and a 

wide range of educational institutions— 

from those serving our youngest 

children to colleges, universities, and 

adult education programs. In each of 

these contexts, promoting equity and 

opportunity for students who have been 

historically underserved is central to the 

Department’s regulatory plan. 

Postsecondary Education/Federal 

Student Aid 

The Department plans to propose 

regulations to provide debt relief to 

student loan borrowers. Specifically, the 

Department is working on regulations to 

better clarify the use of the Secretary’s 

authority to waive some or all of a 

borrower’s outstanding balance on a 

Federal student loan, pursuant to 

Section 432(a)(6) of the Higher 

Education Act of 1965, as amended. 

Negotiation sessions are taking place 

during the fall of 2023, with draft and 

final rules expected next year. 

Civil Rights/Title IX 

The Secretary proposed to amend its 

regulations implementing Title IX of the 

Education Amendments of 1972, as 

amended, consistent with the priorities 

of the Biden-Harris Administration. 

These priorities include those set forth 

in Executive Order 13988 on Preventing 

and Combating Discrimination on the 

Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual 

Orientation and Executive Order 14021 

on Guaranteeing an Educational 

Environment Free from Discrimination 

on the Basis of Sex, Including Sexual 

Orientation and Gender Identity. 

Student Privacy 

The Department is considering policy 

options to amend the Family 

Educational Rights and Privacy Act 

(FERPA) regulations, to update, clarify, 

and improve the current regulations. 

The proposed regulations are also 

needed to implement statutory 

amendments to FERPA contained in the 

Uninterrupted Scholars Act of 2013 and 

the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 

2010, to reflect a change in the name of 

the office designated to administer 

FERPA, and to make changes related to 

the enforcement responsibilities of the 

office concerning FERPA. 

Grants 

The Department plans to propose 

revisions to the Education Department 

General Administrative Regulations 

(EDGAR) to make a variety of updates 

and revisions, including to update and 

clarify evidence-related components, to 

clarify how the Department makes 

determinations related to continuation 

awards under competitive grant 

programs, and to expand flexibility for 

grantees by clarifying that, where not 

prohibited by law or the terms and 

conditions of the grant award, 

subgranting authority rests with States. 

These proposed changes would ensure 

that the EDGAR regulations are 

consistent with current law and would 

reduce or eliminate unnecessary 

burdens and restrictions. 

Recently Completed Rulemakings 

Additionally, the Department has 

recently concluded its Improving 

Income Driven Repayment and Gainful 

Employment rulemakings. For 

Improving Income Driven Repayment, 

the Department issued final regulations 

governing income-contingent repayment 

plans by amending the Revised Pay as 

You Earn repayment plan and 

restructuring and renaming the 

repayment plan regulations under the 

William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan 

Program, including combining the 

Income Contingent Repayment and the 

Income-Based Repayment plans under 

the umbrella term of ‘‘Income-Driven 

Repayment’’ plans, and providing 

conforming edits to the FFEL Program. 

For Gainful Employment, the 

Department published final regulations 

that determine whether postsecondary 

educational programs prepare students 

for gainful employment in recognized 

occupations, and the conditions under 

which programs remain eligible for 

student financial assistance programs 

under Title IV of the HEA. The 

Department also published final 

regulations on Financial Responsibility, 

Administrative Capability, Certification, 

and Ability to Benefit. 

III. Principles for Regulating 

Over the next year, we may need to 

issue other regulations because of new 

legislation or programmatic changes. In 

doing so, we will follow the Principles 

for Regulating, which determine when 

and how we will regulate. Through 

consistent application of those 

principles, we have eliminated 

unnecessary regulations and identified 

situations in which major programs 

could be implemented without 

regulations or with limited regulatory 

action. 

In deciding when to regulate, we 

consider the following: 

• Whether regulations are essential to 

promote quality and equality of 

opportunity in education. 

• Whether a demonstrated problem 

cannot be resolved without regulation. 

• Whether regulations are necessary 

to provide a legally binding 

interpretation to resolve ambiguity. 

• Whether entities or situations 

subject to regulation are similar enough 

that a uniform approach through 

regulation would be meaningful and do 

more good than harm. 

• Whether regulations are needed to 

protect the Federal interest, that is, to 

ensure that Federal funds are used for 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9343 

their intended purpose and to eliminate 

fraud, waste, and abuse. 

In deciding how to regulate, we are 

mindful of the following principles: 

• Regulate no more than necessary. 

• Minimize burden to the extent 

possible and promote multiple 

approaches to meeting statutory 

requirements if possible. 

• Encourage coordination of federally 

funded activities with State and local 

reform activities. 

• Ensure that the benefits justify the 

costs of regulating. 

• To the extent possible, establish 

performance objectives rather than 

specify the behavior or manner of 

compliance a regulated entity must 

adopt. 

• Encourage flexibility, to the extent 

possible and as needed to enable 

institutional forces to achieve desired 

results. 

ED—OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS (OCR) 

Final Rule Stage 

38. Nondiscrimination on the Basis of 

Sex in Education Programs or Activities 

Receiving Federal Financial Assistance 

[1870–AA16] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq. 

CFR Citation: 34 CFR 106. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Department plans to 

issue a final rule amending its 

regulations implementing Title IX of the 

Education Amendments of 1972, 20 

U.S.C. 1681 et seq., consistent with the 

priorities of the Biden-Harris 

Administration. These priorities include 

those set forth in Executive Order 13988 

on Preventing and Combating 

Discrimination on the Basis of Gender 

Identity or Sexual Orientation and 

Executive Order 14021 on Guaranteeing 

an Educational Environment Free from 

Discrimination on the Basis of Sex, 

Including Sexual Orientation and 

Gender Identity. The proposed 

amendments include, among others, 

revisions to 34 CFR 106.2 (Definitions), 

106.6 (Effect of other requirements and 

preservation of rights), 106.8 

(Designation of coordinator, 

dissemination of policy, and adoption of 

grievance procedures), 106.10 (Scope), 

106.11 (Application), 106.30 

(Definitions), 106.31 (Education 

programs or activities), 106.40 (Parental, 

family, or marital status; pregnancy or 

related conditions), 106.44 (Action by a 

recipient to operate its education 

program or activity free from sex 

discrimination), 106.45 (Grievance 

procedures for the prompt and equitable 

resolution of complaints of sex 

discrimination), 106.46 (Grievance 

procedures for the prompt and equitable 

resolution of complaints of sex-based 

harassment involving student 

complainants or student respondents at 

postsecondary institutions); 106.51 

(Employment), 106.57 (Parental, family, 

or marital status; pregnancy or related 

conditions), 106.60 (Pre-employment 

inquiries), and 106.71 (Retaliation). 

Statement of Need: This rulemaking is 

necessary to align the Title IX 

regulations with the priorities of the 

Biden-Harris Administration, including 

those set forth in the Executive Order on 

Preventing and Combating 

Discrimination on the Basis of Gender 

Identity or Sexual Orientation (E.O. 

13988) and the Executive Order on 

Guaranteeing an Educational 

Environment Free from Discrimination 

on the Basis of Sex, Including Sexual 

Orientation and Gender Identity (E.O. 

14021). 

Summary of Legal Basis: We are 

conducting this rulemaking under 20 

U.S.C. 1681 et seq. 

Alternatives: This was discussed in 

the notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM) and will be discussed in the 

final regulations. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: This 

was discussed in the notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) and will be 

discussed in the final regulations. 

Risks: This was discussed in the 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

and will be discussed in the final 

regulations. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 07/12/22 87 FR 41390 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

09/12/22 

Final Action ......... 03/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: State. 

Federalism: This action may have 

federalism implications as defined in 

E.O. 13132. 

URL For Public Comments: 

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Alejandro Reyes, 

Department of Education, Office for 

Civil Rights, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, 

5A–137, Washington, DC 20202, Phone: 

202 245–7705, Email: t9nprm@ed.gov. 

RIN: 1870–AA16 

ED—OCR 

39. Nondiscrimination on the Basis of 

Sex in Education Programs or Activities 

Receiving Federal Financial Assistance: 

Sex-Related Eligibility Criteria for Male 

and Female Athletic Teams [1870– 

AA19] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq. 

CFR Citation: 34 CFR 106. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Department issued a 

proposed rule amending its regulations 

implementing Title IX of the Education 

Amendments of 1972, 20 U.S.C. 1681 et 

seq., consistent with the priorities of the 

Biden-Harris Administration. These 

priorities include those set forth in 

Executive Order 13988 on Preventing 

and Combating Discrimination on the 

Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual 

Orientation and Executive Order 14021 

on Guaranteeing an Educational 

Environment Free from Discrimination 

on the Basis of Sex, Including Sexual 

Orientation and Gender Identity. 

Statement of Need: This rulemaking is 

necessary to align the Title IX 

regulations to fully implement the 

statute. 

Summary of Legal Basis: We are 

conducting this rulemaking under 20 

U.S.C. 1681 et seq. 

Alternatives: We have limited 

information about the alternatives at 

this time. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: We 

have limited information about the costs 

and benefits at this time. 

Risks: We have limited information 

about the risks at this time. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 04/13/23 88 FR 22860 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

05/15/23 

Final Rule ............ 03/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: State. 

Federalism: This action may have 

federalism implications as defined in 

E.O. 13132. 

URL For Public Comments: 

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Alejandro Reyes, 

Department of Education, Office for 

Civil Rights, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, 

Room 5A–137, Washington, DC 20202, 

Phone: 202 245–7705, Email: t9nprm@

ed.gov. 

RIN: 1870–AA19 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I 
9344 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

ED—OFFICE OF PLANNING, 

EVALUATION AND POLICY 

DEVELOPMENT (OPEPD) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

40. EDGAR Revisions (Rulemaking 

Resulting From a Section 610 Review) 

[1875–AA14] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1221e–3 

and 3474, and 6511(a); E.O. 13559; 20 

U.S.C. 1101 et seq.; 20 U.S.C. 1057 et 

seq.; 20 U.S.C. 1062; 20 U.S.C. 1063a; 20 

U.S.C. 1065; 20 U.S.C. 1069c; 20 U.S.C. 

1134 to 1134d 

CFR Citation: 34 CFR 75; 34 CFR 76; 

34 CFR 77; 34 CFR 299; and other 

sections as applicable; 34 CFR 79; . . . 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Education Department 

General Administrative Regulations 

(EDGAR) will be revised to make a 

variety of updates and revisions, 

including to update and clarify 

evidence-related components, to clarify 

how the Department makes 

determinations related to continuation 

awards under competitive grant 

programs, and to expand flexibility for 

grantees by clarifying that, where not 

prohibited by law or the terms and 

conditions of the grant award, 

subgranting authority rests with States. 

In addition, the Department plans to 

amend these regulations where they are 

outdated in order to be consistent with 

current law. 

Statement of Need: It is necessary to 

review and revise these regulations to 

ensure they are consistent with current 

law and to reduce or eliminate 

unnecessary burdens and restrictions. 

Summary of Legal Basis: We are 

conducting this rulemaking under the 

following authorities: 20 U.S.C. 1221e– 

3 and 3474, and 6511(a); E.O. 13559; 20 

U.S.C. 1101 et seq.; 20 U.S.C. 1057 et 

seq.; 20 U.S.C. 1062, 1063a, 1065, and 

1069c; 20 U.S.C. 1134–1134d. 

Alternatives: We have limited 

information about the alternatives at 

this time. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: We 

have limited information about the 

potential cost and benefits and cannot 

estimate at this time. 

Risks: We have limited information 

about the risks at this time. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 11/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: 

Undetermined. 

URL For Public Comments: 

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Kelly Terpak, 

Department of Education, Office of 

Planning, Evaluation and Policy 

Development, 400 Maryland Avenue 

SW, Washington, DC 20202, Phone: 202 

205–5321, Email: kelly.terpak@ed.gov. 

RIN: 1875–AA14 

ED—OPEPD 

41. Family Educational Rights and 

Privacy Act [1875–AA15] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1232g; 20 

U.S.C. 1221e–3; 20 U.S.C. 3474 

CFR Citation: 34 CFR 99. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Department plans to 

propose to amend the Family 

Educational Rights and Privacy Act 

(FERPA) regulations, 34 CFR part 99, to 

update, clarify, and improve the current 

regulations by addressing outstanding 

policy issues, such as clarifying the 

definition of ‘‘education records’’ and 

clarifying provisions regarding 

disclosures to comply with a judicial 

order or subpoena. The proposed 

regulations are also needed to 

implement statutory amendments to 

FERPA contained in the Uninterrupted 

Scholars Act of 2013 and the Healthy, 

Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, to reflect 

a change in the name of the office 

designated to administer FERPA, and to 

make changes related to the 

enforcement responsibilities of the 

office concerning FERPA. 

Statement of Need: These regulations 

are needed to implement amendments 

to FERPA contained in the Healthy, 

Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 

111296) and the Uninterrupted Scholars 

Act (USA) of 2013 (Pub. L. 112278); to 

provide needed clarity regarding the 

definitions of terms and other key 

provisions of FERPA; and to make 

necessary changes identified as a result 

of the Department’s experience 

administering FERPA and the current 

regulations. A number of the proposed 

changes reflect the Department’s 

existing guidance and interpretations of 

FERPA. 

Summary of Legal Basis: These 

regulations are being issued under the 

authority provided in 20 U.S.C. 1221e– 

3, 20 U.S.C. 3474, and 20 U.S.C. 1232g. 

Alternatives: These are discussed in 

the preamble to the proposed 

regulations. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: These 

are discussed in the preamble to the 

proposed regulations. 

Risks: These are discussed in the 

preamble to the proposed regulations. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 05/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

URL For Public Comments: 

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Dale King, 

Department of Education, Office of 

Planning, Evaluation and Policy 

Development, 400 Maryland Avenue 

SW, Room 6C100, Washington, DC 

20202, Phone: 202 453–5943, Email: 

dale.king2@ed.gov. 

RIN: 1875–AA15 

ED—OFFICE OF POSTSECONDARY 

EDUCATION (OPE) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

42. • Student Loan Relief [1840–AD93] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1082(a) 

CFR Citation: 34 CFR 30.1(c)(6); 34 

CFR 30; 34 CFR 682; 34 CFR 685. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Department intends to 

amend regulations related to the 

authorities granted to the Secretary 

under 20 U.S.C. 1082(a) of the Higher 

Education Act of 1965, as amended, to 

provide relief to Federal student loan 

borrowers. 

Statement of Need: This rulemaking is 

necessary to provide debt relief to the 

numerous working and middle class 

student loan borrowers. 

Summary of Legal Basis: We are 

conducting this rulemaking under the 

authority in 20 U.S.C. 1082(a). 

Alternatives: We have limited 

information about the alternatives at 

this time. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: We 

have limited information about the 

anticipated costs and benefits at this 

time. 

Risks: We have limited information 

about the risks at this time. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Notice of Intent to 

Commence Negotiated Rulemaking.

08/31/23 88 FR 60163 

NPRM .................. 05/00/24 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9345 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: 

Undetermined. 

Federalism: Undetermined. 

URL For Public Comments: 

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Tamy Abernathy, 

Department of Education, Office of 

Postsecondary Education, 400 Maryland 

Avenue SW, 2C–232, Washington, DC 

20202, Phone: 202 987–0385, Email: 

tamy.abernathy@ed.gov. 

RIN: 1840–AD93 

ED—OPE 

Completed Actions 

43. Gainful Employment [1840–AD57] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Unfunded Mandates: This action may 

affect the private sector under Public 

Law 104–4. 

Legal Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1001; 20 

U.S.C. 1002; 20 U.S.C. 1003; 20 U.S.C. 

1088; 20 U.S.C. 1091; 20 U.S.C. 1094; 20 

U.S.C. 1099(b); 20 U.S.C. 1099(c); 20 

U.S.C. 1082; . . . 

CFR Citation: 34 CFR 668; 34 CFR 

600. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Secretary proposed 

regulations related to GE to address 

ongoing concerns about educational 

programs designed to prepare students 

for gainful employment in a recognized 

occupation, but that instead leave them 

with unaffordable amounts of student 

loan debt in relation to their earnings. 

We further seek to provide additional 

transparency by providing information 

about all academic programs at 

postsecondary institutions that are 

eligible under title IV of the Higher 

Education Act of 1965, as amended 

(HEA). 

Statement of Need: This rulemaking is 

necessary to determine whether 

postsecondary educational programs 

prepare students for gainful 

employment and the conditions under 

which institutions and programs remain 

eligible for student financial assistance 

programs under Title IV of the HEA. 

Summary of Legal Basis: We are 

conducting this rulemaking under the 

following authorities: 20 U.S.C. 1001; 20 

U.S.C. 1002; 20 U.S.C. 1003; 20 U.S.C. 

1088; 20 U.S.C. 1091; 20 U.S.C. 1094; 20 

U.S.C. 1099(b); 20 U.S.C. 1099(c); and 

20 U.S.C. 1082. 

Alternatives: We have limited 

information about the alternatives at 

this time. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: We 

have limited information about the 

anticipated costs and benefits at this 

time. 

Risks: We have limited information 

about the risks at this time. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Notice of Intent to 

Commence Negotiated Rulemaking.

05/26/21 86 FR 28299 

NPRM .................. 05/19/23 88 FR 32300 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

06/20/23 

Final Action ......... 10/10/23 88 FR 70004 

Final Action Effective.07/01/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: 

Organizations. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

URL For Public Comments: 

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Joe Massman, 

Program Manager, Department of 

Education, Office of Postsecondary 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, 

Washington, DC 20202, Phone: 202 453– 

7771, Email: joe.massman@ed.gov. 

Gregory Martin, Department of 

Education, Office of Postsecondary 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW, 

Room 2C136, Washington, DC 20202, 

Phone: 202 453–7535, Email: 

gregory.martin@ed.gov. 

RIN: 1840–AD57 

ED—OPE 

44. Improving Income Driven 

Repayment [1840–AD81] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1070g; 20 

U.S.C. 1087a et seq. 

CFR Citation: 34 CFR 685. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Secretary plans to 

propose amendments to the regulations 

governing income-contingent repayment 

plans by amending the Revised Pay as 

You Earn (REPAYE) repayment plan, 

and to restructure and rename the 

repayment plan regulations under the 

William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan 

(Direct Loan) Program, including 

combining the Income Contingent 

Repayment (ICR) and the Income-Based 

Repayment (IBR) plans under the 

umbrella term of Income-Driven 

Repayment (IDR) plans. 

Statement of Need: This rulemaking is 

necessary to make improvements to the 

income-driven repayment plans created 

under the ICR authority in the Higher 

Education Act of 1965 that allows the 

Secretary to cap payments at a set share 

of a borrower’s income. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 20 U.S.C. 

1070g, 1087a et seq., unless otherwise 

noted. 

Alternatives: We have limited 

information about the alternatives at 

this time. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: We 

have limited information about the 

anticipated costs and benefits at this 

time. 

Risks: We have limited information 

about the risks at this time. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Notice of Intent to 

Commence Negotiated Rulemaking.

05/26/21 86 FR 28299 

NPRM .................. 01/11/23 88 FR 1894 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

02/10/23 

Final Action ......... 07/10/23 88 FR 43820 

Final Action Effective.07/01/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

URL For Public Comments: 

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Tamy Abernathy, 

Department of Education, Office of 

Postsecondary Education, 400 Maryland 

Avenue SW, 2C–232, Washington, DC 

20202, Phone: 202 987–0385, Email: 

tamy.abernathy@ed.gov. 

RIN: 1840–AD81 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Statement of Regulatory and 

Deregulatory Priorities 

The Department of Energy 

(Department or DOE) makes vital 

contributions to the Nation’s welfare 

through its activities focused on 

improving national security, energy 

supply, energy efficiency, 

environmental remediation, and energy 

research. The Department’s mission is 

to: 

• Promote dependable, affordable and 

environmentally sound production and 

distribution of energy; 

• Advance energy efficiency and 

conservation; 

• Provide responsible stewardship of 

the Nation’s nuclear weapons; 

• Provide a responsible resolution to 

the environmental legacy of nuclear 

weapons production; and 

• Strengthen U.S. scientific 

discovery, economic competitiveness, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9346 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

and improve quality of life through 

innovations in science and technology. 

The Department’s regulatory activities 

are essential to achieving its critical 

mission and to implementing the 

President’s clean energy and climate 

initiatives. Among other things, the 

Regulatory Plan and the Unified Agenda 

contain the rulemakings the Department 

will be engaged in during the coming 

year to fulfill the Department’s 

commitment to meeting deadlines for 

issuance of energy conservation 

standards and related test procedures. 

The Regulatory Plan and Unified 

Agenda also reflect the Department’s 

continuing commitment to cut costs, 

reduce regulatory burden, and increase 

responsiveness to the public. 

Additionally, DOE recognizes that 

public participation and community 

engagement are a crucial aspect of the 

Department’s rulemaking process, as 

well as an important vehicle to assist 

the Department in streamlining its 

regulatory priorities. DOE’s existing ex 

parte communication process provides 

an avenue for stakeholders and 

members of the public to meet with the 

Department to discuss regulatory 

practices, either during or not during a 

rulemaking. This process is intended to 

encourage the public to provide the 

Department with all information 

necessary to develop rules that advance 

public interest. The process serves to 

increase public participation in the 

Department’s rulemaking activities and 

adds transparency to the development 

of any regulatory action. 

Energy Efficiency Program for 

Consumer Products and Commercial 

Equipment 

The Energy Policy and Conservation 

Act (EPCA) requires DOE to set 

appliance efficiency standards at levels 

that achieve the maximum improvement 

in energy efficiency that is 

technologically feasible and 

economically justified. The Department 

continues to follow its schedule for 

setting new appliance efficiency 

standards by both tackling its backlog of 

rulemakings with missed statutory 

deadlines and advancing rulemakings 

with upcoming statutory deadlines. In 

2023, DOE published 40 actions relating 

to energy conservation standards, 

including 11 final actions; and 25 

actions relating to test procedures, 

including 19 final rules. DOE tentatively 

plans to publish 20 additional actions 

relating to energy conservation 

standards and test procedures by the 

end of the year. These rulemakings are 

expected to save American consumers 

billions of dollars in energy costs over 

a 30-year timeframe. 

Additionally, EPCA directs DOE to 

provide interested persons an 

opportunity to present oral and written 

comments on matters related to any 

energy conservation standard or test 

procedure proposed rule. DOE fulfills 

this obligation by organizing public 

meetings, held as webinars, as part of 

the rulemaking process. The meetings 

take place during the comment period, 

which provides the public time to 

review the proposed action prior to 

attending. During the meeting, a DOE 

representative presents an overview of 

the proposed action that may include a 

general discussion of the rulemaking 

background, legal authority for the 

action being taken, and a robust 

discussion of the proposed action. 

Participants are offered an opportunity 

to ask the DOE representative questions 

about the proposal in real time and may 

present a prepared statement during the 

meeting if requested. After the meeting, 

DOE releases a meeting transcript and 

considers any question or information 

presented by the public during the 

meeting in the next stage of the 

rulemaking along with the written 

comments submitted during the 

comment period. Interested members of 

the public may participate in these 

meetings by registering online. 

The Department is highlighting one 

important energy conservation standard 

rule titled ‘‘Energy Conservation 

Standards for Consumer Water Heaters.’’ 

For consumer water heaters, DOE 

estimates that energy savings for active 

mode operation (in terms of uniform 

energy factor) will be 27 quads over 30 

years and that the cumulative net 

present value to total consumer benefits 

of the proposed standards for consumer 

water heaters will be between $56 

billion at a 7-percent discount rate and 

$161 billion at a 3-percent discount rate. 

Additionally, the Department notes that 

two public meeting were held to satisfy 

EPCA’s requirements that interested 

persons are provided an opportunity to 

present oral and written comments on 

matters related to this rulemaking. In 

April 2022, DOE held a public meeting 

to discuss a preliminary technical 

support document and participants 

included members from relevant trade 

organizations, representatives of 

investor-owned electric companies, 

energy efficiency organizations, and 

advocates for appliance standards. DOE 

held a second public meeting to discuss 

the proposed rule in September 2023. 

During both meetings, DOE provided an 

overview of the published rulemaking 

materials and took questions from 

attendees in real time. As part of the 

rulemaking process, DOE intends to 

address any comment raised during the 

September meeting in a subsequent 

rulemaking material, along with all 

written comments submitted for the 

proposal. 

Federal Agency Leadership in Climate 

Change 

Beyond the appliance program, DOE 

is supporting Federal agency leadership 

in climate change in various ways, 

including in its ‘‘Clean Energy Rule for 

New Federal Buildings and Major 

Renovations’’ (Clean Energy Rule), 

which implements a provision of the 

Energy Independence and Security Act 

of 2007 (EISA) that requires the 

Department to establish revisedperformance standards for the 

construction of all new Federal 

buildings, including commercial 

buildings, multi-family high-rise 

residential buildings, and low-rise 

residential buildings. As directed by 

EISA, this rule would require reductions 

in Federal agencies’ on-site use of fossil 

fuels, and provides processes by which 

agencies can petition DOE for the 

downward adjustment of these targets 

for their buildings. For covered 

buildings for which design for 

construction or whole building 

renovation begins in fiscal year 2030 or 

beyond, the onsite fossil fuel-generated 

energy consumption of the building 

must be zero for all building types and 

climate zones, based on the calculation 

established in the regulations, and 

consistent with the requirements of 

EISA. DOE initiated this rulemaking in 

2010, and published its current proposal 

through a supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking (SNOPR) 

published in the Federal Register in 

December of 2022. DOE hosted a public 

stakeholder meeting (January 2022) to 

present its updated proposal and accept 

feedback from stakeholders. DOE also 

solicited formal public comments from 

stakeholders through March (2023), 

receiving 49 comment submissions, 

which will be addressed in DOE’s Final 

Rule (anticipated March 2024). 

Federal Authorizations for Interstate 

Electric Transmission Facilities 

This rulemaking proposes to provide 

an updated process for the timely 

coordination of Federal authorizations 

for proposed interstate electric 

transmission facilities pursuant to 

section 216(h) of the Federal Power Act 

(FPA) (16 U.S.C. 824p(h)). The U.S. 

Department of Energy (DOE) is 

proposing to establish an integrated and 

comprehensive Coordinated Interagency 

Transmission Authorizations and 

Permits Program (CITAP Program), to 

ensure electric transmission projects are 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9347 

developed expeditiously and consistent 

with the nation’s environmental laws, 

including laws that protect endangered 

and threatened species, critical habitats, 

and historic properties. The CITAP 

Program improves the Integrated 

Interagency Pre-Application (IIP) 

Process by ensuring timely submission 

of materials necessary for Federal 

authorizations and related 

environmental reviews. Under the 

program, project proponents develop 

resource reports and public engagement 

plans for communities that would be 

affected by a proposed qualifying 

project through an iterative and 

collaborative process with Federal 

agencies, while providing that those 

Federal agencies would remain 

responsible for completion of 

environmental review. DOE will 

coordinate submission of the materials 

necessary for federal authorizations and 

related environmental reviews required 

under Federal law to site the qualified 

electric transmission facilities. 

Throughout the rulemaking process, 

DOE has taken steps to encourage public 

participation in the rulemaking. On 

August 23, 2023, DOE held a public 

meeting for the proposed rulemaking in 

which DOE provided a briefing of the 

proposed regulatory text and gave 

participants the opportunity to provide 

comments on the proposed rule. 

Throughout the comment period, DOE 

has also provided briefings to various 

stakeholder groups and encouraged the 

submission of comments through the 

processes outlined in the notice of 

proposed rulemaking. Likewise, after 

the comment period closes on October 

2, 2023, DOE intends to continue 

providing stakeholder briefings to 

groups wishing to learn more about the 

proposed rule. 

DOE—ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND 

RENEWABLE ENERGY (EE) 

Final Rule Stage 

45. Clean Energy for New Federal 

Buildings and Major Renovations of 

Federal Buildings [1904–AB96] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 

6834(a)(3)(D) 

CFR Citation: 10 CFR 433; 10 CFR 

435. 

Legal Deadline: Other, Statutory, 

Subject to the requirements in 42 U.S.C. 

6834(a)(3)(D). 

Abstract: This rulemaking 

implements provisions of the Energy 

Independence and Security Act of 2007 

(EISA) that require the U.S. Department 

of Energy (DOE) to establish revisedperformance standards for the 

construction of all new Federal 

buildings, including commercial, multifamily high-rise residential and lowrise residential buildings. This 

rulemaking will specifically address the 

reduction of fossil fuel-generated energy 

consumption in new buildings and 

buildings undergoing major renovations, 

as well as how agencies may petition 

DOE for a downward adjustment of the 

requirements if they believe meeting 

required energy reduction levels would 

be technically impracticable. DOE has 

published a supplemental proposal with 

a new focus that accounts for the needs 

of Federal agencies and the goals of 

President Biden’s Administration and 

responds to comments received on prior 

rulemaking documents. This document 

proposes standards that would require 

reductions in Federal agencies’ on-site 

use of fossil fuels (which include coal, 

petroleum, natural gas, oil shales, 

bitumens, tar sands, and heavy oils) 

consistent with the targets of ECPA and 

EISA and provides processes by which 

agencies can petition DOE for the 

downward adjustment of said targets for 

buildings. DOE issued this effort was 

previously reported as the Fossil FuelGenerated Energy Consumption 

Reduction for New Federal Buildings 

and Major Renovations of Federal 

Buildings rulemaking. 

Statement of Need: The Energy 

Independence and Security Act of 2007 

(EISA 2007) requires certain new 

Federal buildings and Federal buildings 

undergoing major renovations to meet 

fossil fuel-generated consumption 

reduction targets based on fiscal year. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Section 

433(a) of EISA 2007 2007 (Pub. L. 110– 

140) amended section 305 of the Energy 

Conservation and Production Act 

(ECPA) and directed the DOE to 

establish regulations that require fossil 

fuel-generated energy consumption 

reductions for certain new Federal 

buildings and Federal buildings 

undergoing major renovations. (42 

U.S.C. 6834(a)(3)(D)(i)) For these 

buildings, section 305 of ECPA, as 

amended by EISA 2007, mandates that 

the buildings be designed so that a 

building’s fossil fuel-generated energy 

consumption is reduced as compared 

with such energy consumption by a 

similar building in fiscal year (FY) 2003 

(as measured by Commercial Buildings 

Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) or 

Residential Energy Consumption Survey 

(RECS) data from the DOE’s Energy 

Information Administration (EIA)) by 55 

percent beginning in FY2010, 65 

percent beginning in FY2015, 80 

percent beginning in FY2020, 90 

percent beginning in FY2025, and 100 

percent beginning in FY2030. (42 U.S.C. 

6834(a)(3)(D)(i)(I)) 

Alternatives: The statute requires DOE 

to establish regulations implementing 

the specific fossil fuel-generated energy 

consumption targets for certain new 

Federal buildings and Federal buildings 

undergoing major renovations. The 

targets may be adjusted with respect to 

a specific building upon petition from 

an agency, with agreement from the 

DOE Secretary. In implementing these 

regulations, DOE considers the 

technologies available to achieve the 

statutory targets and those relevant for 

petitions submitted by agencies. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

cumulative net present value (NPV) of 

the proposed Clean Energy Rule 

compliant buildings ranges from 

¥$16.0 million (at a 7-percent discount 

rate) to ¥$85.3 million (at a 3-percent 

discount rate). DOE also analyzed an 

additional case where the future grid 

emission factors were assumed to follow 

a 95% reduction by 2035 (95 by 2035) 

profile as defined in the National 

Renewable Energy Laboratory’s (NREL) 

2021 Standard Scenarios Report: A U.S. 

Electricity Sector Outlook. This case 

represents a change in national 

electricity generation which assumes 

national power sector CO2 emissions 

reach 95% below 2005 levels by 2035 

and are eliminated on a net basis by 

2050. The cumulative NPV of the 

proposed Clean Energy Rule compliant 

buildings in the 95 by 2035 case ranges 

from $104.6 million (at a 7-percent 

discount rate) to $83.4 million (at a 3- 

percent discount rate). 

Risks: Optional field—no response. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 10/15/10 75 FR 63404 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

12/14/10 

Supplemental 

NPRM.

10/14/14 79 FR 61693 

Supplemental 

NPRM Comment Period 

End.

12/15/14 

Supplemental 

NPRM.

12/21/22 87 FR 78382 

Public Meeting 

(webinar) held 

January 5, 2023.

12/21/22 87 FR 78382 

Supplemental 

NPRM Comment Period 

End.

02/21/23 

Supplemental 

NPRM Comment Period 

Reopened.

02/27/23 88 FR 12267 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9348 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Action Date FR Cite 

Supplemental 

NPRM Comment Period 

Reopened End.

03/23/23 

Final Action ......... 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal. 

URL For More Information: 

www.energy.gov/eere/femp/notices-andrules. 

URL For Public Comments: 

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Laura Zuber, 

Attorney, Department of Energy, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW, Washington, 

DC 20585, Phone: 240 306–7651, Email: 

laura.zuber@hq.doe.gov. 

RIN: 1904–AB96 

DOE—EE 

46. Energy Conservation Standards for

Consumer Water Heaters [1904–AD91]

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Unfunded Mandates: This action may 

affect the private sector under Public 

Law 104–4. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(1) 

CFR Citation: 10 CFR 430. 

Legal Deadline: Other, Statutory, 

Subject to 6-year-look-back in 42 U.S.C. 

6295(m)(1). 

Abstract: Consistent with the 

requirements under the Energy Policy 

and Conservation Act (EPCA), as 

amended, the U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE) is examining whether to 

amend the current energy conservation 

standards for consumer water heaters 

found at 10 CFR 430.32(d). Once 

completed, this rulemaking will fulfill 

DOE’s statutory obligation to either 

propose amended standards for this 

product or determine that the standards 

do not need to be amended. In this 

rulemaking, DOE has tentatively 

concluded that the proposed standards 

represent the maximum improvement in 

energy efficiency that is technologically 

feasible and economically justified, and 

would result in the significant 

conservation of energy. Specifically, 

with regards to technological feasibility, 

products achieving these proposed 

standard levels are already 

commercially available for all product 

classes covered by the proposal. As for 

economic justification, DOE’s analysis 

shows that the benefits of the proposed 

standards exceed the burdens of the 

proposed standards. 

Statement of Need: The Energy Policy 

and Conservation Act requires 

minimum energy efficiency standards 

for certain appliances and commercial 

equipment, including consumer water 

heaters. (42 U.S.C. 6292(a)(4)) 

Summary of Legal Basis: Title III of 

the Energy Policy and Conservation Act 

(EPCA), Public Law 94–163 (42 U.S.C. 

6291–6309, as codified), established the 

Energy Conservation Program for 

Consumer Products Other Than 

Automobiles. Pursuant to EPCA, any 

new or amended energy conservation 

standard that the U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE) prescribes for certain 

products, such as consumer water 

heaters, shall be designed to achieve the 

maximum improvement in energy 

efficiency that is technologically 

feasible and economically justified (42 

U.S.C. 6295(o)(2)(A)) and to result in a 

significant conservation of energy (42 

U.S.C. 6295(o)(3)(B)). EPCA provides 

that not later the six years after the 

issuance of any final rule establishing or 

amending a standard, DOE must publish 

either a notice of determination that 

standards for the product do not need to 

be amended, or a notice of proposed 

rulemaking including new proposed 

energy conservation standards 

(proceeding to a final rule, as 

appropriate). (42 U.S.C. 6295(m)(1)) 

Alternatives: The statute requires DOE 

to conduct rulemakings to review 

standards and to revise standards to 

achieve the maximum improvement in 

energy efficiency that the Secretary 

determines is technologically feasible 

and economically justified. In making 

this determination, DOE conducts a 

thorough analysis of alternative 

standard levels, including the existing 

standard, based on the criteria specified 

in the statute. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: DOE 

finds that the benefits to the Nation of 

the proposed energy conservation 

standards for Consumer Water Heaters 

(such as energy savings, consumer 

average life-cycle cost savings, an 

increase in national net present value, 

and emissions reductions) outweigh the 

burdens (such as loss of industry net 

present value). For consumer water 

heaters, DOE estimates that energy 

savings (in terms of uniform energy 

factor (UEF)) will be 27 quads over 30 

years and that the cumulative net 

present value (NPV) of total consumer 

benefits of the proposed standards for 

consumer water heaters will be between 

$56 billion at a 7-percent discount rate 

and $161 billion at a 3-percent discount 

rate. 

Risks: Optional field—no response. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite

Request for Information (RFI).05/21/20 85 FR 30853 

RFI Comment Period End.07/06/20 

Notice of Webinar 

and Availability 

of Preliminary 

Technical Support Document.

03/01/22 87 FR 11327 

Public Meeting .... 04/12/22 

Preliminary Technical Support 

Document 

Comment Period End.

05/02/22 

RFI Comment Period Reopened.05/04/22 87 FR 26303 

RFI Comment Period Reopened 

End.

05/16/22 

NPRM .................. 07/28/23 88 FR 49058 

Public Meeting .... 09/13/23 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

09/26/23 

Final Action ......... 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: 

Undetermined. 

Agency Contact: Julia Hegarty, 

Department of Energy, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW, Washington, 

DC 20585, Phone: 240 597–6737, Email: 

julia.hegarty@ee.doe.gov. 

RIN: 1904–AD91 

DOE—DEPARTMENTAL AND OTHERS 

(ENDEP) 

Final Rule Stage 

47. Coordination of Federal

Authorizations for Electric

Transmission Facilities [1901–AB62]

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 16 U.S.C. 824p(h) 

CFR Citation: 10 CFR part 900. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rulemaking proposes to 

provide an updated process for the 

timely submission of information 

needed for Federal authorizations for 

proposed electric transmission facilities 

pursuant to section 216(h) of the Federal 

Power Act (FPA) (16 U.S.C. 824p(h)). It 

seeks to ensure electric transmission 

projects are developed consistent with 

the nation’s environmental laws, 

including laws that protect endangered 

and threatened species, critical habitats, 

and historic properties. It provides a 

framework, called the Integrated 

Interagency Pre-Application (IIP) 

Process, by which the U.S. Department 

of Energy (DOE) will coordinate 

submission of materials necessary for 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9349 

federal authorizations and related 

environmental reviews required under 

Federal law to site qualified electric 

transmission facilities, and integrates 

that IIP Process into the Federal Electric 

Transmission Authorization 

Coordination Program. 

Statement of Need: To address 

capacity constraints and congestion on 

the nation’s electric transmission grid, 

DOE is amending 10 CFR part 900 to 

establish a Coordinated Interagency 

Transmission Authorizations and 

Permits Program (CITAP Program) to 

reduce the time required for 

transmission project developers to 

receive decisions on Federal 

authorizations for interstate 

transmission projects. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The Energy 

Policy Act of 2005 (Pub. L. 109–58) 

(EPAct) established a national policy to 

enhance coordination and 

communication among Federal agencies 

with authority to site electric 

transmission facilities. Section 1221(a) 

of EPAct added a new section 216 to 

part II of the Federal Power Act (16 

U.S.C. 824p) (FPA), which sets forth 

provisions relevant to the siting of 

interstate electric transmission facilities. 

Section 216(h) of the FPA (16 U.S.C. 

824p(h)), Coordination of Federal 

Authorizations for Transmission 

Facilities, requires the DOE to 

coordinate all Federal authorizations 

and related environmental reviews 

needed for siting interstate electric 

transmission projects, including 

National Environmental Policy Act of 

1969 (Pub. L. 91–190, as amended, 42 

U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) (NEPA) reviews. In 

response to the investments made in 

clean energy by the infrastructure 

Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) (Pub. L. 

117–58) and the Inflation Reduction Act 

(IRA) (Pub. L. 117–169), DOE is 

proposing to amend its section 216(h) 

implementing regulations, found in 10 

CFR part 900, to implement this 

authority and better coordinate review 

of Federal authorizations to expediently 

increase interstate electric transmission 

infrastructure. 

Alternatives: The U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Department of Commerce, 

Department of Defense, Department of 

Energy, the Environmental Protection 

Agency, the Council on Environmental 

Quality, the Federal Permitting 

Improvement Steering Council, 

Department of the Interior, and the 

Office of Management and Budget 

Regarding Facilitating Federal 

Authorizations for Electric 

Transmission Facilities entered into a 

Memorandum of Understanding, 

executed May 2023, to expedite the 

siting, permitting, and construction of 

electric transmission infrastructure in 

the United States under section 216(h) 

of the Federal Power Act (FPA), 16 

U.S.C. 824p(h), as enacted by section 

1221(a) of the Energy Policy Act of 

2005, as such, alternatives were not 

considered. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

societal costs of the action are the direct 

costs incurred by project proponents 

during the IIP Process. Most of the 

information required to be submitted 

during the IIP Process would likely be 

required absent this proposal and 

therefore the investment of time and 

resources required by this proposed 

process are unlikely to be an additional 

burden on respondents. However, the 

full costs are considered for 

transparency. These costs of $399,083 

per year are detailed in the Paperwork 

Reduction Act burden analysis. The 10- 

year and 20-year net present value of 

those annual costs, assuming 2% annual 

inflation, are $3.8 million and 7.2 

million under a 3% discount rate, and 

$3.1 million and 5.0 million under a 7% 

discount rate. 

The benefits of the CITAP Program, 

designed to reduce the Federal 

authorization timelines for interstate 

electric transmission facilities and 

enable more rapid deployment of 

transmission infrastructure, include 

direct benefits to the project proponents 

in decreased time and expenditure on 

authorizations and a series of indirect 

social benefits. Increasing the current 

pace of transmission infrastructure 

deployment will generate benefits to the 

public in multiple ways that can be 

categorized into grid operations, system 

planning, and non-market benefits. Grid 

operation benefits include a reduction 

in the congestion costs for generating 

and delivering energy; mitigation of 

weather and variable generation 

uncertainty enhanced diversity of 

supply, which increases market 

competition and reduces the need for 

regional backup power options; and 

increased market liquidity and 

competition. From a system planning 

standpoint, accelerated transmission 

investments will allow the development 

of new, low-cost power plants in areas 

of high congestion which might not 

otherwise see investment due to 

capacity constraints, and additional grid 

hardening or resilience. Finally, nonmarket benefits to the public include 

reduced costs for meeting public policy 

goals related to emissions and equitable 

energy access, as well as emissions 

reductions system wide. 

Risks: Optional field—no response. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 08/16/23 88 FR 55826 

Notice of Public 

Meeting.

08/22/23 88 FR 57011 

Public Meeting .... 08/23/23 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

10/02/23 

Final Action ......... 03/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: 

Undetermined. 

Agency Contact: Gabriel Daly, 

Department of Energy, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW, Washington, 

DC 20585, Phone: 240 597–6973, Email: 

gabriel.daly@hq.doe.gov. 

RIN: 1901–AB62 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN 

SERVICES 

Statement of Regulatory Priorities for 

Fiscal Year 2024 

As the Federal agency with principal 

responsibility for protecting the health 

of all Americans and providing essential 

human services, the Department of 

Health and Human Services (HHS or the 

Department) implements programs that 

strengthen the health care system; 

advance scientific knowledge and 

innovation; and improve the health, 

safety, and wellbeing of the American 

people. 

The Department’s Regulatory Plan for 

Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 focuses on 

lowering costs and expanding coverage, 

reducing disparities and advancing 

equity, increasing public health 

preparedness, and supporting the 

wellbeing of families and communities. 

Highlights from the FY2024 Regulatory 

Plan include: 

• Policies to expand access to 

affordable care and protect health 

coverage following the end of the 

COVID–19 public health emergency. 

• Policies to strengthen Federal early 

care and education programs that 

enhance quality of services to children 

and families, lower child care costs for 

working families, and provide needed 

support to early educators. 

• Advancing health and safety across 

the health care delivery system through 

policies and programs that promote 

health equity. 

• Expanding access to the full 

continuum of mental health and 

substance use prevention, treatment, 

and recovery. 

• Bolstering the Department’s ability 

to identify and prevent future public 

health threats. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9350 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

• Improving the Department’s ability 

to identify foodborne illnesses and 

advancing work to improve consumers’ 

ability to access nutritious food to 

prevent disease and protect public 

health. 

• Strengthening services for older 

Americans to allow them to remain in 

their communities. 

• Ensuring that children and youth 

receive safe and appropriate care and 

support in order to thrive. 

In short, the Department’s Regulatory 

Plan reflects the Biden-Harris 

Administration’s commitment to 

continue building a better, healthier 

America, through rules designed to 

protect and enhance the lives of every 

person touched by HHS programs. 

I. Lowering Health Care Costs and 

Expanding Access to Coverage 

The Biden-Harris Administration has 

worked to expand and strengthen 

coverage for millions of Americans 

enrolled in Medicare, Medicaid, or ACA 

Marketplace plans. In implementing key 

provisions of the Inflation Reduction 

Act, HHS rules will help lower the cost 

of prescription drugs in Medicare. HHS 

has prioritized efforts to protect health 

coverage following the end of the 

COVID–19 public health emergency, 

working with State partners to make it 

easier for beneficiaries and consumers 

to stay covered. 

a. Enhancing Coverage and Access in 

the ACA Marketplaces, Medicaid, CHIP, 

and Medicare 

Rulemaking related to Medicare, 

Medicaid, and the ACA Marketplaces 

will strengthen coverage under these 

programs and help make it easier for 

Americans to stay covered. In response 

to the President’s Executive Orders to 

strengthen Medicaid and the ACA, HHS 

rules will simplify the enrollment 

process to help maintain continuous 

coverage for vulnerable populations and 

reduce administrative burdens for 

States, while improving access to care, 

quality, and health outcomes across 

delivery systems. HHS rules will set a 

minimum access standard in Medicaid 

and CHIP programs, advancing access to 

care for adult and pediatric populations 

in primary care, behavioral health, 

home and community-based services 

and maternal health. 

In collaboration with the Departments 

of Labor and Treasury, HHS has issued 

proposed rules to improve the 

comprehensiveness of coverage and 

protect consumers from low-quality 

coverage. These rules will help to 

expand access to mental health and 

substance use care and preventive 

services as well as ensure that 

consumers protected from buying 

coverage through Short-Term, LimitedDuration Insurance (STLDI) that provide 

little to no coverage and can 

discriminate against those with preexisting conditions. 

In addition, CMS will issue annual 

payment rules and notices over the next 

year that affect federal health programs, 

including Medicare and the ACA 

Marketplace. Though they are not 

included in the HHS Regulatory Plan, 

these rules will include policies that 

further the Secretary’s priority of 

expanding access to affordable, highquality health care. 

b. Expanding the Accessibility and 

Affordability of Drugs and Medical 

Products 

Under the Inflation Reduction Act 

(IRA), HHS policy will allow Medicare 

to negotiate the cost of some drugs and 

provide coverage without cost sharing 

for recommended vaccines in the 

Medicare program. The IRA will require 

rebates if the cost of some Medicare Part 

B physician-administered drugs rise 

faster than the rate of inflation— 

reducing costs and increasing peace of 

mind for millions of older Americans 

and those with disabilities. 

Consistent with the President’s drug 

pricing priorities, revisions to the 340B 

Drug Pricing Program’s (340B Program) 

Administrative Dispute Resolution 

(ADR) rule would establish new 

requirements and procedures for the 

Program’s ADR process, making the 

process more equitable and accessible 

for participation, while supporting the 

Program’s mission to expand access to 

health care for underserved 

communities. 

c. Streamlining the Secure Exchange of 

Health Information 

The secure exchange of health 

information and interoperability among 

health care providers and other entities 

improves patient care, promotes 

competition, reduces costs, and 

provides more accurate public health 

data. Upcoming HHS rulemaking will 

implement provisions of the 21st 

Century Cures Act to set out 

disincentives for health care providers 

who engage in information blocking, 

ensuring effective health information 

exchange and patient access to quality 

care. HHS will also issue proposed 

modifications to the HIPAA Security 

Rule to improve cybersecurity in the 

health care sector by strengthening 

requirements for HIPAA regulated 

entities to safeguard individuals’ 

electronic protected health information 

to prevent, detect, contain, mitigate, and 

recover from cybersecurity threats. 

II. Reducing Disparities and Advancing 

Equity 

Equity is the focus of over a dozen 

Executive Orders issued by President 

Biden, and it remains a cornerstone of 

the Biden-Harris Administration’s 

agenda. The Department recognizes that 

people of color; people with disabilities; 

lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, 

queer, and intersex (LGBTQI+) people; 

and other underserved groups in the 

U.S. have been systematically denied a 

full and fair opportunity to participate 

in economic, social, and civic life. 

Among its other manifestations, this 

history of inequality shows up as 

persistent disparities in health and 

social outcomes and in access to care. 

As the Federal agency responsible for 

ensuring the health and wellbeing of 

Americans, the Department, under 

Secretary Becerra’s leadership, is 

committed to tackling these entrenched 

inequities and their root causes 

throughout its programs and policies. 

The Department’s regulatory priority of 

reducing disparities and advancing 

equity includes rules aimed at 

preventing and remedying 

discrimination, strengthening health 

and safety standards for consumer 

products that impact underserved 

communities, and promoting equity in 

federally supported health care services. 

In addition to the specific 

rulemakings identified in this section, 

HHS is committed to advancing equity 

in all aspects of the Department’s work. 

Consistent with President Biden’s 

Executive Order on Advancing Racial 

Equity and Support for Underserved 

Communities Through the Federal 

Government (E.O. 13985), the 

Department’s efforts in this area include 

an ongoing assessment of whether 

underserved communities face barriers 

in accessing benefits and opportunities 

in HHS programs and whether policy 

changes are necessary to advance 

equity. This process continues to inform 

the Department’s broader regulatory 

agenda. 

Further, HHS continues to seek out 

meaningful and equitable opportunities 

for public input by a range of interested 

or affected individuals and 

communities, including underserved 

communities, to inform our regulatory 

actions consistent with Executive Order 

14094, Modernizing Regulatory Review. 

a. Preventing and Remedying 

Discrimination 

The HHS Regulatory Plan includes 

actions to eliminate discrimination as a 

barrier for historically marginalized 

communities seeking access to HHS 

programs and activities. For instance, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9351 

the Department plans to finalize its rule 

on nondiscrimination in health 

programs and activities, which would 

amend the existing regulations 

implementing Section 1557 of the ACA, 

ensuring that the regulations reflect the 

proper scope of the statute’s protections. 

Because discrimination in the U.S. 

health care system is a driver of health 

disparities, the Section 1557 regulations 

present a key opportunity for the 

Department to promote equity and 

ensure protection of health care as a 

right. 

Additionally, the Department has 

issued a proposed rule addressing 

discrimination on the basis of disability 

in health and human services programs 

or activities. This rule would revise 

regulations under section 504 of the 

Rehabilitation Act of 1973 to address 

unlawful discrimination on the basis of 

disability in HHS-funded health and 

human services programs. The proposed 

rule includes new requirements 

prohibiting discrimination in the areas 

of medical treatment; the use of value 

assessments; web, mobile, and kiosk 

accessibility; and requirements for 

accessible medical equipment, so that 

persons with disabilities have an 

opportunity to participate in or benefit 

from health care programs and activities 

that is equal to the opportunity afforded 

others. It also adds a section on child 

welfare to expand on and clarify the 

obligation to provide nondiscriminatory 

child welfare services. The proposed 

rule would also update the definition of 

disability and other provisions to ensure 

consistency with statutory amendments 

to the Rehabilitation Act, enactment of 

the Americans with Disabilities Act and 

the Americans with Disabilities 

Amendments Act of 2008, the 

Affordable Care Act, as well as Supreme 

Court and other significant court cases. 

It also further clarifies the obligation to 

provide services in the most integrated 

setting. 

b. Strengthening Health and Safety 

Standards for Consumer Products, 

Including Those That 

Disproportionately Impact Underserved 

Communities 

To protect the public health and 

advance equity, the Department 

continues to pursue regulatory action 

with respect to consumer products that 

harm the health of underserved groups. 

Further, the Department plans to 

finalize two rules that prohibit menthol 

as a characterizing flavor in cigarettes 

and prohibit all characterizing flavors 

(other than tobacco) in cigars. These and 

other potential future regulatory actions 

would significantly reduce disease and 

death from combusted tobacco product 

use, the leading cause of preventable 

death in the United States. 

The regulations are also expected to 

promote better health outcomes across 

population groups. Evidence shows that 

menthol cigarettes are 

disproportionately marketed to specific 

communities—such as disproportionate 

storefront and outdoor marketing, as 

well as point-of-sale marketing, in 

Black, Hispanic, and low-income 

communities. The disparities in tobacco 

marketing and use shape disparities in 

tobacco-related disease and death. 

These planned regulatory actions on 

tobacco are expected not only to benefit 

the population as a whole, but in doing 

so, also substantially decrease tobaccorelated health disparities. 

c. Promoting Equity in Federally 

Supported Health Care Services 

The Department continues to seek out 

opportunities to embed equity 

throughout HHS programs and policies, 

including in federally supported health 

care services, and through upcoming 

rulemaking aimed at identifying 

appropriate culturally competent and 

person-centered care requirements for 

Medicare and Medicaid participating 

providers. The Department will 

continue to provide comprehensive, 

culturally appropriate and quality 

personal and public health services to 

American Indian and Alaskan Native 

people through the Indian Health 

Service (IHS). 

III. Increasing Public Health 

Preparedness 

Protecting the nation’s public health 

is a primary responsibility of the 

Department. This responsibility 

includes ensuring that the right 

protections and infrastructure are in 

place to help the nation to respond to 

public health threats and outbreaks 

quickly and effectively. It also includes 

ensuring healthy and safe food for every 

American through protections against 

foodborne illness in the food supply 

chain. In service of this regulatory 

priority, over the next year, the 

Department is pursuing rules that would 

bolster the nation’s resilience to better 

manage the long-term effects of COVID– 

19 and future public health threats and 

improve Americans’ access to safe and 

nutritious food. 

a. Bolstering the Nation’s Resilience To 

Manage COVID–19 and Future Public 

Health Threats 

In the context of COVID–19 and other 

disease outbreaks, it is crucial for public 

health authorities to be able to identify 

and evaluate persons who may have 

been exposed to a communicable 

disease. Currently, the Centers for 

Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is 

authorized to require airlines to collect 

certain data regarding passengers and 

crew arriving from foreign countries for 

the purposes of health education, 

treatment, prophylaxis, or other 

appropriate public health interventions, 

including contact tracing and travel 

restrictions. The Department intends to 

finalize a rulemaking in FY 2024 that 

allows the Department to continue to 

receive data in a timely manner and 

more effectively provide critical public 

health services in response to COVID– 

19 and other communicable diseases 

that may put Americans’ health at risk. 

HHS will also propose rulemaking 

that incorporates learnings from the 

public health emergency into updates to 

national emergency preparedness 

requirements for participating Medicare 

and Medicaid providers, to assure 

adequate planning for natural and manmade disasters, including climaterelated disasters, and coordination with 

official emergency preparedness 

systems. 

b. Improving Access to Safe and 

Nutritious Food 

To help ensure healthy and safe food 

for every American, the HHS Regulatory 

Plan includes rules that improve the 

Department’s ability to identify 

foodborne illnesses, prevent them from 

reoccurring, and remove unsafe 

products from the market. For example, 

the Department intends to finalize a rule 

intended to improve the safety of 

produce by requiring farms to conduct 

comprehensive assessments of preharvest agricultural water that would 

help farms identify and mitigate hazards 

in water used to grow produce. 

The HHS Regulatory Plan also 

supports the goals of the White House 

Conference and Strategy on Hunger, 

Nutrition, and Health, by advancing 

work to improve consumers’ ability to 

access nutritious food to prevent disease 

and protect public health. The 

Department seeks to improve dietary 

patterns in the United States to help 

reduce the burden of diet-related 

chronic diseases. Another way HHS is 

working towards creating a healthier 

food supply is by proposing a rule that 

would permit use of salt substitutes, 

rather than salt, to help reduce the 

amount of sodium in standardized 

foods. Moreover, proposed rulemaking 

that would standardize food package 

labeling and finalization of a rule 

updating the definition of the term 

‘‘healthy’’ would help consumers more 

easily identify nutritious foods and 

maintain healthy diets. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9352 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

IV. Supporting the Wellbeing of 

Families and Communities 

The Department strives to support the 

wellbeing of Americans by funding and 

providing access to a range of critical 

social services. Millions of people 

benefit from HHS programs that help 

older adults and people with disabilities 

participate fully in their communities, 

promote opportunity and economic 

security for families, help refugees and 

other eligible newcomers integrate and 

thrive, and provide care for 

unaccompanied children. The Secretary 

recognizes that these programs and 

forms of assistance are more important 

than ever due to ongoing consequences 

of the pandemic, which have had an 

outsized impact on people of color and 

other underserved communities. 

To sustain and strengthen these 

essential benefits and services, the 

Department is prioritizing regulations 

that would improve their quality and 

accessibility while reducing burdens 

and increasing the efficiency of service 

delivery. The Secretary’s regulatory 

priority in this area includes rules 

aimed at strengthening high-quality 

services for older adults, expanding 

opportunities for children and youth to 

thrive, and providing pathways to 

economic success. 

a. Strengthening High-Quality Services 

for Older Adults 

The HHS Regulatory Plan includes 

rules aimed at enhancing the ability of 

Administration for Community Living 

(ACL) programs to protect the rights and 

wellbeing of older adults. For instance, 

the Department plans to finalize 

regulations for Adult Protective Services 

(APS) programs that will strengthen 

services for older adults and adults with 

disabilities that may experience elder 

abuse. 

Furthermore, consistent with the 

Biden-Harris Administration’s Nursing 

Home Reform Action Plan, the 

Department’s Regulatory Plan includes 

efforts to improve the safety and quality 

of care in the nation’s nursing homes. 

For example, the Department plans to 

finalize rules that institute minimum 

staffing standards in nursing homes, 

protect residents, and prevent fraud, 

waste, and abuse, and mandate 

transparency of ownership, 

management, and other information 

regarding Medicare skilled nursing 

facilities (SNFs) and Medicaid nursing 

facilities. These efforts complement the 

Department’s ongoing efforts to also 

strengthen long term services and 

supports delivered to older adults and 

people with disabilities in their homes 

and communities. 

Notably, consistent with the 

Administration’s commitment to 

maximize transparency and public 

engagement, and to allow communities 

greater opportunities to provide input in 

the regulatory process, HHS sought the 

expertise of colleagues in the Office of 

Management and Budget, the General 

Services Administration, and the 

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau 

to inform an alternative approach to 

public comments for the proposed 

nursing home minimum staffing rule. 

The Department ultimately established 

and disseminated in public materials a 

direct web link to allow a more 

accessible comment submission path to 

the public, lowering the barriers to 

participation for the nursing home 

residents, families, and facility staff who 

will be directly impacted by this 

regulation. 

b. Expanding Opportunities for Children 

and Youth To Thrive 

The Department’s mission to provide 

effective human services includes a 

focus on protecting the wellbeing of 

children and youth. This focus has 

special significance given the ongoing 

consequences of the pandemic, which 

have deeply affected the lives of 

children and youth—particularly Black, 

Latino, Indigenous, Native American, 

and other underserved youth with 

disproportionate involvement in the 

child welfare system. Several rules 

planned for FY 2024 are aimed at 

enhancing programs and protections for 

youth and families experiencing foster 

care, unaccompanied children in the 

Department’s care, and individuals 

entitled to child support. 

As part of its focus on the foster care 

and the child welfare system, the 

Department plans to clarify 

requirements for title IV–E/IV–B 

agencies to effectively serve LGBTQI+ 

children and families by ensuring safe 

and appropriate foster care placements 

and ensure a process that is responsive 

to children’s concerns. The Department 

recently issued a final rule allowing 

licensing standards for relative or 

kinship foster family homes that are 

different from non-relative or nonkinship homes. These changes reduce 

barriers to licensing for relatives and kin 

who can provide continuity and a safe 

and loving home for children when they 

cannot be with their parents. 

Additionally, the Department recently 

issued a proposed rule to facilitate the 

provision of independent legal 

representation to a child who is a 

candidate for foster care, or in foster 

care, and to a parent preparing for 

participation in foster care legal 

proceedings. Improving access to 

independent legal representation may 

help prevent the removal of a child from 

the home or, for a child in foster care, 

achieve permanence faster. 

The Department will also finalize a 

rule to amend the Child Care and 

Development Fund (CCDF) regulations 

with changes that will lower child care 

costs for families, increase parent’s 

child care options, reduce barriers to 

receiving child care assistance, increase 

payments to providers, support higher 

program quality, and improve child care 

stability. 

Moreover, the Department will 

propose a rule that aims to improve the 

quality, stability, and continuity of 

comprehensive Head Start services for 

thousands of children and their families 

by adding provisions to the Head Start 

Program Performance standards to better 

support the Head Start workforce. 

The Department also plans to finalize 

a rule to strengthen services and 

protections for unaccompanied children 

in its care. 

c. Providing Pathways to Economic 

Success 

In administering the Temporary 

Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) 

program, the Department works with 

States, territories, and tribes to help 

children and families achieve economic 

success. The COVID–19 pandemic 

highlighted the importance of using 

Federal investments and existing 

program flexibilities strategically to 

reduce family poverty and alleviate 

economic crises, especially for families 

of color and underserved communities. 

In the next year, the Department plans 

to finalize a rule to reform the TANF 

program to strengthen its role as a safety 

net and for families and individuals 

with the lowest incomes. The proposed 

rule would strengthen TANF’s role in 

supporting family well-being and work, 

as well as creating additional 

accountability for States to ensure 

TANF funds serve their intended 

purpose, while maintaining State 

flexibility. These changes are intended 

to improve the overall wellbeing of 

families while addressing inequities in 

program services and policies. 

Additionally, the Department is 

proposing Federal support for 

employment and training services for 

non-custodial parents as a supplement 

to traditional enforcement tools, to make 

the child support program more 

effective and help noncustodial parents 

find and sustain work to be able to 

support their children. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9353 

HHS—OFFICE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS 

(OCR) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

48. Rulemaking on Discrimination on 

the Basis of Disability in Health and 

Human Services Programs or Activities 

[0945–AA15] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: sec. 504 of the 

Rehabilitation Act of 1973; 29 U.S.C. 

794 

CFR Citation: 45 CFR 84. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This proposed rule would 

revise regulations under section 504 of 

the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 to 

address discrimination on the basis of 

disability in HHS-funded programs and 

activities. Covered topics include 

nondiscrimination in medical treatment; 

child welfare programs and activities; 

value assessment methods; accessible 

medical equipment; accessible web 

content, mobile apps, and kiosks; and 

other relevant health and human 

services activities. 

Statement of Need: To robustly 

enforce the prohibition of 

discrimination on the basis of disability, 

OCR will update the section 504 of the 

Rehabilitation Act regulations to clarify 

obligations and address issues that have 

emerged in our enforcement experience 

(including complaints OCR has 

received), case law, and statutory 

changes under the Americans with 

Disabilities Act and other relevant laws, 

in the forty-plus years since the 

regulation was promulgated. OCR has 

heard from complainants and many 

other stakeholders, as well as Federal 

partners, including the National Council 

on Disability, on the need for updated 

regulations in a number of important 

areas. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The current 

regulations have not been updated to be 

consistent with the Americans with 

Disabilities Act, the Americans with 

Disabilities Amendments Act, or the 

1992 Amendments to the Rehabilitation 

Act, all of which made changes that 

should be reflected in the HHS section 

504 regulations. Under Executive Order 

12250, the Department of Justice has 

provided a template for HHS to update 

this regulation. 

Alternatives: OCR considered issuing 

guidance, and/or investigating 

individual complaints and compliance 

reviews. However, we concluded that 

not taking regulatory action could result 

in continued discrimination, inequitable 

treatment and even untimely deaths of 

people with disabilities. OCR continues 

to receive complaints alleging serious 

acts of disability discrimination each 

year. While we continue to engage in 

enforcement, we believe that our 

enforcement and recipients’ overall 

compliance with the law will be better 

supported by the presence of a clearly 

articulated regulatory framework than 

continuing the status quo. Continuing to 

conduct case-by-case investigations 

without a broader framework risks lack 

of clarity on the part of providers and 

violations of section 504 that could have 

been avoided and may go unaddressed. 

By issuing a proposed rule, we are 

undertaking the most efficient and 

effective means of promoting 

compliance with section 504. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

Department anticipates that this 

rulemaking will result in significant 

benefits, namely by providing clear 

guidance to the covered entity 

community regarding requirements to 

administer their health programs and 

activities in a non-discriminatory 

manner. In turn, the Department 

anticipates cost savings as individuals 

with disabilities can access a range of 

health care services. The Department 

expects that the rule, when finalized, 

will generate some changes in action 

and behavior that may generate some 

costs. The rule will address a wide 

range of issues, with varying impacts 

and a comprehensive analysis is 

underway. Total anticipated costs are 

approximately $1,843.2 million (7% 

discount) or $1,782 million (3% 

discount) and total anticipated benefits 

are approximately $1,864.3 million (7% 

discount) or 1,927.7 million (3% 

discount). There are additional but 

necessary costs to make web content 

and mobile applications accessible and 

to purchase accessible medical 

diagnostic equipment (MDE). DOJ has 

issued/will issue substantially similar 

rulemaking under Title II of the ADA, 

those costs are widely understood to be 

necessary to ensure people with 

disabilities have equal or comparable 

access to health and human services. 

Risks: To be determined. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 09/14/23 88 FR 63392 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

11/13/23 

Final Action ......... 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: Local, 

State. 

Agency Contact: Molly Burgdorf, 

Section Chief, Policy Division, 

Department of Health and Human 

Services, Office for Civil Rights, 200 

Independence Avenue SW, Washington, 

DC 20201, Phone: 800 368–1019, TDD 

Phone: 800 537–7697, Email: 504@

hhs.gov. 

RIN: 0945–AA15 

HHS—OCR 

49. • Proposed Modifications to the 

HIPAA Security Rule To Strengthen the 

Cybersecurity of Electronic Protected 

Health Information [0945–AA22] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined. 

Legal Authority: Health Insurance 

Portability and Accountability Act of 

1996 (HIPAA), sec. 262 (42 U.S.C. 

1320d–2); Health Information 

Technology for Economic and Clinical 

Health (HITECH) Act, sec. 13401 (42 

U.S.C. 17931) 

CFR Citation: 45 CFR 160; 45 CFR 

164. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rule will propose 

modifications to the Security Standards 

for the Protection of Electronic 

Protected Health Information (the 

Security Rule) under the Health 

Insurance Portability and 

Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) and 

the Health Information Technology for 

Economic and Clinical Health Act of 

2009 (HITECH Act). These 

modifications will improve 

cybersecurity in the health care sector 

by strengthening requirements for 

HIPAA regulated entities to safeguard 

electronic protected health information 

to prevent, detect, contain, mitigate, and 

recover from cybersecurity threats. 

Statement of Need: In February 2003, 

the HIPAA Security Rule established 

standards for the security of electronic 

protected health information (ePHI) to 

be implemented by HIPAA covered 

entities and, by amendment of the 

HITECH Act, their business associates 

(collectively, ‘‘regulated entities’’). Prior 

to the HIPAA Security Rule, standard 

security measures did not exist in the 

health care industry to address the 

security of ePHI while stored and 

exchanged between entities. Since 2003, 

the Department has received 

recommendations from the National 

Committee on Vital and Health 

Statistics (NCVHS), an advisory 

committee to the Secretary of HHS, and 

the public to update and strengthen 

security standards to protect ePHI, 

especially in light of newer threats not 

previously contemplated in 2003 such 

as ransomware. Additionally, the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9354 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Department has reviewed media reports 

advocating the strengthening of 

protections provided by the HIPAA 

Security Rule as well as a report from 

a U.S. Senator advocating for 

modernizing HIPAA to increase 

protections of ePHI in the face of current 

cyber threats. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The current 

HIPAA Security Rule has not been 

updated to address the recent dramatic 

increase in cyber-attacks on the health 

care sector that are undermining the 

security of individuals’ ePHI. Section 

1173(d) of the Social Security Act 

requires the Secretary of HHS to adopt 

security standards that take into account 

the technical capabilities of record 

systems used to maintain health 

information, the costs of security 

measures, the need to train persons who 

have access to health information, the 

value of audit trails in computerized 

record systems, and the needs and 

capabilities of small health care 

providers and rural health care 

providers. Since publication of the 

HIPAA Security Rule in 2003, there has 

been an evolution in technical 

capabilities of record systems used to 

maintain health information and costs 

of security measures that support 

updating the HIPAA Security Rule to 

help ensure that it can continue to 

provide a baseline of security standards 

to meet current and emerging security 

risks and threats to ePHI. 

Alternatives: HHS considered whether 

these policy updates could be 

implemented through guidance. 

However, the Department determined 

that this would be insufficient to 

prevent and address cybersecurity 

threats and vulnerabilities facing the 

U.S. health care system. Revisions to the 

existing HIPAA Security Rule will help 

ensure the cybersecurity of individuals’ 

ePHI. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: To be 

determined. 

Risks: To be determined. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 09/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses, 

Governmental Jurisdictions, 

Organizations. 

Government Levels Affected: 

Undetermined. 

Federalism: Undetermined. 

International Impacts: This regulatory 

action will be likely to have 

international trade and investment 

effects, or otherwise be of international 

interest. 

Agency Contact: Marissa GordonNguyen, Senior Advisor for Health 

Information Privacy, Data, and 

Cybersecurity Policy, Department of 

Health and Human Services, Office for 

Civil Rights, 200 Independence Avenue 

SW, Washington, DC 20201, Phone: 800 

368–1019, TDD Phone: 800 537–7697, 

Email: ocrprivacy@hhs.gov. 

RIN: 0945–AA22 

HHS—OCR 

Final Rule Stage 

50. Confidentiality of Substance Use 

Disorder Patient Records [0945–AA16] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 290dd–2 

amended by the Coronavirus Aid, 

Relief, and Economic Security Act (the 

CARES Act), Pub. L. 116–136, sec. 3221 

(March 27, 2020); Health Information 

Technology for Economic and Clinical 

Health (HITECH) Act, Pub. L. 111–5, 

sec. 13402 and 13405 (February 17, 

2009); Health Insurance Portability and 

Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) 

Pub. L. 104–191, sec. 264 (August 21, 

1996); Social Security Act, Pub. L. 74– 

271 (August 14, 1935) (see secs. 1171 to 

1179 of the Social Security Act, 42 

U.S.C. 1320d to 1320d–8) 

CFR Citation: 42 CFR 2; 45 CFR 160; 

45 CFR 164. 

Legal Deadline: NPRM, Statutory, 

March 27, 2021. The CARES Act 

requires revisions to regulations with 

respect to uses and disclosures of 

information occurring on or after the 

date that is 12 months after the date of 

enactment of the Act (March 27, 2021); 

and not later than one year after the date 

of enactment, an update to the Notice of 

Privacy Practices (NPP) provisions of 

the HIPAA Privacy Rule at 45 CFR 

164.520. 

Abstract: This final rule, to be issued 

in coordination with the Substance 

Abuse and Mental Health Services 

Administration (SAMHSA), would 

implement provisions of section 3221 of 

the CARES Act. Section 3221 amended 

42 U.S.C. 290dd–2 to better harmonize 

the 42 CFR part 2 (part 2) confidentiality 

requirements with certain permissions 

and requirements of the HIPAA Rules 

and the HITECH Act. 

Statement of Need: Rulemaking is 

needed to implement section 3221 of 

the CARES Act, which modified the 

statute that establishes protections for 

the confidentiality of substance use 

disorder (SUD) treatment records and 

authorizes the implementing regulations 

at 42 CFR part 2 (part 2). As required by 

the CARES Act, this regulation will: (1) 

Align certain provisions of part 2 with 

aspects of the HIPAA Privacy, Breach 

Notification, and Enforcement Rules. (2) 

Strengthen part 2 protections against 

uses and disclosures of patients’ SUD 

records for civil, criminal, 

administrative, and legislative 

proceedings. (3) Require that a HIPAA 

Notice of Privacy Practices address 

privacy practices with respect to part 2 

records. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Section 

3221(i) of the CARES Act requires 

rulemaking as may be necessary to 

implement and enforce section 3221. 

Alternatives: HHS considered whether 

the CARES Act provisions could be 

implemented through guidance. 

However, rulemaking is required 

because the current part 2 regulations 

are inconsistent with the authorizing 

statute, as amended by the CARES Act. 

HHS considered whether to include the 

anti-discrimination provisions of 

section 3221(g) in this rulemaking. 

However, because implementation of 

the anti-discrimination provisions 

implicates numerous civil rights 

authorities, which require collaboration 

with the Department of Justice, HHS 

will address the anti-discrimination 

provisions in a separate rulemaking. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: HHS 

estimates that the effects of the 

requirements for regulated entities 

would result in new costs of 

$64,299,891 within 12 months of 

implementing the final rule, followed by 

$2,514,756 of recurring annual costs in 

years two through five. HHS estimates 

these first-year costs would be partially 

offset by $12,755,378 annual cost 

savings, resulting in overall net costs of 

$10,582,027 over 5 years. 

Risks: To be determined. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 12/02/22 87 FR 74216 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

01/31/23 

Final Action ......... 11/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses, 

Governmental Jurisdictions, 

Organizations. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State, Tribal. 

Agency Contact: Marissa GordonNguyen, Senior Advisor for Health 

Information Privacy, Data, and 

Cybersecurity Policy, Department of 

Health and Human Services, Office for 

Civil Rights, 200 Independence Avenue 

SW, Washington, DC 20201, Phone: 800 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9355 

368–1019, TDD Phone: 800 537–7697, 

Email: ocrprivacy@hhs.gov. 

RIN: 0945–AA16 

HHS—OCR 

51. Nondiscrimination in Health

Programs and Activities [0945–AA17]

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: sec. 1557 of the 

Patient Protection and Affordable Care 

Act (42 U.S.C. 18116); 42 U.S.C. 1302; 

42 U.S.C. 1395; 42 U.S.C. 1395eee(f); 42 

U.S.C. 1396u–4(f); 42 U.S.C. 2000d–1; 

20 U.S.C. 1405; 29 U.S.C. 794; 42 U.S.C. 

290dd–2; 21 U.S.C. 1174; 42 U.S.C. 

300gg to 300gg–63; 42 U.S.C. 300gg–91; 

42 U.S.C. 300gg–92; 42 U.S.C. 300gg– 

111 to 300gg–139 as amended, sec. 

3203; Pub. L. 116–136, 134 Stat. 281; 42 

U.S.C. 18021 to 18024; 42 U.S.C. 18031 

to 18033; 42 U.S.C. 18041 to 18042; 42 

U.S.C. 18044; 42 U.S.C. 18051; 42 U.S.C. 

18054; 42 U.S.C. 18061; 42 U.S.C. 

18063; 42 U.S.C. 18071; 42 U.S.C. 18081 

to 18083; 26 U.S.C. 36B 

CFR Citation: 42 CFR 438; 42 CFR 

440; 42 CFR 457; 42 CFR 460; 45 CFR 

80; 45 CFR 84; 45 CFR 86; 45 CFR 91; 

45 CFR 92; 45 CFR 147; 45 CFR 155; 45 

CFR 156; . . . 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rule proposed to 

address changes to the 2020 Final Rule 

implementing section 1557 of the 

Patient Protection and Affordable Care 

Act (PPACA). Section 1557 of PPACA 

prohibits discrimination on the basis of 

race, color, national origin, sex, age, or 

disability under any health program or 

activity, any part of which is receiving 

Federal financial assistance, including 

credits, subsidies, or contracts of 

insurance, or under any program or 

activity that is administered by an 

Executive Agency, or any entity 

established under title l of the PPACA. 

Statement of Need: The Biden-Harris 

Administration has made advancing 

health equity and nondiscrimination in 

health care a cornerstone of its policy 

agenda. The current section 1557 

implementing regulation significantly 

curtails the scope of application of 

section 1557 protections and creates 

uncertainty and ambiguity as to what 

constitutes prohibited discrimination in 

covered health programs and activities. 

Issuance of a revised section 1557 

implementing regulation is important 

because it would provide clear and 

concise regulations that are consistent 

with the statutory text and protect 

historically marginalized communities 

as they seek access to health programs 

and activities. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The 

Secretary of the Department is 

statutorily authorized to promulgate 

regulations to implement section 1557. 

42 U.S.C. 18116(c). The current section 

1557 Final Rule (issued in 2020) is in 

litigation. 

Alternatives: The Department has 

considered the alternative of 

maintaining the section 1557 

implementing regulation in its current 

form; however, the Department believes 

it is appropriate to undertake 

rulemaking given the Administration’s 

commitment to advancing equity and 

access to health care and in light of the 

issues raised in litigation challenges to 

the current rule. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: In 

enacting section 1557 of the ACA, 

Congress recognized the benefits of 

equal access to health services and 

health insurance that all individuals 

should have, regardless of their race, 

color, national origin, sex, age, or 

disability. The Department anticipates 

that this rulemaking will result in 

significant benefits that are difficult to 

quantify, namely by providing clear 

guidance to the covered entity 

community regarding requirements to 

administer their health programs and 

activities in a non-discriminatory 

manner. In turn, the Department 

anticipates cost savings as individuals 

are able to access a range of health care 

services that will result in decreased 

health disparities among historically 

marginalized groups and increased 

health benefits. The Department 

estimates annualized costs over a 5-year 

time horizon of about $551 million or 

$560 million; however, it is important to 

recognize that this rule applies preexisting nondiscrimination 

requirements in Federal civil rights laws 

to various entities, the great majority of 

which have been covered by these 

requirements for years. 

Risks: To be determined. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 08/04/22 87 FR 47751 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

10/03/22 

Final Action ......... 01/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State. 

URL For More Information: https://

www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/forindividuals/section-1557/index.html. 

URL For Public Comments: https://

www.regulations.gov/document/HHSOS-2022-0012-0001. 

Agency Contact: Daniel Shieh, 

Associate Deputy Director, Policy 

Division, Department of Health and 

Human Services, Office for Civil Rights, 

200 Independence Avenue SW, 

Washington, DC 20201, Phone: 800 368– 

1019, Email: 1557@hhs.gov. 

Related RIN: Related to 0945–AA02, 

Related to 0945–AA11 

RIN: 0945–AA17 

HHS—OCR 

52. Safeguarding the Rights of

Conscience as Protected by Federal

Statutes [0945–AA18]

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301 

CFR Citation: 44 CFR 88. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Department proposed to 

partially rescind the May 21, 2019, final 

rule entitled, Protecting Statutory 

Conscience Rights in Health Care; 

Delegations of Authority (2019 Final 

Rule), while leaving in effect the 

framework created by the February 23, 

2011, final rule, entitled, Regulation for 

the Enforcement of Federal Health Care 

Provider Conscience Protection Laws. 

The Department also proposed to retain, 

with some modifications, certain 

provisions of the 2019 Final Rule 

regarding federal conscience protections 

but eliminate others. 

Statement of Need: The Biden-Harris 

Administration takes seriously its 

obligations to comply with Federal 

conscience laws and the balance that 

Congress struck through these statutes. 

This rule demonstrates the Department’s 

commitment to educating patients, 

providers, and other covered entities 

about their rights and obligations under 

the conscience statutes and to ensure 

compliance with those authorities. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The 

Secretary of the Department of Health & 

Human Services is statutorily 

authorized to promulgate regulations to 

prescribe regulations for the government 

of his department, the conduct of its 

employees, the distribution and 

performance of its business, and the 

custody, use, and preservation of its 

records, papers, and property. 5 U.S.C. 

301. The current Conscience Final Rule

(issued in 2019) is in pending litigation.

Alternatives: The Department has 

considered the alternative of 

maintaining the current regulation in its 

current form; however, the Department 

believes it is appropriate to undertake 

rulemaking in light of the issues raised 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9356 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

in litigation challenges to the current 

rule. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

Department estimates that the final rule 

would generate cost savings of $725.5 

million using a 3-percent discount rate 

and $586.4 million using a 7-percent 

discount rate over the next five years. 

Risks: To be determined. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 01/05/23 88 FR 820 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

03/06/23 

Final Action ......... 11/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: 

Organizations. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State 

Agency Contact: David Christensen, 

Section Chief, Policy Division, 

Department of Health and Human 

Services, Office for Civil Rights, 200 

Independence Avenue SW, Washington, 

DC 20201, Phone: 800 368–1019, Email: 

consciencerule@hhs.gov. 

Related RIN: Related to 0945–AA10 

RIN: 0945–AA18 

HHS—OCR 

53. Health and Human Services Grants 

Regulation [0945–AA19] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301 

CFR Citation: 45 CFR 75. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This final rule will 

repromulgate certain nondiscrimination 

provisions of the Uniform 

Administrative Requirements, 45 CFR 

part 75, under the Department’s 

Housekeeping Authority, 5 U.S.C. 301. 

The rule will clarify the Department’s 

public policy requirement that no 

person otherwise eligible will be 

discriminated against in the 

administration of HHS grants, consistent 

with applicable federal statute and 

applicable Supreme Court precedent. It 

will also set forth a list of thirteen 

Federal statutes which prohibit 

discrimination on the basis of sex to 

include on the basis of sexual 

orientation and gender identity, 

consistent with the Supreme Court’s 

decision in Bostock v. Clayton County. 

Statement of Need: This rule is 

needed to provide the Department with 

uniform regulations governing HHS 

grants, put the Department in the best 

position to defend HHS from ongoing 

litigation risk, and provide certainty to 

participants in HHS grant programs. 

Summary of Legal Basis: This rule is 

promulgated under 5 U.S.C. 301 and the 

December 26, 2013 OMB requirements, 

Uniform Administrative Requirements, 

Cost Principles, and Audit 

Requirements for Federal Awards, 79 FR 

75867. 

Alternatives: The Department 

published a final rule in 2021, 86 FR 

2257. That rule was vacated by a federal 

district court because it had not been 

promulgated in compliance with the 

Administrative Procedure Act. Thus, 

HHS effectively reverts to the prior 

Final Rule (2016 Grants Rule), 81 FR 

89393, which is currently not being 

enforced due to a 2019 Notice of 

Nonenforcement, 84 FR 63809. Both the 

2016 Grants Rule and the 2019 Notice 

of Nonenforcement are subject to 

litigation risk. If OCR did not 

promulgate this new Grants Rule, HHS 

could lift the 2019 Notice of 

Nonenforcement and defend the 2016 

Grants Rule. However, we believe that 

issuing the proposed rule is the most 

effective way to provide the Department 

with uniform grants regulations in a 

manner that avoids costly litigation. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

Department expects the benefits of 

regulatory clarity will simplify 

compliance and ensure fair and 

nondiscriminatory administration of 

covered programs under this rule. Costs 

associated with implementing this 

administrative change include costs for 

grantees to become familiar with the 

rule and for some covered entities to 

seek an exemption from the rule. 

Risks: To be determined. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 07/13/23 88 FR 44750 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

09/11/23 

Final Action ......... 03/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: David Hyams, 

Section Chief, Policy Division, 

Department of Health and Human 

Services, Office for Civil Rights, 200 

Independence Avenue SW, Washington, 

DC 20201, Phone: 800 368–1019, Email: 

1557@hhs.gov. 

Related RIN: Related to 0991–AC06, 

Related to 0991–AC16 

RIN: 0945–AA19 

HHS—OCR 

54. Proposed Modifications to the 

HIPAA Privacy Rule To Support 

Reproductive Health Care Privacy 

[0945–AA20] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: Health Insurance 

Portability and Accountability Act (PL 

104–191); Executive Order 14076, 

Protecting Access to Reproductive 

Healthcare Services 

CFR Citation: 45 CFR 160; 45 CFR 

164. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This final rule will modify 

the Standards for Privacy of 

Individually Identifiable Health 

Information (Privacy Rule) under the 

Health Insurance Portability and 

Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) and 

the Health Information Technology for 

Economic and Clinical Health Act of 

2009 (HITECH Act). These 

modifications will modify existing 

standards permitting uses and 

disclosures of protected health 

information (PHI) by limiting uses and 

disclosures of PHI for certain purposes. 

Statement of Need: HIPAA and the 

HIPAA Rules promote access to health 

care by establishing standards for the 

privacy of PHI to protect the 

confidentiality of individuals’ health 

information. These protections promote 

the development and maintenance of 

confidence and trust between 

individuals and covered entities, and 

help to improve the completeness and 

accuracy of individual medical records. 

The Privacy Rule, as it has been 

amended over time, carefully balances 

the interests of individuals and society 

in identifiable health information by 

establishing when and how such 

information may be used and disclosed, 

with and without the individual’s 

permission. The Department has 

received communications from 

members of Congress and the public and 

reviewed media reports indicating 

concerns and confusion regarding the 

role of the Privacy Rule in protecting the 

privacy of individual’s health 

information, given the evolution of state 

law in the area of reproductive health 

care. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The current 

HIPAA Privacy Rule has not been 

updated to reflect the evolution in state 

law that undermines the privacy of 

individuals’ protected health 

information, particularly for use in 

investigations into or legal proceedings 

against persons in connection with 

reproductive health care. The final rule 

is consistent with Executive Order 

14076, which directed the Secretary of 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9357 

Health and Human Services to consider 

actions to strengthen the protection of 

sensitive information related to 

reproductive healthcare services and 

bolster patient-provider confidentiality. 

Alternatives: HHS considered whether 

these policy changes could be 

implemented through guidance. 

However, the Department determined 

that this would be insufficient to 

address the concerns that have arisen in 

the wake of the recent evolution in state 

law pertaining to reproductive health 

care that has jeopardize the privacy of 

individuals’ protected health 

information and affected individuals’ 

relationship with their health care 

providers and the U.S. health care 

system. Revisions to the existing HIPAA 

Privacy Rule are necessary to reestablish 

that trust and to ensure the privacy of 

individuals’ protected health 

information. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: HHS 

estimates that the effects of the 

requirements for regulated entities 

would result in new costs of 

$611,831,396 within 12 months of 

implementing the final rule, followed by 

approximately $67,831,396 of recurring 

annual costs in years two through five. 

The Department anticipates that this 

rulemaking will result in significant 

benefits that are difficult to quantify 

because the area of health care the 

proposed rule addresses is among the 

most sensitive for patients and 

providers if privacy is violated. 

Additionally, the value of privacy, 

which cannot be recovered once lost, 

and trust that privacy will be protected 

by others, is difficult to quantify fully. 

The rule would prevent or reduce 

numerous harms, resulting in nonquantifiable benefits to patient and 

providers. 

Risks: To be determined. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 04/17/23 88 FR 23506 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

06/16/23 

Final Action ......... 03/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses, 

Governmental Jurisdictions, 

Organizations. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State, Tribal. 

Federalism: This action may have 

federalism implications as defined in 

E.O. 13132. 

Agency Contact: Marissa GordonNguyen, Senior Advisor for Health 

Information Privacy, Data, and 

Cybersecurity Policy, Department of 

Health and Human Services, Office for 

Civil Rights, 200 Independence Avenue 

SW, Washington, DC 20201, Phone: 800 

368–1019, TDD Phone: 800 537–7697, 

Email: ocrprivacy@hhs.gov. 

RIN: 0945–AA20 

HHS—OFFICE OF THE NATIONAL 

COORDINATOR FOR HEALTH 

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (ONC) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

55. Establishment of Disincentives for 

Health Care Providers Who Have 

Committed Information Blocking 

[0955–AA05] 

Priority: Substantive, Nonsignificant. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 300jj–52; 

42 U.S.C. 1302; 42 U.S.C. 1306; 42 

U.S.C. 1395hh; 42 U.S.C. 1395jjj; 42 

U.S.C. 1395rr(1); 5 U.S.C. 552.2 

CFR Citation: 45 CFR 171; 42 CFR 

414; 42 CFR 425; 42 CFR 495. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The rulemaking implements 

certain provisions of the 21st Century 

Cures Act (Cures Act) to establish 

appropriate disincentives for health care 

providers determined by the HHS 

Inspector General to have committed 

information blocking. Consistent with 

the Cures Act, the rulemaking 

establishes a first set of disincentives 

using HHS authorities under applicable 

Federal law, including authorities 

delegated to the Centers for Medicare & 

Medicaid Services. 

Statement of Need: The rulemaking 

would implement a provision of the 

Cures Act which requires the HHS 

Office of the Inspector General (OIG) to 

refer health care providers that OIG 

determines to have committed 

information blocking to the appropriate 

agency to be subject to appropriate 

disincentives using authorities under 

applicable Federal law, as the Secretary 

sets forth through notice and comment 

rulemaking. Release of the proposed 

rule is needed to implement this critical 

component of the Cures Act and ensure 

effective enforcement of information 

blocking rules. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The 

provisions would be implemented 

under the authority of the Public Health 

Service Act, as amended by the Cures 

Act. 

Alternatives: ONC will consider 

different available authorities under 

which appropriate disincentives could 

be established deter information 

blocking and still minimize regulatory 

burden for health care providers. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

costs of this proposed rule would be 

minimal. Investigated parties may incur 

some costs in response to an OIG 

investigation or the application of a 

disincentive by an HHS agency, 

however, this would depend on the 

frequency of prohibited conduct. The 

expected benefits of the regulation are 

deterring information and its negative 

impacts on many important aspects of 

health care, including effective health 

information exchange, patient access, 

duplicative testing and costs, and the 

availability and quality of care. 

Risks: We anticipate that health care 

providers will express concern with the 

potential complexity of the approach 

(i.e., the application of a range of 

disincentives based on available 

authorities) as compared to a range of 

civil monetary penalties or fines. ONC 

will continue to consider additional 

potential risks, identify them for 

stakeholders, and seek comment from 

stakeholders during the comment period 

for the proposed rule. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 11/01/23 88 FR 74947 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

01/02/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Alex Baker, Federal 

Policy Branch Chief, Department of 

Health and Human Services, Office of 

the National Coordinator for Health 

Information Technology, 330 C Street 

SW, 7th Fl, Washington, DC 20201, 

Phone: 202 690–7151, Email: 

alexander.baker@hhs.gov. 

RIN: 0955–AA05 

HHS—CENTERS FOR DISEASE 

CONTROL AND PREVENTION (CDC) 

Final Rule Stage 

56. Control of Communicable Diseases; 

Foreign Quarantine [0920–AA75] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 264; 42 

U.S.C. 265 

CFR Citation: 42 CFR 71. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rulemaking amends 

current regulation to enable CDC to 

require airlines to collect and provide to 

CDC certain data elements regarding 

passengers and crew arriving from 

foreign countries under certain 

circumstances. 

Statement of Need: In order to control 

the introduction, transmission, and 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I 
9358 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

spread of communicable diseases such 

as COVID–19 into the United States, the 

collection of traveler contact 

information helps ensure that CDC and 

state and local health authorities are 

able to identify and locate persons 

arriving in, or transiting through, the 

United States from a foreign country 

who may have been exposed to a 

communicable disease abroad. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The Public 

Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 264 and 

268) authorizes the Secretary of the 

Department of Health and Human 

Services to make and enforce 

regulations necessary to prevent the 

introduction, transmission, or spread of 

communicable diseases from foreign 

countries into the United States, or from 

one State or possession into any other 

State or possession. Regulations that 

implement federal quarantine authority 

are currently promulgated in 42 CFR 

parts 70 and 71. CDC’s authority for 

collecting these data fields is contained 

in 42 CFR 71.4. 

Alternatives: The transmission of 

disease, as seen during the COVID–19 

pandemic, has the potential to lead to 

thousands or millions of deaths in 

addition to the significant healthcare 

and economic costs. Follow-up with 

passengers arriving from foreign 

countries who may be infectious or 

exposed to a communicable disease is 

critical. The alternative to collecting 

traveler contact information before their 

flight is to collect the information from 

airlines following the passenger’s flight. 

When this was done in the past, some 

airlines took several days to respond to 

a single request if the information was 

available. In addition, there is 

significant time and labor required for 

CDC to obtain additional information 

from federal databases and process the 

received information into a format 

suitable for distribution to state and 

local health authorities in the United 

States. As a result, obtaining contact 

information after a flight, assuming that 

information is available, can lead to a 

delay of several days before health 

authorities can start contacting 

potentially exposed travelers. This time 

delay allows for travelers to be lost to 

follow-up or become symptomatic or 

infectious. The time required and costs 

incurred under this alternative increase 

exponentially with multiple post-flight 

manifest requests to airlines. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

annual, ongoing costs to collect traveler 

contact information, in the form of 

airline and travel agency staff time and 

passenger time, are estimated to be 

approximately $285 million. This does 

not include the initial costs for updating 

IT systems and employee training, 

which have already been incurred. The 

costs to the government are minimal, as 

the vast majority of passenger 

information that is being collected is 

transmitted to the government via 

established data systems that are already 

in use for other purposes. 

The benefits to this rulemaking 

include rapid follow-up by public 

health authorities with passengers who 

may be infectious or exposed to a 

communicable disease, resulting in less 

spread and transmission of disease into 

and throughout the United States, 

helping to prevent public health and 

economic costs. The availability of 

passenger contact data may be used by 

public health authorities to slow the 

introduction and transmission of novel 

infectious diseases, including new 

variants of the SARS–CoV–2 virus, 

which causes COVID–19 disease. 

Risks: The risk to not collecting this 

information is that CDC would have to 

revert to previous ways of obtaining this 

information for public health follow up. 

Some of those methods were time 

intensive and resulted in delays in 

follow up. 

The risk, although minimal, in 

collecting this information is that 

airlines and international passengers 

often do not want to comply (or may not 

want to comply) with the requirement. 

To date, however, CDC has found 

instances of noncompliance have been 

very limited. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Interim Final Rule 

Effective.

02/07/20 

Interim Final Rule 02/12/20 85 FR 7874 

Interim Final Rule 

Comment Period End.

03/13/20 

Final Action ......... 10/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

International Impacts: This regulatory 

action will be likely to have 

international trade and investment 

effects, or otherwise be of international 

interest. 

Agency Contact: Ashley C. 

Altenburger JD, Regulatory Analyst, 

Department of Health and Human 

Services, Centers for Disease Control 

and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Road NE, 

MS: H 16–4, Atlanta, GA 30307, Phone: 

800 232–4636, Email: 

dgmqpolicyoffice@cdc.gov. 

RIN: 0920–AA75 

HHS—FOOD AND DRUG 

ADMINISTRATION (FDA) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

57. Tobacco Product Standard for 

Nicotine Level of Certain Tobacco 

Products [0910–AI76] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 21 U.S.C. 387g 

CFR Citation: 21 CFR 1160. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The proposed rule is a 

tobacco product standard that would 

establish a maximum nicotine level in 

cigarettes and certain other finished 

tobacco products. 

Statement of Need: Each year, 480,000 

people die prematurely from a smokingattributed disease, making tobacco use 

the leading cause of preventable disease 

and death in the United States. Nearly 

all these adverse health effects are 

ultimately the result of addiction to the 

nicotine in combusted tobacco products, 

leading to repeated exposure to 

toxicants from those products. Nicotine 

is powerfully addictive. The U.S. 

Surgeon General has reported that 87 

percent of adult smokers start smoking 

before age 18, and half of adult smokers 

become addicted before age 18. This 

proposed rule is a tobacco product 

standard that would establish a 

maximum nicotine level in cigarettes 

and certain other finished tobacco 

products. Because tobacco-related 

harms primarily result from addiction to 

products that repeatedly expose users to 

toxins, FDA would take this action to 

reduce addictiveness of certain tobacco 

products, thus giving addicted users a 

greater ability to quit. This product 

standard would also help to prevent 

experimenters (mainly youth) from 

initiating regular use, and, therefore, 

from becoming regular smokers. The 

proposed product standard is 

anticipated to benefit the population as 

a whole, while also advancing health 

equity by addressing disparities 

associated with cigarette smoking, 

dependence, and cessation. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Section 907 

of the FD&C Act authorizes the adoption 

of tobacco product standards if the 

Secretary finds that a tobacco product 

standard is appropriate for the 

protection of public health, and 

includes authority related to provisions 

for nicotine yields in tobacco product 

standards. 

Alternatives: In addition to the costs 

and benefits of the product standard as 

proposed, FDA plans to assess the costs 

and benefits of a different effective date 

for the rule and the impact of including 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9359 

additional tobacco products in the 

product standard. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

anticipated benefits of the product 

standard include benefits from reduced 

death and disease resulting from 

decreased tobacco use among adult 

consumers, reduced death and disease 

from secondhand smoke, and reduced 

death and disease among youth who are 

deterred from initiating under the 

product standard. The qualitative 

benefits of the proposed rule include 

impacts such as reduced illness and 

increased productivity for smokers and 

nonsmokers, as well as reduced 

smoking-related fires, cigarette litter, 

and other environmental impacts. 

The proposed rule is expected to 

generate compliance costs on affected 

entities, such as one-time costs to read 

and understand the rule and alter 

manufacturing and importing practices; 

costs to some consumers, such as search 

costs to research substitute products and 

temporary withdrawal costs, and 

enforcement costs to the government. 

Risks: None. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State, Tribal. 

Federalism: This action may have 

federalism implications as defined in 

E.O. 13132. 

Agency Contact: Courtney Smith, 

Senior Regulatory Counsel, Department 

of Health and Human Services, Food 

and Drug Administration, Center for 

Tobacco Products, Document Control 

Center, Building 71, Room G335, 10903 

New Hampshire Avenue, Silver Spring, 

MD 20993 Phone: 877 287–1373, Fax: 

877 287–1426, Email: ctpregulations@

fda.hhs.gov. 

RIN: 0910–AI76 

HHS—FDA 

58. Front-of-Package Nutrition Labeling 

[0910–AI80] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined. 

Legal Authority: Not Yet Determined 

CFR Citation: 21 CFR 101.6 (new). 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This proposed rule would 

require the front of food labels to 

display certain nutrition information to 

help consumers, especially those with 

lower nutrition knowledge, make more 

informed dietary choices. Front-ofpackage (FOP) nutrition labeling is 

intended to complement the Nutrition 

Facts label on packaged foods by giving 

consumers additional context to help 

them quickly and easily identify foods 

that can help them build a healthy 

eating pattern. A variety of FOP labeling 

systems have been adopted in countries 

world-wide and the experience in these 

countries suggests that FOP labeling 

may aid the ability to make healthier 

choices. FDA plays a key role within a 

broader, whole-of-government approach 

to help reduce the burden of chronic 

diseases and advance health equity by 

helping to improve dietary patterns in 

the U.S. This proposed rule is part of 

FDA’s nutrition efforts to empower 

consumers with nutrition information to 

help them more easily identify healthier 

choices and may result in industry 

innovation to produce healthier foods. 

FDA will conduct public outreach on 

this project. FDA has held, and will 

continue to hold, listening sessions with 

a wide range of stakeholders, including 

consumer groups, public health 

organizations, academia, health care 

groups, and industry. Additionally, the 

Reagan-Udall Foundation will host a 

public meeting in November in 

collaboration with FDA to hear input 

from a broad array of stakeholders, and 

we are launching a series of Tribal 

Listening Sessions to begin a 

conversation with federally recognized 

tribes on, among other things, our FOP 

initiative. 

Statement of Need: HHS implemented 

its first mandatory nutrition labeling 32 

years ago. The resulting Nutrition Facts 

label is iconic and 87% of American 

consumers report using the label. 

However, many consumers, particularly 

those with lower nutrition literacy, may 

find additional information on food 

packaging helpful in identifying foods 

that are part of constructing a healthy 

diet. This proposed rule, if finalized, 

could empower consumers with 

information to help them quickly 

identify foods that can help them build 

a healthy eating pattern. 

Summary of Legal Basis: In general, 

our legal authority rests on the 1990 

Nutrition Labeling and Education Act, 

which gave the Secretary the authority 

to require that certain nutrition 

information be conveyed to allow the 

public to readily observe and 

comprehend such information and to 

understand its relative significance in 

the context of a total daily diet. 

(Nutrition Labeling and Education Act 

of 1990. Public Law 101–535, 104 Stat 

2353, Sec. 2(b)(1)(A)). Authority for 

certain aspects may also be found in 

section 403(q), 403(a)(1), and 201(n) of 

the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic 

Act (FD&C Act). In addition, section 

701(a) of the FD&C Act authorizes the 

promulgation of regulations for the 

efficient enforcement of the FD&C Act. 

Alternatives: FDA will consider 

different options so that we maximize 

benefits to consumers. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

proposed rule, if finalized, is expected 

to generate compliance costs on affected 

entities, such as the cost to label 

packaged foods and the one-time costs 

to read and understand the rule. 

Estimated benefits to consumers TBD. 

Risks: None. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 06/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: 

Undetermined. 

Federalism: Undetermined. 

International Impacts: This regulatory 

action will be likely to have 

international trade and investment 

effects, or otherwise be of international 

interest. 

Agency Contact: Mark Kantor 

Nutritionist, Department of Health and 

Human Services Food and Drug 

Administration, CPK1 RM 3D034, HFS– 

830, 5001 Campus Drive, College Park, 

MD 20740, Phone: 240 402–2082, Email: 

mark.kantor@fda.hhs.gov. 

RIN: 0910–AI80 

HHS—FDA 

59. Medical Devices; Laboratory 

Developed Tests [0910–AI85] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Unfunded Mandates: This action may 

affect the private sector under Public 

Law 104–4. 

Legal Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321; 21 

U.S.C. 331; 21 U.S.C. 351; 21 U.S.C. 352; 

21 U.S.C. 360c; . . . 

CFR Citation: 21 CFR 809. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rule would amend the 

Food and Drug Administration’s 

regulations to make explicit that 

laboratory developed tests (LDTs) are 

devices under the Federal Food, Drug, 

and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act). 

Statement of Need: In 1976, the 

Medical Device Amendments of 1976 

(the MDA) amended the FD&C Act to 

create a comprehensive system for the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9360 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

regulation of devices intended for 

human use. In implementing the MDA, 

FDA has generally exercised 

enforcement discretion such that it 

generally has not enforced applicable 

requirements with respect to most LDTs. 

However, the risks associated with LDTs 

are much greater today than they were 

at the time of enactment of the MDA, 

and today’s LDTs are more similar to 

other in vitro diagnostic products (IVDs) 

that have not been under FDA’s general 

enforcement discretion approach. This 

rulemaking would amend FDA’s 

regulations to reflect that the device 

definition in the FD&C Act does not 

differentiate between entities 

manufacturing the device. In 

conjunction with this amendment, FDA 

is advancing a policy under which FDA 

intends to phase out its general 

enforcement discretion approach for 

LDTs, so that IVDs manufactured by a 

laboratory would generally fall under 

the same enforcement approach as other 

IVDs. This action is necessary to redress 

the imbalance in oversight of LDTs and 

other IVDs and to protect the public 

health by helping to assure the safety 

and effectiveness of LDTs. 

Summary of Legal Basis: FDA is 

issuing this rule under the Agency’s 

general rulemaking authorities and 

statutory authorities relating to devices 

in the FD&C Act, including the 

definition of a device under section 

201(h)(1) of the FD&C Act and FDA’s 

authority to issue regulations for the 

efficient enforcement of the FD&C Act 

under section 701(a) of the FD&C Act. 

Alternatives: The Agency has 

considered various options to protect 

the public health by helping to assure 

the safety and effectiveness of LDTs 

while avoiding undue disruption to the 

testing market. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: This 

rule would result in compliance costs 

for laboratories that are ensuring their 

IVDs are compliant with applicable 

statutory and regulatory requirements. 

We anticipate that the benefits would 

include a reduction in healthcare costs 

associated with unsafe or ineffective 

tests, including tests promoted with 

false or misleading claims, and from 

therapeutic decisions based on the 

results of those tests. 

Risks: None. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 10/03/23 88 FR 68006 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

12/04/23 

Final Action ......... 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Eitan Bernstein, 

Regulatory Counsel, Department of 

Health and Human Services, Food and 

Drug Administration, 10903 New 

Hampshire Avenue, WO 66, Silver 

Spring, MD 20993, Phone: 240 402– 

9812, Email: eitan.bernstein@

fda.hhs.gov. 

RIN: 0910–AI85 

HHS—FDA 

Final Rule Stage 

60. Nonprescription Drug Product With 

an Additional Condition for 

Nonprescription Use [0910–AH62] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321; 21 

U.S.C. 352; 21 U.S.C. 355; 21 U.S.C. 371; 

42 U.S.C. 262; 42 U.S.C. 264; . . . 

CFR Citation: 21 CFR 201.67; 21 CFR 

314.56; 21 CFR 314.81; 21 CFR 314.125; 

21 CFR 314.127. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The final rule is intended to 

increase options for applicants to 

develop and market safe and effective 

nonprescription drug products, which 

could improve public health by 

broadening the types of nonprescription 

drug products available to consumers. 

The final rule would establish 

requirements for a drug product that 

could be marketed as a nonprescription 

drug product with an additional 

condition for nonprescription use 

(ACNU) that an applicant must 

implement to ensure appropriate selfselection, appropriate actual use, or 

both by consumers. 

Statement of Need: Currently, 

nonprescription drug products are 

limited to drugs that can be labeled with 

sufficient information for consumers to 

appropriately self-select and use the 

drug product. For certain drug products, 

limitations of labeling present 

challenges for adequate communication 

of information needed for consumers to 

appropriately self-select or use the drug 

product without the supervision of a 

healthcare practitioner. FDA is 

finalizing regulations that would 

establish the requirements for a drug 

product that could be marketed as a 

nonprescription drug product with an 

ACNU that an applicant must 

implement to ensure appropriate selfselection, appropriate actual use or both 

by consumers. 

Summary of Legal Basis: FDA’s 

revisions to the regulations regarding 

labeling and applications for 

nonprescription drug products are 

authorized by the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 

321 et seq.) and by the Public Health 

Service Act (42 U.S.C. 262 and 264). 

Alternatives: FDA evaluated various 

requirements for new drug applications 

to assess flexibility of nonprescription 

drug product design through drug 

labeling for appropriate self-selection 

and appropriate use. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

benefits of the final rule would include 

increased consumer access to drug 

products and reduced access costs to 

these products as compared to their 

prescription alternatives. Benefits to 

industry would arise from the flexibility 

in drug product approval and the 

potential expansion of market revenue. 

Other benefits would include a 

reduction in repetitive meetings with 

industry and the Agency regarding this 

approval pathway. In addition, private 

and government-sponsored drug 

coverage plans may experience cost 

savings. Although applicants would 

incur the costs to develop and submit an 

application for a nonprescription drug 

with an ACNU, they would likely 

submit applications only when they 

expect that the profits from the approval 

would exceed the costs of the 

application. Lastly, we anticipate onetime costs of reading and understanding 

the rule that potential applicants would 

incur. 

Risks: None. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 06/28/22 87 FR 38313 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

10/26/22 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extended.

10/24/22 87 FR 64178 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extended End.

11/25/22 

Final Rule ............ 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Angela Mtungwa, 

Program Coordinator, Department of 

Health and Human Services, Food and 

Drug Administration, 10903 New 

Hampshire Avenue, Building 51, Room 

4393, Silver Spring, MD 20993 Phone: 

301 796–9329, Email: angela.mtungwa@

fda.hhs.gov. 

RIN: 0910–AH62 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9361 

HHS—FDA 

61. Nutrient Content Claims, Definition 

of Term: Healthy [0910–AI13] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Unfunded Mandates: This action may 

affect the private sector under Public 

Law 104–4. 

Legal Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321; 21 

U.S.C. 331; 21 U.S.C. 343; 21 U.S.C. 371 

CFR Citation: 10 CFR 101.65 

(revision). 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The rule would update the 

definition for the implied nutrient 

content claim ‘‘healthy’’ to be consistent 

with current nutrition science and 

federal dietary guidelines. The rule 

would revise the requirements for when 

the claim ‘‘healthy’’ can be voluntarily 

used in the labeling of human food 

products to indicate that a food, because 

of its nutrient content, may be useful in 

achieving a total diet that conforms to 

current dietary recommendations and 

helps consumers maintain healthy 

dietary practices. 

Statement of Need: This rule would 

update the ‘‘healthy’’ claim to make it 

more consistent with advances in 

nutrition science and public health 

recommendations, including those 

captured in recent changes to the 

Nutrition Facts label. The existing 

definition of ‘‘healthy’’ is based on 

nutrition recommendations regarding 

intake of fat, saturated fat, and 

cholesterol, and specific nutrients 

Americans were not getting enough of in 

the early 1990s. Nutrition 

recommendations have evolved since 

that time and now emphasize healthy 

dietary patterns, which include getting 

enough of certain foods from food 

groups such as fruits, vegetables, lowfat dairy, and whole grains. Diet is a 

contributing factor to chronic diseases, 

such as heart disease, cancer, and 

stroke, which are the leading causes of 

death and disability in the United 

States. Claims on food packages such as 

‘‘healthy’’ can provide quick signals to 

busy consumers about the healthfulness 

of a food or beverage. 

FDA is updating the existing 

definition of the ‘‘healthy’’ claim based 

on the food groups recommended by the 

Dietary Guidelines for Americans by 

requiring that food products bearing the 

claim contain a certain amount of food 

from such food groups or subgroups. 

The rule would also require a food 

product to be limited in saturated fat, 

sodium, and added sugar. These 

updates would ensure that foods bearing 

the claim are ones that are part of a 

healthy dietary pattern and are 

recommended by current dietary 

guidelines. The rule is also part of 

FDA’s ongoing effort to empower 

consumers with information to help 

them improve their nutrition and 

dietary patterns and reduce their risk of 

diet-related chronic disease. 

Summary of Legal Basis: FDA is 

issuing this rule under sections 201(n), 

301(a), 403(a), 403(r), and 701(a) of the 

Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act 

(FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 321(n), 331(a), 

343(a), 343(r), and 371(a)). These 

sections authorize the agency to adopt 

regulations that prohibit labeling that 

bears claims that characterize the level 

of a nutrient which is of a type required 

to be declared in nutrition labeling 

unless the claim is made in accordance 

with a regulatory definition established 

by FDA. Pursuant to this authority, FDA 

issued a regulation defining the 

‘‘healthy’’ implied nutrient content 

claim, which is codified at 21 CFR 

101.65. This rule would update the 

existing definition to be consistent with 

current nutrition science and federal 

dietary guidance. 

Alternatives: 

Alternative 1: Codify the alternative 

criteria in the current enforcement 

discretion guidance. 

In 2016, FDA published ‘‘Use of the 

Term ‘Healthy’ in the Labeling of 

Human Food Products: Guidance for 

Industry.’’ This guidance was intended 

to advise food manufacturers of FDA’s 

intent to exercise enforcement 

discretion relative to foods that use the 

implied nutrient content claim 

‘‘healthy’’ on their labels which: (1) Are 

not low in total fat, but have a fat profile 

makeup of predominantly mono and 

polyunsaturated fats; or (2) contain at 

least 10 percent of the Daily Value (DV) 

per reference amount customarily 

consumed (RACC) of potassium or 

vitamin D. 

One alternative is to codify the 

alternative criteria in this guidance 

rather than the proposed update to the 

definition. Although guidance is nonbinding, we assume that most packaged 

food manufacturers are aware of the 

guidance and, over the past 2 years, 

have already made any adjustments to 

their products or product packaging. 

Therefore, we assume that this 

alternative would have no costs to 

industry and no benefits to consumers. 

Alternative 2: Extend the compliance 

date by 1 year. 

Extending the anticipated compliance 

date on the rule updating the definition 

of healthy by 1 year would reduce costs 

to industry as they would have more 

time to change products that may be 

affected by the rule or potentially 

coordinate label changes with already 

scheduled label changes. On the other 

hand, an extended compliance date runs 

the risk of not being helpful to 

consumers because they may not know 

whether a packaged food product 

labeled ‘‘healthy’’ follows the existing 

definition or the updated one. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Food 

products bearing the ‘‘healthy’’ claim 

currently make up a small percentage 

(5%) of total packaged foods. Quantified 

costs to manufacturers include labeling, 

reformulating, and recordkeeping. 

Discounted at seven percent over 20 

years, the mean present value of costs of 

the rule is $237 million, with a lower 

bound of $110 million and an upper 

bound of $434 million. 

Updating the definition of ‘‘healthy’’ 

to align with current dietary 

recommendations can provide 

information to help consumers build 

more healthful diets to help reduce their 

risk of diet-related chronic diseases. 

Discounted at seven percent over 20 

years, the mean present value of benefits 

of the rule is $290 million, with a lower 

bound estimate of $9 million and an 

upper bound estimate of $857 million. 

Risks: None. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 09/29/22 87 FR 59168 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

12/28/22 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extended.

11/29/22 87 FR 73267 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extended End.

02/16/23 

Final Action ......... 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: 

Undetermined. 

Agency Contact: Vincent De Jesus, 

Nutritionist, Department of Health and 

Human Services, Food and Drug 

Administration, Center for Food Safety 

and Applied Nutrition (HFS–830), 

Room 3D–031, 5100 Paint Branch 

Parkway, College Park, MD 20740, 

Phone: 240 402–1774, Fax: 301 436– 

1191, Email: vincent.dejesus@

fda.hhs.gov. 

RIN: 0910–AI13 

HHS—FDA 

62. Tobacco Product Standard for 

Characterizing Flavors in Cigars [0910– 

AI28] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9362 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Unfunded Mandates: This action may 

affect State, local or tribal governments 

and the private sector. 

Legal Authority: 21 U.S.C. 331; 21 

U.S.C. 333; 21 U.S.C. 371(a); 21 U.S.C. 

387b and 387c; 21 U.S.C. 387f(d) and 

387g; . . . 

CFR Citation: 21 CFR 1166. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rule is a tobacco 

product standard that would prohibit 

characterizing flavors (other than 

tobacco) in all cigars. We are taking this 

action with the intention of reducing the 

tobacco-related death and disease 

associated with cigar use. Evidence 

shows that flavored tobacco products 

appeal to youth and also shows that 

youth may be more likely to initiate 

tobacco use with such products. 

Characterizing flavors in cigars, such as 

strawberry, grape, orange, and cocoa, 

enhance taste and make these products 

easier to use. Over a half million youth 

in the United States use flavored cigars, 

placing these youth at risk for cigarrelated death and disease. 

Statement of Need: The Federal Food, 

Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act), as 

amended by the Family Smoking 

Prevention and Tobacco Control Act 

(Tobacco Control Act), authorizes FDA 

to adopt tobacco product standards 

under section 907 if the Secretary finds 

that a tobacco product standard is 

appropriate for the protection of the 

public health. This product standard 

will prohibit characterizing flavors 

(other than tobacco) in all cigars. 

Characterizing flavors in cigars, such as 

strawberry, grape, cocoa, and fruit 

punch, increase appeal and make the 

cigars easier to use, particularly among 

youth and young adults. This product 

standard will reduce the appeal of 

cigars, particularly to youth and young 

adults, and thereby decrease the 

likelihood of experimentation, 

development of nicotine dependence, 

and progression to regular use. This 

product standard will improve public 

health by increasing the likelihood of 

cessation among existing cigar smokers; 

this product standard will also improve 

health outcomes within groups that 

experience disproportionate levels of 

tobacco use, including certain 

vulnerable populations. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Section 907 

of the FD&C Act authorizes the adoption 

of tobacco product standards if the 

Secretary finds that a tobacco product 

standard is appropriate for the 

protection of public health. Section 907 

also authorizes FDA to include in a 

product standard a provision that 

restricts the sale and distribution of a 

tobacco product to the extent that it may 

be restricted by a regulation under 

section 906(d) of the FD&C Act. Section 

906(d) of the FD&C Act authorizes the 

Secretary to issue regulations requiring 

restrictions on the sale and distribution 

of a tobacco product, including 

restrictions on the access to, and the 

advertising and promotion of, the 

tobacco product, if the Secretary 

determines that such regulation would 

be appropriate for the protection of the 

public health. Section 701(a) of the 

FD&C Act authorizes the promulgation 

of regulations for the efficient 

enforcement of the FD&C Act. 

Alternatives: In addition to the costs 

and benefits of the product standard, 

FDA will assess the costs and benefits 

of, among other things, a different 

effective date for the rule, and including 

pipe tobacco in the product standard. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

anticipated benefits of the product 

standard include those coming from 

reduced death and disease that are the 

result of cigar use among adult cigar 

smokers, reduced death and disease 

from secondhand smoke, and reduced 

death and disease among youth who are 

deterred from initiating under the 

product standard. The anticipated costs 

of the product standard are those to 

firms to comply with the rule, to 

consumers impacted by the rule, and to 

the government. 

Risks: None. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

ANPRM ............... 03/21/18 83 FR 12294 

ANPRM Comment 

Period End.

07/19/18 

NPRM .................. 05/04/22 87 FR 26396 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extended.

06/21/22 87 FR 36786 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

07/05/22 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extended End.

08/02/22 

Final Rule ............ 03/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State, Tribal. 

Federalism: This action may have 

federalism implications as defined in 

E.O. 13132. 

Agency Contact: Nathan Mease, 

Regulatory Counsel, Department of 

Health and Human Services, Food and 

Drug Administration, 10903 New 

Hampshire Avenue, Center for Tobacco 

Products, Document Control Center, 

Building 71, Room G335, Silver Spring, 

MD 20993, Phone: 877 287–1373, Email: 

ctpregulations@fda.hhs.gov. 

RIN: 0910–AI28 

HHS—FDA 

63. Standards for the Growing, 

Harvesting, Packing, and Holding of 

Produce for Human Consumption 

Relating to Agricultural Water [0910– 

AI49] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321; 21 

U.S.C. 331; 21 U.S.C. 342; 21 U.S.C. 

350h; 21 U.S.C. 371; 42 U.S.C. 243; 42 

U.S.C. 264; 42 U.S.C. 271; . . . 

CFR Citation: 21 CFR 112. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rulemaking will revise 

certain requirements for agricultural 

water for covered produce other than 

sprouts in the Standards for the 

Growing, Harvesting, Packing, and 

Holding of Produce for Human 

Consumption (produce safety) 

regulation for covered produce other 

than sprouts. 

Statement of Need: Agricultural water 

can be a major conduit of pathogens that 

can contaminate produce. Recent 

produce outbreaks potentially linked to 

agricultural water have emphasized the 

importance of ensuring that FDA’s 

agricultural water standards are 

workable across the diversity of 

domestic and foreign farms and account 

for the variety of factors that impact 

water sources and uses. FDA plans to 

amend its produce safety regulation to 

address concerns about the practical 

challenges of implementing certain 

agricultural water requirements for 

covered produce other than sprouts, 

while protecting the public health. 

Summary of Legal Basis: FDA’s 

authority for issuing this rule is 

provided by sections 402, 419, and 

701(a) of the Federal Food, Drug, and 

Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 

342, 350h, and 371(a)) and sections 311, 

361, and 368 of the Public Health 

Service Act (PHS Act) (42 U.S.C. 243, 

264, and 271). 

Specifically, this rulemaking will 

amend certain agricultural water 

requirements in the produce safety 

regulation, codified at 21 CFR part 112, 

and issued under the following 

authorities: Section 419(c)(1)(A) of the 

FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 350h(c)(1)(A)) 

authorizes FDA to establish sciencebased minimum standards for the safe 

production and harvesting of those 

types of fruits and vegetables that are 

raw agricultural commodities for which 

such standards minimize the risk of 

serious adverse health consequences or 

death. Section 419(c)(1)(B) of the FD&C 

Act (21 U.S.C. 350h(c)(1)(B)) further 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9363 

requires that these minimum standards 

provide sufficient flexibility to be 

practicable for all sizes and types of 

businesses. Section 402(a)(3) of the 

FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 342(a)(3)) provides 

that a food is adulterated if it consists 

in whole or in part of any filthy, putrid, 

or decomposed substance, or if it is 

otherwise unfit for food. Section 

402(a)(4) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 

342(a)(4)) provides that a food is 

adulterated if it has been prepared, 

packed, or held under insanitary 

conditions whereby it may have become 

contaminated with filth, or whereby it 

may have been rendered injurious to 

health. Additionally, section 701(a) of 

the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 371(a)) grants 

the authority to promulgate regulations 

for the efficient enforcement of the 

FD&C Act. Sections 311, 361, and 368 

of the PHS Act (21 U.S.C. 243, 264, and 

271), provide authority for FDA to issue 

regulations to prevent the spread of 

communicable diseases from one State 

to another. 

Alternatives: None. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: FDA 

anticipates costs associated with 

complying with the water risk 

assessment provisions for non-sprout 

covered produce. 

This final rule will generate 

unquantified benefits stemming from 

increasing flexibility and addressing 

practical implementation challenges 

associated with certain agricultural 

water provisions for covered produce 

other than sprouts in the produce safety 

regulation and quantified benefits 

resulting from fewer illnesses caused by 

pre-harvest agricultural water. 

Risks: In a 2019 Report, the 

Interagency Food Safety Analytics 

Collaboration (IFSAC) estimated that 

produce commodities cause 65 percent 

of foodborne E. coli O157 illnesses and 

over 40 percent of foodborne Salmonella 

illnesses. Agricultural water can be a 

major conduit for produce 

contamination. This rule is intended to 

address the practical implementation 

challenges of certain agricultural water 

requirements for covered produce other 

than sprouts, while protecting public 

health by setting forth standards to 

minimize the risk of serious adverse 

health consequences or death, including 

those reasonably necessary to prevent 

the introduction of known or reasonably 

foreseeable biological hazards into or 

onto produce, and provide reasonable 

assurances that the produce is not 

adulterated on account of those hazards. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 12/06/21 86 FR 69120 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

04/05/22 

Supplemental 

NPRM.

07/19/22 87 FR 42973 

Supplemental 

NPRM Comment Period 

End.

09/19/22 

Final Rule ............ 02/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: 

Undetermined. 

Agency Contact: Samir Assar, 

Supervisory Consumer Safety Officer, 

Department of Health and Human 

Services, Food and Drug 

Administration, Center for Food Safety 

and Applied Nutrition, Office of Food 

Safety, 5001 Campus Drive, College 

Park, MD 20740, Phone: 240 402–1636, 

Email: samir.assar@fda.hhs.gov. 

RIN: 0910–AI49 

HHS—FDA 

64. Tobacco Product Standard for 

Menthol in Cigarettes [0910–AI60] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Unfunded Mandates: This action may 

affect State, local or tribal governments 

and the private sector. 

Legal Authority: 21 U.S.C. 387g; 21 

U.S.C. 371; 21 U.S.C. 387f 

CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rule is a tobacco 

product standard to prohibit the use of 

menthol as a characterizing flavor in 

cigarettes. 

Statement of Need: The Federal Food, 

Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act), as 

amended by the Family Smoking 

Prevention and Tobacco Control Act 

(Tobacco Control Act), authorizes FDA 

to adopt tobacco product standards 

under section 907 if the Secretary finds 

that a tobacco product standard is 

appropriate for the protection of the 

public health. This product standard 

would prohibit menthol as a 

characterizing flavor in cigarettes. The 

standard would reduce the appeal of 

cigarettes, particularly to youth and 

young adults, and thereby decrease the 

likelihood that nonusers who would 

otherwise experiment with menthol 

cigarettes would progress to regular 

cigarette smoking. In addition, the 

tobacco product standard would 

improve the health and reduce the 

mortality risk of current menthol 

cigarette smokers by decreasing cigarette 

consumption and increasing the 

likelihood of cessation. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Section 907 

of the FD&C Act authorizes the adoption 

of tobacco product standards if the 

Secretary finds that a tobacco product 

standard is appropriate for the 

protection of public health. 

Alternatives: In addition to the costs 

and benefits of the rule, FDA will assess 

the costs and benefits of extending the 

effective date of the rule, creating a 

process by which some products may 

apply for an exemption or variance from 

the product standard, and prohibiting 

menthol as an intentional additive in 

cigarette products rather than 

prohibiting menthol as a characterizing 

flavor. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

rule is expected to generate compliance 

costs on affected entities, such as onetime costs to read and understand the 

rule and alter manufacturing/importing 

practices. The quantified benefits of the 

rule stem from improved health and 

diminished exposure to tobacco smoke 

for users of cigarettes from decreased 

experimentation, progression to regular 

use, and consumption of menthol 

cigarettes. The qualitative benefits of the 

rule include impacts such as reduced 

illness for smokers and non-smokers. 

Risks: None. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

ANPRM ............... 07/24/13 78 FR 44484 

ANPRM Comment 

Period End.

09/23/13 

NPRM .................. 05/04/22 87 FR 26454 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extended.

06/21/22 87 FR 36786 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

07/05/22 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extended End.

08/02/22 

Final Rule ............ 03/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State, Tribal. 

Federalism: This action may have 

federalism implications as defined in 

E.O. 13132. 

Agency Contact: Beth Buckler, Senior 

Regulatory Counsel, Department of 

Health and Human Services, Food and 

Drug Administration, Center for 

Tobacco Products, 10903 New 

Hampshire Avenue, Document Control 

Center, Building 71, Room G335, Silver 

Spring, MD 20993, Phone: 877 287– 

1373, Email: ctpregulations@

fda.hhs.gov. 

RIN: 0910–AI60 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9364 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

HHS—HEALTH RESOURCES AND 

SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (HRSA) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

65. Countermeasures Injury 

Compensation Program: COVID–19 

Countermeasures Injury Table [0906– 

AB31] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 247d–6e 

CFR Citation: 42 CFR 110. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This proposed rule would 

establish the COVID–19 

Countermeasures Injury Table for the 

Countermeasures Injury Compensation 

Program (CICP). The Public Readiness 

and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP 

Act) authorized the Secretary of HHS to 

establish the CICP to provide benefits to 

certain persons who sustain serious 

physical injury or death as a direct 

result of the administration or use of 

covered countermeasures identified by 

the Secretary in declarations issued 

under the PREP Act. In addition, the 

Secretary may provide death benefits to 

certain survivors of individuals who 

died as a direct result of covered 

injuries or their health complications. 

One way that an individual who was 

administered or used a covered 

countermeasure can show that they 

sustained a covered injury is by 

demonstrating that they sustained an 

injury listed on a Countermeasures 

Injury Table (Table) within the time 

interval set forth on the Table. The 

Table will list and explain injuries that, 

based on compelling, reliable, valid, 

medical, and scientific evidence, are 

presumed to be caused by covered 

COVID–19 countermeasures, and set 

forth the time periods in which the 

onset of these injuries must occur after 

the administration or use of these 

covered COVID–19 countermeasures. 

Statement of Need: The PREP Act 

directs the Secretary to establish, 

through regulations, a Table identifying 

serious physical injuries that are 

presumed to be directly caused by the 

administration or use of a covered 

countermeasure. The Secretary may 

only identify such injuries if it is 

determined based on compelling, 

reliable, valid, medical and scientific 

evidence’’ that the administration or use 

of the covered countermeasure directly 

causes such covered injuries. A Table 

creates a rebuttable presumption of 

causation, for compensation purposes, 

for eligible individuals whose injuries 

are listed on and meet the requirements 

of the Table. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Section 

319F–4 of the Public Health Service Act, 

as amended, directs the Secretary, 

following issuance of a declaration 

under Section 319F–3(b), to establish 

procedures for the CICP to provide 

medical and lost employment benefits 

to certain individuals who sustained a 

covered injury as the direct result of the 

administration or use of a covered 

countermeasure consistent with a 

declaration issued pursuant to section 

319F–3(b), or in good faith belief that 

administration or use of the covered 

countermeasure was consistent with a 

declaration. The CICP’s regulations are 

set forth in 42 CFR part 110. 42 CFR 

110.20(a) states that individuals must 

establish that a covered injury occurred 

to be eligible for benefits under the 

Program. A covered injury is death or a 

serious injury determined by the 

Secretary to be: (1) An injury meeting 

the requirements of a Table, which is 

presumed to be the direct result of the 

administration or use of a covered 

countermeasure unless the Secretary 

determines there is another more likely 

cause; or (2) an injury (or its health 

complications) that is the direct result of 

the administration or use of a covered 

countermeasure. Through this NPRM, 

the Secretary proposes to add the 

COVID–19 Countermeasures Injury 

Table to subpart K of 42 CFR part 110, 

which lists Injury Tables for covered 

countermeasures, by adding sections (e) 

and (f). 

Alternatives: An alternative is to 

continue to review each claim and the 

associated medical records individually 

to ensure the requester has 

demonstrated that the injury occurred as 

the direct result of the administration or 

use of a covered countermeasure. This 

approach would be more time- and 

resource-intensive than providing an 

evidence-based presumption of 

causation by publishing a COVID–19 

Countermeasures Injury Table for the 

CICP. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: This 

NPRM will allow requesters who were 

administered or used a covered COVID– 

19 countermeasure and whose alleged 

injuries are listed on the Table, but who 

missed the one-year filing deadline, to 

be able to file their claim within one 

year from the publication of the Table. 

Also, future requesters, and previous 

requesters who were denied 

compensation, will be able to benefit 

from the presumption of causation 

afforded by their injuries being included 

on the Table, rather than needing to 

prove causation on a case- by-case basis. 

This will likely increase the number of 

claims filed and compensated. However, 

in rare instances that a COVID–19 

countermeasure injury has occurred, 

this will decrease the burden on 

requesters allowing them to more easily 

receive compensation that may include 

reasonable unreimbursed medical 

expenses, lost employment income, and 

survivor death benefit. 

Risks: None. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 12/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: CDR George Grimes, 

Director, Division of Injury 

Compensation Programs, Department of 

Health and Human Services, Health 

Resources and Services Administration, 

5600 Fishers Lane, Room 08N146B, 

Rockville, MD 20857, Phone: 855 266– 

2427, Email: cicp@hrsa.gov. 

RIN: 0906–AB31 

HHS—HRSA 

Final Rule Stage 

66. 340B Drug Pricing Program; 

Administrative Dispute Resolution 

[0906–AB28] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: Not Yet Determined 

CFR Citation: 42 CFR 10. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This final rule will revise 

the Administrative Dispute Resolution 

(ADR) final rule currently in effect and 

apply to all drug manufacturers and 

covered entities that participate in the 

340B Drug Pricing Program (340B 

Program). It will establish new 

requirements and procedures for the 

340B Program’s ADR process. This 

administrative process will allow 

covered entities and manufacturers to 

file claims for specific compliance areas 

outlined in the statute after good faith 

efforts have been exhausted by the 

parties. 

Statement of Need: This final rule 

will revise the December 2020 340B 

Administrative Dispute Resolution 

(ADR) final rule, which became effective 

January 13, 2021. The final rule will 

implement new requirements and 

procedures for the 340B Program’s ADR 

process. The final rule applies to drug 

manufacturers and covered entities 

participating in the 340B Drug Pricing 

Program (340B Program) by allowing 

these entities to file claims for specific 

compliance areas outlined in the 340B 

statute after good faith efforts have been 

exhausted by the parties. It aligns with 

the President’s priorities on drug 

pricing, better reflects the current state 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9365 

of the 340B Program, and seeks to 

correct procedural deficiencies in the 

current 340B ADR process. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Section 

340B(d)(3) of the Public Health Service 

Act (PHS Act) requires the Secretary to 

promulgate regulations establishing and 

implementing an ADR process for 

certain disputes arising under the 340B 

Program. Under the 340B statute, the 

purpose of the ADR process is to resolve 

(1) claims by covered entities that they 

have been overcharged for covered 

outpatient drugs by manufacturers and 

(2) claims by manufacturers, after a 

manufacturer has conducted an audit as 

authorized by section 340B(a)(5)(C) of 

the PHS Act, that a covered entity has 

violated the prohibition on diversion or 

duplicate discounts. 

Alternatives: The 2020 340B ADR 

final rule would remain in effect. This 

final rule is designed to be more 

accessible to stakeholders and will use 

fewer stakeholder and government 

resources to resolve disputes as opposed 

to the 2020 340B ADR final rule. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

ADR process will not have a significant 

financial impact on stakeholders nor 

result in significant costs. The final rule 

will enable stakeholders to resolve 

disputes in a fair, efficient, and 

expeditious manner in accordance with 

section 340B(d)(3) of the Public Health 

Service Act. 

Risks: None. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 11/30/22 87 FR 73516 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

01/30/23 

Final Action ......... 12/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Michelle Herzog, 

Deputy Director, Office of Pharmacy 

Affairs, Department of Health and 

Human Services, Health Resources and 

Services Administration, 5600 Fishers 

Lane, 08W12, Rockville, MD 20857, 

Phone: 301 443–4353, Email: mherzog@

hrsa.gov. 

RIN: 0906–AB28 

HHS—CENTERS FOR MEDICARE & 

MEDICAID SERVICES (CMS) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

67. Healthcare System Resiliency and 

Modernization (CMS–3426) [0938– 

AU91] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Unfunded Mandates: This action may 

affect State, local or tribal governments 

and the private sector. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1395hh; 42 

U.S.C 1302; 42 U.S.C. 1821; 42 U.S.C. 

1832(a)(2)(F)(I); 42 U.S.C. 1861(dd)(1); 

42 U.S.C. 1905(a) 

CFR Citation: 42 CFR 403; 42 CFR 

416; 42 CFR 418; 42 CFR 441; . . . 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rule proposes revisions 

to the regulations for all Medicare- and 

Medicaid-participating providers and 

suppliers to ensure continuous, ongoing 

access to safe and effective health care 

services. 

Statement of Need: This proposed 

rule would revise and update national 

emergency preparedness requirements 

for Medicare- and Medicaidparticipating providers and suppliers to 

plan adequately for both natural and 

man-made disasters, including climaterelated disasters, and coordinate with 

federal, state, tribal, regional, and local 

emergency preparedness systems based 

on lessons learned during the COVID– 

19 public health emergency and other 

recent events. This rule also proposes 

revisions that support health care 

system resiliency. The need for this rule 

is based on feedback and public 

consultations with healthcare providers, 

public health organizations and 

professionals, and researchers, 

including multiple listening sessions. 

Participants described how some 

organizations were unprepared for 

extended, wide- spread, and concurrent 

emergencies. They expressed that 

improvements to CMS requirements 

would support better care and outcomes 

for patients during and after 

emergencies. In addition, this rule 

would advance equity, increase access 

to culturally and linguistically 

appropriate services, and address and 

improve outcomes and disparities in 

maternal health care. Lastly, this rule 

would also advance equity and reduce 

disparities across the continuum of care 

for patients by improving transparency, 

patient education, and health literacy on 

the organ donation and transplantation 

process. The proposals are in 

accordance with Executive Orders 

13985, 13988, 13995, and 14301 on 

Advancing Racial Equity and Support 

for Underserved Communities through 

the Federal Government, Preventing and 

Combating Discrimination on the Basis 

of Gender Identity or Sexual 

Orientation, Ensuring an Equitable 

Pandemic Response and Recovery, and 

on Advancing Equity, Justice, and 

Opportunity for Asian Americans, 

Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders, 

respectively. 

Summary of Legal Basis: There are 

various sections of the Social Security 

Act (the Act) that define the types of 

providers and suppliers that may 

participate in Medicare and Medicaid 

and list the requirements that each 

provider and supplier must meet to be 

eligible for Medicare and Medicaid 

participation. The Act also authorizes 

the Secretary to establish other 

requirements as necessary to protect the 

health and safety of patients, although 

the wording of such authority differs 

slightly between provider and supplier 

types. Such requirements may include 

the CoPs for providers, CfCs for 

suppliers, and requirements for long 

term care facilities. The CoPs and CfCs 

are intended to protect public health 

and safety and promote high quality 

care for all persons. The Public Health 

Service (PHS) Act sets forth additional 

regulatory requirements that certain 

Medicare providers and suppliers are 

required to meet in order to participate. 

The statutory authority to revise the 

health and safety standards for Medicare 

and Medicaid participating providers 

and suppliers is contained within 

Section 1102 (42 U.S.C. 1302) of the 

Social Security Act. In addition, this 

rule revises the health and safety 

regulations to advance health equity and 

reduce disparities for all individuals in 

accordance with Executive Orders 

13985, 13988, 13995, and 14301 on 

Advancing Racial Equity and Support 

for Underserved Communities through 

the Federal Government, Preventing and 

Combating Discrimination on the Basis 

of Gender Identity or Sexual 

Orientation, Ensuring an Equitable 

Pandemic Response and Recovery, and 

on Advancing Equity, Justice, and 

Opportunity for Asian Americans, 

Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders, 

respectively. 

Alternatives: In developing the 

policies contained in this rule, we 

considered numerous alternatives, 

including maintaining existing 

requirements. These alternatives will be 

described in the rule. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

provisions in this rule aim to improve 

emergency preparedness, increase 

system resiliency, advance health 

equity, improve maternal health care, 

increase access to care, improve quality 

of care, and reduce health disparities for 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9366 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

all individuals. This regulation will 

ultimately remove barriers and ensure 

continuous access to health care and 

improve quality of care for all. As we 

move toward publication, estimates of 

the cost and benefits of these provisions 

will be included in the rule. 

Risks: This action furthers the goals of 

the Executive Orders on Advancing 

Racial Equity and Support for 

Underserved Communities Through the 

Federal Government (E.O. 13985), 

Executive Order on Preventing and 

Combating Discrimination on the Basis 

of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation 

(E.O. 13988), Executive Order on 

Ensuring an Equitable Pandemic 

Response and Recovery (E.O. 13995), 

and Executive Order on Advancing 

Equity, Justice, and Opportunity for 

Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, 

and Pacific Islanders (E.O. 14301). 

While there may be some risks 

associated with an increased burden on 

providers as a result of these 

regulations, we believe benefits related 

to culturally and linguistically 

appropriate services and improved 

maternal health care would far outweigh 

any risks. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 12/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State, Tribal. 

Federalism: This action may have 

federalism implications as defined in 

E.O. 13132. 

Agency Contact: Lauren Oviatt, 

Acting Director, Division of NonInstitutional Standards and Quality, 

Department of Health and Human 

Services, Centers for Medicare & 

Medicaid Services, Center for Clinical 

Standards and Quality, MS: C2–21–16, 

7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 

21244–1850, Phone: 410 786–4683, 

Email: lauren.oviatt@cms.hhs.gov 

Related RIN: Merged with 0938–AV21 

RIN: 0938–AU91 

HHS—CMS 

68. Appeal Rights for Certain Changes 

in Patient Status (CMS–4204) [0938– 

AV16] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1395ff 

CFR Citation: 42 CFR 405; 42 CFR 

476; 42 CFR 489. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: Pursuant to a court order, 

this proposed rule would establish new 

appeals processes for Medicare 

beneficiaries who have an inpatient 

hospital admission changed to 

outpatient by a hospital, and meet other 

conditions set forth in the order. 

Statement of Need: This proposed 

rule sets forth new appeals processes to 

implement a court order. In this order, 

the Department of Health and Human 

Services (HHS) is directed to establish 

appeal process for certain beneficiaries 

in Original Medicare who are initially 

admitted to a hospital as an inpatient by 

a physician but whose status during 

their stay is changed to outpatient 

receiving observation services by the 

hospital, thereby effectively denying 

Part A coverage for their hospital stay. 

Summary of Legal Basis: This rule 

sets forth new appeals procedures to 

implement the court order in Alexander 

v. Azar, 613 F. Supp. 3d 559 (D. Conn. 

2020)), aff’d sub nom., Barrows v. 

Becerra, 24 F.4th 116 (2d Cir. 2022). The 

authority for these changes is under 

various sections of the Social Security 

Act (the Act). 

Alternatives: None. This rule 

implements a court order. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: This 

rule is not considered a significant rule. 

Risks: No risks are anticipated. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 12/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal. 

Agency Contact: David Danek, Health 

Insurance Specialist, Department of 

Health and Human Services, Centers for 

Medicare & Medicaid Services, Center 

for Medicare, MS: 2325, 7500 Security 

Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21244, 

Phone: 410 786–8249, Email: 

david.danek@cms.hhs.gov. 

RIN: 0938–AV16 

HHS—CMS 

69. Contract Year 2025 Policy and 

Technical Changes to the Medicare 

Advantage, Medicare Prescription Drug 

Benefit, and Medicare Cost Plan 

Programs, and Pace (CMS–4205) [0938– 

AV24] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: Pub. L. 115–271 

CFR Citation: 42 CFR 422; 42 CFR 

423; 42 CFR 460. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This proposed rule would 

make changes to strengthen and 

improve the Medicare Advantage (Part 

C) and prescription drug benefit (Part D) 

programs, and Programs of All-Inclusive 

Care for the Elderly (PACE), and 

implement any legislative changes that 

are required by January 1, 2025. 

Statement of Need: This proposed 

rule is necessary to amend the 

regulations for the Medicare Advantage 

(Part C) program, Medicare Prescription 

Drug Benefit (Part D) program, Medicare 

cost plan program, and Program of AllInclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE) to 

implement certain statutory 

requirements, to codify existing 

subregulatory guidance, and based on 

our continued experience in the 

administration of the programs. 

Summary of Legal Basis: This rule 

addresses multiple sections of the Social 

Security Act and proposes to codify 

existing Part C and Part D subregulatory 

guidance. It would also implement 

certain sections of the Bipartisan Budget 

Act of 2018 and the Consolidated 

Appropriations Act (CAA), 2023. 

Alternatives: This rule would 

implement provisions that require 

public notice and comment and are 

necessary for the upcoming contract 

year. We will continue to explore 

additional alternatives as we develop 

the rule. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

Preliminary estimates of the anticipated 

costs and benefits of this proposed rule 

indicate minor costs (under $50 million) 

associated with increased paperwork as 

well as some savings to the Medicare 

Trust Fund. Numerical estimates are 

pending and as we move toward 

publication, estimates of costs and 

benefits will be included in the 

proposed rule. 

Risks: Risks associated with the 

impact of this rule are under 

development and will be included in 

the published rule. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 11/15/23 88 FR 78476 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

01/05/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Heather Barkes, 

Director, Division of Policy, Analysis, 

and Planning, Department of Health and 

Human Services, Centers for Medicare & 

Medicaid Services, Center for Medicare, 

MS: C4–21–26, 7500 Security 

Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21244, 

Phone: 410 786–8615, Email: 

heather.barkes@cms.hhs.gov. 

RIN: 0938–AV24 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9367 

HHS—CMS 

70. Minimum Staffing Standards for 

Long-Term Care Facilities and 

Medicaid Institutional Payment 

Transparency Reporting (CMS–3442) 

[0938–AV25] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Unfunded Mandates: This action may 

affect the private sector under Public 

Law 104–4. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 181; 42 

U.S.C. 1919; 42 U.S.C. 1902 

CFR Citation: 42 CFR 483; 42 CFR 

442; 42 CFR 438. 

Legal Deadline: Final, Statutory, 

September 6, 2026, MMA sec. 902 

requires Medicare final rules publish 

within 3 years of a proposed or interim 

final rule. 

Per the CMS notice published 

December 30, 2004 (69 FR 78442), 

except for certain Medicare payment 

regulations and certain other statutorilymandated regulations, we schedule all 

Medicare final regulations for 

publication within the 3-year 

standardized time limit in the current 

Unified Agenda. We do not intend to 

delay publishing a Medicare final 

regulation for 3 years if we are able to 

publish it sooner. 

Abstract: This rule establishes 

minimum staffing standards for longterm care facilities, as part of the BidenHarris Administration’s Nursing Home 

Reform initiative to ensure safe and 

quality care in long term care facilities. 

In addition, this rule requires States to 

report the percent of Medicaid 

payments for certain Medicaid-covered 

institutional services that are spent on 

compensation for direct care workers 

and support staff. Consistent with the 

Administration’s commitment to 

maximize transparency and public 

engagement, and to allow communities 

greater opportunities to provide input in 

the regulatory process, HHS sought the 

expertise of colleagues in the Office of 

Management and Budget, the General 

Services Administration, and the 

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau 

to inform an alternative approach to 

public comments for the proposed 

nursing home minimum staffing rule. 

The Department ultimately established 

and disseminated in public materials a 

direct web link to allow a more 

accessible comment submission path to 

the public, lowering the barriers to 

participation for the nursing home 

residents, families, and facility staff who 

will be directly impacted by this 

regulation. 

Statement of Need: Ensuring that 

beneficiaries receive safe, reliable, and 

quality nursing home care is a critical 

function of the Medicare and Medicaid 

programs and a top priority of CMS. The 

COVID–19 Public Health Emergency 

(PHE) tragically caused unprecedented 

illness and death among nursing home 

residents and workers. The PHE also 

exacerbated staffing challenges 

experienced in many facilities and 

further highlighted disparities in care 

and outcomes. Despite existing 

requirements that facilities provide 

sufficient levels of staffing in LTC 

facilities, chronic understaffing remains 

a significant concern. This rule 

establishes minimum staffing standards 

for long-term care facilities, as part of 

the Biden-Harris Administration’s 

Nursing Home Reform initiative to 

ensure safe and quality care in longterm care facilities. In addition, this rule 

requires States to report the percent of 

Medicaid payments for certain 

Medicaid-covered institutional services 

that are spent on compensation for 

direct care workers and support staff. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Sections 

1819 and 1919 of the Act authorize the 

Secretary to issue requirements for 

participation in Medicare and Medicaid, 

including such regulations as may be 

necessary to protect the health and 

safety of residents (sections 

1819(d)(4)(B) and 1919(d)(4)(B) of the 

Act). 

Alternatives: In developing the 

policies contained in this rule, we 

considered numerous alternatives. The 

proposed rule solicited comments on 

alternative policy options that should be 

considered for establishing minimum 

nurse staffing standards that would 

maintain acceptable quality and safety 

within LTC facilities. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

proposed rule included an estimated 

cost of $40.6 billion over 10 years for 

the 24/7 RN and the 0.55 RN and 2.45 

NA hours per resident day (HPRD) 

requirements and $147 million for the 

Medicaid institutional payment 

transparency reporting requirement. 

Quantified benefits include an 

estimated Medicare savings of $2.5 

billion over 10 years due to fewer 

hospitalizations and emergency 

department visits, as well as increased 

resident discharges to home or the 

community. 

Risks: This action establishes 

minimum staffing standards that 

nursing homes must meet in order to 

ensure that residents receive safe and 

quality care in LTC facilities. The 

minimum staffing standards also 

provide staff in LTC facilities with the 

support they need to safely care for 

residents and reduce staff turnover and 

burnout, which can lead to improved 

safety and quality for residents and staff. 

In addition, the rule promotes public 

transparency related to the percent of 

Medicaid payments for certain 

institutional services that are spent on 

compensation to direct care workers and 

support staff. While there may be 

additional costs to implement these 

requirements, the proposals strike an 

appropriate balance between cost and 

benefit and are necessary at this time to 

protect resident health and safety and 

ensure their needs are met. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 09/06/23 88 FR 61352 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

11/06/23 

Final Action ......... 09/00/26 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: State. 

Agency Contact: Ronisha Blackstone, 

Director, Division of Institutional 

Quality Standards, Department of 

Health and Human Services, Centers for 

Medicare & Medicaid Services, Center 

for Clinical Standards and Quality, MS: 

S3–02–01, 7500 Security Boulevard, 

Baltimore, MD 21244, Phone: 410 786– 

6882, Email: ronisha.blackstone@

cms.hhs.gov. 

RIN: 0938–AV25 

HHS—CMS 

Final Rule Stage 

71. Streamlining the Medicaid, Chip, 

and BHP Application, Eligibility 

Determination, Enrollment, and 

Renewal Processes (CMS–2421) [0938– 

AU00] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1302 

CFR Citation: 42 CFR 431; 42 CFR 

435; 42 CFR 457; 42 CFR 600; . . . 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rule implements 

changes to simplify the processes for 

eligible individuals to enroll and retain 

eligibility in Medicaid, the Children’s 

Health Insurance Program (CHIP), and 

the Basic Health Program (BHP). The 

changes will be finalized in two rules. 

The first final rule removes barriers and 

facilitates enrollment of new applicants, 

particularly those dually eligible for 

Medicare and Medicaid. The second 

final rule will follow in CY 2024 and 

implement changes to align enrollment 

and renewal requirements for most 

individuals in Medicaid; establish 

beneficiary protections related to 

returned mail; create timeliness 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I 
9368 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

requirements for redeterminations of 

eligibility in Medicaid and CHIP; make 

transitions between programs easier; 

eliminate access barriers for children 

enrolled in CHIP by prohibiting 

premium lock-out periods, waiting 

periods, and benefit limitations; and 

modernize recordkeeping requirements 

to ensure proper documentation of 

eligibility and enrollment. 

Statement of Need: Since the 

implementation of the Affordable Care 

Act (ACA), CMS has made 

improvements in streamlining the 

Medicaid and CHIP application, 

eligibility determination, enrollment, 

and renewal processes. Simplifying 

enrollment in Medicaid and CHIP 

coverage is a foundational step in efforts 

to address health disparities for lowincome individuals. However, gaps 

remain in States’ ability to seamlessly 

process beneficiaries’ eligibility and 

enrollment in order to maximize 

coverage. This rule will provide States 

with the tools they need to reduce 

unnecessary barriers to enrollment in 

Medicaid and CHIP and to keep eligible 

beneficiaries covered. CMS engaged in a 

series of discussions with state 

Medicaid and CHIP agencies during 

development of the proposed rule, to 

examine enrollment barriers and discuss 

potential options for relief. 

Summary of Legal Basis: This rule 

responds to the January 28, 2021, 

Executive Order on Strengthening 

Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act. 

It addresses components of title XIX and 

title XXI of the Social Security Act and 

several sections of the Patient Protection 

and Affordable Care Act (Pub. L. 111– 

148) and the Health Care and Education 

Reconciliation Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111– 

152), which amended and revised 

several provisions of the Patient 

Protection and Affordable Care Act. 

Alternatives: In developing the 

policies contained in this rule, we 

considered numerous alternatives, 

including maintaining existing 

requirements. These alternatives are 

described in the rule. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

provisions in this rule will streamline 

Medicaid and CHIP enrollment 

processes and ensure that eligible 

beneficiaries can maintain coverage. 

While states and the Federal 

Government will incur initial costs to 

implement these changes, this rule aims 

to reduce administrative barriers to 

enrollment, which is expected to reduce 

administrative costs over time. The 

provisions in this rule are designed to 

increase access to affordable health 

coverage, and we believe that the 

benefits will justify the costs. 

Additionally, through clear and 

consistent requirements for the timely 

renewal of eligibility for all 

beneficiaries, this rule promotes 

program integrity, thereby protecting 

taxpayer funds at both the state and 

federal levels. As we move toward 

publication, estimates of the cost and 

benefits of these provisions will be 

included in the rule. 

Risks: We anticipate that the 

provisions of this rule will further the 

administration’s goal of strengthening 

Medicaid and making high-quality 

health care accessible and affordable for 

every American. At the same time, 

through clear and consistent 

requirements for conducting regular 

renewals of eligibility, acting on 

changes reported by beneficiaries and 

maintaining thorough recordkeeping on 

these activities, this rule will reduce the 

risk of improper payments. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 09/07/22 87 FR 54760 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

11/07/22 

1st Final Action ... 09/21/23 88 FR 65230 

1st Final Action 

Effective.

11/17/23 

2nd Final Action .. 02/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State. 

Agency Contact: Sarah Delone, 

Deputy Director, Children and Adults 

Health Programs Group, Department of 

Health and Human Services, Centers for 

Medicare & Medicaid Services, Center 

for Medicaid and CHIP Services, MS: 

S2–01–16, 7500 Security Boulevard, 

Baltimore, MD 21244, Phone: 410 786– 

5647, Email: sarah.delone2@

cms.hhs.gov. 

RIN: 0938–AU00 

HHS—CMS 

72. Short-Term, Limited-Duration 

Insurance; Independent, 

Noncoordinated Excepted Benefits 

Coverage; Level-Funded Plan 

Arrangements; and Tax Treatment of 

Certain Accident and Health Insurance 

(CMS–9904) [0938–AU67] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: Pub. L. 111–148, title 

I 

CFR Citation: 45 CFR 144; 45 CFR 

146; 45 CFR 148. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This final rule amends the 

definition of short-term, limited 

duration insurance, which is excluded 

from the definition of individual health 

insurance coverage under the Public 

Health Service Act. This document also 

sets forth amendments to the 

requirements for hospital indemnity or 

other fixed indemnity insurance to be 

considered an excepted benefit in the 

group and individual health insurance 

markets. This document further sets 

forth amendments to clarify the tax 

treatment of certain benefit payments in 

fixed amounts received under employerprovided accident and health plans. 

Statement of Need: These changes 

support the goals of the Affordable Care 

Act (ACA) by increasing access to 

affordable and comprehensive coverage, 

strengthening health insurance markets, 

and promoting consumer understanding 

of coverage options. Consistent with 

E.O. 14094, and accompanying OIRA 

guidance on Broadening Public 

Participation and Community 

Engagement in the Regulatory Process, 

and E.O. 12866, the Departments met 

with interested parties representing 

consumer advocacy and supplemental 

benefits industry representatives at the 

request of those parties. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The 

Department of Health and Human 

Services regulations are adopted 

pursuant to the authority contained in 

sections 2701 through 2763, 2791, 2792, 

2794, 2799A–1 through 2799B–9 of the 

PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 300gg–300gg–63, 

300gg–91, 300gg–92, 300gg–94, 300gg– 

300gg139), as amended. 

Alternatives: In developing the rule, 

the Departments considered different 

approaches, including alternative 

amendments to the definition of shortterm, limited-duration insurance, 

alternative amendments to the 

consumer notices for short-term, 

limited-duration insurance and fixed 

indemnity excepted benefits coverage, 

and alternative applicability timelines. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: These 

changes are expected to increase 

consumer understanding of short-term, 

limited-duration insurance and fixed 

indemnity excepted benefits coverage as 

compared to comprehensive health 

insurance coverage and to strengthen 

markets for comprehensive health 

insurance coverage. These changes are 

also expected to reduce harm caused to 

consumers who enroll in short-term, 

limited- duration insurance or fixed 

indemnity excepted benefits coverage as 

an alternative to or replacement for 

comprehensive health insurance 

coverage. The changes to the definition 

of short-term, limited-duration 

insurance are expected to increase 

enrollment in comprehensive coverage, 

reduce gross premiums for individuals 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9369 

enrolled in individual health insurance 

coverage purchased on an Exchange, 

and decrease Federal expenditures on 

the premium tax credit. These changes 

may increase premium costs for 

individuals who switch from short-term, 

limited-duration insurance to 

comprehensive health insurance 

coverage and are not eligible for 

government subsidies. They may also 

increase the number of uninsured 

individuals if some individuals with 

short-term, limited-duration insurance 

do not switch to comprehensive health 

insurance coverage or purchase shortterm, limited-duration insurance from 

another issuer. 

Risks: Due to a lack of data and 

information, areas of uncertainty 

include the forecasting of enrollment 

changes and the potential impacts to 

risk pools, premiums, Federal 

expenditures, and compensation for 

agents and brokers selling these 

products. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 07/12/23 88 FR 44596 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

09/11/23 

Final Action ......... 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

State. 

Federalism: This action may have 

federalism implications as defined in 

E.O. 13132. 

Agency Contact: Lindsey Murtagh, 

Director, Market-Wide Regulation 

Division, Department of Health and 

Human Services, Centers for Medicare & 

Medicaid Services, Center for Consumer 

Information and Insurance Oversight, 

7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 

21244, Phone: 301 492–4106, Email: 

lindsey.murtagh@cms.hhs.gov. 

RIN: 0938–AU67 

HHS—CMS 

73. Ensuring Access to Medicaid 

Services (CMS–2442) [0938–AU68] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1302 

CFR Citation: 42 CFR 431; 42 CFR 

438; 42 CFR 441; 42 CFR 447. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rule addresses 

elements related to assuring access in 

Medicaid and/or the Children’s Health 

Insurance Program (CHIP). These 

elements include processes that support 

the implementation of a comprehensive 

access strategy as well as payment 

processes, such as those related to 

specific payment systems. 

Statement of Need: In order to assure 

equitable access to health care for all 

Medicaid and CHIP beneficiaries across 

all delivery systems, access regulations 

need to be multi-factorial and focus 

beyond payment rates. Barriers to 

accessing health care services can be as 

heterogeneous as Medicaid and CHIP 

populations which can be measured 

through provider availability and 

provider accessibility to realized or 

perceived access barriers which can be 

measured through utilization and 

satisfaction with services. The final rule 

takes a comprehensive approach to 

improving access to care, quality and 

health outcomes, and better addressing 

health equity issues in the Medicaid 

program across fee-for-service (FFS), 

managed care delivery systems, and in 

home and community-based services 

(HCBS) programs. These improvements 

seek to increase transparency and 

accountability, standardize data and 

monitoring, and create opportunities for 

States to promote active beneficiary 

engagement in their Medicaid programs, 

with the goal of improving access to 

care. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Section 

1902(a)(30)(A) of the Act requires states 

to ‘‘assure that payments are consistent 

with efficiency, economy, and quality of 

care and are sufficient to enlist enough 

providers so that care and services are 

available under the plan at least to the 

extent that such care and services are 

available to the general population in 

the geographic area.’’ In addition, 

2402(a) of the Affordable Care Act 

directs the Secretary to promulgate 

regulations ensuring that all states 

develop service systems that: (1) are 

responsive to the needs of beneficiaries 

receiving HCBS and enable them to 

maximize their independence; (2) 

provide necessary support and 

coordination for beneficiaries in need of 

such services and their caregivers; and 

(3) improve coordination and regulation 

of providers of such services to oversee 

and monitor functions, including a 

complaint system, and ensure that there 

are an adequate number of qualified 

direct care workers to provide selfdirected services. Further, Section 

1902(a)(4) of the Act is a longstanding 

statutory provision that, as implemented 

in part in regulations currently codified 

at 42 CFR 431.12, requires States to have 

a Medical Care Advisory Committee 

(MCAC) in place to advise the State 

Medicaid agency about health and 

medical care services. 

Alternatives: In developing the 

policies contained in this rule, we 

considered numerous alternatives, 

including maintaining existing 

requirements. These alternatives are 

described in the rule. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: This 

rule is expected to result in potential 

costs for states to come into and remain 

in compliance. Estimates for associated 

costs are unknown at this time and may 

vary by state. Information about 

anticipated costs will be included in the 

rule. 

Risks: Risks of this rule are still under 

development and will be included in 

the final rule. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 05/03/23 88 FR 27960 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

07/03/23 

Final Action ......... 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: State. 

Agency Contact: Karen Llanos, 

Director, Medicaid Innovation 

Accelerator Program and Strategy 

Support, Department of Health and 

Human Services, Centers for Medicare & 

Medicaid Services, Center for Medicaid 

and CHIP Services, MS: S2–04–28, 7500 

Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 

21244, Phone: 410 786–9071, Email: 

karen.llanos@cms.hhs.gov. 

RIN: 0938–AU68 

HHS—CMS 

74. Coverage of Certain Preventive 

Services Under the Affordable Care Act 

(CMS–9903) [0938–AU94] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: Pub. L. 111–148, sec. 

1001 

CFR Citation: 45 CFR 147; 45 CFR 

156. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rule amends the final 

rules regarding religious and moral 

exemptions and accommodations 

regarding coverage of certain preventive 

services under title I of the Patient 

Protection and Affordable Care Act. 

Statement of Need: Previous rules, 

regulations, and court decisions have 

left many women without contraceptive 

coverage and access to contraceptive 

services without cost sharing. This rule 

seeks to address religious objections to 

providing contraceptive coverage by 

honoring the entities’ religious 

objections, while also ensuring that 

women enrolled in a group health plan 

established or maintained, or in health 

insurance coverage offered or arranged, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I 
9370 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

by an objecting entity described in 45 

CFR 147.132(a), which does not invoke 

the optional accommodation (if 

eligible), have the opportunity to obtain 

contraceptive services at no cost. This 

rule would also eliminate the exemption 

for entities and individuals that object 

to contraceptive coverage based on nonreligious moral beliefs, which prevents 

access to contraceptive services without 

cost sharing. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The 

Department of Health and Human 

Services regulations are adopted 

pursuant to the authority contained in 

sections 2701 through 2763, 2791, 2792, 

2794, 2799A–1 through 2799B–9 of the 

PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 300gg–63, 300gg–91, 

300gg–92, 300gg–94, 300gg–139), as 

amended. 

Alternatives: In developing this rule, 

the Departments considered various 

alternative approaches. The 

Departments considered maintaining 

the exemption (along with the existing 

accommodations and the proposed 

individual contraceptive arrangement) 

with respect to group health plans, 

health insurance issuers, and 

institutions of higher education that 

have a non-religious, moral objection to 

contraceptive coverage. With respect to 

individuals enrolled in coverage 

through entities that have a religious 

objection to contraceptive coverage, the 

Departments considered an approach 

under which contraceptive coverage 

would be available through separate 

individual insurance policies that cover 

only contraceptives and in which 

participants, beneficiaries, and enrollees 

would have to separately enroll if they 

desired contraceptive coverage. The 

Departments also considered an 

approach under which, if an objecting 

entity designs or contracts for a health 

plan without contraceptive coverage, 

the contraceptive coverage requirement 

would apply directly to the issuer in the 

case of a fully insured plan, or the third 

party administrator in the case of a selfinsured plan. The issuer or third party 

administrator would then be required to 

fulfill its separate and independent 

obligation to provide contraceptive 

coverage. With respect to the proposed 

changes to 45 CFR 156.50(d), in 

addition to the proposed submission 

requirements on the part of the 

participating issuer, HHS considered 

whether to condition a provider of 

contraceptive services’ participation in 

the individual contraceptive 

arrangement on the submission to HHS 

of additional information. In addition to 

an arrangement with a participating 

issuer on the Federally-facilitated 

Exchange or a State-based Exchange on 

the Federal Platform, HHS considered 

whether to allow a provider of 

contraceptive services to arrange with a 

third party administrator to submit 

documentation to HHS on their behalf 

under 45 CFR 156.50(d). 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: This 

rule is expected to increase access to 

contraceptive services without cost 

sharing through the individual 

contraceptive arrangement for eligible 

individuals and the elimination of the 

exemption for entities and individuals 

that object to contraceptive coverage 

based on non-religious moral beliefs. 

This rule would increase health equity 

given the disproportionate burden of 

out-of-pocket spending on contraceptive 

services currently faced by low-income 

individuals (as those individuals with 

lower incomes must spend a greater 

percentage of their incomes on 

contraceptive services). This rule would 

also lead to better health outcomes for 

eligible individuals by increasing access 

to contraceptive services and reducing 

unintended pregnancies Participating 

providers of contraceptive services 

(including clinicians, facilities, and 

pharmacies) and issuers would incur 

costs associated with entering into 

signed agreements for reimbursement of 

costs associated with the provision of 

contraceptive services to eligible 

individuals, including costs of verifying 

consumer eligibility and other 

associated administrative costs. Eligible 

individuals would incur costs 

associated with participating in the 

individual contraception arrangement, 

including confirming eligibility to their 

provider of contraceptive services. HHS 

estimates the total cost to providers of 

contraceptive services, issuers, and 

eligible individuals to be approximately 

$30.2 million annually. The rule would 

also lead to a reduction in health care 

costs for individuals, issuers, group 

health plan sponsors, and states due to 

reductions in unintended pregnancies. 

Risks: The Departments do not have 

information on the number of entities 

and individuals that have claimed a 

moral exemption to providing 

contraceptive coverage and are therefore 

uncertain of the amount of the potential 

transfer from plans and issuers to 

participants, beneficiaries, and enrollees 

due to reduced out- of-pocket spending 

on contraceptive services associated 

with the proposed elimination of the 

exemption for entities and individuals 

that object to contraceptive coverage 

based on nonreligious moral beliefs. The 

Departments estimate that the provision 

of the individual contraceptive 

arrangement could lead to a transfer 

from the Federal Government to 

individuals (via issuers to providers of 

contraceptive services) of approximately 

$49.9 million annually. This estimate is 

uncertain due to the limited information 

available in the 2019 user fee 

adjustment data. The Departments are 

uncertain as to how the number of 

participating providers might vary (for 

example, across rural and urban areas) 

and how this variation might affect 

access to services under the individual 

contraceptive arrangement. Due to the 

lack of data, the Departments are unable 

to develop a precise estimate of the 

number of eligible individuals who 

might participate in the individual 

contraceptive arrangement. This overall 

lack of data leads to uncertainty 

regarding the magnitudes of the total 

cost savings to eligible individuals and 

any resulting potential cost savings to 

states (associated with reduced 

spending on State-funded programs that 

provide contraceptive services or a 

potential reduction in the number of 

unintended pregnancies that would 

otherwise impose costs to states). 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 02/02/23 88 FR 7236 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

04/03/23 

Final Action ......... 08/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State. 

Agency Contact: Lindsey Murtagh, 

Director, Market-Wide Regulation 

Division, Department of Health and 

Human Services, Centers for Medicare & 

Medicaid Services, Center for Consumer 

Information and Insurance Oversight, 

7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 

21244, Phone: 301 492–4106, Email: 

lindsey.murtagh@cms.hhs.gov. 

RIN: 0938–AU94 

HHS—CMS 

75. Medicaid and Children’s Health 

Insurance Program (CHIP) Managed 

Care Access, Finance, and Quality 

(CMS–2439) [0938–AU99] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1302 

CFR Citation: 42 CFR 430; 42 CFR 

438; 42 CFR 457. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rule implements 

additional parameters under managed 

care delivery systems related to access 

to care requirements, States’ use of In 

Lieu of Services or Settings (ILOS), State 

directed payments, quality rating 

systems, and other policy and reporting 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9371 

changes to ensure the efficient operation 

of State managed care programs. 

Statement of Need: This rule 

advances CMS’ efforts to improve access 

to care, quality and health outcomes, 

and better address health equity issues 

for Medicaid and CHIP managed care 

enrollees. The rule specifically 

addresses standards for timely access to 

care and States’ monitoring and 

enforcement efforts, clarifies standards 

State directed payments and certain 

quality reporting requirements, adds 

new standards that would apply when 

States use ILOSs to promote effective 

utilization and identify the scope and 

nature of ILOS, specifies medical loss 

ratio (MLR) requirements, and 

establishes a quality rating system (QRS) 

for Medicaid and CHIP managed care 

plans. 

Summary of Legal Basis: States may 

implement a Medicaid managed care 

delivery system using four Federal 

authorities: sections 1915(a), 1915(b), 

1932(a), and 1115(a) of the Social 

Security Act (the Act), and a CHIP 

managed care delivery system using two 

Federal authorities sections 2101(a) and 

2107(e)(2)(A) of the Act. 

Alternatives: In developing the 

policies contained in this rule, we 

considered numerous alternatives, 

including maintaining existing 

requirements. These alternatives are 

described in the rule. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: We 

anticipate that most of the provisions in 

this rule will minimally or moderately 

increase administrative burden and 

associated costs. Certain provisions 

including State directed payments, MLR 

reporting standards, and ILOS could 

potentially have a significant impact on 

the associated and corresponding 

managed care payments. Information 

about anticipated costs will be included 

in the final rule. 

Risks: Risks of this rule are still under 

development and will be included in 

the published rule. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 05/03/23 88 FR 28092 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

07/03/23 

Final Action ......... 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: State. 

Agency Contact: John Giles, Director, 

Division of Managed Care Policy, 

Department of Health and Human 

Services, Centers for Medicare & 

Medicaid Services, Center for Medicaid 

and CHIP Services, MS: S2–01–16, 7500 

Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 

21244, Phone: 410 786–1255, Email: 

john.giles1@cms.hhs.gov. 

RIN: 0938–AU99 

HHS—CMS 

Long-Term Actions 

76. Disclosures of Ownership and 

Additional Disclosable Parties 

Information for Skilled Nursing 

Facilities and Nursing Facilities (CMS– 

6084) [0938–AU90] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1302; 42 

U.S.C. 1395hh 

CFR Citation: 42 CFR 424; 42 CFR 

455. 

Legal Deadline: Final, Statutory, 

February 15, 2026, MMA sec. 902 

requires Medicare final rules publish 

within 3 years of a proposed or interim 

final rule. 

Per the CMS notice published 

December 30, 2004 (69 FR 78442), 

except for certain Medicare payment 

regulations and certain other statutorilymandated regulations, we schedule all 

Medicare final regulations for 

publication within the 3-year 

standardized time limit in the current 

Unified Agenda. We do not intend to 

delay publishing a Medicare final 

regulation for 3 years if we are able to 

publish it sooner. 

Abstract: This rule implements 

portions of section 6101 of the Patient 

Protection and Affordable Care Act 

(Affordable Care Act), which requires 

the disclosure of certain ownership, 

managerial, and other information 

regarding Medicare skilled nursing 

facilities (SNFs) and Medicaid nursing 

facilities. 

Statement of Need: This rule is 

necessary for CMS and states to obtain 

important data about the owners and 

operators of nursing facilities. This will 

better enable CMS and states to monitor 

the ownership and management of these 

providers; this is an especially critical 

consideration given documented quality 

issues and differences in outcomes in 

nursing facilities with certain types of 

owners, such as private equity firms. 

The rule would also serve as an 

important component of this 

Administration’s initiative to improve 

the safety, quality, and accountability of 

nursing homes. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Section 

6101(a) of the Affordable Care Act (Pub. 

L. 111–148) added a new section 

1124(c) to the Social Security Act (the 

Act). This provision established 

requirements for the disclosure of 

information about the owners and 

operators of Medicare SNFs and 

Medicaid nursing facilities. 

Alternatives: None. This rule 

implements a statutory requirement. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: We 

believe the data furnished under this 

regulation will help CMS more closely 

monitor the ownership and management 

of nursing facilities. This, in 

conjunction with the Administration’s 

other initiatives, could help improve 

beneficiary care, although potential 

benefits cannot be monetarily 

quantified. As discussed in the 

published proposed rule, the lone 

category of costs associated with this 

rule involves nursing facilities’ 

submission of the required information. 

We do not anticipate any direct savings 

or transfers principally because the rule 

merely involves the submission of data 

for CMS or state review. 

Risks: No risks are anticipated. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 02/15/23 88 FR 9820 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

04/14/23 

Final Action ......... 02/00/26 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

State. 

Agency Contact: Frank Whelan, 

Health Insurance Specialist, Department 

of Health and Human Services, Centers 

for Medicare & Medicaid Services, 

Center for Program Integrity, MS: AR– 

18–50, 7500 Security Boulevard, 

Baltimore, MD 21244, Phone: 410 786– 

1302, Email: frank.whelan@

cms.hhs.gov. 

RIN: 0938–AU90 

HHS—CMS 

Completed Actions 

77. Hospital Outpatient Prospective 

Payment System: Remedy for 340B– 

Acquired Drugs Purchased in Cost 

Years 2018–2022 (CMS–1793) (Section 

610 Review) [0938–AV18] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

CFR Citation: 42 CFR 419. 

Abstract: This final rule describes the 

agency’s actions to comply with the 

remand from the district court to craft 

a remedy in light of the United States 

Supreme Court’s decision in American 

Hospital Association v. Becerra, 142 S. 

Ct. 1896 (2022), relating to the 

adjustment of Medicare payment rates 

for drugs acquired under the 340B 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I 
9372 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Program from calendar year (CY) 2018 

through September 27th of CY 2022. 

Statement of Need: From CY 2018 

through September 27th of CY 2022, 

CMS paid a lower rate (generally ASP 

minus 22.5 percent) to certain hospitals 

for drugs acquired through the 340B 

discount program. The purpose of this 

policy was to pay these hospitals for 

340B drugs at a rate that more 

accurately reflected the actual costs they 

incurred to acquire them. This 340B 

policy was the subject of several years 

of litigation, which culminated in a 

decision of the Supreme Court of the 

United States in American Hospital 

Association v. Becerra, 142 S. Ct. 1896 

(2022), which held that if CMS has not 

conducted a survey of hospitals’ 

acquisition costs, it may not vary the 

payment rates for outpatient 

prescription drugs by hospital group. 

The Supreme Court subsequently 

remanded the case, and the district 

court ultimately ordered CMS to 

implement a remedy to address the 

reduced payment amounts to the 

plaintiff hospitals from CY 2018 through 

September 27th of CY 2022. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Under the 

Hospital Outpatient Prospective 

Payment System (OPPS), we generally 

set payment rates for separately payable 

drugs and biologicals (hereinafter 

referred to collectively as drugs) under 

section 1833(t)(14)(A) of the Social 

Security Act (the Act). Section 

1833(t)(14)(A)(iii)(II) of the Act provides 

that, if hospital acquisition cost data are 

not available, the payment amount is 

the average price for the drug in a year 

established under section 1842(o), 

section 1847A, or section 1847B of the 

Act, as the case may be. Payment rates 

for drugs are usually established under 

section 1847A of the Act, which 

generally sets a default rate of the 

average sales price (ASP) plus 6 percent. 

Section 1833(t)(14)(A)(iii)(II) of the Act 

also provides that the average price for 

the drug in the year as established under 

section 1847A of the Act is calculated 

and adjusted by the Secretary of the 

Department of Health and Human 

Services (Secretary) as necessary for 

purposes of paragraph (14). 

Alternatives: We evaluated several 

options to determine which remedy 

would best achieve the objectives of 

unwinding the unlawful 340B payment 

policy while making certain OPPS 

providers as close to whole as is 

administratively feasible. A discussion 

of these options, including our reasons 

for not moving forward with them, will 

be included in the final rule. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: To 

comply with statutory budget neutrality 

requirements, we plan to annually 

reduce OPPS payments for non-drug 

items and services beginning in CY 2025 

by decreasing the OPPS conversion 

factor by 0.5 percent each year, until a 

total offset of an estimated $7.8 billion 

is reached. 

Risks: Any risks regarding potential 

impacts will be included in the final 

rule. 

Completed: 

Reason Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 07/11/23 88 FR 44078 

Final Action ......... 11/08/23 88 FR 77150 

Final Action Effective.01/08/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses, 

Governmental Jurisdictions. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State. 

Agency Contact: Elise Barringer, 

Health Insurance Specialist, Department 

of Health and Human Services, Centers 

for Medicare & Medicaid Services, 

Center for Medicare, MS: C4–03–06, 

7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 

21244, Phone: 410 786–9222, Email: 

elise.barringer@cms.hhs.gov. 

RIN: 0938–AV18 

HHS—ADMINISTRATION FOR 

CHILDREN AND FAMILIES (ACF) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

78. Strengthening Temporary 

Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) 

as a Safety Net Program [0970–AC97] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 609 

CFR Citation: 45 CFR 260. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rule would improve the 

effectiveness and integrity of the 

Temporary Assistance for Needy 

Families (TANF) program as a safety net 

program by clarifying allowable uses of 

TANF funds and reducing 

administrative burden. The rule takes 

into account concerns from Members of 

Congress from both parties who are 

focused on ensuring TANF funds are 

serving their intended purpose, and 

advances the Biden-Harris 

Administration’s priority for economic 

growth through investment in American 

families. The rule aims to ensure TANF 

funds are used in accordance with the 

statute, focusing on services that 

support families to meet their basic 

needs, get access to opportunities in the 

job market, and remain together. 

Statement of Need: In fiscal year (FY) 

2020, combined federal TANF and state 

maintenance-of-effort (MOE) 

expenditures and transfers totaled $31.6 

billion. Of that amount only 22 percent 

was spent on basic assistance, compared 

to 71 percent in FY 1997. As a result, 

TANF currently serves less than 25 

percent of eligible families across the 

country, as compared to 1997 when 

TANF served almost 70 percent of 

eligible families. The rule aims to 

address these shortcomings and would 

align with the Administration’s efforts 

to increase opportunities for economic 

mobility for low-income families. The 

NPRM may consider changes around 

use of funds, eligible families, state 

MOE spending, and work flexibilities. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The 

proposed regulations will relate to 

allowable spending, eligible work 

activities and penalties, and 

administrative simplification. The 

NPRM would be issued under the 

Secretary’s authority to issue regulations 

where Congress has charged the 

Department with enforcing penalties, 42 

U.S.C. 609. 

Alternatives: In the absence of these 

regulatory changes, states will not 

experience any relief in their 

administrative burden to operate the 

TANF program and these changes will 

improve program integrity and access to 

services. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: This 

NPRM imposes no costs on the Federal 

government nor does it change overall 

funding amounts for States, territories, 

and tribes, as TANF is a fixed block 

grant. We anticipate a benefit in the 

transfer of funding toward critical 

supports to families experiencing 

economic hardships. 

Risks: While we expect more lowincome families to receive TANF 

benefits and receive more effective 

work-related services, this action may 

result in states having to increase their 

own spending to fund activities 

previously funded by federal TANF 

dollars or previously counted as state 

MOE spending. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 10/02/23 88 FR 67697 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

12/01/23 

Final Action ......... 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Deborah List, 

Associate Deputy Director, Office of 

Family Assistance, Department of 

Health and Human Services, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9373 

Administration for Children and 

Families, 330 C Street SW, Washington, 

DC 20201, Phone: 202 401–5488, Email: 

deborah.list@acf.hhs.gov. 

RIN: 0970–AC97 

HHS—ACF 

79. Employment and Training Services 

for Noncustodial Parents in the Child 

Support Services Program [0970–AD00] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1302 

CFR Citation: 45 CFR part 302; 45 

CFR part 303; 45 CFR part 304. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: In an effort to make the 

child support program more effective 

and to increase regular child support 

payments, the Office of Child Support 

Services will propose to allow child 

support agencies to strengthen 

supportive services for noncustodial 

parents. 

Statement of Need: Currently, IV–D 

agencies have many enforcement tools 

to collect child support from 

noncustodial parents who are able to 

pay their child support, but these 

enforcement tools are less effective in 

collecting support from unemployed 

noncustodial parents. Many of these 

parents face significant barriers to 

employment and could benefit from 

employment and training services, but 

rarely receive them. This Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) would 

explore options for providing 

nonduplicative employment and 

training services to unemployed 

noncustodial parents, which will help 

them become employed and pay their 

child support. 

Summary of Legal Basis: This NPRM 

is published under the authority granted 

to the Secretary of Health and Human 

Services by section 1102 of the Social 

Security Act (Act), 42 U.S.C. 1302. 

Alternatives: There are no satisfactory 

alternatives to publishing this NPRM 

that provide improved child support 

program effectiveness. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: To Be 

Determined. 

Risks: None. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 12/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Chad Edinger, 

Program Specialist, Department of 

Health and Human Services, 

Administration for Children and 

Families, 330 C Street SW, Washington, 

DC 20201. Phone: 303 844–1213, Email: 

chad.edinger@acf.hhs.gov. 

RIN: 0970–AD00 

HHS—ACF 

80. Supporting the Head Start 

Workforce and Other Quality 

Improvements [0970–AD01] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 9801; 42 

U.S.C. 9836a; 42 U.S.C. 9839 

CFR Citation: 45 CFR parts 1302 and 

1305. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This NPRM will propose 

changes to the Head Start Program 

Performance Standards to better support 

the Head Start workforce and to 

maintain the quality of comprehensive 

Head Start services. 

Statement of Need: This notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM) proposes 

to add new provisions to the Head Start 

Program Performance Standards to 

increase pay and support the Head Start 

workforce, make improvements to the 

overall quality of Head Start program 

services, and strengthen mental health 

supports. Head Start programs serve 

hundreds of thousands of children ages 

birth to five, pregnant women, and their 

families each year. This NPRM is 

critical to improving the quality, 

stability, and continuity of Head Start 

services for children and families. 

Summary of Legal Basis: ACF 

publishes this NPRM under the 

authority granted to the Secretary of 

Health and Human Services by sections 

641A, 645, 645A, 648A, and 653 of the 

Act (42 U.S.C. 9836a, 9840, 9840a, 

9843a, and 9848), as amended by the 

Improving Head Start for School 

Readiness Act of 2007 (Pub. L. 110– 

134). 

Alternatives: One alternative is to 

keep the status quo and not put forward 

this proposed rule. This would likely 

result in the workforce crisis 

continuing, which ultimately has a 

negative impact on the quality of 

services for the children and families 

Head Start aims to serve and enrollment 

levels may continue to decline as 

programs have difficulty filling 

vacancies. 

Another alternative is to allow this 

NPRM to be published and move 

forward to a final rule. This would 

stabilize the Head Start workforce and 

enable Head Start programs to provide 

consistent, high-quality services to 

children and families. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

costs associated with this proposed rule 

include the funding required for 

implementing compensation 

requirements proposed in the rule. 

Another potential cost is that burden on 

programs may temporarily increase as 

they work to implement the proposed 

requirements. 

The benefits associated with the 

proposed rule include a more stable 

Head Start workforce and high-quality 

services consistently provided to all 

children and families served by Head 

Start. ACF strongly believes the 

anticipated benefits of this proposed 

rule far outweigh the potential costs. 

Risks: None. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 11/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses, 

Organizations. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Lindsey A. 

Hutchison, Senior Policy Analyst, 

Department of Health and Human 

Services, Administration for Children 

and Families, 330 C Street SW, #4305B, 

Washington, DC 20201, Phone: 904 860– 

7032, Email: lindsey.hutchison@

acf.hhs.gov. 

RIN: 0970–AD01 

HHS—ACF 

81. • Safe and Appropriate Foster Care 

Placement Requirements for Titles IV– 

E and IV–B (Section 610 Review) [0970– 

AD03] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 671(a)(16); 

42 U.S.C. 622(b)(8)(A)(ii); 42 U.S.C. 

675(1)(B); 42 U.S.C. 675(5)) 

CFR Citation: CFR 1355.22; CFR 

1355.34. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rule will propose to 

clarify that title IV–E/IV–B agencies are 

required to offer safe and appropriate 

foster care placements, including 

processes to ensure children can request 

such placements and agencies must 

respond to concerns about those 

placements, for children in foster care 

who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, 

transgender, queer or questioning, 

intersex (LGBTQI+). The rule will not 

interfere with faith-based child welfare 

providers continue to partner with title 

IV–E/IV–B agencies in a way that does 

not interfere with those providers’ 

sincerely held religious beliefs. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9374 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Statement of Need: To support States 

and tribes in complying with Federal 

laws that require that all children in 

foster care receive safe and proper care, 

the proposed rule would clarify the 

processes and requirements to State 

child welfare agencies must follow to 

ensure children in foster care who 

identity as LGBTQI+ are provided with 

placements the agency designates as 

safe and appropriate for an LGBTQI+ 

child, and with services that are 

necessary to support their health and 

wellbeing. These requirements clarify 

how title IV–E/IV–B agencies must meet 

IV–E and IV–B statutory requirements, 

including for the case review system 

and case plan, to appropriately serve 

children in foster care who identify as 

LGBTQI+. While the general 

requirements for the case review system 

are not new, ACF is proposing to 

prescribe how agencies must implement 

the requirements to provide placements 

and services to children in foster care 

who identity as LGBTQI+. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Sections 

471(a)(16), 422(b), and 475(1)(B) of the 

Social Security Act. 

Alternatives: As an alternative to this 

NPRM, ACF has already provided subregulatory guidance requiring agencies 

to implement the provisions of the 

NPRM for children who identify as 

LGBTQI+. However, this guidance did 

not have the force of law and thus was 

not sufficient to effectively ensure that 

LGBTQI+ children and youth in foster 

care receive appropriate placements and 

services. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

benefits of this NPRM are that placing 

children in foster care with providers 

the agencies designate as safe and 

appropriate for LGBTQI+ children will 

reduce the negative experiences of such 

children by allowing them to have 

access to needed care and services and 

to be placed in nurturing placement 

settings with caregivers who have 

received appropriate training. Ensuring 

such placements may also reduce 

LGBTQI+ foster children’s high rates of 

homelessness, housing instability and 

food insecurity. ACF acknowledges that 

there will be a cost to implement 

changes made by this proposed rule as 

we anticipate that a majority of states 

would need to expand their efforts to 

recruit and identify providers and foster 

families that the state or tribe could 

designate as safe and appropriate 

placements for a LGBTQI+ child. This 

cost would vary depending on an 

agency’s available resources to 

implement a final rule, though Federal 

financial participation is available to 

agencies for eligible administrative 

expenses, including expenses for 

recruiting and identifying providers and 

foster families that could be designated 

as safe and appropriate placements for 

an LGBTQI+ child. 

Risks: TBD. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 09/28/23 88 FR 66752 

NPRM Comment 

Period End..

11/27/23 

Final Action ......... 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State, Tribal. 

Federalism: This action may have 

federalism implications as defined in 

E.O. 13132. 

Agency Contact: Kathleen McHugh, 

Director, Division of Policy, Children’s 

Bureau, ACYF/ACF/HHS, Department 

of Health and Human Services, 

Administration for Children and 

Families, 330 C Street SW, Room 3411, 

Washington, DC 20201, Phone: 202 401– 

5789, Fax: 202 205–8221, Email: 

kmchugh@acf.hhs.gov. 

RIN: 0970–AD03 

HHS—ACF 

Final Rule Stage 

82. Improving Child Care Access, 

Affordability, and Stability in the Child 

Care and Development Fund (CCDF) 

[0970–AD02] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Legal Authority: The Child Care and 

Development Block Grant (CCDBG) Act 

of 1990, as amended (42 U.S.C. 9858 et 

seq.); sec.418 of the Social Security Act 

(42 U.S.C. 618) 

CFR Citation: 45 CFR part 98. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This final rule would update 

the Child Care and Development Fund 

(CCDF) regulations to ease eligible 

families’ enrollment in the child care 

subsidy system and increase 

participating families’ access to a range 

of high-quality child care options for 

which they may use child care 

subsidies. The changes would address: 

(1) Family copayments; (2) provider 

payment rates and practices; (3) child 

eligibility determination and redetermination; and (4) technical 

changes. 

Statement of Need: This final rule 

amends Child Care and Development 

Fund (CCDF) regulations in four areas: 

(1) family co- payments; (2) provider 

payment rates and practices; (3) child 

enrollment and eligibility 

determination; and, (4) technical 

changes. These changes will lower child 

care costs for families, increase parent’s 

child care options, reduce barriers to 

receiving child care assistance, increase 

payments to providers, support higher 

program quality, and improve child care 

stability. 

The Child Care and Development 

Block Grant (CCDBG) Act, together with 

Section 418 of the Social Security Act, 

authorize the CCDF, which is the 

primary Federal funding source devoted 

to supporting families with low incomes 

access child care and to increasing the 

quality of child care for all children. 

Fiscal year (FY) 2023 funding was over 

$11 billion by formula to states, 

territories, and tribes. CCDF child care 

subsidies support children’s positive 

and healthy development and family 

economic wellbeing, enabling parents to 

pursue employment, education, and 

training opportunities. More than 

900,000 families and 1.5 million 

children benefit from CCDF financial 

assistance each month. 

Congress last authorized the CCDBG 

Act in 2014, and the Department of 

Health and Human Services (HHS) 

published final regulations clarifying 

the new provisions of the Act in 

September 2016. These statutory and 

regulatory actions included significant 

changes to the CCDF program. In the 

years since 2016 Final Rule, CCDF 

agencies have taken significant steps to 

implement the requirements, but child 

care remains a broken system in crisis 

due to chronic underinvestment. 

Parents struggle to find affordable highquality child care that meets their 

needs, and the system relies on a poorly 

compensated workforce and 

unaffordable parent fees. 

This final rule builds on the 2016 

final rule and to create a stronger child 

care assistance program that will better 

meet the needs of children, families, 

and child care providers. It provides 

additional clarity around key policies 

that are needed to provide more help for 

families so they can find child care that 

meets their families’ needs and for the 

continued stabilization of the child care 

sector. 

Summary of Legal Basis: ACF 

publishes this final rule under the 

authority granted to the Secretary of 

Health and Human Services (the 

Secretary) by the Child Care and 

Development Block Grant (CCDBG) Act 

of 1990, as amended (42 U.S.C. 9857, et 

seq.) and section 418 of the Social 

Security Act (42 U.S.C. 618). 

Alternatives: 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9375 

Alternative 1: One alternative is to 

publish this final rule, which will lower 

family costs, increase parent’s options 

for child care, help families receive 

more timely assistance, increase 

payments to child care providers, 

incentivize child care providers to 

accept CCDF subsidies, help stabilize 

the child care sector, and improve child 

care quality. 

Alternative 2: Another alternative is to 

keep the status quo, which will 

continue current fees and policies that 

limit a family’s ability to participate in 

the CCDF program and access child 

care, payment practices that limit parent 

choices and undermine child care 

provider stability, and eligibility 

processes that create barriers to the 

child care subsidy. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

Changes made by this final rule would 

have the most direct benefit for the over 

900,000 families and 1.5 million 

children who use CCDF assistance to 

help pay for child care each month. 

Families who receive CCDF assistance 

will benefit from lower parent copayments, more parental options for 

child care arrangements, expanded and 

easier access to child care which could 

improve the ability of families to 

participate in the labor market, and 

improved eligibility determination 

processes. 

Providers will benefit from fairer 

payment practices that support their 

financial stability, including payments 

that more accurately reflect the cost of 

providing high quality care, which can 

lead to higher wages for providers and 

their staff. 

The cost of implementing these 

changes would vary based on a state, 

territory, or Tribe’s specific situation 

and implementation choices. Some 

states may also need to invest in IT and 

systems changes. 

Risks: None. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 07/13/23 88 FR 45022 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

08/28/23 

Final Action ......... 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Local, 

State, Tribal. 

Agency Contact: Megan Campbell, 

Child Care Policy Supervisor, 

Department of Health and Human 

Services, Administration for Children 

and Families, 330 C Street SW, 

Washington, DC 20201, Phone: 202 690– 

6499, Fax: 202 690–5600, Email: 

megan.campbell@acf.hhs.gov. 

RIN: 0970–AD02 

HHS—ACF 

Completed Actions 

83. Separate Licensing Standards for 

Relative or Kinship Foster Family 

Homes [0970–AC91] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

CFR Citation: 45 CFR 1355.20. 

Abstract: This regulation allows title 

IV–E agencies to adopt separate 

licensing standards for relative or 

kinship foster family homes. 

Statement of Need: Currently, the 

regulation provides that in order to 

claim title IV–E, all foster family homes 

must meet the same licensing standards, 

regardless of whether the foster family 

home is a relative or non-relative 

placement. This Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (NPRM) allows a title IV–E 

agency to adopt licensing or approval 

standards for all relative foster family 

homes that are different from the 

licensing standards used for non-related 

foster family homes. 

Summary of Legal Basis: This NPRM 

is published under the authority granted 

to the Secretary of Health and Human 

Services by section 1102 of the Social 

Security Act (Act), 42 U.S.C. 1302. 

Section 1102 of the Act authorizes the 

Secretary to publish regulations, not 

inconsistent with the Act, as may be 

necessary for the efficient 

administration of the functions for 

which the Secretary is responsible 

pursuant to the Act. Section 472 of the 

Act authorizes federal reimbursement 

for a FCMP for an otherwise eligible 

child when the child is placed in a fully 

licensed or approved foster family 

home. 

Alternatives: There are no satisfactory 

alternatives to publishing this NPRM. 

This change cannot be made in subregulatory guidance. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: This 

NPRM impacts state and tribal title IV– 

E agencies and does not impose a 

burden. The title IV–E agency has 

discretion to develop separate licensing 

standards for relatives and non-relatives 

and if they do so, they may claim title 

IV–E funding. ACF estimates that the 

proposed regulatory change would cost 

the Federal Government $3.085 billion 

in title IV–E foster care federal financial 

participation over 10 years. 

Risks: None. 

Completed: 

Reason Date FR Cite 

Final Action ......... 09/28/23 88 FR 66700 

Reason Date FR Cite 

Final Action Effective.11/27/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Kathleen McHugh, 

Director, Division of Policy, Children’s 

Bureau, ACYF/ACF/HHS, Department 

of Health and Human Services, 

Administration for Children and 

Families, 330 C Street SW, Room 3411, 

Washington, DC 20201, Phone: 202 401– 

5789, Fax: 202 205–8221, Email: 

kmchugh@acf.hhs.gov. 

RIN: 0970–AC91 

HHS—ADMINISTRATION FOR 

COMMUNITY LIVING (ACL) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

84. Adult Protective Services Functions 

and Grant Programs [0985–AA18] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: Elder Justice Act 

(SSA sec. 2042. [42 U.S.C. 1397m–1] (a) 

Secretarial Responsibilities) 

CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The final rule would create 

federal regulations for Adult Protective 

Services (APS) programs as authorized 

by the Elder Justice Act. APS programs 

were originally recognized by federal 

law in 1975 under title XX of the Social 

Security Act via the Social Services 

Block Grant (SSBG). States have wide 

discretion whether to allocate any 

funding to APS via the SSBG program, 

and there are no regulations pertaining 

to APS under SSBG. Since 1975, all 50 

states, the District of Columbia, and four 

territories have developed APS 

programs in accordance with local 

needs, structures, and laws. Historic 

investments through the Coronavirus 

Relief and Response Supplemental 

Appropriations Act (CRRSA) and the 

American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) 

provided the very first funding for APS 

program formula funding to states as 

authorized by the Elder Justice Act 

(EJA). These regulations would promote 

an effective APS response across the 

country so that all older adults and 

adults with disabilities, regardless of the 

state or jurisdiction in which they live, 

have similar protections and service 

delivery from APS systems. Following 

release of the NPRM, ACL held a 

stakeholder call open to all of the public 

on September 18, 2023, that provided a 

walkthrough of the proposed rule and 

background resources and information 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
9376 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

on how to comment. ACL also held a 

separate stakeholder call with Tribal 

grantees and leadership regarding the 

same. ACL has created a specific 

stakeholder web page at https://acl.gov/ 

APSrule, which includes a summary of 

the rule and how to comment. 

Statement of Need: The proposed rule 

would create federal regulations for 

Adult Protective Services (APS) 

programs as authorized by the Elder 

Justice Act (EJA). These regulations are 

critical in establish consistent national 

requirements and standards for EJA APS 

program formula funding to states. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 

Development, promulgation and 

implementation of this regulation will 

be carried out consistently with the 

statute; however, this regulatory action 

is not required by the statute or a court 

order. 

Alternatives: ACL considers subregulatory guidance, information and 

education outreach, and voluntary 

approaches as alternatives to regulatory 

action. Prior to the availability of 

appropriations for formula funding for 

this program ACL utilized guidance and 

voluntary approach for the 

establishment of a national data system 

and in supporting the establishment and 

dissemination of program best practices. 

However, now that federal funding is 

available to all states and territories, 

none of these alternatives are the 

appropriate option for promulgating and 

administering the provisions that will 

be included in the regulations 

consistent with statute. Economic 

incentives and instruments are not an 

option. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

proposed rule will require the revision 

of State policies and procedures, require 

training on new rules for APS staff, 

require the submission of new State 

plans, require data sharing agreements 

between APS systems and other State 

entities, require APS systems create a 

feedback loop to provide information to 

mandatory reporters, require data 

reporting to ACL, inform potential APS 

clients of their rights under State law, 

and require new or updated record 

retention systems for certain States. The 

rule will result in improved consistency 

in implementation of APS systems 

within and across States, clarity of 

obligations associated with Federal 

funding for administrators of APS 

systems and will result in better and 

more effective service delivery within 

and across States with better quality 

investigations in turn leading to more 

person-directed outcomes. The rule is 

anticipated to cost a total of 

$3,532,916.99 to fully implement. This 

cost will be offset by improved 

investigations and better outcomes for 

the victims of adult maltreatment. This 

represents significant value, particularly 

given the widespread and egregious 

nature of adult maltreatment in the 

United States. 

Risks: These regulations would 

establish first ever regulations for APS 

programs consistent with the Elder 

Justice Act passed in 2010. 

Promulgating this NPRM and obtaining 

public feedback in order to issue a new 

final rule will result in decreased risk 

for administering agencies at the federal, 

state and local level in ensuring the 

administration of appropriations for 

APS programs consistent with the 

statute, and in also supporting the 

statute’s programmatic purpose of 

detecting, preventing and reducing the 

abuse, neglect and exploitation of 

adults, including older adults. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 09/12/23 88 FR 62503 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

11/13/23 

Final Action ......... 05/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: State. 

Federalism: This action may have 

federalism implications as defined in 

E.O. 13132. 

Agency Contact: Richard Nicholls, 

Chief of Staff and Executive Secretary, 

Department of Health and Human 

Services, Administration for 

Community Living, 330 C Street SW, 

Room 1004B, Washington, DC 20201, 

Phone: 202 795–7415, Fax: 202 205– 

0399, Email: rick.nicholls@acl.hhs.gov 

RIN: 0985–AA18 

BILLING CODE 4150–03–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY (DHS) 

Fall 2023 Statement of Regulatory 

Priorities 

The Department of Homeland 

Security (DHS or Department) was 

established in 2003 pursuant to the 

Homeland Security Act of 2002, Public 

Law 107–296. The DHS mission 

statement provides the following: ‘‘With 

honor and integrity, we will safeguard 

the American people, our homeland, 

and our values.’’ 

DHS was created in the aftermath of 

the horrific attacks of 9/11, and its 

distinctive mission is defined by those 

words. The phrase ‘‘homeland security’’ 

refers to the security of the American 

people, the homeland (understood in 

the broadest sense), and the nation’s 

defining values. A central part of the 

mission of protecting ‘‘our values’’ 

includes fidelity to law and the rule of 

law, reflected above all in the 

Constitution of the United States, and 

also in statutes enacted by Congress, 

including the Administrative Procedure 

Act. That commitment is also associated 

with a commitment to individual 

dignity. Among other things, the attacks 

of 9/11 were attacks on that value as 

well. 

The regulatory priorities of DHS are 

founded on an insistence on the rule of 

law—and also on a belief that 

individual dignity, symbolized and 

made real by the opening words of the 

Constitution (‘‘We the People’’), the 

separation of powers, and the Bill of 

Rights (including the Due Process 

Clause), helps to define our mission. 

Fulfilling that mission requires the 

dedication of more than 240,000 

employees in jobs that range from 

aviation and border security to 

emergency response, from cybersecurity 

analyst to chemical facility inspector, 

from the economist seeking to identify 

the consequences of our actions to the 

scientist and policy analyst seeking to 

make the nation more resilient against 

flooding, drought, extreme heat, and 

wildfires. Our duties are wide-ranging, 

but our goal is clear: keep America safe. 

There are six overarching homeland 

security missions that make up DHS’s 

strategic plan: (1) Counter terrorism and 

homeland security threats; (2) secure 

U.S. borders and approaches; (3) secure 

cyberspace and critical infrastructure; 

(4) preserve and uphold the Nation’s 

prosperity and economic security; (5) 

strengthen preparedness and resilience 

(including resilience from risks actually 

or potentially aggravated by climate 

change); and (6) champion the DHS 

workforce and strengthen the 

Department. See also 6 U.S.C. 111(b)(1) 

(identifying the primary mission of the 

Department). 

In promoting these goals, we attempt 

to evaluate our practices by reference to 

evidence and data, and to improve them 

in real time. We also attempt to deliver 

our multiple services in a way that, at 

once, protects the American people and 

does not impose excessive or unjustified 

barriers and burdens on those who use 

them. 

In achieving those goals, we are 

committed to public participation and 

to listening carefully to the American 

people (and to noncitizens as well). We 

are continually strengthening our 

partnerships with communities, first 

responders, law enforcement, and 

Government agencies—at the Federal, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9377 

State, local, tribal, and international 

levels. We are accelerating the 

deployment of science, technology, and 

innovation in order to make America 

more secure against risks old and new— 

and to perform our services better. We 

are becoming leaner, smarter, and more 

efficient, ensuring that every security 

resource is used as effectively as 

possible. We are reducing 

administrative burdens and simplifying 

our processes. For a further discussion 

of our mission, see the DHS website at 

https://www.dhs.gov/mission. 

The regulations we have summarized 

below in the Department’s Fall 2023 

regulatory plan and agenda support the 

Department’s mission. We are 

committed to continuing evaluation of 

our regulations, consistent with 

Executive Order 13563, and Executive 

Order 13707, and in a way that 

improves them over time. These 

regulations will improve the 

Department’s ability to accomplish its 

mission. Also, these regulations address 

legislative initiatives such as the ones 

found in the Implementing 

Recommendations of the 9/11 

Commission Act of 2007 (9/11 Act) and 

the FAA Extension, Safety, and Security 

Act of 2016. 

We emphasize here our commitments 

(1) To fidelity to law; (2) to treating 

people with dignity and respect; (3) to 

increasing national resilience against 

multiple risks and hazards, including 

those actually or potentially associated 

with climate change; (4) to 

modernization of existing requirements; 

and (5) to reducing unjustified barriers 

and burdens, including administrative 

burdens. 

DHS strives for organizational 

excellence and uses a centralized and 

unified approach to managing its 

regulatory resources. The Office of the 

General Counsel manages the 

Department’s regulatory program, 

including the agenda and regulatory 

plan. In addition, DHS senior leadership 

reviews each significant regulatory 

project in order to ensure that the 

project fosters and supports the 

Department’s mission. 

The Department is committed to 

ensuring that all of its regulatory 

initiatives are aligned with its guiding 

principles to remain faithful to law, 

protect civil rights and civil liberties, 

integrate our actions, listen to those 

affected by our actions, build coalitions 

and partnerships, develop human 

resources, innovate, and be accountable 

to the American public. 

DHS is strongly committed to the 

principles described in Executive 

Orders 13563 and 12866 (as amended). 

Both Executive Orders direct agencies to 

assess the costs and benefits of available 

regulatory alternatives and, if regulation 

is necessary, to select regulatory 

approaches that maximize net benefits. 

Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the 

importance of quantifying both costs 

and benefits, of reducing costs, of 

harmonizing rules, and of promoting 

flexibility. Executive Order 13563 

explicitly draws attention to human 

dignity and to equity. 

Finally, the Department values public 

involvement in the development of its 

regulatory plan, agenda, and 

regulations. It is particularly concerned 

with the impact its regulations have on 

small businesses and startups, 

consistent with its commitment to 

promoting economic growth. DHS is 

also concerned to ensure that its 

regulations are equitable, and that they 

do not have unintended or adverse 

effects on (for example) women, 

disabled people, people of color, or the 

elderly. Its general effort to modernize 

regulations, and to remove unjustified 

barriers and burdens, is meant in part to 

avoid harmful effects on small 

businesses, startups, and disadvantaged 

groups of multiple sorts. DHS and its 

components continue to emphasize the 

use of plain language in our regulatory 

documents to promote a better 

understanding of regulations and to 

promote increased public participation 

in the Department’s regulations. We 

want our regulations to be transparent 

and ‘‘navigable,’’ so that people are 

aware of how to comply with them (and 

in a position to suggest improvements). 

DHS and its components regularly seek 

public input on regulatory plans, 

including through Requests for 

Information and Advanced Notices of 

Proposed Rulemaking, listening 

sessions, Federal Advisory Committees, 

and more. 

The Fall 2023 regulatory plan for DHS 

includes regulations from multiple DHS 

components, including the Federal 

Emergency Management Agency 

(FEMA), U.S. Citizenship and 

Immigration Services (USCIS), the U.S. 

Coast Guard (the Coast Guard), U.S. 

Customs and Border Protection (CBP), 

Transportation Security Administration 

(TSA), U.S. Immigration and Customs 

Enforcement (ICE), and the 

Cybersecurity and Infrastructure 

Security Agency (CISA). We next 

describe the regulations that comprise 

the DHS fall 2023 regulatory plan. 

Federal Emergency Management 

Agency 

The Federal Emergency Management 

Agency (FEMA) is the government 

agency responsible for helping people 

before, during, and after disasters. 

FEMA supports the people and 

communities of our Nation by providing 

experience, perspective, and resources 

in emergency management. FEMA is 

particularly focused on national 

resilience in the face of the risks of 

flooding, drought, extreme heat, and 

wildfire; it is acutely aware that these 

risks, and others, are actually or 

potentially aggravated by climate 

change. FEMA seeks to ensure, to the 

extent possible, that changing weather 

conditions do not mean a more 

vulnerable nation. FEMA is also focused 

on individual equity, and it is aware 

that administrative burdens and undue 

complexity might produce inequitable 

results in practice. 

Consistent with President Biden’s 

Executive Order on Climate Related 

Financial Risk (Executive Order 14030), 

FEMA will propose a regulation titled 

National Flood Insurance Program: 

Standard Flood Insurance Policy, 

Homeowner Flood Form. The National 

Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), 

established pursuant to the National 

Flood Insurance Act of 1968, is a 

voluntary program in which 

participating communities adopt and 

enforce a set of minimum floodplain 

management requirements to reduce 

future flood damages. Property owners 

in participating communities are 

eligible to purchase NFIP flood 

insurance. This proposed rule would 

revise the Standard Flood Insurance 

Policy by adding a new Homeowner 

Flood Form and five accompanying 

endorsements. The new Homeowner 

Flood Form would replace the Dwelling 

Form as a source of coverage for 

homeowners of one-to-four family 

residences. Together, the new Form and 

endorsements would more closely align 

with property and casualty 

homeowners’ insurance and provide 

increased options and coverage in a 

more user-friendly and comprehensible 

format. 

FEMA will also publish an Interim 

Final Rule (IFR) titled Individual 

Assistance Program Equity to further 

align with Executive Order 13985, 

Advancing Racial Equity and Support 

for Underserved Communities Through 

the Federal Government and Executive 

Order 14091, Further Advancing Racial 

Equity and Support for Underserved 

Communities Through the Federal 

Government. FEMA will amend its 

Individual Assistance (IA) program 

regulations to increase equity by 

simplifying processes, removing barriers 

to entry, and increasing eligibility for 

certain types of assistance under the 

program. Specifically, FEMA will 

increase eligibility for home repair 

assistance by amending the definitions 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9378 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

1 86 FR 21325, Apr. 22, 2021. 

2See ‘‘Request for Information on FEMA 

Programs, Regulations, and Policies; Public 

Meetings; Extension of Comment Period,’’ 86 FR 

30326, June 7, 2021. 

3 80 FR 6530, Feb. 5, 2015. 

4 80 FR 16018, Mar. 26, 2015. 

5 81 FR 57401, Aug. 22, 2016. 

6 86 FR 59745, Oct. 28, 2021 and 86 FR 66329, 

Nov. 22, 2021. 

and application of the terms safe, 

sanitary, and functional, allowing 

assistance for certain accessibilityrelated items, and amending its 

approach to evaluating insurance 

proceeds; allow for the re-opening of the 

applicant registration period when the 

President adds new counties to the 

major disaster declaration; simplify the 

documentation requirements for 

continued temporary housing 

assistance; simplify the appeals process; 

simplify the process to request approval 

for a late registration; remove the 

requirement to apply for a Small 

Business Administration loan as a 

condition of eligibility for Other Needs 

Assistance (ONA); and establish 

additional assistance under ONA for 

serious needs, displacement, disasterdamaged computing devices, and 

essential tools for self-employed 

individuals. FEMA also makes revisions 

to reflect changes to statutory authority 

that have not yet been implemented in 

regulation, to include provisions for 

utility and security deposit payments, 

lease and repair of multi-family rental 

housing, child care assistance, 

maximum assistance limits, and waiver 

authority. 

FEMA informed the development of 

this IFR by seeking input on regulatory 

changes to the Individuals and 

Households Program (IHP) through an 

Request for Information (RFI) published 

on April 22, 2021, seeking public input 

on its programs, regulations, collections 

of information, and policies to ensure 

they effectively achieve FEMA’s mission 

in a manner that furthers the goals of 

advancing equity for all, including those 

in underserved communities; bolstering 

resilience from the impacts of climate 

change, particularly for those 

disproportionately impacted by climate 

change; and environmental justice.1

FEMA held public meetings and 

extended the comment period on the 

RFI to ensure all interested parties had 

sufficient opportunity to provide 

comments.2 All relevant comments 

received in response to the RFI, 

including those received during the 

public meetings, have been posted to 

the public rulemaking docket on the 

Federal eRulemaking portal at https://

www.regulations.gov/document/FEMA2021-0011-0001/comment. Commenters 

raised equitable concerns that FEMA 

will address in this IFR, such as by 

removing the requirement to apply for 

the SBA for a loan before receipt of 

ONA, amending FEMA’s habitability 

standards, increasing assistance for 

essential tools, simplifying its appeal 

process, and removing documentation 

requirements for late registrations. 

FEMA will seek public comment on this 

IFR and will carefully consider each 

comment received to determine whether 

further changes to FEMA’s IHP 

regulations are needed. 

In addition, FEMA will propose a 

regulation titled Update of FEMA’s 

Public Assistance Regulations. FEMA 

proposes to revise its Public Assistance 

program regulations to reflect current 

statutory authorities and implement 

program improvements. The proposed 

rule would incorporate changes brought 

about by amendments to the Robert T. 

Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency 

Assistance Act. FEMA is also proposing 

clarifications and corrections to improve 

the efficiency and consistency of the 

Public Assistance program. 

Additionally, FEMA will propose a 

regulation titled Updates to Floodplain 

Management and Protection of 

Wetlands Regulations to Implement the 

Federal Flood Risk Management 

Standard consistent with Executive 

Order 14030. FEMA proposes to amend 

its existing regulations to incorporate 

amendments that have been made to 

Executive Order 11988 and the Federal 

Flood Risk Management Standard 

(FFRMS). FEMA has engaged the public 

extensively on these matters. On 

February 5, 2015, FEMA, acting on 

behalf of the Mitigation Framework 

Leadership Group, posted a Federal 

Register notice seeking comments on a 

draft of the Revised Guidelines for 

Implementing Executive Order 11988, 

Floodplain Management.3 The 60-day 

comment period was extended an 

additional 30 days.4 During the public 

comment period for the Revised 

Guidelines, FEMA sent advisories to 

representatives from Governors’ offices 

nationwide inviting comments on the 

draft Revised Guidelines. Over 25 

meetings were held across the country 

with State, local, and Tribal officials 

and interested stakeholders to discuss 

the draft Revised Guidelines as well as 

9 public listening sessions across the 

country attended by over 700 

participants to facilitate feedback. All 

relevant comments received in response 

to these efforts have been posted to the 

public rulemaking docket on the Federal 

eRulemaking portal at https://

www.regulations.gov/document/FEMA2015-0006-0001/comment. Comments 

from meetings and listening sessions 

can be found at https://

www.regulations.gov/docket/FEMA2015-0006/document. 

Additionally, FEMA published a 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) 

in 2016 5 seeking public comment on 

FEMA’s proposed implementation of 

the Revised Guidelines. All relevant 

comments received in response to the 

2016 NPRM have been posted to the 

public rulemaking docket on the Federal 

eRulemaking portal at https://

www.regulations.gov/document/FEMA2015-0006-0373/comment. The FFRMS 

is a flexible framework allowing 

agencies to choose among three 

approaches to define the floodplain and 

corresponding flood elevation 

requirements for federally funded 

projects. Existing regulations describe 

FEMA’s process for determining 

whether the proposed location for an 

action falls within a floodplain and how 

to complete the action in the floodplain 

in light of the risk of flooding. The 

proposed rule would change how FEMA 

defines a floodplain with respect to 

certain actions. Additionally, under the 

proposed rule, FEMA would use natural 

systems, ecosystem process, and naturebased approaches, where practicable, 

when developing alternatives to locating 

the proposed action in the floodplain. 

Finally, FEMA continues to engage 

with the public related to its NFIP 

minimum floodplain management 

standards. On October 12, 2021, FEMA 

issued an RFI to receive the public’s 

input on revising the NFIP’s floodplain 

management standards for land 

management and use regulations to 

better align with the current 

understanding of flood risk and flood 

risk reduction approaches. FEMA’s 

authority under the National Flood 

Insurance Act requires the agency to, 

from time to time, develop 

comprehensive criteria designed to 

encourage the adoption of adequate 

State and local measures. During the RFI 

comment period, FEMA held three 

public meetings and extended the 

comment period on the RFI to ensure all 

interested parties had sufficient 

opportunity to provide comments.6 All 

relevant comments received in response 

to the RFI have been posted to the 

public rulemaking docket on the Federal 

eRulemaking portal at https://

www.regulations.gov/docket/FEMA2021-0024/comments and transcripts 

from the public meetings have also been 

posted at https://www.regulations.gov/ 

docket/FEMA-2021-0024/document. In 

April 2023, FEMA requested 

recommendations from the Technical 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9379 

Mapping Advisory Council (TMAC) on 

modifying the definition of the Special 

Flood Hazard Area or modifying how it 

is calculated. In addition, FEMA 

requested a recommendation from 

TMAC on how FEMA might consider 

changing mapping procedures related to 

when land is filled. These 

recommendations will assist FEMA in 

exploring the feasibility of public 

comments received from the 2021 RFI. 

The agency will propose regulations 

to better align the NFIP minimum 

floodplain management standards with 

FEMA’s current understanding of flood 

risk, flood insurance premium rates, and 

risk reduction approaches to make 

communities safer, stronger, and more 

resilient to increased flooding. As part 

of the proposed regulations, FEMA is 

considering revisions to the NFIP 

minimum floodplain management 

standards to better protect people and 

property in a nuanced manner that 

balances community needs with the 

national scope of the NFIP. FEMA will 

also propose opportunities to make 

these minimum floodplain management 

standards improve resilience in 

historically underserved communities. 

The proposed revisions to the NFIP 

floodplain management minimum 

standards will consider how to advance 

the conservation of threatened and 

endangered species and their habitat. 

FEMA is also reviewing ways to further 

promote enhanced resilience efforts 

through the Community Rating System. 

United States Citizenship and 

Immigration Services 

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration 

Services (USCIS) is the government 

agency that administers and oversees 

lawful immigration to the United States. 

USCIS is firmly committed to creating 

and strengthening an accessible and 

humane immigration system. The 

USCIS mission statement is: ‘‘USCIS 

upholds America’s promise as a nation 

of welcome and possibility with 

fairness, integrity, and respect for all we 

serve.’’ The American people, through 

Congress, have entrusted USCIS to 

faithfully administer the legal 

immigration programs that allow foreign 

nationals to visit, work, study, live, and 

seek refuge in the United States. Every 

day, USCIS delivers immigration 

decisions to individuals, families, 

businesses, workers, and those seeking 

a place of safety and shelter in our 

country, whether they filed 

applications, petitions, requests, or 

appeals. The work of USCIS employees 

makes the possibility of America a 

reality for immigrants, for the 

communities and economies they join, 

and for the nation as a whole. In 

achieving this mission, partnership with 

our stakeholders and strong public 

engagement is a strategic priority of 

USCIS to ensure we are crafting policies 

and regulations to reduce unnecessary 

burdens or barriers to legal immigration, 

meet the economic needs of U.S. 

employers, and reinvigorate the size and 

scope of humanitarian relief. Over the 

coming year, USCIS will pursue several 

regulatory actions in support of 

furthering a strong legal immigration 

system that operates with integrity, and 

that promotes integration, inclusion, 

and citizenship. USCIS will issue 

regulations that restore and strengthen 

the family and employment-based 

immigration systems, that improve the 

lives of survivors of domestic and 

sexual violence and other serious 

crimes, and that are nimble enough to 

address urgent humanitarian needs 

effectively and quickly. We will publish 

regulations that are clear and easy to 

understand, and include opportunities 

for public engagement and input. 

Employment Issues, Economic Needs, 

and Lawful Pathways. USCIS is focused 

on promulgating policies that are 

responsive to the needs of the U.S. 

economy and U.S. employers, while 

providing lawful pathways to work in 

the United States and also protecting the 

rights of both U.S. and noncitizen 

workers. USCIS has recently proposed a 

rule to modernize and reform the H–2A 

and H–2B programs. The proposed rule 

incorporates necessary program 

efficiencies, aims to meet the needs of 

U.S. employers, and include provisions 

designated to protect against the 

exploitation or other abuse of H–2A and 

H–2B workers (Modernization and 

Reform of the H–2 Programs). USCIS 

will also propose a rule to update and 

streamline the H–1B program, with a 

goal of improving program efficiency, 

integrity, and flexibility including 

proposed changes to the registration 

system to reduce the possibility of 

misuse and fraud. 

Many of these proposals will be 

informed by the public comments we 

received in response to a Request for 

Public Input that USCIS published on 

April 19, 2021, to solicit feedback from 

our stakeholders and customers on 

identifying and reducing barriers to 

immigration (86 FR 20398). 

(Modernizing H–1B Requirements and 

Oversight and Providing Flexibility in 

the F–1 Program.) 

Improvements to the Overall 

Immigration System. On January 4, 

2023, USCIS published a proposal to 

adjust certain immigration and 

naturalization benefit request fees (after 

performing the required biennial fee 

review) to ensure that fees charged 

recover full costs borne by USCIS. 

Following publication of the notice of 

proposed rulemaking and during the 

official comment period, on January 11, 

2023, USCIS held a virtual listening 

session, ‘‘National Listening Session on 

the Proposed Rule to Adjust Certain 

Immigration Fees’’ (attended by 1,671 

people), for members of the public to 

provide their feedback and thoughts. 

USCIS will consider all comments and 

input received from the public in 

developing the final rule and set fees in 

a manner that adheres to the ideals of 

removing unjustified barriers and 

promoting access to the immigration 

system (to promote, among other things, 

economic needs and economic growth); 

improving and expanding naturalization 

processing; and meeting the 

administration’s humanitarian 

priorities. (USCIS Fee Schedule and 

Changes to Certain Other Immigration 

Benefit Request Requirements.) In 

addition, USCIS plans to take steps to 

reform the regulations governing the 

adjustment of status to lawful 

permanent residence to improve the 

efficiency and administration of that 

program. USCIS will propose a rule that 

updates outdated regulations, reduces 

the potential for visa retrogression, and 

promotes the efficient use of 

immediately available immigrant visas. 

Many of the proposed policy and 

operational changes contained in this 

rulemaking were informed by public 

comments USCIS received on its April 

19, 2021 Request for Public Input and 

are crafted to reduce barriers to lawful 

immigration as identified by our 

stakeholders. (Improving the 

Regulations Governing the Adjustment 

of Status to Lawful Permanent 

Residence and Related Immigration 

Benefits.) Lastly, USCIS is also planning 

a proposed rule to clarify and update 

eligibility requirements governing 

citizenship and naturalization. This 

project is also informed by information 

submitted by our public stakeholders in 

response to the 2021 Request for Public 

Input, as well as a CIS Ombudsman’s 

Webinar Series: Naturalization and 

Immigrant Integration on May 23, 2021 

(attended by 635 people and 118 people 

provided written questions/comments) 

and a Citizenship and Naturalization 

Engagement on March 15, 2022 

(attended by 463 people and 6 people 

submitted written questions/comments 

by email) in which the public provided 

comments on regulations and policies. 

USCIS reviewed all comments provided 

through the Request for Public Input 

and the engagements, and incorporated 

edits into the proposed rule as 

applicable. (Citizenship and 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9380 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Naturalization and Other Related 

Flexibilities.) 

Humanitarian Relief. USCIS will 

propose reforms to the U nonimmigrant 

visa classification. The U nonimmigrant 

status is for noncitizen victims of 

certain qualifying criminal activities, 

and their eligible family members, who 

have been, are, or are likely to be 

helpful in the investigation or 

persecution of those crimes. To 

streamline the procedures and enhance 

operational efficiency, USCIS will 

propose a rule to update eligibility, 

procedural and filing requirements 

governing U nonimmigrant status, and 

adjustment of status for those 

nonimmigrants. (Victims of Qualifying 

Criminal Activities; Eligibility 

Requirements for U Nonimmigrant 

Status and Adjustment of Status). 

Asylum Reforms. USCIS is focused on 

pursuing regulations to strengthen, 

rebuild, and (where appropriate) 

streamline the asylum system, 

consistent with law and mission 

imperatives. For example, USCIS and 

DOJ will take steps to remove regulatory 

provisions that are currently enjoined 

(Procedures for Asylum and Bars to 

Asylum Eligibility), propose updates to 

clarify eligibility for asylum and 

withholding of removal (Clarifying 

Definitions and Analyses for Fair and 

Efficient Asylum and Other Protection 

Determinations), and propose 

modifications or withdrawal of other 

asylum-related regulatory provisions 

(Asylum Eligibility and Public Health). 

United States Coast Guard 

The Coast Guard is a military, multimission, maritime service of the United 

States and the only military 

organization within DHS. It is the 

principal Federal agency responsible for 

maritime safety, security, and 

stewardship in U.S. ports and 

waterways. 

Effective governance in the maritime 

domain hinges upon an integrated 

approach to safety, security, and 

stewardship. The Coast Guard’s policies 

and capabilities are integrated and 

interdependent, delivering results 

through a network of enduring 

partnerships with maritime 

stakeholders. Consistent standards of 

universal application and enforcement, 

which encourage safe, efficient, and 

responsible maritime commerce, are 

vital to the success of the maritime 

industry. The Coast Guard’s ability to 

field versatile capabilities and highly 

trained personnel is one of the U.S. 

Government’s most significant and 

important strengths in the maritime 

environment. 

America is a maritime nation, and our 

security, resilience, and economic 

prosperity are intrinsically linked to the 

oceans. Safety, efficient waterways, and 

freedom of transit on the high seas are 

essential to our well-being. The Coast 

Guard is leaning forward, poised to 

meet the demands of the modern 

maritime environment. The Coast Guard 

creates value for the public through 

solid prevention and response efforts. 

Activities involving oversight and 

regulation, enforcement, maritime 

presence, and public and private 

partnership foster increased maritime 

safety, security, and stewardship. 

The statutory responsibilities of the 

Coast Guard include ensuring marine 

safety and security, preserving maritime 

mobility, protecting the marine 

environment, enforcing U.S. laws and 

international treaties, and performing 

search and rescue. The Coast Guard 

supports the Department’s overarching 

goals of mobilizing and organizing our 

Nation to secure the homeland from 

terrorist attacks, natural disasters, and 

other emergencies. These goals include 

protection against the risks associated 

with climate change, and the Coast 

Guard seeks to obtain scientific 

information to assist in that task, while 

also acting to promote resilience and 

adaptation. 

In 33 CFR 1.05–15, each year since 

1995 the Coast Guard has confirmed 

that it considers public participation 

essential to effective rulemaking. We 

encourage you to participate. It is Coast 

Guard policy to provide opportunities 

for you to participate early in potential 

rulemaking projects. Also, in our notices 

of proposed rulemaking, in addition to 

soliciting your written comments, we 

solicit requests for public meetings to 

provide you an opportunity for oral 

comment. We also seek 

recommendations from our ten Federal 

advisory committees and publish 

notices of those committee meetings 

should you want to attend. And our 

regulatory advisory group composed of 

senior Coast Guard officials, the Marine 

Safety and Security Council, has 

published the Proceedings magazine 

since the 1940s. Available online, the 

magazine informs the public about the 

subject matter of Coast Guard 

regulations, as well as the rulemaking 

process itself. 

The Coast Guard highlights the 

following regulatory actions, which are 

in the proposed rule stage: 

Cybersecurity in the Marine 

Transportation System. The Coast 

Guard is proposing to update its 

maritime security regulations by adding 

cybersecurity requirements to existing 

regulations. This proposed rulemaking 

is part of an ongoing effort to address 

emerging cybersecurity risks and threats 

to maritime security by including 

additional security requirements to 

safeguard the marine transportation 

system. 

Shipping Safety Fairways Along the 

Atlantic Coast. The Coast Guard 

published an Advance Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) on June 

19, 2020. We have considered 

comments on the ANPRM to develop a 

proposed rule that would establish 

shipping safety fairways along the 

Atlantic Coast of the United States. 

Fairways are marked routes for vessel 

traffic. They facilitate the direct and 

unobstructed transit of ships. The 

proposed fairways will be based on 

studies about vessel traffic along the 

Atlantic Coast for which we requested 

public comments. 

MARPOL Annex VI; Prevention of Air 

Pollution from Ships. The Coast Guard 

is proposing regulations to carry out the 

provisions of Annex VI of the MARPOL 

Protocol, which is focused on the 

prevention of air pollution from ships. 

The Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships 

has already given direct effect to most 

provisions of Annex VI, and the Coast 

Guard and the Environmental Protection 

Agency have carried out some Annex VI 

provisions through previous 

rulemakings. This proposed rulemaking 

would fill gaps in the existing 

framework for carrying out the 

provisions of Annex VI. Chapter 4 of 

Annex VI contains shipboard energy 

efficiency measures that include shortterm measures reducing carbon 

emissions linked to climate change. 

This proposed rulemaking would apply 

to U.S.-flagged ships. It would also 

apply to foreign-flagged ships operating 

either in U.S. navigable waters or in the 

U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone. 

Regarding outreach in the 

development of this proposed 

rulemaking, in June 2018, the Coast 

Guard held a public workshop regarding 

Implementation of Regulation 14.1.3 of 

MARPOL Annex VI (Global 0.50% 

Sulfur Cap). In October 2011, we held 

a public meeting on the International 

Maritime Organization guidelines for 

exhaust gas cleaning systems for marine 

engines with respect to Regulations 4 

and 14 of MARPOL Annex VI. And in 

December 2010, we requested comments 

regarding a study on Ship Emission 

Reduction Technology for cargo and 

passenger vessels, including what 

methods or equipment were then under 

development that might meet the 

MARPOL Annex VI requirements. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9381 

United States Customs and Border 

Protection 

Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 

is the Federal agency principally 

responsible for the security of our 

Nation’s borders, both at and between 

the ports of entry into the United States. 

CBP must accomplish its border security 

and enforcement mission without 

stifling the flow of legitimate trade and 

travel. The primary mission of CBP is its 

homeland security mission, that is, to 

prevent terrorists and terrorist weapons 

from entering the United States. An 

important aspect of this mission 

involves improving security at our 

borders and ports of entry, but it also 

means extending our zone of security 

beyond our physical borders. 

CBP is also responsible for 

administering laws concerning the 

importation of goods into the United 

States and enforcing the laws 

concerning the entry of persons into the 

United States. This includes regulating 

and facilitating international trade; 

collecting import duties; enforcing U.S. 

trade, immigration and other laws of the 

United States at our borders; inspecting 

imports; overseeing the activities of 

persons and businesses engaged in 

importing; enforcing the laws 

concerning smuggling and trafficking in 

contraband; apprehending individuals 

attempting to enter the United States 

illegally; protecting our agriculture and 

economic interests from harmful pests 

and diseases; servicing all people, 

vehicles, and cargo entering the United 

States; maintaining export controls; and 

protecting U.S. businesses from theft of 

their intellectual property. 

In carrying out its mission, CBP’s goal 

is to facilitate the processing of 

legitimate trade and people efficiently 

without compromising security, and 

public input is an important tool in 

meeting this goal. CBP regularly seeks 

input from Federal Advisory 

Committees, issues formal Requests for 

Information, and holds listening 

sessions and symposia, including those 

on forced labor, green trade, and the 

21st Century Customs Framework. 

However, some of CBP’s rules further 

law enforcement purposes and are 

therefore not ripe for robust public 

outreach prior to their issuance. CBP’s 

public Newsroom, with details on 

upcoming public engagements, is 

available at: https://www.cbp.gov/ 

newsroom. 

Consistent with its primary mission of 

homeland security, CBP intends to issue 

several regulations that are intended to 

improve security at our borders and 

ports of entry. During the upcoming 

year, CBP will also work on various 

projects to streamline CBP processing, 

reduce duplicative processes, reduce 

various burdens on the public, and 

automate various paper forms. CBP 

highlights one of those projects below. 

Advance Passenger Information 

System: Electronic Validation of Travel 

Documents. CBP intends to amend 

current Advance Passenger Information 

System (APIS) regulations to 

incorporate additional carrier 

requirements that would further enable 

CBP to determine whether each 

passenger is traveling with valid, 

authentic travel documents prior to the 

passenger boarding the aircraft. The 

proposed regulation would require 

commercial air carriers to receive a 

second message from CBP that would 

state whether CBP matched the travel 

documents of each passenger to a valid, 

authentic travel document recorded in 

CBP’s databases. The proposed 

regulation would also require air 

carriers to transmit additional data 

elements regarding contact information 

through APIS for all commercial aircraft 

passengers arriving in the United States 

to support border operations and 

national security. CBP expects that the 

collection of these elements would 

enable CBP to further support the Center 

for Disease Control and Prevention’s 

mission in monitoring and tracing the 

contacts for persons involved in health 

incidents. This action will result in time 

savings to passengers and cost savings 

to CBP, carriers, and the public. 

In addition to the regulations that CBP 

issues to promote DHS’s mission, CBP 

issues regulations related to the mission 

of the Department of the Treasury. 

Under section 403(1) of the Homeland 

Security Act of 2002, the former-U.S. 

Customs Service, including functions of 

the Secretary of the Treasury relating 

thereto, transferred to the Secretary of 

Homeland Security. As part of the 

initial organization of DHS, the Customs 

Service inspection and trade functions 

were combined with the immigration 

and agricultural inspection functions 

and the Border Patrol and transferred 

into CBP. The Department of the 

Treasury retained certain regulatory 

authority of the U.S. Customs Service 

relating to customs revenue function. In 

the coming year, CBP expects to 

continue to issue regulatory documents 

that will facilitate legitimate trade and 

implement trade benefit programs. For a 

discussion of CBP regulations regarding 

the customs revenue function, see the 

regulatory plan of the Department of the 

Treasury. 

Transportation Security Administration 

The Transportation Security 

Administration (TSA) protects the 

Nation’s transportation systems to 

ensure freedom of movement for people 

and commerce. TSA applies an 

intelligence-driven, risk-based approach 

to all aspects of its mission. This 

approach results in layers of security to 

mitigate risks effectively and efficiently. 

In fiscal year 2024, TSA is prioritizing 

the following actions. In general, TSA 

has prioritized actions that are required 

to meet statutory mandates and, that are 

necessary for national security, and that 

are consistent with the goals of 

Executive Order 14058, Transforming 

Federal Customer Experience and 

Service Delivery to Rebuild Trust in 

Government. 

Consistent with Executive Order 

14094, Modernizing Regulatory Review, 

TSA endeavors, as practicable and 

appropriate, to proactively engage 

parties that are interested in or affected 

by TSA rulemaking. With respect to the 

actions described below, TSA has used 

a range of measures to engage the 

public, including advance notices of 

proposed rulemakings, public meetings, 

and advisory committees. 

Enhancing Surface Cyber Risk 

Management. On January 28, 2021, the 

President issued the National Security 

Memorandum on Improving 

Cybersecurity for Critical Infrastructure 

Controls Systems. Consistent with this 

priority of the Administration and in 

response to the ongoing cybersecurity 

threat to pipeline systems, TSA used its 

authority under 49 U.S.C. 114 to issue 

security directives to owners and 

operators of TSA-designated critical 

pipelines that transport hazardous 

liquids and natural gas to implement a 

number of urgently needed protections 

against cyber intrusions. The first 

directive, issued in May 2021, requires 

critical pipeline owner/operators to (a) 

report confirmed and potential 

cybersecurity incidents to DHS’s 

Department of Cybersecurity and 

Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA); 

(b) designate a Cybersecurity 

Coordinator to be available 24 hours a 

day, seven days a week; (3) review 

current cybersecurity practices; and (4) 

identify any gaps and related 

remediation measures to address cyberrelated risks and report the results to 

TSA and CISA within 30 days of 

issuance of the SD. A second security 

directive, first issued in July 2021, 

requires these owners and operators to 

(1) implement specific mitigation 

measures to protect against ransomware 

attacks and other known threats to 

information technology and operational 

technology systems; (2) develop and 

implement a cybersecurity contingency 

and recovery plan; and (3) conduct a 

cybersecurity architecture design 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9382 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

review. TSA updated the second 

directive to require owners/operators to 

achieve critical security outcomes 

through performance-based measures. In 

December 2021 and October 2022, TSA 

imposed similar requirements on certain 

rail operations to address emerging 

threats. TSA is committed to enhancing 

and sustaining cybersecurity for all 

modes of transportation and intends to 

issue a rulemaking that may codify 

these and other requirements following 

an opportunity for notice and comment. 

TSA published an advance notice of 

proposed rulemaking on this topic in 

November 2022. 

Flight Training Security Program. 

Through an interim final rule, TSA 

created a new part 1552, Flight Schools, 

in title 49 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR). The IFR requires 

flight schools to notify TSA when 

noncitizens, and other individuals 

designated by TSA, apply for flight 

training or recurrent training. TSA 

subsequently issued exemptions and 

interpretations in response to comments 

on the IFR, questions raised during 

operation of the program since 2004, 

and a notice extending the comment 

period on May 18, 2018. Based on the 

comments and questions received, TSA 

is finalizing the rule with modifications 

that may include changing the 

frequency of security threat assessments 

from a high-frequency event-based 

interval to a time-based interval, clarify 

the definitions and other provisions of 

the rule, and enable industry to use 

TSA-provided electronic recordkeeping 

systems for all documents required to 

demonstrate compliance with the rule. 

These and other changes will provide 

significant cost-savings to the industry 

and individuals seeking flight training 

while also enhancing security. 

REAL ID Applicability to Mobile 

Driver’s Licenses. TSA will issue a final 

rule to amend the REAL ID regulation to 

address mobile driver’s licenses (mDL). 

The REAL ID Act of 2005 and DHS 

implementing regulation set minimum 

requirements for state-issued driver’s 

licenses and identification cards 

accepted by Federal agencies for official 

purposes, which include accessing 

Federal facilities, boarding federally 

regulated commercial aircraft, entering 

nuclear power plants, and any other 

purposes that the Secretary shall 

determine. The REAL ID Modernization 

Act (December 2020) clarifies that the 

REAL ID Act applies to mobile or digital 

driver’s licenses that have been issued 

in accordance with regulations 

prescribed by DHS. This final rule will 

amend 6 CFR part 37 to set the 

minimum technical requirements and 

security standards for mDLs to enable 

Federal agencies to accept mDLs for 

official purposes. to establish a process 

that states must follow to apply for a 

mDL waiver from the REAL ID 

regulations. This rulemaking would also 

enable federal agencies to accept state 

mDLs for official purposes from states 

who are issued such a waiver under this 

final rule. 

Frequency of Renewal Cycle for 

Indirect Air Carrier Security Programs. 

TSA’s regulations for Indirect Air 

Carriers (IACs) in 49 CFR part 1548 

currently require annual renewal of an 

IAC’s security program and prompt 

notification to TSA of any changes to 

operations-related to information 

previously provided to TSA. Through 

this rulemaking, TSA will modify the 

regulation to allow for a three-year 

renewal schedule, rather than annual 

renewal. This change will align the 

security program renewal requirement 

with those applicable to other regulated 

entities within the air cargo industry. 

United States Immigration and Customs 

Enforcement 

U.S. Immigration and Customs 

Enforcement (ICE) is the principal 

criminal investigative arm of DHS and 

one of the three Department 

components charged with the criminal 

and civil enforcement of the Nation’s 

immigration laws. Its primary mission is 

to protect national security, public 

safety, and the integrity of our borders 

through the criminal and civil 

enforcement of Federal law governing 

border control, customs, trade, and 

immigration. In carrying out this 

mission and consistent with Executive 

Order 14058 on Transforming Federal 

Customer Experience And Service 

Delivery To Rebuild Trust In 

Government ICE is committed to 

providing opportunities for the public to 

engage in the improvement of our 

programs, processes, and services. For 

example, on October 26, 2021, DHS 

published a notice in the Federal 

Register titled Remote Document 

Examination for Form I–9, Employment 

Eligibility Verification: Request for 

Public Input, (https://www.govinfo.gov/ 

content/pkg/FR-2021-10-26/pdf/2021- 

23260.pdf) seeking comments from the 

public regarding document examination 

practices associated with Form I–9. ICE 

carefully considered this input resulting 

in a final rule and procedure that 

incorporates commenters suggestions. 

During the coming fiscal year, ICE will 

focus rulemaking efforts on regulations 

pertaining to processing improvements, 

including the rules mentioned below. 

Clarifying and Revising Custody 

Determination Procedures for 

Noncitizens Subject to Discretionary 

Detention (INA 236(a)/8 U.S.C. 1226 

detention). The Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. 

Immigration and Customs Enforcement 

(ICE) and the Department of Justice 

(DOJ) Executive Office for Immigration 

Review (EOIR) (collectively, the 

Departments) are planning to amend the 

regulations that govern detention and 

release determinations for noncitizens 

subject to the custody provisions in 

section 236 of the Immigration and 

Nationality Act (Act), 8 U.S.C. 1226(a). 

The goal of the proposed regulation 

would be to clarify the scope and 

applicability of section 236(a) of the 

Act, 8 U.S.C. 1226(a), and the 

procedures that apply under that 

section, including the burden and 

standard of proof for continued 

detention at initial custody 

determinations and any custody 

redetermination hearings, and related 

issues. This rulemaking is consistent 

with Executive Order 14058, which 

directs agencies to take actions that 

improve service delivery and customer 

experience by decreasing administrative 

burdens, enhancing transparency, and 

improving the efficiency and 

effectiveness of government. 

Cybersecurity and Infrastructure 

Security Agency 

The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure 

Security Agency (CISA) is responsible 

for leading the national effort to develop 

cybersecurity and critical infrastructure 

security programs, operations, and 

associated policy to enhance the 

security and resilience of physical and 

cyber infrastructure. 

Ammonium Nitrate Security Program. 

This rule implements a 2007 

amendment to the Homeland Security 

Act. The amendment requires DHS to 

‘‘regulate the sale and transfer of 

ammonium nitrate facility . . . to 

prevent the misappropriation or use of 

ammonium nitrate in an act of 

terrorism.’’ CISA published a Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking in 2011. CISA is 

planning to issue a Supplemental Notice 

of Proposed Rulemaking. 

Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism 

Standards (CFATS). This rule would 

update CFATS’ Risk Based Performance 

Standards to enhance cybersecurity 

requirements, modify the counting rules 

associated with release-flammable 

chemicals, remove release-explosive 

chemicals, and adjust the Screening 

Threshold Quantities of Appendix A to 

account for the updated risk analysis 

methodology. CISA previously invited 

public comment on an Advance Notice 

of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) 

during August 2014 for potential 

revisions to the CFATS regulations. The 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9383 

ANPRM provided an opportunity for the 

public to provide recommendations for 

possible program changes. In June 2020, 

CISA published for public comment a 

retrospective analysis of the CFATS 

program. And in January 2021, CISA 

invited additional public comment 

through an ANPRM concerning the 

removal of certain explosive chemicals 

from CFATS. CISA intends to address 

many of the subjects raised in both 

ANPRMs and the retrospective analysis 

in this regulatory action, including 

potential updates to CFATS 

cybersecurity requirements and 

Appendix A to the CFATS regulations. 

CISA is planning to issue a notice of 

proposed rulemaking. 

Cybersecurity Incident Reporting for 

Critical Infrastructure Act Regulations. 

CISA will propose regulations to 

implement certain aspects of the 

Cybersecurity Incident Reporting for 

Critical Infrastructure Act of 2022 

(CIRCIA). Specifically, CIRCIA directs 

CISA to develop and implement 

regulations requiring covered entities to 

submit reports to CISA regarding 

covered cyber incidents and ransom 

payments. CIRCIA requires CISA to 

publish a Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (NPRM) within 24 months 

of the date of enactment of CIRCIA as 

part of the process for developing these 

regulations. CISA previously issued a 

Request for Information on September 

12, 2022, and held a series of listening 

sessions seeking public input on 

potential aspects of the proposed 

regulation prior to publication of the 

NPRM. CISA is planning to issue a 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. 

A more detailed description of the 

priority regulations that comprise the 

DHS regulatory plan follows. 

DHS—U.S. CITIZENSHIP AND 

IMMIGRATION SERVICES (USCIS) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

85. Victims of Qualifying Criminal 

Activities; Eligibility Requirements for 

U Nonimmigrant Status and 

Adjustment of Status [1615–AA67] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552; 5 U.S.C. 

552a; 8 U.S.C. 1101; 8 U.S.C. 1101 

(note); 8 U.S.C. 1102; Pub. L. 113–4 

CFR Citation: 8 CFR 214; 8 CFR 274a; 

8 CFR 103; 8 CFR 299. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This proposed rule would 

clarify and update eligibility, 

procedural, and filing requirements for 

U nonimmigrant status (commonly 

known as the ‘‘U’’ visa) and adjustment 

of status for U nonimmigrants. U 

nonimmigrant status is for noncitizen 

victims of certain qualifying criminal 

activities who have been, are being, or 

are likely to be helpful in the 

investigation or prosecution of those 

crimes and eligible family members. 

There is a statutory limit of 10,000 U 

visas per year for principal petitioners. 

DHS published an interim final rule in 

2007 (72 FR 53013) to establish the 

procedures to be followed in order to 

petition for U nonimmigrant status and 

published an interim final rule in 2008 

(73 FR 75540) to establish the 

procedures for applying for adjustment 

of status as a U nonimmigrant. This rule 

would address relevant comments and 

feedback from stakeholders since 

publication of those interim final rules, 

as well as update the regulations for 

changes in legislation. 

Statement of Need: This U 

classification allows noncitizen victims 

of certain crimes to petition for U 

nonimmigrant status and to adjust status 

to that of a lawful permanent resident. 

Noncitizen victims of certain qualifying 

criminal activities who have been, are 

being, or are likely to be helpful in the 

investigation or prosecution of those 

crimes are eligible to petition for U 

nonimmigrant status. This rule would 

address the eligibility requirements that 

must be met for classification as a U 

nonimmigrant and implements statutory 

amendments to these requirements, 

streamlines the procedures to petition 

for U nonimmigrant status, provides 

evidentiary guidance to assist in the 

petition process, and clarifies 

adjustment of status requirements. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Section 

101(a)(15) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 

1101(a)(15) establishes classifications 

for noncitizens who are coming 

temporarily to the United States as 

nonimmigrants, including the U 

nonimmigrant classification. Section 

214(a)(1) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1184(a)(1), 

authorizes the Secretary to prescribe, by 

regulation, the terms and conditions of 

the admission of nonimmigrants, 

including U nonimmigrants. Section 

214(p) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1184(p), sets 

forth certain procedural and substantive 

requirements for the U nonimmigrant 

classification, including employment 

authorization for U nonimmigrants 

incident to status and discretionary 

employment authorization for those 

with pending, bona fide U 

nonimmigrant visa petitions. Section 

274A of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1324a, 

recognizes the Secretary’s authority to 

extend employment authorization to 

noncitizens in the United States. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: DHS is 

currently considering the specific 

impacts of the proposed provisions. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Interim Final Rule 09/17/07 72 FR 53013 

Interim Final Rule 

Effective.

10/17/07 

Interim Final Rule 

Comment Period End.

11/17/07 

NPRM .................. 02/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State. 

Additional Information: Transferred 

from RIN 1115–AG39. 

URL For More Information: https://

www.regulations.gov. 

URL For Public Comments: https://

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Rena Cutlip-Mason, 

Chief, Division of Humanitarian Affairs, 

OP&S, Department of Homeland 

Security, U.S. Citizenship and 

Immigration Services, 5900 Capital 

Gateway Drive, Camp Springs, MD 

20746, Phone: 240 721–3000. 

RIN: 1615–AA67 

DHS—USCIS 

86. Improving the Regulations 

Governing the Adjustment of Status to 

Lawful Permanent Residence and 

Related Immigration Benefits [1615– 

AC22] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101; 8 

U.S.C. 1103(a); 8 U.S.C. 1153 to 1155; 8 

U.S.C. 1159 and 1160; 8 U.S.C. 1254a; 

8 U.S.C. 1255; 8 U.S.C. 1257; 8 U.S.C. 

1324a; 8 U.S.C. 1184; . . . 

CFR Citation: 8 CFR 204.5; 8 CFR 

204.12; 8 CFR 205.1; 8 CFR 209.1; 8 CFR 

209.2; 8 CFR 244.15; 8 CFR 245.1; 8 CFR 

245.2; 8 CFR 245.5; 8 CFR 245.11; 8 CFR 

245.15; 8 CFR 245.18; 8 CFR 249.2; 8 

CFR 264.2; 8 CFR 274a.12; . . . 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS) proposes to 

amend its regulations governing 

adjustment of status to lawful 

permanent residence in the United 

States. The proposed changes include 

permitting concurrent filing of a visa 

petition and the application for 

adjustment of status for the 

employment-based 4th preference 

(certain special immigrants) category, 

including religious workers; permitting 

the transfer of underlying basis of a 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9384 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

pending adjustment of status 

application; amending the definition 

relating to ineligibilities under section 

245(c) of the INA; clarifying when a visa 

becomes available for purposes of the 

age calculation under the Child Status 

Protection Act; and authorizing 

compelling circumstances employment 

authorization for certain derivative 

beneficiaries waiting for immigrant visa 

availability. DHS also proposes to 

amend the regulations relating to 

temporary protected status and travel 

authorization and clarify the impact on 

the adjustment of status eligibility. The 

intent of these proposed changes is to 

reduce processing times, improve the 

quality of inventory data provided to 

partner agencies, reduce the potential 

for visa retrogression, and promote the 

efficient use of immediately available 

immigrant visas. 

Statement of Need: This rulemaking is 

necessary to address outdated 

regulations to improve efficiency and 

the administration of the adjustment of 

status of immigrants to lawful 

permanent residence in the United 

States, improve the quality of inventory 

data that DHS provides to agencies, 

reduce the potential for visa 

retrogression, and promote the efficient 

use of immediately available immigrant 

visas. This rule also changes eligibility 

requirements for certain classifications 

for what constitutes compelling 

circumstances for employment 

authorization. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The DHS’s 

authority for the regulatory amendments 

proposed are found in various sections 

of the Immigration and Nationality Act 

(INA), codified at title 8 of the United 

States Code, and the Homeland Security 

Act of 2002 (HSA), Public Law 107–296, 

116 Stat. 2135 (Nov. 25, 2002), codified 

at 6 U.S.C. 101 et seq. Specifically, 6 

U.S.C. 112, and 8 U.S.C. 1103, charge 

DHS with the administration and 

enforcement of the immigration laws of 

the United States, and 8 U.S.C. 1103(a) 

authorizes DHS to establish such 

regulations, prescribe such forms of 

bond, reports, entries, and other papers; 

issue instructions; and perform such 

other acts deemed necessary for carrying 

out the Secretary’s authority under the 

provisions of the INA, including for the 

provisions related to immigrant visa 

petitions (8 U.S.C. 1153 to 1155); 

Adjustment of status of refugees (8 

U.S.C. 1159); Special Agricultural 

Workers (8 U.S.C. 1160); Admission of 

nonimmigrants (8 U.S.C. 1184); 

Temporary Protected Status (8 U.S.C. 

1254a); Adjustment of status of 

nonimmigrant to that of person 

admitted for permanent residence (8 

U.S.C. 1255); Adjustment of status of 

certain resident aliens to nonimmigrant 

status; exceptions (8 U.S.C. 1157); Work 

Authorization (8 U.S.C. 1324a). 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: DHS is 

currently considering the specific 

impacts of the proposed provisions. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 03/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: 

Undetermined. 

Federalism: Undetermined. 

Agency Contact: Mark Phillips, 

Residence and Naturalization Division 

Chief, Department of Homeland 

Security, U.S. Citizenship and 

Immigration Services, Office of Policy 

and Strategy, 5900 Capital Gateway 

Drive, Suite 4S190, Camp Springs, MD 

20588–0009, Phone: 240 721–3000. 

RIN: 1615–AC22 

DHS—USCIS 

87. Asylum Eligibility and Public 

Health [1615–AC57] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: Illegal Immigration 

Reform and Immigrant Responsibility 

Act of 1996 (‘‘IIRIRA’’), Pub. L. 104–208, 

110 Stat. 3009, sec. 604(a) (codified at 

INA 208(b)(2)(C), 8 U.S.C. 

1158(b)(2)(C)); INA 241(b)(3)(B), 8 

U.S.C. 1231(b)(3)(B); Foreign Affairs 

Reform and Restructuring Act 

(‘‘FARRA’’), Pub. L. 105–277, 112 Stat. 

2681–822, sec. 2242 (1998); INA 235(b), 

8 U.S.C. 1225(b) 

CFR Citation: 8 CFR 208; 8 CFR 1208. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: On December 23, 2020, DHS 

and the DOJ (collectively, the 

Departments) published a final rule 

entitled Security Bars and Processing to 

clarify that the danger to the security of 

the United States statutory bar to 

eligibility for asylum and withholding 

of removal encompasses certain 

emergency public health concerns and 

make certain other changes. As of 

December 28, 2022, the rule’s effective 

date was delayed until December 31, 

2024. The Departments plan to propose 

modification or withdrawal of the 

December 23, 2020, rule. 

Statement of Need: The Departments 

are reviewing and reconsidering 

whether the Security Bars and 

Processing final rule is consistent with 

the goals of ensuring the safe and 

orderly reception and processing of 

asylum seekers consistent with public 

health and safety, with the additional 

context of the complex relationship 

between the Procedures for Asylum and 

Withholding of Removal; Credible Fear 

and Reasonable Fear Review final rule 

(RINs 1125–AA94 and 1615–AC42) and 

the Security Bars and Processing final 

rule. The Departments are reevaluating 

whether the Security Bars and 

Processing rule provides the most 

appropriate and effective framework for 

achieving its goals of mitigating the 

spread of communicable diseases, 

including COVID–19, among certain 

noncitizens in the credible fear 

screening process, as well as DHS 

personnel and the public. Based on such 

reconsideration, the Departments will 

propose to modify or withdraw the 

Security Bars rule. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: DHS is 

currently considering the specific cost 

and benefit impacts of the proposed 

provisions. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 07/09/20 85 FR 41201 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

08/10/20 

Final Action ......... 12/23/20 85 FR 84160 

Final Action Effective.01/22/21 

Final Rule; Delay 

of Effective 

Date.

01/25/21 86 FR 6847 

Final Rule; Effective Date Delayed Until.03/22/21 

Interim Final Rule; 

Delay of Effective Date.

03/22/21 86 FR 15069 

Interim Final Rule 

Comment Period End.

04/21/21 

Interim Final Rule 

Effective Date 

Delayed Until.

12/31/21 

Interim Final Rule; 

Delay of Effective Date.

12/28/21 86 FR 73615 

Interim Final Rule 

Comment Period End.

02/28/22 

Interim Final Rule 

Effective Date 

Delayed Until.

12/31/22 

Interim Final Rule; 

Delay of Effective Date.

12/28/22 87 FR 79789 

Interim Final Rule 

Comment Period End.

02/27/23 

Interim Final Rule 

Effective Date 

Delayed Until.

12/31/24 

NPRM .................. 11/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

URL For More Information: https:// 

www.regulations.gov. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9385 

URL For Public Comments: https:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Rena ́ Cutlip-Mason, 

Chief, Division of Humanitarian Affairs, 

Department of Homeland Security, U.S. 

Citizenship and Immigration Services, 

5900 Capital Gateway Drive, Camp 

Springs, MD 20746, Phone: 240 721– 

3000. 

Related RIN: Related to 1125–AB08, 

Related to 1615–AC69 

RIN: 1615–AC57 

DHS—USCIS 

88. Clarifying Definitions and Analyses 

for Fair and Efficient Asylum and Other 

Protection Determinations [1615–AC65] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(42); 

8 U.S.C. 1158; 8 U.S.C. 1225; 8 U.S.C. 

1231 and 1231 (note); E.O. 14010; 86 FR 

8267 (Feb. 2, 2021) 

CFR Citation: 8 CFR 207; 8 CFR 208; 

8 CFR 235; 8 CFR 244; 8 CFR 1003; 8 

CFR 1208; 8 CFR 1212; 8 CFR 1235; 8 

CFR 1244. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rule proposes to amend 

Department of Homeland Security 

(DHS) and Department of Justice (DOJ) 

(collectively, ‘‘the Departments’’) 

regulations that govern eligibility for 

asylum and withholding of removal. 

The amendments focus on portions of 

the regulations that deal with the 

definitions of membership in a 

particular social group and the 

interpretation of various other elements 

of eligibility for asylum, including some 

that are often determinative in 

particular social group claims, such as 

the requirements for failure of State 

protection, and determinations about 

whether persecution is on account of a 

protected ground. The rule will also 

propose to republish, modify, or rescind 

portions of the Procedures for Asylum 

and Withholding of Removal; Credible 

Fear and Reasonable Fear Review final 

rule (RINs 1125–AA94 and 1615–AC42). 

This rule is consistent with Executive 

Order 14010 of February 2, 2021, which 

directs the Departments to promulgate 

joint regulations, consistent with 

applicable law, addressing the 

circumstances in which a person should 

be considered a member of a particular 

social group. 

Statement of Need: The Departments 

propose this rule to clarify standards 

governing numerous elements of 

eligibility for asylum, withholding of 

removal under section 241(b)(3) of the 

Immigration and Nationality Act, and 

protection from removal under the 

regulations that implement U.S. 

obligations in immigration cases under 

Article 3 of the Convention Against 

Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or 

Degrading Treatment or Punishment. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: DHS is 

currently considering the specific cost 

and benefit impacts of the proposed 

provisions. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 01/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: 

Undetermined. 

Federalism: Undetermined. 

International Impacts: This regulatory 

action will be likely to have 

international trade and investment 

effects, or otherwise be of international 

interest. 

Agency Contact: Rena Cutlip-Mason, 

Chief, Division of Humanitarian Affairs, 

OP&S, Department of Homeland 

Security, U.S. Citizenship and 

Immigration Services, 5900 Capital 

Gateway Drive, Camp Springs, MD 

20746, Phone: 240 721–3000. 

Related RIN: Related to 1615–AC42, 

Related to 1125–AB13, Related to 1125– 

AA94 

RIN: 1615–AC65 

DHS—USCIS 

89. Procedures for Asylum and Bars to 

Asylum Eligibility [1615–AC69] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Legal Authority: Homeland Security 

Act of 2002, Pub. L. 107–296, 116 Stat. 

2135, sec. 1102, as amended; 8 U.S.C. 

1103(a)(1); 8 U.S.C. 1103(a)(3); 8 U.S.C. 

1103(g); 8 U.S.C. 1225(b); 8 U.S.C. 

1231(b)(3) and 1231 (note); 8 U.S.C. 

1158 

CFR Citation: 8 CFR 208; 8 CFR 235; 

8 CFR 1003; 8 CFR 1208; 8 CFR 1235. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: In 2020, the Department of 

Homeland Security and Department of 

Justice (collectively, the Departments) 

published a final rule amending their 

respective regulations governing bars to 

asylum eligibility and procedures: 

Procedures for Asylum and Bars to 

Asylum Eligibility (RINs 1125–AA87 

and 1615–AC41), 85 FR 67202 (Oct. 21, 

2020). The Departments will propose to 

modify or rescind the regulatory 

changes promulgated in this final rule 

consistent with Executive Order 14010 

(Feb. 2, 2021). 

Statement of Need: The Departments 

are reviewing this regulation in light of 

the issuance of Executive Order 14010 

and Executive Order 14012. This rule is 

needed to restore and strengthen the 

asylum system and to address 

inconsistencies with the goals and 

principles outlined in Executive Order 

14010 and Executive Order 14012. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

Departments are currently considering 

the specific cost and benefit impacts of 

the proposed provisions. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 06/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Rena Cutlip-Mason, 

Chief, Division of Humanitarian Affairs, 

OP&S, Department of Homeland 

Security, U.S. Citizenship and 

Immigration Services, 5900 Capital 

Gateway Drive, Camp Springs, MD 

20746, Phone: 240 721–3000. 

Related RIN: Related to 1125–AA87, 

Split from 1615–AC41, Related to 1125– 

AB12 

RIN: 1615–AC69 

DHS—USCIS 

90. Modernizing H–1B Requirements 

and Oversight, Providing Flexibility in 

the F–1 Program, and Program 

Improvements Affecting Other 

Nonimmigrant Workers [1615–AC70] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 6 U.S.C. 101, 112 and 

202; 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(F) and 

(H)(i)(b),1103(a), 1184(a), 1184(c), 

1184(i) and 1357(b); . . . 

CFR Citation: 8 CFR 214.2. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS) is proposing 

to amend its regulations governing H– 

1B specialty occupation workers and F– 

1 students who are the beneficiaries of 

timely filed H–1B cap-subject petitions. 

Specifically, DHS proposes to revise the 

regulations relating to ‘‘specialty 

occupation’’ and the ‘‘employeremployee relationship’’; provide 

flexibility for start-up entrepreneurs; 

implement new requirements and 

guidelines for H–1B site visits; provide 

flexibility on the employment start date 

listed on the petition (in limited 

circumstances); address ‘‘cap-gap’’ 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9386 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

issues; bolster the H–1B registration 

process to reduce the possibility of 

misuse and fraud in the H–1B 

registration system; modernize cap 

exemptions; clarify the requirement that 

an amended or new petition be filed 

where there are material changes; and 

codify USCIS’ deference policy and 

requirement of maintenance of status for 

all employment-based nonimmigrant 

classifications that use Form I–129, 

among other provisions. 

Statement of Need: These proposed 

changes are needed to modernize and 

streamline the requirements of the H–1B 

program, improve program efficiency 

and integrity measures, and provide 

greater benefits and flexibilities for 

petitioners and beneficiaries. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The 

Secretary of Homeland Security’s 

authority for these proposed regulatory 

amendments is found in various 

sections of the Immigration and 

Nationality Act (INA or the Act), 8 

U.S.C. 1101 et seq., and the Homeland 

Security Act of 2002 (HSA), Public Law 

107–296, 116 Stat. 2135, 6 U.S.C. 101 et 

seq. General authority for issuing this 

rule is found in section 103(a) of the 

INA, 8 U.S.C. 1103(a), which authorizes 

the Secretary to administer and enforce 

the immigration and nationality laws, as 

well as section 112 of the HSA, 6 U.S.C. 

112, which vests all of the functions of 

DHS in the Secretary and authorizes the 

Secretary to issue regulations. Section 

101(a)(15) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 

1101(a)(15) establishes classifications 

for noncitizens who are coming 

temporarily to the United States as 

nonimmigrants. Section 214(a)(1) of the 

INA, 8 U.S.C. 1184(a)(1), authorizes the 

Secretary to prescribe, by regulation, the 

terms and conditions of the admission 

of nonimmigrants. Section 214(c) of the 

INA, 8 U.S.C. 1184(c) authorizes the 

Secretary to prescribe how an importing 

employer may petition for 

nonimmigrant workers, the information 

that an importing employer must 

provide in the petition; and certain fees 

that are required for certain 

nonimmigrant petitions. Section 214(g) 

of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1184(g), prescribes 

the H–1B numerical limitations, various 

exceptions to those limitations, and the 

period of authorized admission for H– 

1B nonimmigrants. Section 214(i) of the 

INA, 8 U.S.C. 1184(i), sets forth the 

definition and requirements of a 

specialty occupation. Section 248 of the 

INA, 8 U.S.C. 1258, authorizes a 

noncitizen to change from any 

nonimmigrant classification (subject to 

certain exceptions) to any other 

nonimmigrant classification if the 

noncitizen was lawfully admitted to the 

United States as a nonimmigrant and is 

continuing to maintain that status and is 

not otherwise subject to the 3- or 10- 

year bar applicable to certain 

noncitizens who were unlawfully 

present in the United States. Section 

274A of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1324a, 

recognizes the Secretary’s authority to 

extend employment authorization to 

noncitizens in the United States. 

Finally, section 287(b) of the INA, 8 

U.S.C. 1357(b), authorizes the taking 

and consideration of evidence 

concerning any matter that is material or 

relevant to the enforcement of the INA. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: DHS is 

currently considering the specific 

impacts of the proposed provisions. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 11/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Charles Nimick, 

Chief, Business and Foreign Workers 

Division, Office of Policy and Strategy, 

Department of Homeland Security, U.S. 

Citizenship and Immigration Services, 

5900 Capital Gateway Drive, Suite 

4S190, Camp Springs, MD 20588–0009, 

Phone: 240 721–3000. 

RIN: 1615–AC70 

DHS—USCIS 

91. Modernizing H–2 Program 

Requirements, Oversight, and Worker 

Protections [1615–AC76] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1103(a)(3); 8 

U.S.C. 1001(a)(15)(H)(ii)(a) and (b); 8 

U.S.C. 1184(a), (c) and (g); 8 U.S.C. 

1324a 

CFR Citation: 8 CFR 214; 8 CFR 274a. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: On September 20, 2023, 

DHS published a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) in which proposed 

several changes to modernize and 

reform the H–2A and H–2B 

nonimmigrant worker programs. 

Specifically, the NPRM incorporates 

new policies that if finalized would 

produce program efficiencies, address 

current aspects of the program that may 

have unintentionally resulted in 

exploitation or other abuse of persons 

seeking to come to this country as H– 

2A and H–2B workers, builds upon 

existing protections against prohibited 

payments or other assessment of fees 

and/or salary deductions by H–2A and 

H–2B employers in connection with 

recruitment and/or H–2 employment, 

and otherwise adds protections for 

workers. DHS has not proposed any 

changes that would revise the temporary 

labor certification process or the 

regulations contained in 20 CFR part 

655 or 29 CFR part 501 and 503. The 

public comment period closes 

November 20, 2023, and DHS will 

review the comments received during 

the comment period and in accordance 

with the instructions contained in the 

NPRM before issuing any future final 

rule. 

Statement of Need: This rulemaking is 

needed to enhance protections for 

workers and better ensure the integrity 

of the H–2A and H–2B programs. In 

addition, this proposed rule is necessary 

to improve H–2 program efficiencies 

and remove certain barriers to program 

access. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The 

Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) 

charges the Secretary of Homeland 

Security with the administration and 

enforcement of the immigration laws 

and provides that the Secretary shall 

establish such regulations and perform 

such other acts as he deems necessary 

for carrying out his authority under the 

INA. See INA section 103(a)(1),(3), 8 

U.S.C. 1103(a)(1), (3). In addition, the 

Homeland Security Act of 2002 charges 

the Secretary with establishing and 

administering rules governing the 

granting of visas or other forms of 

permission to enter the United States to 

individuals who are not a citizen, or an 

alien lawfully admitted for permanent 

residence in the United States. See 

Public Law 107–296, 116 Stat. 2135, 6 

U.S.C. 202(4). Congress established the 

H–2A and H–2B nonimmigrant 

classifications in INA section 

101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(a) and (b), 8 U.S.C. 

1101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(a) and (b). With 

respect to nonimmigrants in particular, 

the INA provides that the admission to 

the United States of any alien as a 

nonimmigrant shall be for such time 

and under such conditions as the 

Secretary may by regulations prescribe. 

See INA section 214(a)(1), 8 U.S.C. 

1184(a)(1). The INA also tasks DHS with 

approving petitions filed by the 

importing employers of nonimmigrants, 

including those in the H nonimmigrant 

visa classification, before a 

nonimmigrant visa may be granted. See 

INA section 214(c)(1), 8 U.S.C. 

1184(c)(1). 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: In the 

published proposed rule, DHS estimates 

annualized costs of rule range from 

$1,998,572 to $2,668,028 at a 3-percent 

discount rate and $2,186,033 to 

$2,915,885 at a 7-percent discount rate. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9387 

In addition, the total annualized 

transfers (from consumers to a limited 

number of H–2A and H–2B workers) 

amount to $2,918,958 in additional 

earnings at the 3-percent and 7-percent 

discount rate and related total tax 

transfers of $337,122. Fees paid for 

Form I–129 and premium processing as 

a result of the proposed rule’s 

portability provision constitute a 

transfer of $636,760 from petitioners to 

USCIS (3 and 7-percent annualized 

equivalent). 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 09/20/23 88 FR 65040 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

11/20/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

URL For More Information: https://

www.regulations.gov. 

URL For Public Comments: https://

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Charles Nimick, 

Chief, Business and Foreign Workers 

Division, Office of Policy and Strategy, 

Department of Homeland Security, U.S. 

Citizenship and Immigration Services, 

5900 Capital Gateway Drive, Suite 

4S190, Camp Springs, MD 20588–0009, 

Phone: 240 721–3000. 

RIN: 1615–AC76 

DHS—USCIS 

92. Citizenship and Naturalization and 

Other Related Flexibilities [1615–AC80] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Legal Authority: sec. 102 of the 

Homeland Security Act of 2002; 6 

U.S.C. 112(a)(3); 8 U.S.C. 1101; 8 U.S.C. 

1103; 8 U.S.C. 1151; 8 U.S.C. 1153; 8 

U.S.C. 1154; 8 U.S.C. 1159; 8 U.S.C. 

1182; 8 U.S.C. 1255; 8 U.S.C. 1401; 8 

U.S.C. 1409; 8 U.S.C. 1421; 8 U.S.C. 

1423; 8 U.S.C. 1427; 8 U.S.C. 1429 to 

1431; 8 U.S.C. 1433; 8 U.S.C. 1435; 8 

U.S.C. 1438 to 1440; 8 U.S.C. 1443; 8 

U.S.C. 1445 to 1449; 8 U.S.C. 1452; 8 

U.S.C. 1454; 8 U.S.C. 1481 

CFR Citation: 8 CFR 1.2; 8 CFR 103; 

8 CFR 106; 8 CFR 204; 8 CFR 209; 8 CFR 

245; 8 CFR 300; 8 CFR 306; 8 CFR 312; 

8 CFR 316; 8 CFR 318; 8 CFR 319; 8 CFR 

320; 8 CFR 322; 8 CFR 324; 8 CFR 329; 

8 CFR 333; 8 CFR 334; 8 CFR 335; 8 CFR 

336; 8 CFR 337; 8 CFR 338; 8 CFR 339; 

8 CFR 341; 8 CFR 343a; 8 CFR 349; 8 

CFR 212; . . . 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS) will propose 

to amend its regulations governing 

citizenship and naturalization. This 

includes clarifying the testing 

requirements, updating eligibility 

requirements, and proposing 

amendments to clarify definitions. DHS 

will also propose to amend other 

immigration benefit provisions, such as 

certain provisions related to adjustment 

of status and waivers of inadmissibility 

that can affect naturalization and 

acquisition of citizenship. In addition, 

DHS will propose removing certain 

outdated provisions and amending other 

provisions to align with current 

statutory framework, such as updating 

the adoption-related regulatory 

provisions consistent with the 

Intercountry Adoption Universal 

Accreditation Act of 2012. 

Statement of Need: These proposed 

changes, some of which were requested 

by the public, are needed to improve the 

efficiency, effectiveness, accessibility, 

uniformity, and consistency of 

adjudications. 

Summary of Legal Basis: DHS’s 

authority is found in several statutory 

provisions. Section 102 of the 

Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Pub. L. 

107296, 116 Stat. 2135), 6 U.S.C. 112, 

and section 103(a) of the Immigration 

and Nationality Act (INA or the Act), 8 

U.S.C. 1103(a), charge the Secretary 

with the administration and 

enforcement of the immigration and 

naturalization laws of the United States. 

In addition to establishing the 

Secretary’s general authority for the 

administration and enforcement of 

immigration laws, section 103(a) of the 

Act, 8 U.S.C. 1103(a), enumerates 

various related authorities that include 

the Secretary’s authority to establish 

such regulations as the Secretary deems 

necessary for carrying out the 

Secretary’s authority under the Act. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: DHS is 

currently considering the specific 

impacts of the proposed provisions. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 12/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: 

Undetermined. 

Agency Contact: Mark Phillips, 

Residence and Naturalization Division 

Chief, Department of Homeland 

Security, U.S. Citizenship and 

Immigration Services, Office of Policy 

and Strategy, 5900 Capital Gateway 

Drive, Suite 4S190, Camp Springs, MD 

20588–0009, Phone: 240 721–3000. 

RIN: 1615–AC80 

DHS—USCIS 

Final Rule Stage 

93. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration 

Services Fee Schedule and Changes to 

Certain Other Immigration Benefit 

Request Requirements [1615–AC68] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1356(m), (n) 

CFR Citation: 8 CFR 103; 8 CFR 106; 

8 CFR 204; 8 CFR 212; 8 CFR 214; 8 CFR 

240; 8 CFR 244; 8 CFR 245; 8 CFR 245a; 

8 CFR 264; 8 CFR 274a. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: On January 4, 2023, the 

Department of Homeland Security 

(DHS) published a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM or proposed rule) 88 

FR 402 that proposed to adjust the fees 

charged by U.S. Citizenship and 

Immigration Services (USCIS) for 

immigration and naturalization benefit 

requests. On August 3, 2020, DHS 

adjusted the fees USCIS charges for 

immigration and naturalization benefit 

requests, imposed new fees, revised 

certain fee waiver and exemption 

policies, and changed certain 

application requirements via the rule 

‘‘USCIS Fee Schedule & Changes to 

Certain Other Immigration Benefit 

Request Requirements.’’ DHS has been 

preliminarily enjoined from 

implementing that rule by court order. 

This rule would rescind and replace the 

changes made by the August 3, 2020, 

rule and establish new USCIS fees to 

recover USCIS operating costs. DHS 

solicited public comment on the NPRM, 

which DHS intends to consider and 

address in a final rule. 

Statement of Need: USCIS projects 

that its costs of providing immigration 

adjudication and naturalization services 

will exceed the financial resources 

available to it under its existing fee 

structure. DHS proposes to adjust the 

USCIS fee structure to ensure that 

USCIS recovers the costs of meeting its 

operational requirements. 

The CFO Act requires each agency’s 

chief financial officer to ‘‘review, on a 

biennial basis, the fees, royalties, rents, 

and other charges imposed by the 

agency for services and things of value 

it provides, and make recommendations 

on revising those charges to reflect costs 

incurred by it in providing those 

services and things of value.’’ 

Summary of Legal Basis: INA 286(m) 

and (n), 8 U.S.C. 1356(m) and (n), 

authorize the Attorney General and 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
9388 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Secretary of Homeland Security to 

recover the full cost of providing 

immigration adjudication and 

naturalization services by establishing 

and collecting fees deposited into the 

Immigration Examinations Fee Account. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: In the 

published proposed rule, DHS estimated 

the annualized net costs to the public 

would be $532,379,138 discounted at 3- 

and 7-percent. Fee increases and other 

changes in this proposed rule would 

result in annualized transfer payments 

from applicants/petitioners to USCIS of 

approximately $1,612,127,862 

discounted at both 3-percent and 7- 

percent. Fee reductions and exemptions 

in this proposed rule would result in 

annualized transfer payments from 

USCIS to applicants/petitioners of 

approximately $116,372,429 discounted 

at both 3-percent and 7-percent. The 

annualized transfer payments from the 

Department of Defense (DoD) to USCIS 

would be approximately $222,145 at 

both 3- and 7-percent discount rates. 

DHS is currently considering the 

specific impacts of the final rule’s 

provisions. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 01/04/23 88 FR 402 

NPRM Correction 01/09/23 88 FR 1172 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

03/06/23 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extended.

02/24/23 88 FR 11825 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extended End.

03/13/23 

Final Action ......... 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses, 

Governmental Jurisdictions, 

Organizations. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

URL For More Information: https:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

URL For Public Comments: https:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Kika Scott, Chief 

Financial Officer, Department of 

Homeland Security, U.S. Citizenship 

and Immigration Services, 5900 Capital 

Gateway Drive, Suite 4S190, Camp 

Springs, MD 20588–0009, Phone: 240 

721–3000. 

RIN: 1615–AC68 

DHS—U.S. COAST GUARD (USCG) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

94. Shipping Safety Fairways Along the 

Atlantic Coast [1625–AC57] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70001; 46 

U.S.C. 70003; 46 U.S.C. 70034 

CFR Citation: 33 CFR 166; 33 CFR 

167. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Coast Guard seeks 

comments regarding the possible 

establishment of shipping safety 

fairways (fairways) along the Atlantic 

Coast of the United States. Fairways are 

marked routes for vessel traffic in which 

any fixed obstructions are prohibited. 

The proposed fairways are based on 

studies about vessel traffic along the 

Atlantic Coast. The Coast Guard is 

coordinating this action with the Bureau 

of Offshore Energy Management (BOEM) 

to minimize the impact on potential 

offshore energy leases. 

Statement of Need: This rulemaking 

would establish shipping safety 

fairways along the Atlantic coast of the 

United States to facilitate the direct and 

unobstructed transits of ships and 

facilitate development on the outer 

continental shelf. The establishment of 

fairways would ensure that obstructionfree routes are preserved to and from US 

ports and along the Atlantic coast. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Section 

70003 of title 46 United States Code (46 

U.S.C. 70003) directs the Secretary of 

the department in which the Coast 

Guard resides to designate necessary 

fairways that provide safe access routes 

for vessels proceeding to and from U.S. 

ports. 

Alternatives: The ANPRM outlined 

the Coast Guard’s plans for fairways 

along the Atlantic Coast and requested 

information and data associated with 

the regulatory concepts. The Coast 

Guard will use this information and 

data to shape regulatory language and 

alternatives and assess the associated 

impacts in the NPRM. The Coast Guard 

is also considering comments received 

on port access route studies notices in 

development of the proposed rule. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

fairways are designed to keep traditional 

vessel navigation routes free from fixed 

structures that could impact navigation 

safety and impede other shared offshore 

activities. Fairways are not mandatory; 

however, the Coast Guard recognizes 

that there is increasing interest in 

offshore commercial development, 

including offshore renewable energy 

installations, and believes this 

development is best served by the 

establishment of consistent and welldefined fairways. The proposed 

fairways would help ensure that 

offshore developments remain viable by 

allowing developers to construct and 

maintain installations without risk of 

impeding vessel traffic. 

Risks: The Bureau of Ocean Energy 

Management (BOEM) is leasing offshore 

areas that could affect customary 

shipping routes. Expeditious pursuit of 

this rulemaking is intended to prevent 

conflict between customary shipping 

routes and areas that may be leased by 

BOEM. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

ANPRM ............... 06/19/20 85 FR 37034 

ANPRM Comment 

Period End.

08/18/20 

NPRM .................. 11/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Additional Information: Docket 

number USCG–2019–0279. 

URL For More Information: https:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

URL For Public Comments: https:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Maureen Kallgren 

Program Manager, Department of 

Homeland Security, U.S. Coast Guard, 

Office of Navigation Systems (CG– 

NAV), 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. 

Avenue SE, STOP 7509, Washington, 

DC 20593–7509, Phone: 202 372–1561, 

Email: maureen.r.kallgren2@uscg.mil. 

RIN: 1625–AC57 

DHS—USCG 

95. Cybersecurity in the Marine 

Transportation System [1625–AC77] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70101; 46 

U.S.C. 70102; 46 U.S.C. 70104; 46 U.S.C. 

70124 

CFR Citation: 33 CFR 101. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Coast Guard proposes to 

update its maritime security regulations 

by adding cybersecurity requirements to 

existing Maritime Security regulations 

in 33 CFR part 101 et seq. This proposed 

rulemaking is part of an ongoing effort 

to address emerging cybersecurity risks 

and threats to maritime security by 

including additional security 

requirements to safeguard the marine 

transportation system. 

Statement of Need: The purpose of 

this rulemaking is to set minimum 

cybersecurity requirements for vessels 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9389 

and facilities to safeguard the Marine 

Transportation System (MTS) from 

cybersecurity vulnerabilities. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The Coast 

Guard exercises the Maritime 

Transportation Security Act of 2002 

(MTSA) authorities of Chapter 701 of 

Title 46 of the U.S. Code. This includes 

the authority to promulgate Chapter 701 

regulations under 46 U.S.C. 70124. This 

statute provides that the Secretary of 

Homeland Security may issue 

regulations necessary to implement 

Chapter 701 of Title 46. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

regulatory analysis for the proposed rule 

is still being developed. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 12/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: 

Undetermined. 

Agency Contact: Frank Strom, Chief, 

Systems Engineering Division (CG– 

ENG–3), Department of Homeland 

Security, U.S. Coast Guard, Office of 

Design and Engineering Standards, 2703 

Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue SE, 

STOP 7509, Washington, DC 20593– 

7509, Phone: 202 372–1375, Email: 

frank.a.strom@uscg.mil. 

RIN: 1625–AC77 

DHS—USCG 

96. Marpol Annex VI; Prevention of Air 

Pollution From Ships [1625–AC78] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1903 

CFR Citation: 33 CFR 151. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Coast Guard is 

proposing regulations to carry out the 

provisions of Annex VI of the MARPOL 

Protocol, which is focused on the 

prevention of air pollution from ships. 

The Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships 

has already given direct effect to most 

provisions of Annex VI, and the Coast 

Guard and the Environmental Protection 

Agency have carried out some Annex VI 

provisions through previous 

rulemakings. This proposed rule would 

fill gaps in the existing framework for 

carrying out the provisions of Annex VI. 

Chapter 4 of Annex VI contains 

shipboard energy efficiency measures 

that include short-term measures 

reducing carbon emissions linked to 

climate change and supports 

Administration goals outlined in 

Executive Order 14008 titled Tackling 

the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad. 

This proposed rule would apply to U.S.- 

flagged ships. It would also apply to 

foreign-flagged ships operating either in 

U.S. navigable waters or in the U.S. 

Exclusive Economic Zone. 

Statement of Need: The Coast Guard 

is proposing regulations to carry out the 

provisions of Annex VI of the MARPOL 

Protocol, which is focused on the 

prevention of air pollution from ships. 

The Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships 

has already given direct effect to most 

provisions of Annex VI, and the Coast 

Guard and the Environmental Protection 

Agency have carried out some Annex VI 

provisions through previous 

rulemakings. This proposed rule would 

fill gaps in the existing framework for 

carrying out the provisions of Annex VI 

and explain how the United States has 

chosen to carry out certain discretionary 

aspects of Annex VI. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Section 4 of 

the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships 

(Pub. L. 96–478, Oct. 21, 1980, 94 Stat. 

2297), as reflected in 33 U.S.C. 1903, 

directs the Secretary of Homeland 

Security to prescribe any necessary or 

desired regulations to carry out the 

provisions of the MARPOL Protocol. 

The ‘‘MARPOL Protocol’’ is defined in 

33 U.S.C. 1901 and includes Annex VI 

of the International Convention for the 

Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 

1973. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: USCG 

anticipates the costs for the proposed 

rule to come primarily from additional 

labor for 5 requirements including 

overseeing surveys; developing and 

maintaining a fuel-switching procedure; 

recording various data during each fuel 

switching; developing and managing a 

Volatile organic compounds (VOC) 

management plan; crew member to 

calculate and report the attained Energy 

Efficient Design Index (EEDI) of the 

vessel, and crew member to develop and 

maintain the Ship Energy Efficiency 

Management Plan (SEEMP). USCG 

expects the proposed rule to have 

benefits from avoided engine emissions. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 07/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Federalism: Undetermined. 

Agency Contact: Frank Strom, Chief, 

Systems Engineering Division (CG– 

ENG–3), Department of Homeland 

Security, U.S. Coast Guard, Office of 

Design and Engineering Standards, 2703 

Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue SE, 

STOP 7509, Washington, DC 20593– 

7509, Phone: 202 372–1375, Email: 

frank.a.strom@uscg.mil. 

RIN: 1625–AC78 

DHS—U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER 

PROTECTION (USCBP) 

Final Rule Stage 

97. Advance Passenger Information 

System: Electronic Validation of Travel 

Documents [1651–AB43] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 49 U.S.C. 44909; 8 

U.S.C. 1221 

CFR Citation: 19 CFR 122. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection (CBP) regulations require 

commercial air carriers to electronically 

transmit passenger information to CBP’s 

Advance Passenger Information System 

(APIS) prior to an aircraft’s arrival in or 

departure from the United States. CBP 

proposes to amend these regulations to 

incorporate additional carrier 

requirements that will enable CBP to 

validate each passenger’s travel 

documents prior to the passenger 

boarding the aircraft. This proposed rule 

would also require air carriers to 

transmit additional data elements 

through APIS for all commercial aircraft 

passengers arriving in the United States 

in order to support border operations 

and national security. The collection of 

additional data elements will support 

the efforts of the Centers for Disease 

Control, within the Department of 

Health and Human Services, to monitor 

and contact-trace health incidents. This 

rule is consistent with Executive Order 

14058, which directs agencies to take 

actions that improve service delivery 

and customer experience by decreasing 

administrative burdens, enhancing 

transparency, and improving the 

efficiency and effectiveness of 

government. 

Statement of Need: Current 

regulations require U.S. citizens and 

foreign travelers entering and leaving 

the United States via air travel to submit 

travel documents containing 

biographical information, such as a 

passenger’s name and date of birth. For 

security purposes, CBP compares the 

information on passengers’ documents 

to various databases and the terrorist 

watch list through APIS. While in the 

case of security threats CBP may require 

an air carrier to deny boarding to the 

passenger. CBP recommends that air 

carriers deny boarding to those likely to 

be deemed inadmissible upon arrival in 

the United States. To further improve 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9390 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

CBP’s vetting processes with respect to 

identifying and preventing passengers 

with fraudulent or improper documents 

from traveling to or leaving the United 

States, CBP proposes to require carriers 

to receive from CBP a message that 

would state whether CBP matched the 

travel documents of each passenger to a 

valid, authentic travel document prior 

to departure to the United States from 

a foreign port or place or departure from 

the United States. The proposed rule 

also would require carriers to submit 

passenger contact information while in 

the United States to CBP through APIS. 

Submission of such information would 

enable CBP to identify and interdict 

individuals posing a risk to border, 

national, and aviation safety and 

security more quickly. Collecting these 

additional data elements would also 

enable CBP to further assist CDC to 

monitor and trace the contacts of those 

involved in serious public health 

incidents upon CDC request. 

Additionally, the proposed rule would 

allow carriers to include the aircraft tail 

number in their electronic messages to 

CBP and make technical changes to 

conform with current practice. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

proposed rule would result in costs to 

CBP, air carriers, and passengers for 

additional time spent coordinating to 

resolve a passenger’s status should there 

be a security issue upon checking in for 

a flight. In addition, CBP will incur 

costs for technological improvements to 

its systems. CBP, air carriers, and 

passengers would benefit from reduced 

passenger processing times during 

customs screening. Unquantified 

benefits would result from greater 

efficiency in passenger processing preflight, improved national security, and 

fewer penalties for air carriers following 

entry denial of a passenger. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 02/02/23 88 FR 7016 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

04/03/23 

Final Action ......... 08/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

URL For More Information: https://

www.regulations.gov. 

URL For Public Comments: https://

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Robert Neumann, 

Program Manager, Office of Field 

Operations, Department of Homeland 

Security, U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW, Washington, DC 20229, Phone: 202 

412–2788, Email: robert.m.neumann@

cbp.dhs.gov. 

RIN: 1651–AB43 

DHS—TRANSPORTATION SECURITY 

ADMINISTRATION (TSA) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

98. Enhancing Surface Cyber Risk 

Management [1652–AA74] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 49 U.S.C. 114; Pub. L. 

110–53, secs. 1405, 1512 and 1531 

CFR Citation: 49 CFR 1520; 49 CFR 

1570; 49 CFR 1580; 49 CFR 1582; 49 

CFR 1584. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: On July 28, 2021, the 

President issued the National Security 

Memorandum on Improving 

Cybersecurity for Critical Infrastructure 

Control Systems. In response to the 

ongoing threat to pipeline systems, TSA 

used its authority under 49 U.S.C. 114 

to issue emergency security directives to 

owners and operators of TSA-designated 

critical pipelines that transport 

hazardous liquids and natural gas to 

implement a number of urgently needed 

protections against cyber intrusions. 

TSA also issued security directives in 

the freight, passenger, and transit-rail 

sectors under the same statutory 

authority. TSA is committed to 

enhancing and sustaining industry’s 

resilience to cybersecurity attacks. TSA 

intends to issue a rulemaking that will 

permanently codify critical 

cybersecurity requirements for pipeline 

and rail modes. Through this 

rulemaking, TSA will also address 

certain requirements in the 

Implementing Recommendations of the 

9/11 Commission Act of 2007 related to 

information and operational technology 

systems. TSA is committed to 

enhancing and sustaining cybersecurity 

for all modes of transportation and 

intends to issue a rulemaking that may 

codify these and other requirements 

following an opportunity for notice and 

comment. In addition to holding 

numerous technical roundtables with 

the industry regarding cybersecurity 

requirements, TSA also solicited public 

input in the development of this 

rulemaking through publication of an 

advance notice of proposed rulemaking 

in November 2022. 

Statement of Need: This rulemaking is 

necessary to address the ongoing 

cybersecurity threat to U.S. 

transportation modes with potential 

impacts on national security, including 

economic security. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: TSA is 

in the process of determining the costs 

and benefits of this rulemaking. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

ANPRM ............... 11/30/22 87 FR 73527 

ANPRM Comment 

Period End.

01/17/23 

ANPRM Comment 

Period Extended.

12/23/22 87 FR 78911 

ANPRM Comment 

Period Extended End.

02/01/23 

NPRM .................. 11/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: 

Undetermined. 

URL For More Information: https://

www.regulations.gov. 

URL For Public Comments: https://

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Victor Parker, Branch 

Manager, Policy Development Branch, 

Surface Division, Department of 

Homeland Security, Transportation 

Security Administration, Policy, Plans 

and Engagement, 6595 Springfield 

Center Drive, Springfield, VA 20598– 

6028, Phone: 571 227–3664, Email: 

victor.parker@tsa.dhs.gov. 

James Ruger, Chief Economist, 

Economic Analysis BranchCoordination & Analysis Division, 

Department of Homeland Security, 

Transportation Security Administration, 

Policy, Plans, and Engagement, 6595 

Springfield Center Drive, Springfield, 

VA 20598–6028, Phone: 571 227–5519, 

Email: james.ruger@tsa.dhs.gov. 

David Kasminoff, Senior Counsel, 

Regulations and Security Standards, 

Department of Homeland Security, 

Transportation Security Administration, 

Chief Counsel’s Office, 6595 Springfield 

Center Drive, Springfield, VA 20598– 

6002, Phone: 571 227–3583, Email: 

david.kasminoff@tsa.dhs.gov. 

Related RIN: Related to 1652–AA56 

RIN: 1652–AA74 

DHS—TSA 

Final Rule Stage 

99. Flight Training Security Program 

[1652–AA35] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 6 U.S.C. 469(b); 49 

U.S.C. 114; 49 U.S.C. 44939; 49 U.S.C. 

46105 

CFR Citation: 49 CFR part 1552. 

Legal Deadline: Final, Statutory, 

February 10, 2004, interim final rule 

required within 60 days of enactment of 

the Vision 100 Act. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9391 

Public Law 108–176, sec. 612(a) (Dec. 

12, 2003) requires an interim final rule 

to implement the requirements of 49 

U.S.C. 44939, as further amended by 

section 612(a), not later than 60 days 

after the date of enactment of the act. 

Public Law 108–90, sec. 520 (Oct. 1, 

2003), codified at 6 U.S.C. 469(b), 

requires collection of fees authorized by 

Public Law 108–176). Public Law 110– 

329, sec. 543 (Sept. 30, 2008) further 

amends 6 U.S.C. 469 to include both 

initial and recurrent training. 

Abstract: As required by the Vision 

100 Act, TSA issued an Interim Final 

Rule (IFR) (effective September 20, 

2004) that transferred responsibility for 

the vetting of flight school candidates 

from the Department of Justice to TSA, 

with certain modifications to the 

program required by the act. TSA 

reopened the comment period for 30 

days on May 18, 2018. This IFR applies 

to training providers and to individuals 

who apply for or receive flight training. 

Flight schools are required to notify 

TSA when non-U.S. citizens, non-U.S. 

nationals, and other individuals 

designated by TSA, apply for flight 

training or recurrent flight training. TSA 

issued exemptions and interpretations 

in response to comments on the IFR and 

questions raised during operation of the 

program since 2004, and a notice 

published in 2018 extending the 

comment period on the IFR. Many of the 

changes made to the program through 

this final rule are in direct responses to 

recommendations from the Aviation 

Security Advisory Committee, a 

statutorily created committee charged 

with providing input to TSA on 

regulatory requirements. Based on the 

comments and questions received, TSA 

is finalizing the rule and considering 

modifications that would change the 

frequency of security threat assessments 

from a high-frequency, event-based 

interval, to a time-based interval; clarify 

the definitions and other provisions of 

the rule; and enable industry to use 

TSA-provided electronic recordkeeping 

systems for all documents required to 

demonstrate compliance with the rule. 

These and other changes will provide 

significant cost-savings to the industry 

and individuals seeking flight training 

while also enhancing security. 

Statement of Need: In the years since 

TSA published the IFR, members of the 

aviation industry, the public, and 

federal oversight organizations have 

identified areas where the Flight 

Training Security Program (formerly the 

Alien Flight Student Program) could be 

improved. TSA’s internal procedures 

and processes for vetting applicants also 

have advanced through technology and 

other enhancements. Publishing a final 

rule that addresses comments on the IFR 

and aligns with modern TSA vetting 

practices would streamline and reduce 

burden for the Flight Training Security 

Program application, vetting, and 

recordkeeping process for all parties 

involved. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: TSA is 

considering revising the requirements of 

the Flight Training Security Program to 

reduce costs and industry burden. One 

action TSA is considering is an 

electronic recordkeeping platform 

where all flight training providers 

would upload certain information to a 

TSA-managed website (https://

fts.tsa.dhs.gov/). Also at industry’s 

request, TSA is considering changing 

the interval for a Security Threat 

Assessment of each non-U.S. citizen and 

non-U.S. national flight student, by 

eliminating the requirement for a 

Security Threat Assessment for each 

separate training event. This change 

would result in an annual savings, 

although there may be additional startup and record retention costs for the 

agency as a result of this revision. The 

change in the interval of the Security 

Threat Assessment would result in 

immediate cost savings to flight 

providers and students who are neither 

U.S. citizens nor U.S. nationals without 

compromising the security process. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Interim Final Rule; 

Request for 

Comments.

09/20/04 69 FR 56324 

Interim Final Rule 

Effective.

09/20/04 

Interim Final Rule; 

Comment Period End.

10/20/04 

Notice-Information 

Collection; 60- 

Day Renewal.

11/26/04 69 FR 68952 

Notice-Information 

Collection; 30- 

Day Renewal.

03/30/05 70 FR 16298 

Notice-Information 

Collection; 60- 

Day Renewal.

06/06/08 73 FR 32346 

Notice-Information 

Collection; 30- 

Day Renewal.

08/13/08 73 FR 47203 

Notice-Alien Flight 

Student Program Recurrent 

Training Fees.

04/13/09 74 FR 16880 

Notice-Information 

Collection; 60- 

Day Renewal.

09/21/11 76 FR 58531 

Notice-Information 

Collection; 30- 

Day Renewal.

01/31/12 77 FR 4822 

Notice-Information 

Collection; 60- 

Day Renewal.

03/10/15 80 FR 12647 

Action Date FR Cite 

Notice-Information 

Collection; 30- 

Day Renewal.

06/18/15 80 FR 34927 

IFR; Comment 

Period Reopened.

05/18/18 83 FR 23238 

IFR; Comment 

Period Reopened End.

06/18/18 

Notice-Information 

Collection; 60- 

Day Renewal.

07/06/18 83 FR 31561 

Notice-Information 

Collection; 30- 

Day Renewal.

10/31/18 83 FR 54761 

Notice-Information 

Collection; 60- 

Day Renewal.

08/27/21 86 FR 48239 

Notice-Information 

Collection; 30- 

Day Renewal.

01/19/22 87 FR 2889 

Final Rule ............ 11/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

URL For More Information: https://

www.regulations.gov. 

URL For Public Comments: https://

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Stephanie Hamilton, 

Manager, Vetting Programs Branch, 

Department of Homeland Security, 

Transportation Security Administration, 

Enrollment Services & Vetting Programs, 

6595 Springfield Center Drive, 

Springfield, VA 20598–6010, Phone: 

571 227–2851, Email: 

stephanie.w.hamilton@tsa.dhs.gov. 

James Ruger, Chief Economist, 

Economic Analysis BranchCoordination & Analysis Division, 

Department of Homeland Security, 

Transportation Security Administration, 

Policy, Plans, and Engagement, 6595 

Springfield Center Drive, Springfield, 

VA 20598–6028, Phone: 571 227–5519, 

Email: james.ruger@tsa.dhs.gov. 

David Ross, Attorney-Advisor, 

Regulations and Security Standards, 

Department of Homeland Security, 

Transportation Security Administration, 

Chief Counsel’s Office, 6595 Springfield 

Center Drive, Springfield, VA 20598– 

6002, Phone: 571 227–2465, Email: 

david.ross1@tsa.dhs.gov. 

Related RIN: Related to 1652–AA61 

RIN: 1652–AA35 

DHS—TSA 

100. Frequency of Renewal Cycle for 

Indirect Air Carrier Security Programs 

[1652–AA72] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9392 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Legal Authority: 49 U.S.C. 114; 49 

U.S.C. 5103; 49 U.S.C. 40113; 49 U.S.C. 

44901 to 44905; 49 U.S.C. 4491 to 

44914; 49 U.S.C. 44916 to 44917; 49 

U.S.C. 44932; 49 U.S.C. 449354 to 

44936; 49 U.S.C. 46105 

CFR Citation: 49 CFR 1548. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Transportation Security 

Administration (TSA) is reducing the 

frequency of renewal applications for 

indirect air carriers (IACs). Currently, 

these entities must submit an 

application to renew their security 

program each year. Following a review 

of TSA’s regulatory requirements 

seeking to reduce the cost of 

compliance, TSA determined that the 

duration of the security program for 

these entities can be increased from 1 

year to 3 years without having a 

negative impact on transportation 

security. This change will align the 

security program renewal requirement 

with the renewal cycle for Certified 

Cargo Screening Facilities under 49 CFR 

part 1549. This rulemaking is in 

response to a request from the industry 

subject to these requirements. 

Statement of Need: Consistent with 

Executive Order 12866 and Executive 

Order 13563, TSA identified portions of 

air cargo regulations that may be 

tailored to impose a lesser burden on 

society and that may improve 

government processes. Under 49 CFR 

part 1548 indirect air carriers are 

required to renew their security 

programs each year. TSA’s robust 

inspection and compliance 

requirements make the annual renewal 

requirement unnecessary. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: This 

rule would reduce the frequency of IAC 

security program certifications from 

annually to once every three years. This 

rule does not impose any incremental 

costs because regulated entities are 

already performing all actions required 

to obtain the certification in question. 

The expected outcome will have a 

minimal cost impact with positive net 

benefit due to time saved with a lower 

frequency in the renewal cycle. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Final Rule ............ 09/16/09 74 FR 47705 

Final Rule Effective.09/16/09 

NPRM .................. 12/27/22 87 FR 79264 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

02/27/23 

Final Rule ............ 03/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

URL For More Information: https://

www.regulations.gov. 

URL For Public Comments: https://

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Angel Rodriguez, 

Acting Section Chief, Department of 

Homeland Security, Transportation 

Security Administration, 6595 

Springfield Center Drive, Springfield, 

VA 20598–6028, Phone: 571 227–2108, 

Email: angel.l.rodriguez@tsa.dhs.gov. 

James Ruger, Chief Economist, 

Economic Analysis BranchCoordination & Analysis Division, 

Department of Homeland Security, 

Transportation Security Administration, 

Policy, Plans, and Engagement, 6595 

Springfield Center Drive, Springfield, 

VA 20598–6028, Phone: 571 227–5519, 

Email: james.ruger@tsa.dhs.gov. 

David Ross, Attorney-Advisor, 

Regulations and Security Standards, 

Department of Homeland Security, 

Transportation Security Administration, 

Chief Counsel’s Office, 6595 Springfield 

Center Drive, Springfield, VA 20598– 

6002, Phone: 571 227–2465, Email: 

david.ross1@tsa.dhs.gov. 

Related RIN: Related to 1652–AA23 

RIN: 1652–AA72 

DHS—TSA 

101. • Minimum Standards for Driver’s 

Licenses and Identification Cards 

Acceptable by Federal Agencies for 

Official Purposes; Waiver for Mobile 

Driver’s Licenses [1652–AA76] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30301 note; 

6 U.S.C. 111; 6 U.S.C. 112 

CFR Citation: 6 CFR 37. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This proposal is the first 

rulemaking in a multi-phased project to 

enable Federal agencies, at their 

discretion, to continue accepting mobile 

driver’s licenses and mobile 

identification cards (collectively 

referred to as mDLs), while the 

Transportation Security Administration 

(TSA) develops comprehensive 

regulatory requirements for REAL IDcompliant mDLs. This rule is proposing 

to add new mDL definitions to 6 CFR 

part 37 (REAL ID regulations), and to 

establish a process that states must 

follow to apply for a mDL waiver from 

the REAL ID regulations. This initial 

rulemaking would also enable federal 

agencies to accept State mDLs for 

official purposes from States who are 

issued such a waiver. 

After multiple industry technical 

standards are finalized and published, 

TSA would repeal the waiver provisions 

and issue regulations setting the 

minimum technical requirements and 

security standards for mDLs to enable 

Federal agencies to accept mDLs for 

official purposes. The Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS) solicited 

public participation in the development 

of requirements in this rulemaking 

through a request for information 

published in April 2021, including two 

extensions of the comment period. As 

part of this public engagement, DHS 

also held a virtual public meeting on 

June 30, 2021, to discuss the purposes 

of the rulemaking and provide an 

additional forum of comments by 

stakeholders and other interested 

persons. 

Effective May 22, 2023, authority to 

administer the REAL ID program was 

delegated from the Secretary of 

Homeland Security to the Administrator 

of TSA pursuant to DHS Delegation No. 

7060.02.1. 

Statement of Need: This rulemaking is 

necessary to implement authority under 

the REAL ID Modernization Act, which 

clarified that REAL ID requirements 

apply to mDLs issued in accordance 

with regulations prescribed by the 

Secretary. The rule would enable 

continued mDL acceptance when REAL 

ID enforcement begins in 2025. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: TSA 

anticipates that States, TSA, and some 

Federal agencies will incur costs 

associated with using mDLs. States 

incur costs to submit waiver 

applications, TSA incurs costs to 

administer the waiver program, and 

Federal agencies that choose to accept 

mDLs for official purposes incur costs to 

implement mDL acceptance. TSA 

anticipates benefits for all stakeholders, 

including increased convenience, 

security, privacy, and health benefits 

from contact-free identity verification. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 08/30/23 88 FR 60056 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

10/16/23 

Final Rule ............ 05/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

State. 

URL For More Information: https://

www.regulations.gov. 

URL For Public Comments: https://

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: George Petersen, 

Senior Program Manager, REAL ID 

Program, Department of Homeland 

Security, Transportation Security 

Administration, Enrollment Services & 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9393 

Vetting Programs, 6595 Springfield 

Center Drive, Springfield, VA 20598– 

6010, Phone: 571 227–2215, Email: 

george.petersen@tsa.dhs.gov. 

Related RIN: Previously reported as 

1601–AB06, Related to 1601–AA37, 

Related to 1601–AB01, Related to 1601– 

AB03 

RIN: 1652–AA76 

DHS—U.S. IMMIGRATION AND 

CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT (USICE) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

102. Clarifying and Revising Custody 

Determination and Detention 

Classification Procedures [1653–AA92] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1103; 6 

U.S.C. 251; 6 U.S.C. 111; 8 U.S.C. 1226 

CFR Citation: 8 CFR 236.1. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. 

Immigration and Customs Enforcement 

(ICE) and the Department of Justice 

(DOJ) Executive Office for Immigration 

Review (EOIR) (collectively, the 

Departments) are planning to amend the 

regulations that govern detention and 

release determinations for noncitizens 

subject to the custody provisions in 

section 236 of the Immigration and 

Nationality Act (Act), 8 U.S.C. 1226(a). 

The goal of the proposed regulation 

would be to clarify the scope and 

applicability of section 236(a) of the 

Act, 8 U.S.C. 1226(a), and the 

procedures that apply under that 

section, including the burden and 

standard of proof for continued 

detention at initial custody 

determinations and any custody 

redetermination hearings, and related 

issues. This rulemaking is consistent 

with Executive Order 14058, which 

directs agencies to take actions that 

improve service delivery and customer 

experience by decreasing administrative 

burdens, enhancing transparency, and 

improving the efficiency and 

effectiveness of government. 

Statement of Need: The proposed rule 

is needed to bring clarity and uniformity 

to the procedures governing ICE initial 

custody decisions and IJ bond hearings 

for noncitizens subject to discretionary 

detention under INA 236(a). This rule 

will also revise the procedures for 

determining whether a noncitizen is 

properly subject to INA 236(c) 

detention. Additionally, this rule will 

clarify the detention authority that 

applies during the petition for review 

process for certain noncitizens seeking 

judicial review of their removal orders. 

Lastly, the proposed rule will make 

organizational changes to the structure 

of the EOIR regulations governing 

custody redetermination hearings and 

address outdated provisions in the 

Departments’ custody and bond 

regulations. The Departments believe 

this rulemaking will help address issues 

that frequently arise in litigation 

brought by noncitizens challenging the 

Departments’ existing custody and bond 

hearing procedures and it may also help 

to resolve differing interpretations 

among Federal circuit courts. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: DOJ 

and DHS are currently considering the 

specific cost and benefit impacts of the 

proposed provisions. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 12/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: 

Undetermined. 

Federalism: Undetermined. 

Agency Contact: Sharon Hageman, 

Deputy Assistant Director, Department 

of Homeland Security, U.S. Immigration 

and Customs Enforcement, 500 12th 

Street SW, Mail Stop 5006, Washington, 

DC 20536, Phone: 202 732–6960, Email: 

ice.regulations@ice.dhs.gov. 

Related RIN: Related to 1125–AB27 

RIN: 1653–AA92 

DHS—FEDERAL EMERGENCY 

MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

103. National Flood Insurance 

Program: Standard Flood Insurance 

Policy, Homeowner Flood Form [1660– 

AB06] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq. 

CFR Citation: 44 CFR 61. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The National Flood 

Insurance Program (NFIP), established 

pursuant to the National Flood 

Insurance Act of 1968, is a voluntary 

program in which participating 

communities adopt and enforce a set of 

minimum floodplain management 

requirements to reduce future flood 

damages. Property owners in 

participating communities are eligible to 

purchase NFIP flood insurance. This 

proposed rule would revise the 

Standard Flood Insurance Policy by 

adding a new Homeowner Flood Form 

and five accompanying endorsements. 

The new Homeowner Flood Form 

would replace the Dwelling Form as a 

source of coverage for homeowners of 

one-to-four family residences. Together, 

the new Form and endorsements would 

more closely align with property and 

casualty homeowners insurance and 

provide increased options and coverage 

in a more user-friendly and 

comprehensible format. 

Statement of Need: The National 

Flood Insurance Act requires FEMA to 

provide by regulation the general terms 

and conditions of insurability 

applicable to properties eligible for 

flood insurance coverage. 42 U.S.C. 

4013(a). To comply with this 

requirement, FEMA adopts the Standard 

Flood Insurance Policy (SFIP) in 

regulation, which sets out the terms and 

conditions of insurance. See 44 CFR 

part 61, Appendix A. FEMA must use 

the SFIP for all flood insurance policies 

sold through the NFIP. See 44 CFR 

61.13. 

The SFIP is a single-peril (flood) 

policy that pays for direct physical 

damage to insured property. There are 

currently three forms of the SFIP: the 

Dwelling Form, the General Property 

Form, and the Residential 

Condominium Building Association 

Policy (RCBAP) Form. The Dwelling 

Form insures a one-to-four family 

residential building or a single-family 

dwelling unit in a condominium 

building. See 44 CFR part 61, Appendix 

A(1). Policies under the Dwelling Form 

offer coverage for building property, up 

to $250,000, and personal property up 

to $100,000. The General Property Form 

ensures a five-or-more family residential 

building or a non-residential building. 

See 44 CFR part 61, Appendix A(2). The 

General Property Form offers coverage 

for building and contents up to 

$500,000 each. The RCBAP Form 

insures residential condominium 

association buildings and offers 

building coverage up to $250,000 

multiplied by the number of units and 

contents coverage up to $100,000 per 

building. See 44 CFR part 61, appendix 

A(3). RCBAP contents coverage insures 

property owned by the insured 

condominium association. Individual 

unit owners must purchase their own 

Dwelling Form policy in order to insure 

their own contents. 

FEMA last substantively revised the 

SFIP in 2000. See 65 FR 60758 (Oct. 12, 

2000). In 2020, FEMA published a final 

rule that made non-substantive 

clarifying and plain language 

improvements to the SFIP. See 85 FR 

43946 (July 20, 2020). However, many 

policyholders, agents, and adjusters 

continue to find the SFIP difficult to 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9394 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

read and interpret compared to other, 

more modern, property and casualty 

insurance products found in the private 

market. Accordingly, FEMA proposes to 

adopt a new Homeowner Flood Form. 

The new Homeowner Flood Form, 

which FEMA proposes to add to its 

regulations at 44 CFR 61 appendix A(4), 

would protect property owners in a oneto-four family residence. Upon 

adoption, the Homeowner Flood Form 

would replace the Dwelling Form as a 

source of coverage for this class of 

residential properties. FEMA would 

continue to use the Dwelling Form to 

insure landlords, renters, and owners of 

mobile homes, travel trailers, and 

condominium units. Compared to the 

current Dwelling Form, the new 

Homeowner Flood Form would clarify 

coverage and more clearly highlight 

conditions, limitations, and exclusions 

in coverage as well as add and modify 

coverages and coverage options. FEMA 

also proposes adding to its regulations 

five endorsements to accompany the 

new Form: Increased Cost of 

Compliance Coverage, Actual Cash 

Value Loss Settlement, Temporary 

Housing Expense, Basement Coverage, 

and Builder’s Risk. These endorsements, 

which FEMA proposes to codify at 44 

CFR 61 appendices A(101)- (105), 

respectively, would give policyholders 

the option of amending the Homeowner 

Flood Form to modify coverage with a 

commensurate adjustment to premiums 

charged. Together, the Homeowner 

Flood Form and accompanying 

endorsements would increase options 

and coverage for owners of one-to-four 

family residences. 

FEMA intends that this new Form 

will be more user-friendly and 

comprehensible. As a result, the new 

Homeowner Flood Form and its 

accompanying endorsements would 

provide a more personalized, 

customizable product than the NFIP has 

offered during its 50 years. In addition 

to aligning with property and casualty 

homeowners’ insurance, the result 

would increase consumer choice and 

simplify coverage. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: FEMA 

estimates that this rulemaking would 

result in an increase in transfer 

payments from policyholders to FEMA 

and insurance providers in the form of 

flood insurance premiums, and from 

FEMA to policyholders in the form of 

claims payments. Additionally, this 

rulemaking would result in benefits to 

policyholders, insurance providers, and 

FEMA, mostly through cost savings due 

to increased clarity and fulfillment of 

customer expectations through 

expanded coverage options. It would 

also help the NFIP better signal risk 

through premiums, reduce the need for 

Federal assistance, and increase 

resilience by enhancing mitigation 

efforts. Lastly, FEMA, States, and 

insurance providers will incur costs for 

implementation and familiarization of 

the rule. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 02/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal. 

Agency Contact: Christine Merk, Lead 

Management and Program Analyst, 

Department of Homeland Security, 

Federal Emergency Management 

Agency, Insurance Analytics and Policy 

Branch, 400 C Street SW, Washington, 

DC 20472, Phone: 202 735–6324, Email: 

christine.merk@fema.dhs.gov. 

RIN: 1660–AB06 

DHS—FEMA 

104. Update of FEMA’S Public 

Assistance Regulations [1660–AB09] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 5121 to 

5207 

CFR Citation: 44 CFR 206. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Federal Emergency 

Management Agency (FEMA) proposes 

to revise its Public Assistance (PA) 

program regulations to reflect current 

statutory authorities and implement 

program improvements. The proposed 

rule would incorporate changes brought 

about by amendments to the Robert T. 

Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency 

Assistance Act. FEMA is also proposing 

clarifications and corrections to improve 

the efficiency and consistency of the 

Public Assistance program. 

Statement of Need: The Robert T. 

Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency 

Assistance Act (Stafford Act), Pub. L. 

100–707, 102 Stat. 4689, authorizes the 

President to provide Federal assistance 

when the severity and magnitude of an 

incident or threatened incident, exceeds 

the affected State, local, Indian Tribal, 

and Territorial government’s (SLTT’s) 

capabilities to effectively respond or 

recover. 42 U.S.C. 5170 and 5191. If the 

President declares an emergency or 

major disaster authorizing the Public 

Assistance program, FEMA may award 

Public Assistance grants to assist SLTTs 

and certain private nonprofit (PNP) 

organizations so communities can 

quickly respond to and recover from the 

major disaster or emergency. 

FEMA proposes to amend its Public 

Assistance and Community Disaster 

Loan program regulations to incorporate 

statutory changes that have amended 

sections of the Stafford Act relating to 

Public Assistance and Community 

Disaster Loans and to improve program 

administration. These include the PostKatrina Emergency Management Reform 

Act of 2006 (PKEMRA), Public Law 

109–295, 120 Stat. 1394, the Security 

and Accountability for Every Port Act of 

2006 (SAFE Port Act), Public Law 109– 

347, 120 Stat. 1884, the Pets Evacuation 

and Transportation Standards Act of 

2006 (PETS Act), Public Law 109–308, 

120 Stat. 1725, the Sandy Recovery 

Improvement Act of 2013 (SRIA), Public 

Law 113–2, 127 Stat. 39, the Emergency 

Information Improvement Act of 2015, 

Public Law 114–111, 129 Stat. 2240, the 

Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, Public 

Law 115–123, 132 Stat. 64, and the FAA 

Reauthorization Act of 2018, Division D, 

Disaster Recovery Reform Act of 2018 

(DRRA), Public Law 115–254, 132 Stat. 

3438. FEMA also proposes to implement 

program improvements and make 

clarifications and corrections to existing 

regulations. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: FEMA 

estimates that this rulemaking would 

result in benefits to SLTTs and FEMA 

from improving clarity and aligning 

FEMA regulations with statutory 

changes and current practices. Such 

increased clarity and understanding 

would improve the efficiency and the 

consistency of FEMA’s PA programs. 

Additionally, proposed improvements 

to State/Tribal administrative plans 

would better position SLTTs to respond 

to and to recover from emergencies and 

disasters. Lastly, FEMA estimates 

increases in costs for SLTTs due to 

additional paperwork burden and 

familiarization of the rule. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 05/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State, Tribal. 

Additional Information: Docket ID 

FEMA–2023–0005. 

Agency Contact: Tod Wells, Deputy 

Director, Public Assistance Division 

Recovery Directorate, Department of 

Homeland Security, Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, 

Washington, DC 20472–3100, Phone: 

202 646–3834, Email: fema-recovery-papolicy@fema.dhs.gov. 

RIN: 1660–AB09 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9395 

DHS—FEMA 

105. Updates to Floodplain 

Management and Protection of 

Wetlands Regulations To Implement 

the Federal Flood Risk Management 

Standard [1660–AB12] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.; 

42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 4321 

et seq.; E.O. 11988 of May 24, 1977, 42 

FR 26951, 3 CFR, 1977 Comp., p. 117; 

E.O. 11990 of May 24, 1977, 42 FR 

26961, 3 CFR, 1977 Comp., p. 121; E.O. 

13690, 80 FR 6425; E.O. 14030, 86 FR 

27967 

CFR Citation: 44 CFR 9. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: Consistent with President 

Biden’s Executive Order on Climate 

Related Financial Risk (E.O. 14030), the 

Federal Emergency Management Agency 

(FEMA) proposes to amend its 

regulations at 44 CFR part 9, 

‘‘Floodplain Management and 

Protection of Wetlands,’’ to incorporate 

amendments to Executive Order 11988 

and the Federal Flood Risk Management 

Standard (FFRMS). The FFRMS is a 

flexible framework allowing agencies to 

choose among three approaches to 

define the floodplain and corresponding 

flood elevation requirements for 

federally funded projects. 44 CFR part 9 

describes FEMA’s process under 

Executive Order 11988 for determining 

whether the proposed location for an 

action falls within a floodplain and how 

to complete the action in the floodplain, 

in light of the risk of flooding. The 

proposed rule would change how FEMA 

defines a floodplain with respect to 

certain actions. Additionally, under the 

proposed rule, FEMA would use natural 

systems, ecosystem process, and naturebased approaches, where practicable, 

when developing alternatives to locating 

the proposed action in the floodplain. 

FEMA has engaged the public 

extensively on these matters. On 

February 5, 2015, FEMA acting on 

behalf of the Mitigation Framework 

Leadership Group, posted a Federal 

Register notice seeking comments on a 

draft of the Revised Guidelines for 

Implementing Executive Order 11988, 

Floodplain Management. The 60-day 

comment period was extended an 

additional 30 days. During the public 

comment period for the Revised 

Guidelines, FEMA sent advisories to 

representatives from Governors’ offices 

nationwide inviting comments on the 

draft Revised Guidelines. Over 25 

meetings were held across the country 

with State, local, and Tribal officials 

and interested stakeholders to discuss 

the draft Revised Guidelines as well as 

9 public listening sessions across the 

country attended by over 700 

participants to facilitate feedback. All 

relevant comments received in response 

to these efforts have been posted to the 

public rulemaking docket on the Federal 

eRulemaking portal at https://

www.regulations.gov/document/FEMA2015-0006-0001/comment. Comments 

from meetings and listening sessions 

can be found at https://

www.regulations.gov/docket/FEMA2015-0006/document. Additionally, 

FEMA published a Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (NPRM) in 2016 seeking 

public comment on FEMA’s proposed 

implementation of the Revised 

Guidelines. All relevant comments 

received in response to the 2016 NPRM 

have been posted to the public 

rulemaking docket on the Federal 

eRulemaking portal at https://

www.regulations.gov/document/FEMA2015-0006-0373/comment. 

Statement of Need: The United States 

is experiencing increased flooding and 

flood risk from changing conditions. 

FEMA has not made significant updates 

to its regulations governing floodplain 

management to reflect the challenges 

faced because of increased flooding and 

changing conditions since initial 

publication in 1980. As a result, FEMA 

is now proposing to amend 44 CFR part 

9, ‘‘Floodplain Management and 

Protection of Wetlands,’’ to implement 

the FFRMS and update the agency’s 8- 

step process. The FFRMS is a flood 

resilience standard that is required for 

federally funded projects and provides a 

flexible framework to increase resilience 

against flooding and help preserve the 

natural values of floodplains and 

wetlands. A floodplain is any land area 

that is subject to flooding and refers to 

geographic features with undefined 

boundaries. 44 CFR part 9 describes the 

8-step process FEMA uses to determine 

whether a proposed action would be 

located within or affect a floodplain, 

and if so, whether and how to continue 

with or modify the proposed action. 

Executive Order 11988, as amended, 

and the FFRMS changed the Executive 

Branch-wide guidance for defining the 

floodplain with respect to federally 

funded projects (i.e., actions involving 

the use of Federal funds for new 

construction, substantial improvement, 

or to address substantial damage to a 

structure or facility). This proposed rule 

would ensure that actions subject to the 

FFRMS are designed to be resilient to 

both current and future flood risks to 

minimize the impact of floods on 

human health, safety, and welfare and 

to protect Federal investments by 

reducing the risk of flood loss. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: FEMA 

estimates that this rulemaking would 

result in benefits to grant recipients 

(States, Local, Tribes, Territories, and 

Individuals) and to FEMA, mostly 

through the reduction in damage to 

properties and contents from future 

floods, potential lives saved, public 

health and safety benefits, reduced 

recovery time from floods, and 

increased community resilience to 

flooding. FEMA estimates project cost 

increases for FEMA and grant recipients 

due to increased elevation or 

floodproofing requirements of the 

proposed rule. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Proposed Policy: 

Request for 

Comments.

10/02/23 88 FR 67697 

Proposed Policy: 

Comment Period End.

12/01/23 

NPRM .................. 10/02/23 88 FR 67869 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

12/01/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Governmental 

Jurisdictions, Organizations. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State, Tribal. 

Additional Information: Docket ID 

FEMA–2023–0026. 

URL For More Information: https://

www.regulations.gov. 

URL For Public Comments: https://

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Portia Ross, Office of 

Environmental and Historic 

Preservation, Department of Homeland 

Security, Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, 400 C Street SW, 

Washington, DC 20472, Phone: 202 709– 

0677, Email: fema-regulations@

fema.dhs.gov. 

RIN: 1660–AB12 

DHS—FEMA 

Final Rule Stage 

106. Individual Assistance Program 

Equity [1660–AB07] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 5155; 42 

U.S.C. 5174; 42 U.S.C. 5189a 

CFR Citation: 44 CFR 206.101; 44 CFR 

206.110 to 206.115; 44 CFR 206.117 to 

206.119; 44 CFR 206.191. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Federal Emergency 

Management Agency (FEMA) will 

publish an interim final rule (IFR) 

amending its regulations governing the 

Individual Assistance program to 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9396 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

increase equity by simplifying 

processes, removing barriers to entry, 

and increasing eligibility for certain 

types of assistance under the program. 

Specifically, the IFR will: Increase 

eligibility for home repair assistance by 

amending the definitions and 

application of the terms safe, sanitary, 

and functional, allowing assistance for 

certain accessibility-related items, and 

amending its approach to evaluating 

insurance proceeds; allow for the reopening of the applicant registration 

period when the President adds new 

counties to the major disaster 

declaration; simplify the documentation 

requirements for continued temporary 

housing assistance; simplify the appeals 

process; simplify the process to request 

approval for a late registration; remove 

the requirement to apply for a Small 

Business Administration loan as a 

condition of eligibility for Other Needs 

Assistance (ONA); and establish 

additional assistance under ONA for 

serious needs, displacement, disasterdamaged computing devices, and 

essential tools for self-employed 

individuals. FEMA also makes revisions 

to reflect changes to statutory authority 

that have not yet been implemented in 

regulation, to include provisions for 

utility and security deposit payments, 

lease and repair of multi-family rental 

housing, child care assistance, 

maximum assistance limits, and waiver 

authority. 

FEMA sought input on regulatory 

changes to the Individuals and 

Households Program (IHP) through a 

Request for Information (RFI), published 

on April 22, 2021, seeking public input 

on its programs, regulations, collections 

of information, and policies to ensure 

they effectively achieve FEMA’s mission 

in a manner that furthers the goals of 

advancing equity for all, including those 

in underserved communities; bolstering 

resilience from the impacts of climate 

change, particularly for those 

disproportionately impacted by climate 

change; and environmental justice. 86 

FR 21325, Apr. 22, 2021. 

FEMA held public meetings and 

extended the comment period on the 

RFI to ensure all interested parties had 

sufficient opportunity to provide 

comments. See ‘‘Request for Information 

on FEMA Programs, Regulations, and 

Policies; Public Meetings; Extension of 

Comment Period,’’ 86 FR 30326, June 7, 

2021. All relevant comments received in 

response to the RFI, including those 

received during the public meetings, 

have been posted to the public 

rulemaking docket on the Federal 

eRulemaking portal at https:// 

www.regulations.gov/document/FEMA2021-0011-0001/comment. Commenters 

raised equitable concerns that FEMA 

will address in this IFR, such as by 

removing the requirement to apply for 

the SBA for a loan before receipt of 

ONA, amending FEMA’s habitability 

standards, increasing assistance for 

essential tools, simplifying its appeal 

process, and removing documentation 

requirements for late registrations. 

FEMA will seek public comment on this 

IFR and will carefully consider each 

comment received to determine whether 

further changes to FEMA’s IHP 

regulations are needed. 

Statement of Need: FEMA’s IHP 

regulations have not had a major review 

and update since section 206 of the 

Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 replaced 

the Individual and Family Grant 

Assistance Program with the current 

IHP. Some minor changes to Repair 

Assistance were completed in 2013, but 

Congress has passed multiple other laws 

that have superseded portions of the 

regulations and created other programs 

or forms of assistance with no 

supporting regulations. This IFR will 

update the IHP regulations now to bring 

them up to date and address other 

lessons learned through the course of 

implementing the IHP in disasters much 

larger than any previously addressed at 

the time the regulations were first 

developed. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: FEMA 

estimates that this rulemaking would 

result in an increase in transfer 

payments from FEMA and States in the 

form of disaster assistance to 

individuals and households. It would 

also result in additional costs to States 

for familiarization of the rule and to 

FEMA and applicants for paperwork 

burden. The rule would ensure disaster 

assistance is more equitably distributed 

and assist applicants to more quickly 

and fully recover from disasters by 

expanding eligibility for, and access to, 

certain types of assistance. Lastly, the 

rulemaking would improve clarity and 

align FEMA regulations with statutory 

changes improving the efficiency and 

the consistency of IHP assistance. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Interim Final Rule 12/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State. 

Additional Information: Docket ID 

FEMA–2023–0003. 

Agency Contact: Kristina McAlister, 

Supervisory Emergency Management 

Specialist (Recovery), Department of 

Homeland Security, Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, Individual 

Assistance Division Recovery 

Directorate, 500 C Street SW, 

Washington, DC 20472, Phone: 866 826– 

8751, Email: fema-ihp-policy@

fema.dhs.gov. 

RIN: 1660–AB07 

DHS—FEMA 

Long-Term Actions 

107. National Flood Insurance 

Program’s Floodplain Management 

Standards for Land Management & Use, 

& an Assessment of the Program’s 

Impact on Threatened and Endangered 

Species & Their Habitats [1660–AB11] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq. 

CFR Citation: 44 CFR 59 to 60. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Federal Emergency 

Management Agency (FEMA) issued a 

Request for Information (RFI) to receive 

the public’s input on revisions to the 

National Flood Insurance Program’s 

(NFIP) floodplain management 

standards for land management and use 

regulations. FEMA’s authority under the 

National Flood Insurance Act requires 

the agency to, from time to time, 

develop comprehensive criteria 

designed to encourage the adoption of 

adequate State and local measures. The 

agency will propose regulations to better 

align the NFIP minimum floodplain 

management standards with our current 

understanding of flood risk, flood 

insurance premium rates, and risk 

reduction approaches to make 

communities safer, stronger, and more 

resilient to increased flooding. As part 

of the proposed regulations, FEMA is 

considering revisions to the NFIP 

minimum floodplain management 

standards to better protect people and 

property in a nuanced manner that 

balances community needs with the 

national scope of the NFIP. FEMA will 

also propose opportunities to make 

these minimum floodplain management 

standards improve resilience in 

communities that have been historically 

underserved. The proposed revisions to 

the NFIP minimum floodplain 

management standards will also 

consider how to advance the 

conservation of threatened and 

endangered species and their habitat. 

The agency is also reviewing ways to 

further promote enhanced resilience 

efforts through the Community Rating 

System. 

During the RFI comment period, 

FEMA held three public meetings and 

extended the comment period on the 

RFI to ensure all interested parties had 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9397 

sufficient opportunity to provide 

comments. All relevant comments 

received in response to the RFI have 

been posted to the public rulemaking 

docket on the Federal eRulemaking 

portal at https://www.regulations.gov/ 

docket/FEMA-2021-0024/comments and 

transcripts from the public meetings 

have also been posted at https:// 

www.regulations.gov/docket/FEMA2021-0024/document. In April 2023, 

FEMA requested recommendations from 

the Technical Mapping Advisory 

Council (TMAC) on modifying the 

definition of the Special Flood Hazard 

Area or modifying how it is calculated. 

In addition, FEMA requested a 

recommendation from TMAC on how 

FEMA might consider changing 

mapping procedures related to when 

land is filled. These recommendations 

will assist FEMA in exploring the 

feasibility of public comments received 

from the 2021 RFI. 

Statement of Need: FEMA issued an 

RFI to seek information from the public 

on the agency’s current floodplain 

management standards to ensure the 

agency receives public input to inform 

any action to revise the NFIP minimum 

floodplain management standards. 

FEMA is re-evaluating the 

implementation of the NFIP under the 

Endangered Species Act at the national 

level. FEMA will propose regulations 

based on the comments received on this 

RFI to better align the NFIP minimum 

floodplain management standards with 

our current understanding of flood risk, 

flood insurance premium rates, and risk 

reduction approaches to make 

communities safer, stronger, and more 

resilient to increased flooding. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: FEMA 

is currently considering the cost and 

benefit impacts of potential proposed 

actions. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Request for Information.10/12/21 86 FR 56713 

Announcement of 

Public Meetings.

10/28/21 86 FR 59745 

Announcement of 

Additional Public Meeting; Extension of Comment Period.

11/22/21 86 FR 66329 

Request for Information Comment Period 

End.

01/27/22 

NPRM .................. To Be Determined 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Additional Information: Docket ID 

FEMA–2021–0024. 

URL For More Information: https:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

URL For Public Comments: https:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Rachel Sears, 

Resilience, Department of Homeland 

Security, Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, 400 C Street SW, 

Washington, DC 20472, Phone: 202 646– 

2977, Email: fema-regulations@

fema.dhs.gov. 

RIN: 1660–AB11 

BILLING CODE 9110–9B–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND 

URBAN DEVELOPMENT 

Statement of Regulatory Priorities for 

Fiscal Year 2024 

Introduction 

The Regulatory Plan for the 

Department of Housing and Urban 

Development (HUD) for Fiscal Year (FY) 

2024 highlights two significant 

regulations and policy initiatives that 

HUD seeks to complete during the 

upcoming fiscal year. As the Federal 

agency that serves as the nation’s 

housing agency, HUD is committed to 

ensuring everyone has an affordable, 

healthy place to live. As a result, HUD 

plays a significant role in the lives of 

families and in communities throughout 

America. 

HUD is currently working to meet the 

goals of its Strategic Plan to: support 

underserved communities, ensure 

access to and increase the production of 

affordable housing, promote 

homeownership, advance sustainable 

communities, and strengthen HUD’s 

internal capacity. Under the leadership 

of Secretary Marcia L. Fudge, HUD is 

dedicated to implementing the 

Administration’s priorities by setting 

forth initiatives related to increasing 

equity and improving customer 

experience across all HUD programs. 

The rules highlighted in HUD’s 

regulatory plan for FY 2023 reflect 

HUD’s efforts to continue its work in 

building strong and sustainable 

communities and addressing the 

housing needs of all Americans. 

Additionally, HUD notes that the FY 

2023 Semiannual Regulatory Agenda 

includes additional rules that advance 

the Administration’s priorities, 

including rules to advance racial equity 

and civil rights and rules to provide 

economic relief to homeowners and 

renters. 

HOME Investment Partnerships 

Program: Program Updates and 

Streamlining 

HUD’s HOME Investment 

Partnerships Program (HOME) provides 

formula grants to States and units of 

general local government to fund a wide 

range of activities to produce and 

maintain affordable rental and 

homeownership housing and provides 

tenant-based rental assistance for lowincome and very low-income 

households. 

This rule proposes to revise the 

current HOME regulations at 24 CFR 

part 92 to update, simplify, and 

streamline requirements, better align the 

program with other Federal housing 

programs, and implement recent 

amendments to the HOME statute. 

Specifically, the proposed changes to 

the HOME program include significant 

revisions to the community housing 

development organization requirements, 

a change in the approach to HOME 

rents, simplified requirements for smallscale rental projects, enhanced 

flexibility in tenant-based rental 

assistance (TBRA) programs, and 

simplified provisions and new 

flexibilities for community land trusts. 

The proposed rule would also 

strengthen and expand tenant 

protections, and create incentives for 

meeting green building standards in 

new construction, reconstruction, and 

rehabilitation of housing. 

Aggregate Costs and Benefits 

Executive Order 12866, as amended, 

requires the agency to provide its best 

estimate of the combined aggregate costs 

and benefits of all regulations included 

in the agency’s Regulatory Plan that will 

be pursued in fiscal year 2024. HUD 

expects that neither the total economic 

costs nor the total efficiency gains will 

exceed $200 million for this proposed 

rulemaking. In fact, the direct economic 

impact of this rule would be almost 

entirely within the HOME program. In 

other words, the proposed changes 

would affect what participating 

jurisdictions do with the HOME funds 

they receive from HUD and how 

projects that accept this funding source 

can operate. Many of the policy 

adjustments proposed would only have 

a practical impact if participating 

jurisdictions choose to participate in 

HOME-funded activities that are 

affected by the updated policies. 

Statement of Need 

The HOME program is authorized by 

title II of the Cranston-Gonzalez 

National Affordable Housing Act 

(‘‘NAHA’’) (42 U.S.C. 12721 et seq). 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9398 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Title II of NAHA has not been 

significantly revised since the HOME 

program was last reauthorized by 

Congress in 1992. The constraints of the 

prescriptive statutory authority of title II 

of NAHA limit the scope of changes that 

the Department can propose to the 

HOME program regulations. Working 

within these limitations, the Department 

conducted a comprehensive review of 

title II of NAHA and current HOME 

program regulations to determine 

whether previously unrecognized 

opportunities might exist to revise 

current regulatory provisions. In 

creating the proposed rule, the 

Department focused on its commitment 

to equity and wealth-building and 

considered input from stakeholders on 

the most challenging aspects of 

administering and using HOME funds to 

provide affordable housing. This 

proposed rule is necessary to reduce the 

burden and increase flexibility for 

participating jurisdictions and other 

program participants, while adhering to 

statutory intent and requiring 

responsible management of State and 

local HOME programs. 

This proposed rule also incorporates 

changes made by the Housing 

Opportunity Through Modernization 

Act of 2016 (HOTMA) and recent 

amendments to the HOME statute. 

Alternatives: An alternative to 

promulgating this rule would be to 

maintain HUD’s existing regulations 

governing the HOME program. 

However, doing so would mean failing 

to fully benefit from the advantages of 

streamlining, updating, and simplifying 

our regulations. It would also mean that 

HUD would fail to adjust its HOME 

regulations to be fully consistent with 

HOTMA and recent amendments to the 

HOME statute. 

Risks: This proposed rule would 

impose tenant protections that may not 

be currently applicable to other 

affordable housing funding sources (e.g., 

the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit 

program). This could result in some 

project owners and developers 

becoming hesitant to include HOME 

funds in the capital funding stack of 

affordable housing projects. 

Additionally, this proposed rule would 

make updates throughout the HOME 

regulation, including significant updates 

to a number of sections within the 

regulation. This could lead to a partially 

challenging transitional period for 

participating jurisdictions and other 

stakeholders as they learn and 

implement the new regulations into 

their policies and procedures. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .............. 12/00/2023 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Local, 

State. 

Federalism Affected: No. 

Energy Affected: No. 

International Impacts: No. 

Section 184 Indian Home Loan 

Guarantee Program 

Section 184 of the Housing and 

Community Development Act of 1992 

(Pub. L. 102–550, approved October 28, 

1992) (12 U.S.C. 1715z–13a), as 

amended, authorizes the Section 184 

Indian Home Loan Guarantee Program 

(Section 184 Program) to improve access 

to private financing for Native American 

families, Tribes, and Tribally Designated 

Housing Entities (TDHEs) by providing 

a loan guarantee to financial 

organizations who lend to them. 

This rule would modernize and 

enhance the regulations governing the 

Section 184 Program. Through the 

Section 184 Program, HUD guarantees 

home mortgage loans made to Native 

American borrowers in certain areas. 

The Section 184 Program facilitates 

homeownership and improves access to 

capital in Native American 

communities. 

Since its inception in 1994, the 

number of loans guaranteed under the 

Section 184 Program has increased 

significantly but its regulations have 

never been substantially revised. 

In 2015, the HUD Office of Inspector 

General (OIG), audited the Section 184 

Program and recommended that HUD 

develop and implement policies and 

procedures for monitoring and 

evaluating the Section 184 Program, 

standardize monthly delinquency 

reports, deny payments to lenders for 

claims on loans that have material 

underwriting deficiencies, take 

enforcement actions against certain 

lenders, and ensure that only 

underwriters that are approved by HUD 

are underwriting Section 184 loans. 

This rule is part of the improvements to 

the Section 184 Program that HUD is 

pursuing to address the findings in the 

audit. 

In developing this rule, HUD engaged 

in robust consultation with Tribes 

consistent with HUD’s Tribal 

Consultation policy. As early as 2018, 

prior to drafting the proposed rule, HUD 

held eleven in-person Tribal 

consultation sessions to outline HUD’s 

vision for the rule and obtain feedback 

from the tribes. As HUD completed 

drafts of various subparts of the 

regulation, HUD shared these drafts 

with Tribes and held three additional 

in-person consultations to solicit Tribal 

feedback on each subpart of the 

proposed rule. During this time, HUD 

also held two in-person Tribal 

consultations and two national 

teleconferences to review the draft 

proposed rule. In addition to the Tribal 

consultation sessions held prior and 

during the drafting of the proposed rule, 

HUD conducted ten additional 

consultations during the proposed rule 

public comment period. HUD held six 

regional consultation sessions and four 

national consultation sessions between 

December 2022 and March 2023. During 

these consultation sessions, HUD 

continued to solicit input and answered 

questions participants had about the 

proposed rule. 

The regulations proposed in this rule, 

drafted in consideration of the public 

comments and tribal consultations, 

would strengthen and comprehensively 

modernize the operation of the Section 

184 Program. Specifically, this rule 

would make the Section 184 Program 

sustainable, protect Borrowers, address 

weaknesses identified by OIG, provide 

clarity for new and existing Direct 

Guarantee and Non-Direct Guarantee 

Lenders, and reduce unreasonable claim 

payment requests from Servicers Many 

of the procedures and policy proposed 

by the proposed rule adopt industry 

standards and best practices and do not 

differ from existing HUD guidance or 

current practice within the Section 184 

Program, which are often documented 

in HUD guidance such as ‘‘PIH Notices’’ 

and ‘‘Dear Lender Letters’’. 

Aggregate Costs and Benefits 

Executive Order 12866, as amended, 

requires the agency to provide its best 

estimate of the combined aggregate costs 

and benefits of all regulations included 

in the agency’s Regulatory Plan that will 

be pursued in FY 2022. HUD expects 

that neither the total economic costs nor 

the total efficiency gains will exceed 

$100 million. Expanding oversight, 

improving loan origination quality, 

enhancing loss mitigation and 

foreclosure prevention, and 

implementing new claims procedures 

will all help to ensure the fiscal stability 

of the Section 184 Loan Guarantee 

Fund. While most of the requirements 

and policies in the proposed regulations 

mirror existing practices within the 

Program, some are expected to have a 

marginal economic impact on 

mortgagees, Tribes, and borrowers. 

These impacts could impose slightly 

greater administrative costs on 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9399 

participating lenders and shift some risk 

from the Fund to participating lenders. 

Statement of Need 

Since its inception, the number of 

loans guaranteed under the Section 184 

Program has significantly increased. At 

the same time, the program regulations 

have never been substantially revised. 

This rule helps to address housing 

challenges that Native American 

households continue to face, 

particularly: overcrowding and a lack of 

affordable housing in tribal areas; and 

access to mortgage credit outside of 

tribal area. 

In 2015, the OIG recommended that 

HUD develop and implement policies 

and procedures for monitoring and 

evaluating the Section 184 Program, 

standardize monthly delinquency 

reports, deny payments to lenders for 

claims on loans that have material 

underwriting deficiencies, take 

enforcement actions against certain 

lenders, and ensure that only 

underwriters that are approved by HUD 

are underwriting Section 184 loans. 

This rule provides additional structure 

to the Section 184 Program and is part 

of the OIG’s corrective action plan. 

Alternatives: An alternative to 

promulgating this rule would be to 

maintain HUD’s existing regulations and 

practices concerning the Program. 

However, doing so would ignore the 

OIG’s recommendations and pose a 

greater risk to the Section 184 Loan 

Guarantee Fund and the Program, as 

demand for the Program has 

significantly increased since its 

inception. 

Risks: This rule could slightly 

increase the administrative costs for 

lenders that participate in the Program 

and dissuade some lenders from 

participating in the Program. However, 

in the long-term, enhanced loan 

origination and loss mitigation and 

foreclosure prevention options will help 

to strengthen the vitality of the Program; 

thus, making the Program more 

attractive for lenders. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .............. 12/21/2022 87 FR 78324 

NPRM Comment Period 

End.

3/17/2023 

Final Rule ........ 03/00/2024 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: No. 

Federalism Affected: No. 

Energy Affected: No. 

International Impacts: No. 

BILLING CODE 4210–67–P 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF 

THE INTERIOR 

Fall 2023 Regulatory Plan 

Introduction 

The U.S. Department of the Interior 

(Department) is the principal steward of 

our Nation’s public lands and resources, 

including many of our cultural 

treasures. The Department serves as 

trustee to Native Americans, Alaska 

Natives, and Federally Recognized 

Tribes and is responsible for our 

ongoing relationships with the Island 

Territories under U.S. jurisdiction and 

the freely associated States. Among the 

Department’s many responsibilities is 

managing more than 500 million surface 

acres of Federal land, which constitutes 

approximately 20 percent of the 

Nation’s land area, as well as 

approximately 700 million subsurface 

acres of Federal mineral estate, and 

more than 2.5 billion acres of 

submerged lands on the Outer 

Continental Shelf (OCS). 

In addition, the Department protects 

and recovers endangered species; 

protects natural, historic, and cultural 

resources; provides scientific and other 

information about those resources; and 

manages water projects that are an 

essential lifeline and economic engine 

for many communities. 

Hundreds of millions of people visit 

Department-managed lands each year to 

take advantage of a wide range of 

recreational pursuits—including 

camping, hiking, hunting, fishing, and 

various other forms of outdoor 

recreation—and to learn about our 

Nation’s history. Each of these activities 

supports local communities and their 

economies. The Department also 

provides access to Federal lands and 

offshore areas for the development of 

energy, minerals, and other natural 

resources that generate billions of 

dollars in revenue. 

In short, the Department plays a 

central role in how the United States 

stewards its public lands, ensures 

environmental protections, pursues 

environmental justice, honors the 

nation-to-nation relationship with 

Tribes and the special relationships 

with other Indigenous people and the 

insular areas. 

Regulatory and Deregulatory Priorities 

To help advance the Secretary of the 

Interior’s (Secretary) commitment to 

honoring the Nation’s trust 

responsibilities and to conserve and 

manage the Nation’s natural resources 

and cultural heritage, the Department’s 

regulatory and deregulatory priorities in 

the coming year will focus on: 

• Tackling the Climate Crisis, 

Strengthening Climate Resiliency, and 

Facilitating the Transition to Renewable 

Energy; 

• Upholding Trust Responsibilities to 

Federally Recognized American Indian 

and Alaska Native Tribes, Restoring 

Tribal Lands, and Protecting Natural 

and Cultural Resources, Advancing 

Equity and Supporting Underserved 

Communities; and 

• Investing in Healthy Lands, Waters, 

and Local Economies and Strengthening 

Conservation of the Nation’s Lands, 

Waters, and Wildlife. 

• Promoting Equitable and 

Meaningful Participation in the 

Regulatory Process 

Tackling the Climate Crisis, 

Strengthening Climate Resiliency, and 

Facilitating the Transition to Renewable 

Energy 

The Biden-Harris administration 

remains committed to combatting 

climate change and reducing 

greenhouse gas emissions while 

improving public health, protecting the 

environment, and ensuring access to 

clean air and water. Under this 

administration, the Department has 

been a key leader in tackling the climate 

crises. Pursuant to Executive Order 

(E.O.) 13990 ‘‘Protecting Public Health 

and the Environment and Restoring 

Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis,’’ 

(signed on Jan. 20, 2021) and E.O. 

14008, ‘‘Tackling the Climate Crisis at 

Home and Abroad,’’ (signed January 27, 

2021), the Department has advanced 

multiple policy and regulatory efforts to 

reduce climate pollution; improve and 

increase adaptation and resilience to the 

impacts of drought, wildfire, and 

extreme weather; address current and 

historic environmental injustice; protect 

public health; and conserve 

Department-managed lands and waters. 

The historic Infrastructure Investment 

and Jobs Act of 2021 (BIL) and the 

Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), which 

President Biden signed respectively on 

November 15, 2021, and August 16, 

2022, will enable transformational 

outcomes on these clean energy and 

resilience priorities while driving the 

creation of good-paying union jobs. In 

referring to the BIL, Secretary Haaland 

said, ‘‘The Interior Department is hard 

at work to deliver these critical 

investments from the President’s 

Investing in America agenda into the 

hands of American communities as 

quick as we can, and we’re making 

tremendous progress.’’ 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9400 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

In accordance with E.O.s 13990 and 

14008, as well as E.O. 14052, 

‘‘Implementation of the Infrastructure 

Investment and Jobs Act,’’ (signed on 

Nov. 15, 2021), several bureaus within 

the Department are pursuing regulatory 

actions to implement these 

administration priorities, including 

steps toincrease renewable energy 

production by improving siting and 

permitting processes on public lands 

and in offshore waters. 

The Department is committed to fully 

facilitating the development of 

renewable energy on public lands and 

waters, as well as supporting tribal and 

territorial efforts to develop renewable 

energy, including deploying 30 

gigawatts (GW) of offshore wind by 2030 

and 25GW of onshore renewable energy 

by 2025. The Department will meet 

these ambitious goals while also 

ensuring appropriate protection of 

public lands, waters, and biodiversity 

and creating good jobs. As Secretary 

Haaland has stated, ‘‘The Department of 

the Interior continues to make 

significant progress in our efforts to spur 

a clean energy revolution, strengthen 

and decarbonize the nation’s economy, 

and help communities transition to a 

clean energy future.’’ 

As part of these ongoing efforts, the 

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management’s 

(BOEM) most important regulatory 

initiative is focused on expanding 

offshore wind energy’s role in 

strengthening U.S. energy security and 

independence, creating jobs, providing 

benefits to local communities, and 

further developing the U.S. economy. 

The BOEM’s renewable energy program 

has matured over the past 10 years, a 

time in which BOEM has conducted 

numerous auctions, and issued and 

managed multiple commercial leases. 

Based on this experience, BOEM has 

identified multiple opportunities to 

update its regulations to better facilitate 

the development of renewable energy 

resources and to promote U.S. energy 

independence. On January 30, 2023 (88 

FR 5968), BOEM proposed a rule, the 

‘‘Renewable Energy Modernization 

Rule’’ (1010–AE04). As proposed, the 

rule facilitates development of offshore 

renewable energy and promotes U.S. 

energy independence in a safe and 

environmentally sound manner that 

provides a fair return to U.S. taxpayers. 

Similarly, the Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM) plans to update its 

regulations for onshore rights-of- way, 

leasing, and operations related to all 

activities associated with renewable 

energy. On June 16, 2023 (88 FR 39726), 

the BLM proposed the rule, ‘‘Rights-ofway, Leasing, and Operations for 

Renewable Energy’’ (1004–AE78). This 

rule aims to improve permitting 

activities and processes to facilitate 

increased renewable energy production 

on public lands. 

To advance the deployment of clean 

energy infrastructure while also meeting 

obligations to conserve habitats and 

wildlife, the Department will improve 

permitting frameworks for bird 

conservation. On September 30, 2022 

(87 FR 59598), the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (FWS) proposed the 

‘‘Eagle Permits; Incidental Take’’ rule 

(1018–BE70) to revise the regulations 

authorizing eagle incidental take and 

eagle nest take permits to increase the 

efficiency and effectiveness of 

permitting, facilitate and improve 

compliance, and increase the 

conservation benefit for eagles. The 

FWS plans to finalize this rule in 

December 2023. 

The FWS will also propose the 

‘‘Migratory Bird Permits; Authorizing 

the Incidental Take of Migratory Birds’’ 

rule (1018–BF71), to clarify the MBTA’s 

prohibitions on taking and killing 

migratory birds and consider 

establishing a straightforward process to 

secure authorizations for otherwise 

prohibited take of migratory birds. 

The BIL enables the Department to 

establish important regulations 

governing carbon transportation and 

storage on the OCS. The orderly 

implementation of negative emissions 

technologies, such as carbon capture, 

utilization, and storage, is necessary to 

reduce hard-to-abate emissions from the 

industrial sector, which emits nearly 25 

percent of all carbon dioxide released 

into the atmosphere in the United 

States. In accordance with the BIL, the 

Bureau of Safety and Environmental 

Enforcement (BSEE) and BOEM are 

drafting a joint proposed rule that 

would address the transportation and 

geologic sequestration aspects of carbon 

storage development on the OCS, 

including leasing, geological, and 

geophysical exploration for appropriate 

storage reservoirs; environmental plans 

and mitigations; facility and 

infrastructure design and installation; 

injection operations; long-term site 

stewardship (i.e., monitoring and 

response); financial assurance; and 

safety. BSEE and BOEM plan to publish 

this proposed rule in December 2023. 

The Department is also committed to 

modernizing its oversight of oil and gas 

leasing and development to help 

address the climate and biodiversity 

crises and to advance environmental 

justice. In November 2021, the 

Department released its report on 

Federal oil and gas leasing and 

permitting practices, following a review 

of onshore and offshore oil and gas 

programs called for in E.O. 14008. The 

report identified significant reforms 

needed to ensure the programs provide 

a fair return to taxpayers, discourage 

speculation, hold operators responsible 

for remediation, and create a more 

inclusive and just approach to managing 

public lands and waters. The 

Department’s ‘‘Report on the Federal Oil 

and Gas Leasing Program’’ makes a 

number of specific recommendations to 

restore balance to these programs, 

including adjusting royalty rates, 

pursuing adequate financial assurance 

for decommissioning liabilities, and 

prioritizing leasing in areas with known 

resource potential while avoiding 

conflicts with other uses. 

This past year, the Department 

proposed regulations to implement 

important reforms, including the 

report’s recommendations and reforms 

included in the IRA regarding oil and 

gas resources on public lands. On Nov. 

30, 2022 (87 FR 73588), the BLM 

published the proposed rule ‘‘Waste 

Prevention, Production Subject to 

Royalties, and Resource Conservation 43 

CFR parts 3160 and 3170’’ (1004–AE79), 

known as the Waste Prevention Rule. 

On July 24, 2023 (88 FR 47562), the 

BLM published the proposed rule 

‘‘Fluid Mineral Leases and Leasing 

Process’’ (1004–AE80), known as the 

Fluid Minerals Rule. The Waste 

Prevention Rule would prevent waste of 

Federal resources with an additional 

benefit of reducing methane emissions 

in the oil and gas sector. The Fluid 

Minerals Rule would incorporate many 

urgent fiscal and programmatic reforms 

included in the report and IRA, such as 

updating BLM’s process for leasing to 

ensure the protection and proper 

stewardship of the public lands, 

including potential climate and other 

impacts associated with oil and gas 

leasing activities. BLM will finalize 

these rules to ensure the responsible 

development of oil and gas on public 

lands. The BLM also plans to finalize a 

rule (1004–AE95) to govern the 

management of surface resources and 

Special Areas in the National Petroleum 

Reserve in Alaska. On September 8, 

2023, the BLM published the proposed 

rule ‘‘Management and Protection of the 

National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska’’ 

(88 FR 62025), which would improve 

upon the existing regulations’ 

procedures to balance oil and gas 

activities with the protection of surface 

resources in the NPR–A; assure 

maximum protection of Special Areas; 

and protect longstanding subsistence 

activities. 

On June 29, 2023, the BOEM 

published the proposed rule (1010– 

AE14) ‘‘Risk Management and Financial 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9401 

Assurance for OCS Lease and Grant 

Obligations’’ (88 FR 42136), which 

would better protect the American 

taxpayers from shouldering liability for 

the decommissioning of offshore oil and 

gas facilities. 

BSEE is furthering its mission to 

promote safety, protect the 

environment, and conserve resources 

offshore through vigorous regulatory 

oversight and enforcement in several 

rulemaking efforts. Among others, BSEE 

is working to update its regulations 

governing oil spills (1014–AA44), 

offshore pipelines (1014–AA45), and 

decommissioning requirements on the 

OCS (1014–AA53). 

Upholding Trust Responsibilities to 

Federally Recognized American Indian 

and Alaska Native Tribes Restoring 

Tribal Lands, and Protecting Natural 

and Cultural Resources 

Among the Department’s most 

important responsibilities is its 

commitment to honor the nation-tonation relationship between the Federal 

Government and Tribes. Secretary 

Haaland is strongly committed to 

strengthening how the Department 

carries out its trust responsibilities and 

to increasing economic development 

opportunities for Tribes and other 

historically underserved communities. 

To advance the Department’s trust 

responsibilities, the Bureau of Indian 

Affairs (BIA) has identified 

opportunities, following consultation 

and in close collaboration with Tribal 

governments, to promote Tribal 

economic growth and development, and 

provide clearer and more efficient 

processes for Tribes that are applying to 

place land into trust or enter into 

gaming compacts. For example, BIA is 

working to remove barriers to the 

development of renewable energy and 

other resources in Indian country. 

Deb Haaland stated, ‘‘Through 

President Biden’s Investing in America 

agenda, we’re launching a new program 

to electrify Indian Country to provide 

reliable, resilient energy that Tribes can 

rely on, and advance our work to tackle 

the climate crisis and build a clean 

energy future.’’ 

In consultation with Tribes, BIA 

engaged in efforts to update and 

improve its regulations governing how it 

manages land held in trust or in 

restricted status for Tribes and 

individual Indians. These efforts 

included improving the consultation 

process, identifying best practices, and 

strengthening relationships with Tribal 

governments. The BIA also launched a 

broader review to determine whether 

any regulatory reforms are needed to 

facilitate restoration of Tribal lands and 

safeguard natural and cultural 

resources. As a result of these 

consultations and this review, BIA is 

preparing a proposed rule, ‘‘Agricultural 

Leasing of Indian Land,’’ which would 

revise the regulations governing leases 

of Indian land for agricultural purposes 

found at 25 CFR part 162 (1076–AF66). 

This proposed rule would streamline 

how leases are obtained and increase 

the agricultural usage of Indian land. 

In December of 2022, BIA published 

two proposed rules, one regarding the 

fee-to-trust process and one regarding 

Class III gaming compacts (87 FR 74334, 

87 FR 74916). The updated regulations 

will provide clearer and more efficient 

processes for Tribes that are applying to 

place land into trust or enter into 

gaming compacts. The land acquisitions 

rule (1076–AF71) will lead to a more 

efficient, less cumbersome, and less 

expensive fee-to-trust process by 

clarifying the Secretary of the Interior’s 

authority to take land in trust for Tribes, 

reducing processing time, and 

establishing clear decision-making 

criteria. The rule also places an express 

focus on taking land into trust for 

conservation purposes. The Class III 

gaming rule (1076–AF68) will provide 

clarity on the criteria the Department 

would consider when deciding whether 

to approve these compacts by clarifying 

boundaries as to allowable topics of 

negotiation, better defining key terms, 

and clearly outlining when the 

Department must review a gaming 

compact. BIA plans to finalize these 

rules in February 2024. 

The Department is also committed to 

improving regulations meant to protect 

sacred and cultural resources. To this 

end, the Assistant Secretary for Indian 

Affairs and the Assistant Secretary for 

Fish and Wildlife and Parks are working 

with the National Park Service (NPS) to 

incorporate recommendations from 

consultation with Tribes on updates to 

regulations implementing the Native 

American Graves and Repatriation Act 

(NAGPRA), 43 CFR part 10 (1024– 

AE19). This proposed rule, the ‘‘Native 

American Graves Protection and 

Repatriation Act Systematic Process for 

Disposition and Repatriation of Native 

American Human Remains, Funerary 

Objects, Sacred Objects, and Objects of 

Cultural Patrimony,’’ which published 

on October 18, 2022 (87 FR 63202), 

would provide for the disposition and 

repatriation of Native American human 

remains, funerary objects, sacred 

objects, and objects of cultural 

patrimony. The updates are intended to 

simplify and improve the regulatory 

process for repatriation, rectify 

provisions in the current regulations 

that inhibit and effectively prevent 

respectful repatriation, and remove the 

burden on Indian Tribes and Native 

Hawaiian organizations to initiate the 

process and add a requirement for 

museums and Federal agencies to 

complete the process. The Department 

expects to publish a final rule titled 

‘‘Native American Graves Protection 

and Repatriation Act Systematic Process 

for Disposition and Repatriation of 

Native American Human Remains, 

Funerary Objects, Sacred Objects, and 

Objects of Cultural Patrimony,’’ by the 

end of 2023. 

Advancing Equity and Supporting 

Underserved Communities 

The Biden-Harris administration and 

Secretary Haaland recognize and 

support the goals of advancing equity 

and addressing the needs of 

underserved communities. In January 

2021, the President signed E.O. 13985, 

‘‘Advancing Racial Equity and Support 

for Underserved Communities Through 

the Federal Government.’’ Additionally, 

On February 17, 2022, Secretary 

Haaland issued S.O. 3406, 

‘‘Establishment of a Diversity, Equity, 

Inclusion and Accessibility Council.’’ In 

response to E.O. 13985 and the S.O. 

3406, the Department issued its Equity 

Action Plan on April 14, 2022. The 

Equity Action Plan is a key part of the 

Department’s efforts to implement E.O. 

13985, which calls on Federal agencies 

to advance equity by identifying and 

addressing barriers to equal opportunity 

that underserved communities may face 

as a result of Government policies and 

programs. 

On February 16, 2023, the President 

signed E.O. 14091, ‘‘Further Advancing 

Racial Equity and Support for 

Underserved Communities Through the 

Federal Government.’’ This order builds 

upon the previous equity-related 

Executive orders by extending and 

strengthening equity-advancing 

requirements for agencies, and it 

positions agencies to deliver better 

outcomes for the American people. 

On April 6, 2023, the President signed 

E.O. 14094, ‘‘Modernizing Regulatory 

Reform.’’ Section 2 of this E.O. directs 

agencies to promote equitable and 

meaningful opportunities for public 

participation in the rulemaking process 

by a range of interested or affected 

parties, including underserved 

communities. 

In Fiscal Year (FY) 2024, the 

Department will undertake a number of 

regulatory actions that will assist people 

who are members of underserved 

communities by removing barriers, and 

strengthening equity-advancing 

requirements. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9402 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

The BLM (1004–AE60), FWS (1018– 

BD78), and NPS (1024–AE75) are 

working on right-of-way (ROW) rules 

that would streamline and improve 

efficiencies in the permitting process for 

electric transmission, distribution 

facilities, and broadband facilities. The 

BLM published their proposed rule 

‘‘Update of the Communications Uses 

Program, Cost Recovery Fee Schedules, 

and Section 512 of FLPMA for Rightsof-Way,’’ on November 7, 2022 (87 FR 

67306). The FWS published their 

revised proposed rule ‘‘Streamlining 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Permitting of Rights-of-Way Across 

National Wildlife Refuges and Other 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceAdministered Lands’’ on July 24, 2023 

(88 FR 47442). These rules should result 

in increased services such as broadband 

connectivity with resulting benefits to 

underserved communities and visitors 

to Departmental lands and promote 

good governance. These proposed rules 

are expected to implement several 

provisions of the BIL. 

Investing in Healthy Lands, Waters, and 

Local Economies and Strengthening 

Conservation of the Nation’s Lands, 

Waters, and Wildlife 

The Department’s regulatory agenda 

will continue to advance the goals of 

investing in healthy lands, waters, and 

local economies across the country. 

These regulatory efforts, which are 

consistent with the Biden-Harris 

administration’s America the Beautiful 

initiative as well as the BIL and IRA 

which provide the Department with 

historic resilience and restoration 

investments, include expanding 

opportunities for outdoor recreation, 

such as hunting and fishing, for all 

Americans; enhancing conservation 

stewardship; and improving the 

management of species and their 

habitat. In a priority effort to advance 

these goals, the BLM published a 

proposed rule on April 3, 2023 (88 FR 

19583), ‘‘Conservation and Landscape 

Health (1004–AE92),’’ to advance the 

bureaus’ mission to manage the public 

lands for multiple use and sustained 

yield by prioritizing the health and 

resilience of ecosystems across those 

lands. To ensure that health and 

resilience, the proposed rule provides 

that the BLM will protect intact 

landscapes, restore degraded habitat, 

and make informed management 

decisions based on science and data. 

Through this regulatory plan, the 

Department affirms the importance of 

the ESA on the 50th anniversary of its 

passage in providing a broad and 

flexible framework to facilitate 

conservation with a variety of 

stakeholders. The Department, through 

FWS, is committed to working with 

diverse Federal, Tribal, State, and 

industry partners not only to protect 

and recover America’s imperiled 

wildlife, but to ensure the ESA is 

helping meet 21st century challenges. 

In FY 2023, FWS published numerous 

proposed and final rules to continue 

improving implementation of the ESA 

so that it is clearly and consistently 

applied, helps recover listed species, 

and provides the maximum degree of 

certainty possible to all parties. 

Consistent with the steadfast 

commitment to allowing access to our 

National Wildlife Refuges (NWRs) and 

continued efforts to provide hunting 

and fishing opportunities, the FWS 

opened, for the first time, two NWRs 

that had been closed to hunting and 

sport fishing. In addition, FWS opened 

or expanded hunting or sport fishing at 

16 NWRs and added pertinent stationspecific regulations for other NWRs that 

pertain to migratory game bird hunting, 

upland game hunting, big game hunting, 

or sport fishing for the 2022–2023 

season. The FWS also changed existing 

station-specific regulations to reduce 

regulatory burden on the public and 

increase access for hunters and anglers 

on FWS lands and waters. FWS 

published a proposed rule on June 23, 

2023 (88 FR 41058), ‘‘National Wildlife 

Refuge System; 2023–2024 StationSpecific Hunting and Sport Fishing 

Regulations,’’ that would expand 

hunting opportunities on three NWRs. 

Per section 2 of E.O. 13990 and the 

‘‘Fact Sheet: List of Agency Actions for 

Review,’’ the Departments of Commerce 

and the Interior (Departments) initiated 

a review of the August 27, 2019, final 

rules, ‘‘Endangered and Threatened 

Wildlife and Plants; Regulations for 

Listing Endangered and Threatened 

Species and Designating Critical 

Habitat,’’ (1018–BF95) (84 FR 45020) 

that revised the regulations for adding 

and removing species from the Lists of 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants and the procedures for 

designating critical habitat as well as 

‘‘Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Regulations for Interagency 

Cooperation,’’ (1018–BC87) (84 FR 

44976) that revised portions of the 

regulations that implement section 7 of 

the ESA, as amended. In addition, the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service initiated 

a review of the August 27, 2019, final 

rule ‘‘Endangered and Threatened 

Wildlife and Plants; Regulations for 

Prohibition to Threatened Wildlife and 

Plants,’’ (1018–BC97) (84 FR 44753) that 

removed default protections for 

threatened species under section 4 of 

the ESA. On July 5, 2022, the 2019 rules 

were vacated and remanded by the U.S. 

District Court for the Northern District 

of California. 

In response to the court order, the 

Departments proposed a new 

rulemaking for FY 2023, ‘‘Endangered 

and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 

Listing and Designating Critical 

Habitat,’’ which published on June 22, 

2023 (88 FR, 40764); ‘‘Endangered and 

Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 

Revision of Regulations for Interagency 

Cooperation’’ (1018–BF96), which 

published on June 22, 2023 (88 FR 

40753); and ‘‘Endangered and 

Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 

Regulations Pertaining to Endangered 

and Threatened Wildlife and Plants’’ 

(1018–BF88), which published on June 

22, 2023 (88 FR 40753). The 

Departments will work to finalize these 

rules in 2024. 

Under section 4(d) of the Endangered 

Species Act (ESA), FWS plans to 

promulgate several species-specific 

rules to protect threatened species. Of 

particular note, the FWS issued a 

proposed rule on November 17, 2022, 

(87 FR 68975) that would revise the rule 

for the African elephant (Loxodonta 

africana) promulgated under section 

4(d) of the ESA (1018–BG66). The 

proposed rule intends to increase 

domestic protection for African 

elephants in light of the recent rise in 

global trade of live African elephants 

from range countries by establishing 

ESA permit requirements and 

enhancement standards for trade in live 

African elephants. This rulemaking 

action would also clarify the existing 

enhancement requirement during our 

evaluation of the application for a 

permit to import African elephant sporthunted trophies and incorporate a 

Party’s designation under the 

Convention on International Trade in 

Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and 

Flora (CITES) National Legislation 

Project into the decision-making process 

for the import of live African elephants, 

African elephant sport-hunted trophies, 

and African elephant parts and products 

other than ivory. The Department 

expects to publish a final rule titled 

‘‘Revision to the Section 4(d) Rule for 

the African Elephant’’ in January 2024. 

The NPS is also pursuing several 

regulatory actions under the 

Department’s direction and in 

accordance with these goals. These 

regulatory actions would authorize 

recreational activities, such as off-road 

vehicle use, motorized vessels, and 

bicycling, within appropriate, 

designated areas of certain National 

Park System units. These regulations 

would promote appropriate visitor use 

while supporting long-term preservation 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9403 

of park resources and quality visitor 

experiences. 

Promoting Equitable and Meaningful 

Participation in the Regulatory Process 

In accordance with E.O. 14094, 

‘‘Modernizing Regulatory Review,’’ and 

the OMB Memorandum ‘‘Broadening 

Public Participation and Community 

Engagement in the Regulatory Process’’ 

(July 19, 2023), the Department is 

committed to informing their regulatory 

actions through meaningful and 

equitable opportunities for public input 

by a range of interested or affected 

parties, including underserved 

communities. 

For example, to inform the 

development of and increase awareness 

of the proposed rulemaking for Carbon 

Sequestration on the OCS (RIN 1082– 

AA04), BOEM and BSEE coordinated an 

extensive outreach strategy to facilitate 

discussions with representatives from 

the U.S. interagency, foreign counterpart 

agencies, Tribal Nations, state agencies, 

industry, academia, non-governmental 

organizations, environmental justice 

groups, labor organizations, and 

international organizations. 

The goals of the outreach strategy 

were to (1) Facilitate the Bureaus’ access 

to information and perspectives related 

to offshore carbon sequestration in 

support of developing a robust and 

effective rule in a timely manner, and 

(2) foster relationships with a range of 

stakeholders that could provide value to 

the bureaus well beyond the rulemaking 

effort. The bureaus began implementing 

the outreach strategy in November 2021, 

that includes the identification of 

representatives from each category 

listed above, introductory and follow-up 

written exchanges, coordination of 

listening sessions and informational 

sharing meetings, and initiation of 

government-to-government engagements 

with Tribal Nations. 

In another example, on June 22, 2023, 

the FWS and the National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration’s National 

Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), 

together the ‘‘Services,’’ proposed two 

rules to improve and strengthen 

implementation of the Endangered 

Species Act (ESA) (RINs 1018–BF95 and 

1018–BF96; 88 FR 40764 and 88 FR 

40753), and FWS published a separate 

but related action (RIN 1018–BF88; 88 

FR 40742). In accordance with E.O. 

13990 (Protecting Public Health and the 

Environment and Restoring Science To 

Tackle the Climate Crisis), these rules 

will ensure the ESA effectively 

addresses 21st century conservation 

challenges, such as climate change. 

The Services made a concerted effort 

to engage with the public to inform 

these rules. With publication of the 

proposed rules, the Services issued a 

news release with a link to a website 

with additional information about the 

rules as well as a recording of an 

informational webinar. Additionally, in 

coordination with Federal and State 

agency association partners we reached 

out via direct email to hundreds of 

stakeholders with specific registration 

instructions for virtual information 

sessions. The Services subsequently 

delivered a series of six live virtual 

informational sessions to Federal 

agencies, State agencies, federally 

recognized Tribes, Native Hawaiian 

community leaders, non-governmental 

organizations and conservation partners, 

and industry groups. In total, more than 

500 people attended the 6 information 

sessions. Frequently asked questions 

and a recording of the presentation can 

be viewed on the website https://

fws.gov/project/endangered-species-actregulation-revisions. 

The BLM published a proposed rule, 

‘‘Conservation and Landscape Health,’’ 

on April 3, 2023, (1004–AE92, 88 FR 

19583) that provides tools for the BLM 

to improve the resilience of public lands 

in the face of a changing climate; 

conserve important wildlife habitat and 

intact landscapes; plan for development; 

and better recognize unique cultural and 

natural resources on public lands. The 

proposed rule directly responds to the 

growing need to better manage public 

lands, waters, and wildlife in the face of 

devastating wildfires, historic droughts, 

and severe storms that communities are 

experiencing across the West, as well as 

to deepen BLM’s collaborative work 

with communities, States and Tribes to 

support responsible development of 

critical minerals, energy and other 

resources. The BLM held two virtual 

and three in-person meetings to provide 

detailed information about the proposal. 

Members of the public had an 

opportunity to ask questions that 

facilitate a deeper understanding of the 

proposal. BLM also created a separate 

web page detailing specific details on 

the rule: Public Lands Rule | Bureau of 

Land Management (blm.gov). 

Bureaus and Offices Within the 

Department of the Interior 

The following is an overview of some 

of the major regulatory and deregulatory 

priorities of the Department’s Bureaus 

and Offices. 

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

The BIA enhances the quality of life, 

promotes economic opportunity, and 

protects and improves the trust assets of 

approximately 1.9 million American 

Indians, Indian Tribes, and Alaska 

Natives. The BIA maintains a 

government-to-government relationship 

with the 574 Federally Recognized 

Indian Tribes. The BIA also administers 

and manages 55 million acres of surface 

land and 57 million acres of subsurface 

minerals held in trust by the United 

States for American Indians and Indian 

Tribes. 

Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions 

In the coming year, BIA will prioritize 

the following rulemakings: 

Procedures for Federal 

Acknowledgment of Indian Tribes 

(1076–AF67) 

This proposed rule would respond to 

recent Federal court decisions holding 

that the Department did not adequately 

explain its regulations prohibiting 

previously denied petitioners for 

Federal acknowledgment from 

petitioning again. The Department 

sought Tribal government input through 

communication under Executive Order 

13175 criteria and the Department’s 

consultation policy on meaningful 

communication and collaboration with 

tribal officials. The Department held 

Consultation sessions with federally 

recognized Indian Tribes and a listening 

session for present, former, and 

prospective petitioners. 

Appeals From Administrative Actions 

(1076–AF64) 

The proposed rule published on 

December 1, 2022 (87 FR 73688). This 

final rule will clarify the processes for 

appeals of actions taken by officials in 

the Office of the Assistant Secretary— 

Indian Affairs, BIA, Bureau of Indian 

Education, and Office of the Special 

Trustee for American Indians 

(collectively, Indian Affairs). The rule 

advances the purposes of E.O. 14058 to 

effectively reduce administrative 

burdens, simplify both public-facing 

and internal processes to improve 

efficiency, and empower the Federal 

workforce to solve problems. The rule 

streamlines the process for appeals of 

Tribal government representative 

decisions, to ensure the continued 

government-to-government relations 

with the appropriate Tribal leadership is 

not unduly interrupted. The Department 

received Tribal government input 

through two consultation sessions 

(February 17, 2022, and February 22, 

2022) held under Executive Order 13175 

criteria and the Department’s policy on 

meaningful communication and 

collaboration with Tribal officials. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9404 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Mining of the Osage Mineral Estate for 

Oil and Gas (1076–AF59) 

The proposed rule published on 

January 13, 2023 (88 FR 2430). This 

final rule will revise the regulations in 

25 CFR part 226 to strengthen the BIA’s 

management of the Osage Mineral Estate 

and improve accounting and production 

measurement standards; offer 

consistency in production valuation; 

address inadequate bonding; support 

the implementation of electronic 

reporting systems; enhance 

accountability; clarify lessees’ 

obligations; prevent waste; promote safe 

and environmentally sound operations; 

and protect resource values. The 

Department received Tribal government 

input through consultation sessions 

held pursuant to Executive Order 13175 

criteria and the Department’s policy on 

meaningful communication and 

collaboration with Tribal officials. 

Land Acquisitions (1076–AF71) 

The proposed rule published on 

December 5, 2022 (87 FR 74334). This 

final rule will advance the purposes of 

E.O. 13985 and address the 

Department’s jurisdiction to acquire 

land in trust for certain Tribes, 

streamline acquisitions on existing 

reservations, clarify Tribal jurisdiction, 

and promote Tribal conservation of 

lands. The Department received Tribal 

government input through consultations 

and listening sessions held under 

Executive Order 13175 criteria and the 

Department’s policy on meaningful 

communication and collaboration with 

Tribal officials. 

Class III Tribal State Gaming Compact 

Process (1076–AF68) 

The proposed rule published on 

December 6, 2022 (87 FR 74916). This 

final rule will provide States and Tribes 

with a better understanding of how the 

Department reviews their compacts by 

codifying longstanding Departmental 

policy and interpretations of existing 

case law. The Department received 

Tribal government input through 

consultations and listening sessions 

held under Executive Order 13175 

criteria and the Department’s policy on 

meaningful communication and 

collaboration with Tribal officials. 

Agricultural Leasing of Indian Land 

(1076–AF66) 

This proposed rule would update 

provisions addressing leasing of trust or 

restricted land (Indian land) for 

agricultural purposes to reflect updates 

that have been made to business and 

residential leasing provisions and 

address outdated provisions. The 

Department received Tribal government 

input through consultations and 

listening sessions held under Executive 

Order 13175 criteria and the 

Department’s policy on meaningful 

communication and collaboration with 

Tribal officials. 

Indian Arts and Crafts (1076–AF69) 

This proposed rule would modernize 

the Indian Arts and Crafts Board 

regulations to better meet the objectives 

of the Indian Arts and Crafts Act to 

promote the economic welfare of the 

Indian Tribes and Indian individuals 

through the development of Indian arts 

and crafts and the expansion of the 

market for the products of Indian art 

and craftsmanship. The Department is 

seeking Tribal government input 

through communication under 

Executive Order 13175 criteria and the 

Department’s policy on meaningful 

collaboration with Tribal officials. 

Bureau of Land Management 

The BLM manages more than 245 

million acres of public land, known as 

the National System of Public Lands, 

primarily located in 12 Western States, 

including Alaska. The BLM also 

administers 700 million acres of subsurface mineral estate throughout the 

Nation. The agency’s mission is to 

sustain the health, diversity, and 

productivity of America’s public lands 

for the use and enjoyment of present 

and future generations. 

Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions 

In the coming year, the BLM will 

prioritize the following rulemaking 

actions and highlight its efforts under 

E.O. 14094: 

Update of the Communications Uses 

Program, Right-of-Way Cost Recovery 

Fee Schedules and Section 512 of 

FLPMA for Rights-of-Way (1004–AE60) 

The BLM published its proposed rule 

on November 7, 2022 (87 FR 67306). 

This final rule will streamline and 

improve efficiencies in the 

communications uses program, update 

the cost recovery fee schedules for ROW 

work activities, and include provisions 

governing the development and 

approval of operating plans and 

agreements for ROWs for electric 

transmission and distribution facilities. 

Communications uses, such as 

broadband, are a subset of ROW 

activities authorized under FLPMA, as 

amended. Cost recovery fees apply to 

most ROW activities authorized under 

either FLPMA or the Mineral Leasing 

Act of 1920, as amended. This proposed 

rule would also implement vegetation 

management requirements included in 

the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 

2018 (codified at 43 U.S.C. 1772) to 

address fire risk from and to powerline 

ROWs on public lands and national 

forests. The regulatory amendments 

would also codify statutory 

requirements regarding review and 

approval of utilities maintenance plans, 

liability limitations, and definitions of 

hazard trees and emergency conditions. 

The proposed rule was highlighted on 

the BLM’s website with links to 

comment options, FAQs, and direct 

links to the rule. We plan to do the same 

for the final rule. 

Rights-of-Way, Leasing and Operations 

for Renewable Energy (1004–AE78) 

The BLM published this proposed 

rule on June 16, 2023 (88 FR 39726). 

This final rule will revise BLM’s 

regulations for ROWs, leasing, and 

operations related to all activities 

associated with renewable energy. The 

Energy Act of 2020 and E.O. 14008 

prioritize the Department’s need to 

improve permitting activities and 

processes to facilitate increased 

renewable energy production on public 

lands. BLM held three virtual 

informational meetings over the course 

of the comment period. Additionally, 

the rule was highlighted on the BLM’s 

website with links to comment options, 

FAQs, and direct links to the rule. 

Waste Prevention, Production Subject to 

Royalties, and Resource Conservation 

(1004–AE79) 

This proposed rule published on 

November 30, 2022 (87 FR 73588). The 

final rule will update BLM’s regulations 

governing the waste of natural gas 

through venting, flaring, and leaks on 

onshore Federal and Indian oil and gas 

leases. The proposed rule would 

address the priorities associated with 

E.O. 14008. The proposed rule was 

highlighted on the BLM’s website with 

links to comment options, FAQs, and 

direct links to the rule. We plan to do 

the same for the final rule. 

Fluid Mineral Leases and Leasing 

Process (1004–AE80) 

This proposed rule published on July 

24, 2023 (88 FR 47562). This final rule 

will revise BLM’s oil and gas regulations 

to update the fees, rents, royalties, and 

bonding requirements related to oil and 

gas leasing, development, and 

production. The final rule will also 

update BLM’s process for leasing to 

ensure the protection and proper 

stewardship of the public lands, 

including potential climate and other 

impacts associated with oil and gas 

activities. This rule will implement 

provisions of the IRA regarding oil and 

gas resources on public lands. BLM will 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9405 

hold five informational meetings (Two 

virtual, three in-person) over the course 

of the comment period. Additionally, 

the rule was highlighted on the BLM’s 

website with links to comment options, 

FAQs, and direct links to the rule. We 

plan to do the same for the final rule. 

Closure and Restriction Orders (1004– 

AE89) 

This proposed rule would help BLM 

to better protect persons, property, and 

public lands and resources by allowing 

the agency to close or restrict the use of 

public lands in a timelier manner. The 

rule would also make BLM’s regulations 

more consistent with other Federal land 

management agencies’ closure and 

restriction authorities. The proposed 

rule was highlighted on the BLM’s 

website with links to comment options, 

FAQs, and direct links to the rule. We 

plan to do the same for the final rule. 

Conservation and Landscape Health 

(1004–AE92) 

On April 3, 2023, the BLM published 

a proposed rule (88 FR 19583) to clarify 

and support the principles of multiple 

use and sustained yield in the 

management of the public lands 

pursuant to FLPMA and other relevant 

authorities. This final rule will provide 

an overarching framework governing 

multiple resource areas to ensure land 

health and sustained yield. This rule 

affirms the important role of restoration 

and conservation actions in building 

and maintaining sustainable land 

management practices to ensure healthy 

and productive ecosystems for current 

and future generations. BLM held five 

informational meetings (Two virtual, 

three in-person) over the course of the 

comment period. Additionally, the rule 

was highlighted on the BLM’s website 

with links to comment options, FAQs, 

and direct links to the rule. 

Management and Protection of the 

National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska 

(1004–AE95) 

This final rule will assure maximum 

protection of Special Areas in the NPR– 

A pursuant to and consistent with the 

provisions of the Naval Petroleum 

Reserves Production Act of 1976 (90 

Stat. 303; 42 U.S.C. 6501 et seq.), Alaska 

National Interest Lands Conservation 

Act, and other applicable authorities. 

On September 8, 2023, the BLM 

published the proposed rule 

‘‘Management and Protection of the 

National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska’’ 

(88 FR 62025). The proposed rule was 

highlighted on the BLM’s website with 

links to comment options, FAQs, and 

direct links to the rule. Additionally, a 

number of listening sessions will occur. 

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management 

The mission of BOEM is to manage 

development of U.S. OCS energy and 

mineral resources in an environmentally 

and economically responsible way. In 

accordance with its statutory mandate 

under Outer Continental Shelf Lands 

Act (OCSLA), BOEM is committed to 

implementing its dual mission of 

promoting the expeditious and orderly 

development of the Nation’s energy 

resources while simultaneously 

protecting the marine, human, and 

coastal environment of the OCS State 

submerged lands and the coastal 

communities. Consistent with the policy 

outlined by the Biden-Harris 

administration in E.O. 14008, BOEM is 

reevaluating its programs related to the 

offshore development of energy and 

mineral resources. The BOEM is 

working with the Department to review 

options for expanding renewable energy 

production while evaluating alternatives 

to better protect the lands, waters, and 

biodiversity of species located within 

the U.S. exclusive economic zone. 

Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions 

In the coming year, BOEM will 

prioritize the following rulemaking 

actions: 

Renewable Energy Modernization Rule 

(1010–AE04) 

On January 30, 2023, the BOEM 

proposed the Renewable Energy 

Modernization Rule (88 FR 5968). As 

proposed, the rule would facilitate 

development of offshore renewable 

energy and promotes U.S. energy 

independence in a safe and 

environmentally sound manner that 

provides a fair return to U.S. taxpayers. 

This proposed rule contains reforms 

identified by BOEM and recommended 

by industry, including proposals for 

incremental funding of 

decommissioning accounts; more 

flexible geophysical and geotechnical 

survey submission requirements; 

streamlined approval of meteorological 

buoys; revised project verification 

procedures; and greater clarity regarding 

safety requirements. 

Risk Management and Financial 

Assurance for OCS Lease and Grant 

Obligations (1010–AE14) 

The BOEM has reconsidered the 

financial assurance policies expressed 

in the joint proposed rule (85 FR 65904) 

issued with BSEE (1082–AA02) and has 

determined that it would be appropriate 

to issue a new rule that will better 

protect the American taxpayers from 

shouldering liability for the 

decommissioning of offshore oil and gas 

facilities. On June 29, 2023, the BOEM 

published the Risk Management and 

Financial Assurance for OCS Lease and 

Grant Obligations (88 FR 42136), which 

proposed provisions that would ensure 

that facilities no longer needed for oil or 

gas exploration or development are shut 

down in a safe and environmentally 

responsible manner. The rule will 

modify the evaluation criteria for 

determining whether oil, gas and sulfur 

lessees, right-of-use and easement grant 

holders, and pipeline ROW grant 

holders may be required to provide 

bonds or other financial assurance, 

above the regulatorily prescribed 

amounts for base bonds, to ensure 

compliance with their OCS obligations. 

Carbon Sequestration (1082–AA04) 

In accordance with the BIL, BOEM 

and BSEE are working to jointly propose 

regulations governing carbon 

transportation and geologic 

sequestration aspects of a development, 

including leasing; siting of storage 

reservoirs; environmental plans and 

mitigations; facility and infrastructure 

design and installation; injection 

operations; monitoring; incident 

response; financial assurance; and 

safety. 

Protection of Marine Archaeological 

Resources (1010–AE11) 

On February 15, 2023, BOEM 

published a proposed rule (88 FR 9797) 

that would revise when lessees and 

operators would need to conduct 

archaeological surveys. The proposal 

put forward provisions that clarify when 

operators would submit an 

archaeological report with their 

applications and clarify the source and 

extent of the data utilized. 

Fitness To Operate Standards for Oil 

and Gas Operators and Lessees on the 

Outer Continental Shelf (1010–AE21) 

This proposed rule would enhance 

the Secretary’s stewardship over the 

OCS and offshore waters by providing 

regulations governing the 

disqualification of operators that have 

poor environmental or safety 

performance records. If not properly 

maintained and operated, oil and gas 

operations can cause significant safety 

hazards and environmental harm and 

prevent other beneficial uses of the OCS 

(such as fishing and future resource 

development). Additionally, these safety 

and environmental issues potentially 

place American taxpayers at risk to 

cover future cleanup costs. 

Bureau of Safety and Environmental 

Enforcement 

The BSEE’s mission is to promote 

safety, protect the environment, and 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9406 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

conserve resources offshore through 

vigorous regulatory oversight and 

enforcement. The BSEE is the lead 

Federal agency charged with improving 

safety and ensuring environmental 

protection related to conventional and 

renewable energy activities on the U.S. 

OCS. 

Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions 

In the coming year, BSEE will 

prioritize the following rulemaking 

actions: 

Oil-Spill Response Requirements for 

Facilities Located Seaward of the Coast 

Line Proposed Rule (1014–AA44) 

The oil spill response requirements 

regulations found in 30 CFR part 254 

were last updated over 20 years ago (62 

FR 13996, Mar. 25, 1997). This proposed 

rule would update existing regulations 

to incorporate the latest advancements 

in spill response and preparedness 

policies and technologies, as well as 

lessons learned and recommendations 

from reports related to the Deepwater 

Horizon explosion and subsequent oil 

spill. 

Revisions to Subpart J—Pipelines and 

Pipeline Rights-of-Way Proposed Rule 

(1014–AA45) 

This proposed rule would revise 

specific provisions of the current 

pipelines and pipeline ROW regulations 

under 30 CFR 250 subpart J to align 

with current technology and state-ofthe-art safety equipment and 

procedures, primarily through the 

incorporation of industry standards. 

Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act; 

Operating in High-Pressure and/or HighTemperature (HPHT) Environments 

(1014–AA49) 

Currently, BSEE has no regulations 

specific to high pressure and/or high 

temperature (HPHT) projects, requiring 

it to issue multiple guidance documents 

clarifying the specific HPHT 

information prospective operators 

should submit to BSEE to support the 

Bureau’s programmatic reviews and 

approvals of such projects. This final 

rule will formally codify BSEE’s existing 

process for reviewing and approving 

projects in HPHT environments. BSEE 

published this proposed rule on May 16, 

2022 (87 FR 29790). 

Oil and Gas and Sulfur Operations in 

the Outer Continental Shelf-Blowout 

Preventer Systems and Well Control 

Revisions (RIN 1014–AA52) 

This final rule will revise BSEE 

regulations published in the 2019 final 

rule ‘‘Oil and Gas and Sulfur Operations 

in the Outer Continental Shelf Blowout 

Preventer Systems and Well Control 

Revisions,’’ 84 FR 21908 (May 15, 2019), 

for drilling, workover, completion, and 

decommissioning operations. BSEE 

published the proposed rule on 

September 14, 2022 (87 FR 56354). 

Revisions to Decommissioning 

Requirements on the OCS (1014–AA53) 

This proposed rule would address 

issues relating to: (1) Idle iron by adding 

a definition of this term to clarify that 

it applies to idle wells and structures on 

active leases; (2) abandonment in place 

of subsea infrastructure by adding 

regulations addressing when BSEE may 

approve decommissioning-in-place 

instead of removal of certain subsea 

equipment; and (3) other operational 

considerations. 

Office of the Chief Information Officer 

The Office of the Chief Information 

Officer (OCIO) provides leadership to 

the Department and its Bureaus in all 

areas of information management and 

technology (IT). To successfully serve 

the Department’s multiple missions, the 

OCIO applies modern IT tools, 

approaches, systems, and products. 

Effective and innovative use of 

technology and information resources 

enables transparency and accessibility 

of information and services to the 

public. 

In 2023, OCIO finalized the following 

rule: 

Personnel Security Files System of 

Records (1090–AB16) 

This final rule was published on 

February 21, 2023 (88 FR 10479) and 

revised the Department’s Privacy Act 

regulations at 43 CFR 2.254 to claim 

exemptions for certain records in the 

INTERIOR/DOI–45, Personnel Security 

Files, system of records from one or 

more provisions of the Privacy Act of 

1974 pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k), 

because of criminal, civil, and 

administrative law enforcement 

requirements. 

For the coming year, OCIO will 

prioritize the following rules: 

Network Security System of Records 

(1090–AB14) 

This proposed rule would revise the 

Department’s Privacy Act regulations at 

43 CFR 2.254 to claim exemptions for 

certain records in the INTERIOR DOI– 

49, Network Security, system of records 

from one or more provisions of the 

Privacy Act of 1974 pursuant to 5 U.S.C 

552a(j) and (k), because of criminal, 

civil, and administrative law 

enforcement requirements. 

Investigative Records System of Records 

(1090–AB27) 

A proposed rule was published on 

July 13, 2023 (88 FR 44748). The final 

rule would revise the Department’s 

Privacy Act regulations at 43 CFR 2.254 

to claim exemptions for certain records 

in the INTERIOR/OIG–02, Investigative 

Records, system of records from one or 

more provisions of the Privacy Act of 

1974 pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k), 

because of criminal, civil or 

administrative law enforcement 

requirements. 

DOI Law Enforcement Records 

Management System (LERMS) System of 

Records (1090–AB28) 

This proposed rule would revise the 

Department’s Privacy Act regulations at 

43 CFR 2.254 to claim exemptions for 

certain records in the INTERIOR/DOI– 

10, DOI Law Enforcement Records 

Management System (LERMS), system 

of records from one or more provisions 

of the Privacy Act of 1974 pursuant to 

5 U.S.C. 552a(k), because of criminal, 

civil or administrative law enforcement 

requirements. 

Office of Acquisition and Property 

Management 

The Office of Acquisition and 

Property Management (PAM) 

coordinates Department-wide 

implementation of Federal policy and 

regulations for acquisition; and real, 

personal, and museum property. The 

PAM also directs activities in other 

essential areas including motor vehicle 

fleet management, space management, 

energy efficiency, water conservation, 

renewable energy programs, and capital 

planning for real and personal property 

assets. 

For the coming year, PAM will 

prioritize the following rules: 

Department of the Interior Acquisition 

Regulation, Governance Titles (1090– 

AB25) 

The PAM proposes changes to the 

Department of the Interior Acquisition 

Regulation to update its nomenclature 

to align with recent changes to agency 

procurement governance. The senior 

GS–1102 contracting subject matter 

expert in a Department Bureau or Office 

would be designated as the Head of the 

Contracting Activity (formerly 

designated as the Bureau Procurement 

Chief). The Senior Executive who is 

accountable for the contracting activity 

would be designated as the Bureau 

Procurement Executive (this position 

was formerly designated as the Head of 

the Contracting Activity). These 

amendments would enable acquisition 

programs to more efficiently meet the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9407 

Department’s mission needs and comply 

with all applicable law and regulations. 

Office of Hearings and Appeals 

The Office of Hearings and Appeals 

(OHA) exercises the delegated authority 

of the Secretary to conduct hearings and 

decide appeals from decisions made by 

the Bureaus and Offices of the 

Department. The OHA provides an 

impartial forum for parties who are 

affected by the decisions of the 

Department’s Bureaus and Offices to 

obtain independent review of those 

decisions. The OHA also handles the 

probating of Indian trust estates, 

ensuring that individual Indian interests 

in allotted lands, their proceeds, and 

other trust assets are conveyed to the 

decedents’ rightful heirs and 

beneficiaries. 

For the coming year, OHA will 

prioritize the following rule: 

Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) 

Rule (1094–AA57) 

This proposed rule will update 

outdated provisions, make process 

improvements, and provide a more 

modernized hearings and appeals 

process for proceedings before OHA. 

This is a comprehensive proposal to 

provide a more efficient process for 

OHA and the parties who appear before 

it, including external stakeholders and 

Departmental bureaus. The rule will 

build upon the Direct Final Rule to 

incorporate a new electronic filing and 

docket management system into OHA’s 

processes and will update a number of 

other procedural rules. Included in this 

proposed rule are comprehensive 

changes to special rules for the Interior 

Board of Land Appeals, Departmental 

Cases Hearings Division, and the 

Director’s office. Other provisions 

address specific needs of the Interior 

Board of Indian Appeals and the Probate 

Hearings Division. OHA conducted 

informal outreach and plans to hold 

Tribal consultation sessions. 

In 2023, OHA finalized the following 

rules: 

Practices Before the Department of 

Interior (1094–AA56) 

On March 16, 2023, OHA’s Final Rule 

became effective to amend existing 

regulations to update office addresses 

for hearings and appeals purposes, to 

allow the OHA Director to issue interim 

orders in emergency circumstances, and 

to allow the OHA Director to issue 

standing orders to improve OHA’s 

service to the public and the parties by 

modernizing its processes. 

Technical Corrections to Updates to 

American Indian Probate Regulations 

(1094–AA55) 

On June 20, 2023 (88 FR 39768), OHA 

published correcting amendments in a 

final rule to update the regulations 

governing probate of property that the 

United States holds in trust or restricted 

status for American Indians. 

Office of Natural Resources Revenue 

The Office of Natural Resources 

Revenue (ONRR) is responsible for 

collecting, accounting for, and 

disbursing revenues from Federal and 

Indian energy and mineral leases. The 

ONRR operates nationwide and is 

primarily responsible for the timely and 

accurate collection, distribution, and 

accounting of revenues associated with 

mineral and energy production. 

In 2023, ONRR completed the 

following rules: 

Partial Repeal of Consolidated Federal 

Oil & Gas and Federal & Indian Coal 

Reform Final Rule (1012–AA34) 

On July 21, 2023, ONRR reissued 

certain regulations for the valuation of 

Federal and Indian coal to implement a 

court order that vacates the coal 

valuation portions of a 2016 rule. These 

republished regulations implement the 

court’s order by recodifying the 

regulations that were in effect prior to 

the vacated 2016 rule. 

In the coming year, ONRR will 

prioritize the following rulemaking 

actions: 

ONRR Designation Form for Payment 

Responsibility (1012–AA33) 

This proposed rule would amend 

ONRR’s regulations and revise its form 

for designating a designee for a Federal 

oil and gas lease. This action would 

open a 60-day comment period to allow 

interested parties to comment on the 

proposed rule and its information 

collection requirements. 

Office of Restoration and Damage 

Assessment (ORDA) 

ORDA oversees the Department’s 

Natural Resource Damage Assessment 

and Restoration (NRDAR) Program 

whose mission is to restore natural 

resources injured as a result of oil spills 

or hazardous substance releases into the 

environment. In partnership with 

affected state, tribal and Federal trustee 

agencies, damage assessments are 

conducted which are the first step 

toward resource restoration and used to 

provide the basis for determining 

restoration needs that address the 

public’s loss and use of natural 

resources. Once the damages are 

assessed, legal settlements are 

negotiated, or legal actions are taken 

against the responsible parties for the 

spill or release. Funds from these 

settlements are then used to restore the 

injured resources. 

Natural Resource Damages for 

Hazardous Substances—RIN (1090– 

AB26) 

In January 2023, ORDA issued an 

Advanced Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (ANPRM) to revise part of 

the CERCLA NRDAR Regulations Type 

A procedures. These procedures allow 

trustees to use a standardized and 

simplified methodology for performing 

Injury Determination, Quantification 

and Damage Determination that requires 

minimal field observation. Current Type 

A procedures are limited to certain 

environments when claims are less than 

$100,000 and are based on outdated 

computer models and software with 

extremely limited current utility. 

Revisions would account for modeling 

advances for different environments and 

to provide methodologies that are not 

technology specific and could be used 

into the future without additional 

revisions. Public comments were 

received on this ANPRM in March 2023. 

Based on the comments received, ORDA 

is proceeding to issue a Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) this fall. 

In the upcoming year, ORDA will 

review the public comments received on 

the NPRM and then utilizing those 

comments, will issue a final rule 

revising the Type A procedures which 

are part of the CERCLA NRDAR 

Regulations. 

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation 

and Enforcement 

The Office of Surface Mining 

Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE) 

was created by the Surface Mining 

Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 

(SMCRA). The OSMRE works with 

States and Tribes to ensure that citizens 

and the environment are protected 

during coal mining and that the land is 

restored to beneficial use when mining 

is finished. The OSMRE and its partners 

are also responsible for reclaiming and 

restoring lands and water degraded by 

mining operations before 1977. The 

OSMRE focuses on overseeing the State 

programs and developing new tools to 

help the States and Tribes get the job 

done. 

The OSMRE also works with colleges 

and universities and other State and 

Federal agencies to further the science 

of reclaiming mined lands and 

protecting the environment, including 

initiatives to promote planting more 

trees and restoring much-needed 

wildlife habitat. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9408 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions 

For coming year, OSMRE will 

prioritize the following regulatory 

actions: 

Ten Day Notices (1029–AC81) 

The proposed rule published on April 

25, 2023 (88 FR 24944). The rule will 

amend the existing regulations about 

when OSMRE sends ten-day notices to 

State regulatory authorities regarding 

possible SMCRA violations. 

Emergency Preparedness for 

Impoundments (1029–AC82) 

This rule would incorporate certain 

aspects of the Federal Guidelines for 

Dam Safety (FGDS) into OSMRE’s 

existing regulations. These regulations 

relate to emergency preparedness for 

impoundments and propose to 

incorporate the FGDS Emergency Action 

Plans (EAP) and After-Action Reports 

(AAR). Also, OSMRE may add new 

provisions to the regulations to align the 

classification of impoundments with 

industry and other Government agency 

standards. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

The mission of FWS is to work with 

others to conserve, protect, and enhance 

fish, wildlife, and plants and their 

habitats for the continuing benefit of the 

American people. FWS provides 

opportunities for Americans to enjoy the 

outdoors and our shared natural 

heritage. FWS also promotes and 

encourages the pursuit of recreational 

activities such as hunting and fishing 

and wildlife observation. 

FWS manages a network of 568 

NWRs, with at least 1 refuge in each 

U.S. State and Territory, and with more 

than 100 refuges close to major urban 

centers. The Refuge System plays an 

essential role in providing outdoor 

recreation opportunities to the 

American public with more than 67 

million annual visits to refuges to hunt, 

fish, observe or photograph wildlife, or 

participate in environmental education 

or interpretation. 

The FWS fulfills its responsibilities 

through a diverse array of programs that: 

• Protect and recover endangered and 

threatened species; 

• Monitor and manage migratory 

birds; 

• Restore nationally significant 

fisheries; 

• Enforce Federal wildlife laws and 

regulate international trade; 

• Conserve and restore wildlife 

habitat such as wetlands; 

• Manage and distribute over a billion 

dollars each year to States, Territories, 

and Tribes for fish and wildlife 

conservation; 

• Help foreign governments conserve 

wildlife through international 

conservation efforts; and 

• Fulfill our Federal Tribal trust 

responsibility. 

Regulations Under the Endangered 

Species Act 

FWS promulgated multiple regulatory 

actions under the ESA in FY 2023 to 

prevent the extinction of and facilitate 

the recovery of both domestic and 

foreign animal and plant species. These 

rulemaking actions added species to, 

removed species from, and reclassified 

species on the Lists of Endangered and 

Threatened Wildlife and Plants and 

designated critical habitat for certain 

listed species. FWS published these 

rulemaking documents in accordance 

with the National Listing Workplan. The 

Workplan enables FWS to prioritize 

workloads based on the needs of species 

that are candidates for regulatory 

actions under the ESA or those for 

which FWS has received a petition for 

rulemaking. The Workplan represents 

the conservation priorities of FWS based 

on its review of scientific information 

and provides greater clarity and 

predictability about the timing of listing 

determinations to State wildlife 

agencies, nonprofit organizations, and 

other stakeholders and partners. The 

goal is to encourage proactive 

conservation so that Federal protections 

are not needed in the first place. 

In FY 2023, FWS published 23 

proposed and 28 final rules to list 

species, reclassify their status under the 

ESA, or designate critical habitat; 3 

proposed and 4 final rules to remove 

species from the Lists; and 1 proposed 

and 1 final rule to establish nonessential 

experimental populations of listed 

species under the ESA. FWS will 

publish many more species-specific 

rulemaking actions under the ESA in 

FY2024, as described in multiple entries 

in the Unified Agenda. 

In addition, in FY 2023 FWS 

completed numerous other rulemaking 

actions, including these: 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Designation of Experimental 

Populations (1018–BF98) 

On August 2, 2023, final rule (88 FR 

42642, July 3, 2023) revised the 

regulations concerning experimental 

populations of endangered species and 

threatened species under the 

Endangered Species Act (ESA). The rule 

removed language restricting the 

introduction of experimental 

populations to only the species’ 

‘‘historical range’’ to allow for the 

introduction of populations into habitat 

outside of their historical range. To 

provide for the conservation of certain 

species, establishing experimental 

populations outside of their historical 

range may be increasingly necessary and 

appropriate if the habitat’s ability to 

support one or more life-history stages 

has been reduced due to threats such as 

climate change or invasive species. 

Regulations To Implement the Big Cat 

Public Safety Act (1018–BH23) 

On June 12, 2023, FWS amended the 

implementing regulations for the 

Captive Wildlife Safety Act by 

incorporating the requirements of the 

Big Cat Public Safety Act (BCPSA; 

signed into law on December 20, 2022) 

(88 FR 38358, June 12, 2023). To further 

the conservation of certain wildlife 

species (lions, tigers, leopards, snow 

leopards, clouded leopards, jaguars, 

cheetahs, and cougars, or any hybrids 

thereof), the BCPSA made certain 

activities with these species unlawful. 

The BCPSA also required certain 

entities or individuals to register each 

such animal with the Service not later 

than June 18, 2023, to continue to 

possess these animals. 

Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions for 

FY 2024 

In the coming year, FWS will 

prioritize the following rulemaking 

actions: 

Permits for Incidental Take of Eagles 

and Eagle Nests, Final Rule (1018–BE70) 

On September 30, 2022, FWS 

proposed revisions to regulations 

authorizing the issuance of permits for 

eagle incidental take and eagle nest take 

(87 FR 59598). The purpose of these 

revisions is to increase the efficiency 

and effectiveness of permitting, 

facilitate and improve compliance, and 

increase the conservation benefit for 

eagles. FWS proposed continuing to 

authorize specific permits as well as 

creating general permits for certain 

activities under prescribed conditions: 

qualifying wind-energy generation 

projects, power line infrastructure, 

activities that may disturb breeding bald 

eagles, and bald eagle nest take. 

During the public comment period, 

FWS held four information sessions in 

webinar format: two for members of 

federally recognized Native American 

Tribes and two for the general public. 

The purpose of each of these sessions 

was to provide the public with a general 

understanding of the background for 

this proposed rulemaking action, 

activities it would cover, alternative 

proposals under consideration, and the 

draft environmental documents for the 

proposed action. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9409 

Migratory Bird Permits; Authorizing the 

Incidental Take of Migratory Birds, 

Proposed Rule (1018–BF71) 

This proposed rulemaking action 

would amend FWS regulations by 

providing definitions to terms used in 

the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, as 

amended (MBTA). The proposed rule 

would clarify that the MBTA’s 

prohibitions on taking and killing 

migratory birds includes foreseeable, 

direct taking and killing that is 

incidental to other activities. The 

proposed rule would also establish 

authorizations for otherwise prohibited 

take of migratory birds. 

Regulations for Listing Endangered and 

Threatened Species and Designating 

Critical Habitat, Final Rule (1018–BF95) 

On June 22, 2023, FWS and the 

National Marine Fisheries Service 

(NMFS) proposed to revise portions of 

our regulations that implement section 

4 of the ESA (88 FR 40764). The 

proposed revisions clarify, interpret, 

and implement portions of the ESA 

concerning the procedures and criteria 

used for listing, reclassifying, and 

delisting species on the Lists of 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants and designating critical 

habitat. 

After publication of this proposed 

rule and the two discussed next (RINs 

1018–BF96 and 1018–BF88), FWS 

delivered a series of informational 

sessions to stakeholders including 

Federal agencies, State agencies, 

federally recognized Tribes, Native 

Hawaiian community leaders, nongovernmental organizations, 

conservation partners, industry groups, 

and Pacific Islander community leaders. 

Frequently asked questions and a 

recording of the presentation can be 

viewed on the website https://fws.gov/ 

project/endangered-species-actregulation-revisions. 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Interagency Cooperation, 

Final Rule (1018–BF96) 

On June 22, 2023, FWS and NMFS 

proposed to amend portions of our 

regulations that implement section 7 of 

the ESA (88 FR 40753). The Services are 

proposing these changes to further 

clarify and improve the interagency 

consultation processes, while 

continuing to provide for the 

conservation of listed species. See 

description above under RIN 1018–BF95 

for public engagement efforts. 

Regulations Pertaining to Endangered 

and Threatened Wildlife and Plants, 

Final Rule (1018–BF88) 

On June 22, 2023, FWS proposed to 

revise our regulations concerning 

protections of endangered species and 

threatened species under the ESA (88 

FR 40742). We proposed to reinstate the 

general application of the ‘‘blanket rule’’ 

option for protecting newly listed 

threatened species pursuant to section 

4(d) of the Act, with the continued 

option to promulgate species-specific 

rules. We also proposed to extend to 

federally recognized Tribes certain 

regulatory exceptions currently 

provided to the employees or agents of 

the Service and other Federal and State 

agencies to aid, salvage, or dispose of 

threatened species. We also requested 

comments on an additional provision 

that would extend to federally 

recognized Tribes the exceptions to 

prohibitions for threatened species that 

the regulations currently provide to 

employees or agents of the Service, 

NMFS, and State agencies for take 

associated with conservation-related 

activities. See description above under 

RIN 1018–BF95 for public engagement 

efforts. 

Wildlife and Fisheries; Compensatory 

Mitigation Mechanisms, Proposed Rule 

(1018–BF63) 

FWS will propose to establish 

regulations covering objectives, 

standards, and criteria for review and 

approval of compensatory mitigation 

programs and projects intended to 

offset, or compensate for, unavoidable 

impacts to federally listed, proposed, or 

at-risk species and designated critical 

habitat pursuant to the ESA. The 

proposed rule will advance the 

purposes of the ESA by promoting the 

effective, consistent, transparent, and 

predictable delivery of compensatory 

mitigation. 

Endangered Species Act Section 10 

Regulations; Enhancement of Survival 

and Incidental Take Permits, Final Rule 

(1018–BF99) 

On February 9, 2023, FWS proposed 

to revise the regulations concerning the 

issuance of enhancement of survival 

and incidental take permits under the 

ESA (88 FR 8380). The purposes were 

to clarify the appropriate use of these 

permit types; clarify our authority to 

issue these permits for non-listed 

species without also including a listed 

species; simplify the requirements for 

enhancement of survival permits by 

combining safe harbor agreements and 

candidate conservation agreements with 

assurances into one agreement type; and 

include portions of our policies for safe 

harbor agreements, candidate 

conservation agreements with 

assurances, and habitat conservation 

plans in the regulations to reduce 

uncertainty. The proposed regulatory 

changes are intended to reduce costs 

and time associated with developing the 

application materials. We anticipate that 

these improvements will encourage 

more engagement in these voluntary 

programs, thereby generating greater 

conservation results overall. 

The final rule will incorporate and 

address public comments received in 

response to the proposed rule and 

informational webinars held with State 

agencies and Tribal nations. 

Establishment of a Nonessential 

Experimental Population of Gray Wolf 

in the State of Colorado, Final Rule 

(1018–BG79) 

On February 17, 2023, FWS proposed 

to establish a nonessential experimental 

population (NEP) of the gray wolf (Canis 

lupus) in Colorado, under section 10(j) 

of the ESA (88 FR 10258). Establishment 

of this NEP will facilitate the State of 

Colorado’s reintroduction of gray 

wolves and provide for allowable legal 

incidental taking of the gray wolf within 

the NEP area. The best available data 

indicate that reintroduction of the gray 

wolf into Colorado is biologically 

feasible and will promote the 

conservation of the species. 

FWS held four public information 

meetings during a 60-day public 

comment period. The final 

determination will be based on 

consideration of public comments and 

peer review received in response to the 

proposed rule. 

Revision to the Section 4(d) Rule for the 

African Elephant, Final Rule (1018– 

BG66) 

On November 17, 2022, FWS 

proposed to revise the current 

regulations for the African elephant 

(Loxodonta africana) promulgated 

under section 4(d) of the ESA (87 FR 

68975). The purposes of this rulemaking 

action are to: (1) Increase protection for 

African elephants in response to the 

recent rise in international trade of live 

African elephants from range countries 

by establishing ESA permit 

requirements and enhancement 

standards for trade in live African 

elephants, (2) clarify the existing 

enhancement requirement during our 

evaluation of the application for a 

permit to import African elephant sporthunted trophies, and (3) incorporate a 

Party’s designation under the 

Convention on International Trade in 

Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9410 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Flora (CITES) National Legislation 

Project into the decision-making process 

for the import of live African elephants, 

African elephant sport-hunted trophies, 

and African elephant parts and 

products. 

FWS conducted a virtual public 

hearing on January 5, 2023. The virtual 

public hearing was conducted in 

multiple languages, and several foreign 

countries expressed comments. The 

comment period for the proposed rule 

was extended due to comments 

expressed during the virtual public 

hearing. In addition to the public 

hearing, the agency has conducted 

several calls with foreign countries that 

have a stake in the proposed 

rulemaking. 

Maintaining the Biological Integrity, 

Diversity, and Environmental Health of 

the National Wildlife Refuge System, 

Proposed Rule (1018–BG78) 

FWS will propose to promulgate 

regulations directing the management of 

the National Wildlife Refuge System 

(NWRS) to promote the biological 

integrity, diversity, and environmental 

health of all lands and waters under the 

jurisdiction of the NWRS. These 

regulations would be based on language 

in the National Wildlife Refuge System 

Administration Act of 1966, as amended 

by the National Wildlife Refuge System 

Improvement Act of 1997, directing the 

Service to ensure that the biological 

integrity, diversity, and environmental 

health of the System are maintained for 

the benefit of present and future 

generations of Americans. 

National Wildlife Refuge System; 

Station-Specific Hunting and Sport 

Fishing Regulations, 2023–24, Final 

Rule (1018–BG71) 

On June 23, 2023, FWS proposed to 

make additions and revisions to stationspecific regulations and expand hunting 

and sport fishing opportunities for the 

2023–24 hunting and sport fishing 

season (88 FR 41058). This action is part 

of an annual update for the national 

wildlife refuge system and the national 

fish hatchery system that ensures 

adequate public notice of openings and 

changes. These changes and openings 

enhance conservation stewardship and 

outdoor recreation and improve the 

management of game species and their 

habitat. FWS operates hunting and sport 

fishing programs on refuges to 

implement congressional directives to 

facilitate compatible priority wildlifedependent recreational opportunities. 

Although hatcheries are not part of the 

national wildlife refuge system, by 

regulation, the administrative 

provisions of refuge regulations are 

applied to national fish hatchery areas. 

FWS coordinated closely with the 

Association of Fish and Wildlife 

Agencies when developing the proposed 

rule. FWS also engaged with 

stakeholder groups through the Hunting 

and Wildlife Conservation Council for 

input on hunting and fishing programs 

on FWS lands and waters. 

National Park Service 

The NPS preserves the natural and 

cultural resources and values within 

425 units of the National Park System 

encompassing more than 85 million 

acres of lands and waters for the 

enjoyment, education, and inspiration 

of this and future generations. The NPS 

also cooperates with partners to extend 

the benefits of resource conservation 

and outdoor recreation throughout the 

United States and the world. 

Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions 

In 2023, NPS completed the following 

rulemakings: 

Mount Rainier National Park; Fishing 

(1024–AE66) 

This final rule which published on 

January 20, 2023 (88 FR 3659), removed 

from the Code of Federal Regulations 

special fishing regulations for Mount 

Rainier National Park, including those 

that restrict the take of nonnative 

species. Instead, the National Park 

Service will publish closures and 

restrictions related to fishing in the 

Superintendent’s Compendium for the 

park. This action helps implement a 

2018 Fish Management Plan that aims to 

conserve native fish populations and 

restore aquatic ecosystems by reducing 

or eliminating nonnative fish. 

In the coming year, NPS will 

prioritize the following rulemaking 

actions: 

Native American Graves Protection and 

Repatriation Act Systematic Process for 

Disposition and Repatriation of Native 

American Human Remains, Funerary 

Objects, Sacred Objects, and Objects of 

Cultural Patrimony (1024–AE19) 

This final rule will revise the 

NAGPRA implementing regulations. On 

October 18, 2022, the NPS published the 

proposed rule ‘‘Native American Graves 

Protection and Repatriation Act 

Systematic Process for Disposition and 

Repatriation of Native American Human 

Remains, Funerary Objects, Sacred 

Objects, and Objects of Cultural 

Patrimony,’’ (87 FR 63202). This rule 

eliminates ambiguities, corrects 

inaccuracies, simplifies excessively 

burdensome and complicated 

requirements, clarifies timelines, and 

removes offensive terminology in the 

existing regulations that have inhibited 

the respectful repatriation of most 

Native American human remains. This 

rule will simplify and improve the 

regulatory process for repatriation and 

thereby advance the goals of racial 

justice, equity, and inclusion. The 

Department received Tribal government 

input through consultations and 

listening sessions held under Executive 

Order 13175 criteria and the 

Department’s policy on meaningful 

communication and collaboration with 

Tribal officials. 

Alaska; Hunting and Trapping in 

National Preserves (1024–AE70) 

This rule would amend NPS 

regulations for sport hunting and 

trapping in national preserves in Alaska. 

This rule would prohibit certain harvest 

practices, including bear baiting; and 

prohibit predator control or predator 

reduction on national preserves. 

Bureau of Reclamation 

The Bureau of Reclamation’s 

(Reclamation) mission is to manage, 

develop, and protect water and related 

resources in an environmentally and 

economically sound manner in the 

interest of the American public. To 

accomplish this mission, Reclamation 

employs management, engineering, and 

science to achieve effective and 

environmentally sensitive solutions. 

Reclamation’s projects provide 

irrigation water service; municipal and 

industrial water supply; hydroelectric 

power generation; water quality 

improvement; groundwater 

management; fish and wildlife 

enhancement; outdoor recreation; flood 

control; navigation; river regulation and 

control; system optimization; and 

related uses. In addition, Reclamation 

continues to provide increased security 

at its facilities. 

Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions 

In the coming year, Reclamation will 

prioritize the following rulemaking 

action: 

Public Conduct on Bureau of 

Reclamation Facilities, Lands and 

Waterbodies (1006–AA58) 

The proposed rule published on 

February 16, 2023 (88 FR 10070). The 

final rule, targeted to publish on or 

before November 2023, will revise 

existing definitions for the use of 

aircraft; the possession of firearms, 

update regulations on camping, 

swimming, and winter recreation for the 

wide range of circumstances found 

across Reclamation; and would clarify 

the permitting of memorials and 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9411 

reburials on Reclamation lands. During 

the proposed rule stage, Reclamation 

held three tribal consultations in April 

and May 2022, with invites to all 287 

western state Tribes, and Tribal 

comments were incorporated into this 

update. 

DOI—OFFICE OF NATURAL 

RESOURCES REVENUE (ONRR) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

108. ONRR Designation Form for 

Payment Responsibility [1012–AA33] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301 et seq.; 

30 U.S.C. 181 et seq.; 30 U.S.C. 351 et 

seq.; 30 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.; 30 U.S.C. 

1701 et seq.; 31 U.S.C. 3335; 31 U.S.C. 

3711; 31 U.S.C. 3716 to 3718; 31 U.S.C. 

3720A; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 43 U.S.C. 1301 

et seq.; 43 U.S.C. 1331 et seq.; 43 U.S.C. 

1801 et seq. 

CFR Citation: None. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: ONRR proposes to amend its 

regulations and revise its form for 

designating a designee for a Federal oil 

and gas lease. This action opens a 60- 

day comment period to allow interested 

parties to comment on the proposed rule 

and its information collection 

requirements. 

Statement of Need: ONRR proposes to 

amend its regulations and revise its 

form for designating a designee for a 

Federal oil and gas lease. This action 

opens a 60-day comment period to 

allow interested parties to comment on 

the proposed rule and its information 

collection requirements. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 5 U.S.C. 301 

et seq., 30 U.S.C. 181 et seq., 30 U.S.C. 

351 et seq., 30 U.S.C. 1001 et seq., 30 

U.S.C. n1701 et seq., 31 U.S.C. 3335, 31 

U.S.C. 3711, 31 U.S.C. 3716 to 3718, 31 

U.S.C. 3720A, 31 U.S.C. n9701, 43 

U.S.C. 1301 et seq., 43 U.S.C. 1331 et 

seq., and 43 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 11/00/23 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

01/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Luis Aguilar, 

Regulatory Specialist, Department of the 

Interior, Office of Natural Resources 

Revenue, Denver Federal Center West, 

6th Avenue and Kipling Street, Building 

85, MS 64400B, Denver, CO 80225, 

Phone: 303 231–3418, Email: 

luis.aguilar@onrr.gov. 

RIN: 1012–AA33 

DOI—BUREAU OF SAFETY AND 

ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT 

(BSEE) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

109. Oil-Spill Response Requirements 

for Facilities Located Seaward of the 

Coast Line Proposed Rule [1014–AA44] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: Federal Water 

Pollution Control Act, 33 U.S.C. 1321; 

Oil Pollution Act of 1990, 33 U.S.C. 

2701 et seq.; Outer Continental Shelf 

Lands Act, 42 U.S.C. 1331 et seq. 

CFR Citation: 30 CFR 254 (proposed 

rewrite of 254). 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This proposed rule would 

identify opportunities for updating Oil 

Spill Response Requirements 

regulations, in 30 CFR part 254, last 

updated 22 years ago (62 FR 13996, Mar. 

25, 1997). This proposed rule would 

codify industry best practices, BSEE 

policy, and regulatory guidance for oil 

spill response planning and operations. 

This proposed rule would also 

streamline the oil spill response 

planning requirements, clarify 

equipment and operational capabilities, 

and address requirements from other 

applicable laws and technological 

advancements to reflect oil spill 

response best practices and advance 

safety and protection of the 

environment. 

Statement of Need: This proposed 

rule would identify opportunities for 

updating Oil Spill Response 

Requirements regulations, in 30 CFR 

part 254, last updated 22 years ago (62 

FR 13996, Mar. 25, 1997). This proposed 

rule would codify industry best 

practices, BSEE policy, and regulatory 

guidance for oil spill response planning 

and operations. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Federal 

Water Pollution Control Act, 33 U.S.C. 

1321, Oil Pollution Act of 1990, 33 

U.S.C. 2701 et seq., Outer Continental 

Shelf Lands Act, 42 U.S.C. 1331 et seq. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 12/00/23 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

03/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Kirk Malstrom, 

Chief, Regulations and Standards 

Branch, Department of the Interior, 

Bureau of Safety and Environmental 

Enforcement, 45600 Woodland Road, 

Sterling, VA 20166, Phone: 703 787– 

1751, Fax: 703 787–1555, Email: 

kirk.malstrom@bsee.gov. 

RIN: 1014–AA44 

DOI—BSEE 

110. Revisions to Subpart J—Pipelines 

and Pipeline Rights-of-Way Proposed 

Rule [1014–AA45] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1331 to 

1356a, Outer Continental Shelf Lands 

Act 

CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This proposed rule would 

identify opportunities for improving 

safety, environmental protections, and 

equipment reliability, within the 

Pipelines and Pipeline Rights-of-Way 

regulations under 30 CFR 250 subpart J. 

This rule would incorporate several 

guidance documents and conditions of 

approval and update industry standards 

incorporated by reference into the 

regulations. This rulemaking rule would 

result in an up-to-date set of pipeline 

regulations that reflect current industry 

practices and BSEE policies that address 

topics such as pipeline permitting, 

design, installation, maintenance, 

inspections, and decommissioning. 

Statement of Need: This proposed 

rule would identify opportunities for 

improving safety, environmental 

protections, and equipment reliability, 

within the Pipelines and Pipeline 

Rights-of-Way regulations under 30 CFR 

250 subpart J. This rule would 

incorporate several guidance documents 

and conditions of approval and update 

industry standards incorporated by 

reference into the regulations. This 

rulemaking rule would result in an upto-date set of pipeline regulations that 

reflect current industry practices and 

BSEE policies that address topics such 

as pipeline permitting, design, 

installation, maintenance, inspections, 

and decommissioning. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 43 U.S.C. 

1331 to 1356a, Outer Continental Shelf 

Lands Act. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 01/00/24 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

03/00/24 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 

I I 

I 
9412 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Kirk Malstrom, 

Chief, Regulations and Standards 

Branch, Department of the Interior, 

Bureau of Safety and Environmental 

Enforcement, 45600 Woodland Road, 

Sterling, VA 20166, Phone: 703 787– 

1751, Fax: 703 787–1555, Email: 

kirk.malstrom@bsee.gov. 

RIN: 1014–AA45 

DOI—BSEE 

Final Rule Stage 

111. Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act; 

Operating in High-Pressure and/or 

High-Temperature (HPHT) 

Environments [1014–AA49] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: Outer Continental 

Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA), 43 U.S.C. 

1331 to 1356a 

CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rule will formally 

codify BSEE’s existing process for 

reviewing and approving projects in 

high pressure and/or high temperature 

(HPHT) environments. Currently, BSEE 

reviews and approves HPHT projects 

under its existing regulations. Based on 

these regulations, BSEE issued multiple 

guidance documents clarifying the 

specific HPHT information prospective 

operators should submit to BSEE to 

support the bureau’s programmatic 

reviews and approvals of such projects. 

Statement of Need: This rule will 

formally codify BSEE’s existing process 

for reviewing and approving projects in 

high pressure and/or high temperature 

(HPHT) environments. Currently, BSEE 

reviews and approves HPHT projects 

under its existing regulations. Based on 

these regulations, BSEE issued multiple 

guidance documents clarifying the 

specific HPHT information prospective 

operators should submit to BSEE to 

support the bureau’s programmatic 

reviews and approvals of such projects. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Outer 

Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA), 

43 U.S.C. 1331 to 1356a. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 05/16/22 87 FR 29790 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

07/01/22 

Final Action ......... 11/00/23 

Final Action Effective.01/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Kirk Malstrom, 

Chief, Regulations and Standards 

Branch, Department of the Interior, 

Bureau of Safety and Environmental 

Enforcement, 45600 Woodland Road, 

Sterling, VA 20166, Phone: 703 787– 

1751, Fax: 703 787–1555, Email: 

kirk.malstrom@bsee.gov. 

RIN: 1014–AA49 

DOI—ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR 

LAND AND MINERALS MANAGEMENT 

(ASLM) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

112. Carbon Sequestration [1082–AA04] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Legal Authority: Pub. L. 117–58 

CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined. 

Legal Deadline: Final, Statutory, 

November 15, 2022, Public Law 117–58. 

The Infrastructure Investment and 

Jobs Act of 2021 (Pub. L. 117–58) 

mandates that a new regulation be 

published within 12 months from 

enactment of the legislation on 

November 15, 2021. 

Abstract: The proposed rulemaking 

would address the transportation and 

geologic sequestration aspects of a 

development, including leasing; siting 

of storage reservoirs; environmental 

plans and mitigations; facility and 

infrastructure design and installation; 

injection operations; monitoring; 

incident response; financial assurance; 

and safety. The Infrastructure 

Investment and Jobs Act of 2021 

directed the Department to establish 

regulations intended to initiate OCS 

activities to accomplish carbon 

sequestration. This proposed joint 

rulemaking between the Bureau of 

Ocean Energy management (BOEM) and 

the Bureau of Safety and Environmental 

Enforcement (BSEE) would establish 

new regulations to implement processes 

in support of safe and environmentally 

responsible carbon sequestration 

activities on the OCS. 

Statement of Need: The proposed 

rulemaking would address the 

transportation and geologic 

sequestration aspects of a development, 

including leasing; siting of storage 

reservoirs; environmental plans and 

mitigations; facility and infrastructure 

design and installation; injection 

operations; monitoring; incident 

response; financial assurance; and 

safety. The Infrastructure Investment 

and Jobs Act of 2021 directed the 

Department to establish regulations 

intended to initiate Outer Continental 

Shelf (OCS) activities to accomplish 

carbon sequestration. This proposed 

joint rulemaking between the Bureau of 

Ocean Energy management (BOEM) and 

the Bureau of Safety and Environmental 

Enforcement (BSEE) would establish 

new regulations to implement processes 

in support of safe and environmentally 

responsible carbon sequestration 

activities on the OCS. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Public Law 

117–58. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 12/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: 

Undetermined. 

Federalism: Undetermined. 

Agency Contact: Stacey Noem, Chief, 

Office of Offshore Regulatory Programs, 

Department of the Interior, Assistant 

Secretary for Land and Minerals 

Management, 456000 Woodland Road, 

Sterling, VA 20166, Phone: 703 787– 

1222, Email: stacey.noem@bsee.gov. 

Related RIN: Related to 1082–AA04 

RIN: 1082–AA04 

DOI—ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR 

POLICY, MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET 

(ASPMB) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

113. Department of the Interior 

Acquisition Regulation Governance 

Titles [1090–AB25] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1702 

CFR Citation: 48 CFR 1.301; 48 CFR 

1401.301. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Office of Acquisition 

and Property Management would 

propose changes to the Department of 

the Interior Acquisition Regulation to 

update its nomenclature to align with 

recent changes to agency procurement 

governance. This proposal would enable 

acquisition programs to more efficiently 

meet the Department’s mission needs 

and comply with all applicable law and 

regulations. 

Statement of Need: This proposed 

rule would change the Department of 

the Interior Acquisition Regulations to 

update its nomenclature to align with 

recent changes to agency procurement 

governance. This proposal would enable 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9413 

acquisition programs to more efficiently 

meet the Department’s mission needs 

and comply with all applicable law and 

regulations. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 41 U.S.C. 

1702. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 11/00/23 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

01/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Antonia Giammo, 

Senior Procurement Analyst—Office of 

Acquisition and Property Management, 

Department of the Interior, Assistant 

Secretary for Policy, Management and 

Budget, 1849 C Street NW, Washington, 

DC 20240, Phone: 202 208–5250, Email: 

antonia_giammo@ios.doi.gov. 

RIN: 1090–AB25 

DOI—ASPMB 

114. Natural Resource Damages for 

Hazardous Substances [1090–AB26] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. secs. 9601 

et seq. 104, 107, 111 (i), 122 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 300.600; 43 CFR 

11. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This proposal would update 

the existing Type A Rule of the CERCLA 

Natural Resource Damage Assessment 

and Restoration (NRDAR) regulations so 

it could be used in different 

environments and include 

methodologies which are not technology 

specific. Adjustments would also be 

made to the rebuttable presumption for 

Type A procedures which is currently 

limited to damages of $100,000 or less. 

Statement of Need: This proposed 

rule would update the existing Type A 

Rule of the CERCLA Natural Resource 

Damage Assessment and Restoration 

(NRDAR) regulations so it could be used 

in different environments and include 

methodologies which are not technology 

specific. Adjustments would also be 

made to the rebuttable presumption for 

Type A procedures which is currently 

limited to damages of $100,000 or less. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 42 U.S.C. 

secs. 9601 et seq., 42 U.S.C. 104, 42 

U.S.C. 107, 42 U.S.C. 111 (i), and 42 

U.S.C. 122. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

ANPRM ............... 01/19/23 88 FR 3373 

ANPRM Comment 

Period End.

03/20/23 

NPRM .................. 11/00/23 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

01/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State, Tribal. 

Agency Contact: Emily Joseph, 

Director, Office of Restoration and 

Damage Assessment, Department of the 

Interior, Assistant Secretary for Policy, 

Management and Budget, 1849 C Street 

NW, Washington, DC 20240, Phone: 202 

208–4438, Email: emily_joseph@

ios.doi.gov. 

Related RIN: Related to 1090–AB17 

RIN: 1090–AB26 

DOI—ASPMB 

115. • Privacy Act Exemption for 

Interior/DOI–10, DOI Law Enforcement 

Records Management System (LERMS) 

[1090–AB28] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C 552a(k) 

CFR Citation: 43 CFR 2.254. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This proposed rule would 

revise the Department’s Privacy Act 

regulations at 43 CFR 2.254 to claim 

exemptions for certain records in the 

INTERIOR/DOI–10, DOI Law 

Enforcement Records Management 

System (LERMS), system of records 

from one or more provisions of the 

Privacy Act of 1974 pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 

552a(k), because of criminal, civil or 

administrative law enforcement 

requirements. 

Statement of Need: This proposed 

rule would revise the Department’s 

Privacy Act regulations at 43 CFR 2.254 

to claim exemptions for certain records 

in the INTERIOR/DOI–10, DOI Law 

Enforcement Records Management 

System (LERMS), system of records 

from one or more provisions of the 

Privacy Act of 1974 pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 

552a(k), because of criminal, civil or 

administrative law enforcement 

requirements. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 5 U.S.C. 

552a(k). 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 12/00/23 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

02/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Teri Barnett, 

Departmental Privacy Officer, 

Cybersecurity Division, Department of 

the Interior, 1849 C Street NW, Office of 

the Chief Information Officer, Room 

7112, Washington, DC 20240, Phone: 

202 208–1943, Email: teri_barnett@

ios.doi.gov. 

Related RIN: Related to 1090–AB02 

RIN: 1090–AB28 

DOI—ASPMB 

Final Rule Stage 

116. Privacy Act Exemption for 

Interior/OIG–02 Investigative Records 

[1090–AB27] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C.552a(k) 

CFR Citation: 43 CFR 2.254. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This proposed rule would 

amend the DOI Privacy Act regulations 

at 43 CFR 2.254 to exempt certain 

records in the INTERIOR/OIG–02, 

Investigative Records, system of records 

from one or more provisions of the 

Privacy Act to protect investigatory 

records pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k). In 

order to claim the exemptions and meet 

the requirements of the Privacy Act, DOI 

will publish a Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking and a Final Rule in the 

Federal Register. 

Statement of Need: This proposed 

rule would amend the DOI Privacy Act 

regulations at 43 CFR 2.254 to exempt 

certain records in the INTERIOR/OIG– 

02, Investigative Records, system of 

records from one or more provisions of 

the Privacy Act to protect investigatory 

records pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(k). In 

order to claim the exemptions and meet 

the requirements of the Privacy Act, DOI 

will publish a Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking and a Final Rule in the 

Federal Register. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 5 

U.S.C.552a(k). 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 07/13/23 88 FR 44748 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

09/11/23 

Final Action ......... 11/00/23 

Final Action Effective.11/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 

I I 
9414 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Agency Contact: Teri Barnett, 

Departmental Privacy Officer, 

Cybersecurity Division, Department of 

the Interior, 1849 C Street NW, Office of 

the Chief Information Officer, Room 

7112, Washington, DC 20240, Phone: 

202 208–1943, Email: teri_barnett@

ios.doi.gov. 

RIN: 1090–AB27 

DOI—OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND 

APPEALS (OHA) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

117. Office of Hearings And Appeals 

(OHA) Rule [1094–AA57] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301 (2018); 

43 U.S.C. 1457c (2018) 

CFR Citation: 43 CFR 4. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Office of Hearings and 

Appeals (OHA) proposes a Notice and 

Comment Rulemaking to modernize and 

clarify its regulations governing 

hearings and appeals before the Interior 

Board of Land Appeals (IBLA), the 

Interior Board of Indian Appeals (IBIA), 

the Departmental Cases Hearings 

Division (DCHD), and the OHA Director. 

OHA is proposes this regulatory action 

to update outdated provisions, make 

process improvements, and provide a 

more modernized and logical hearings 

and appeals process. 

Statement of Need: The Office of 

Hearings and Appeals (OHA) proposes a 

Notice and Comment Rulemaking to 

modernize and clarify its regulations 

governing hearings and appeals before 

the Interior Board of Land Appeals 

(IBLA), the Interior Board of Indian 

Appeals (IBIA), the Departmental Cases 

Hearings Division (DCHD), and the OHA 

Director. OHA proposes this regulatory 

action to update outdated provisions, 

make process improvements, and 

provide a more modernized and logical 

hearings and appeals process. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 5 U.S.C. 301 

(2018) and 43 U.S.C. 1457c (2018). 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 11/00/23 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

01/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State. 

Agency Contact: Rachel Lukens, 

Counsel to the Director, Department of 

the Interior, Office of Hearings and 

Appeals, 801 N Quincy Street, #300, 

Arlington, VA 22203, Phone: 703 223– 

9934, Email: rachel_lukens@

oha.doi.gov. 

RIN: 1094–AA57 

DOI—UNITED STATES FISH AND 

WILDLIFE SERVICE (FWS) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

118. Wildlife and Fisheries; 

Compensatory Mitigation Mechanisms 

[1018–BF63] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et 

seq.; Pub. L. 116–283 

CFR Citation: 50 CFR 413. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rulemaking action 

would address section 329 of the 

National Defense Authorization Act for 

Fiscal Year 2021, Objectives, 

Performance Standards, and Criteria for 

Use of Wildlife Conservation Banking 

Programs (NDAA 2021), which states 

that, to the maximum extent practicable, 

the regulatory standards and criteria 

shall maximize available credits and 

opportunities for mitigation, provide 

flexibility for characteristics of various 

species, and apply equivalent standards 

and criteria to all mitigation banks. 

Statement of Need: This rulemaking 

action will address section 329 of the 

National Defense Authorization Act for 

Fiscal Year 2021, Objectives, 

Performance Standards, and Criteria for 

Use of Wildlife Conservation Banking 

Programs (NDAA 2021), which states 

that, to the maximum extent practicable, 

the regulatory standards and criteria 

shall maximize available credits and 

opportunities for mitigation, provide 

flexibility for characteristics of various 

species, and apply equivalent standards 

and criteria to all mitigation banks. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 16 U.S.C. 

1531 et seq., Pub. L. 116–283. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

ANPRM ............... 07/27/22 87 FR 45076 

ANPRM Comment 

Period End.

09/26/22 

NPRM .................. 01/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal. 

Agency Contact: Craig Aubrey, Chief, 

Division of Environmental Review, 

Ecological Services Program, 

Department of the Interior, United 

States Fish and Wildlife Service, 5275 

Leesburg Pike, MS: ES, Falls Church, 

VA 22041, Phone: 703 358–2442, Fax: 

703 358–1800, Email: craig_aubrey@

fws.gov. 

RIN: 1018–BF63 

DOI—FWS 

119. Migratory Bird Permits; 

Authorizing the Incidental Take of 

Migratory Birds, Proposed Rule [1018– 

BF71] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Legal Authority: 16 U.S.C. 703 et seq. 

CFR Citation: 50 CFR 21. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This proposed rulemaking 

action would amend FWS regulations 

by providing definitions to terms used 

in the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, as 

amended (MBTA). The proposed rule 

would clarify that the MBTA’s 

prohibitions on taking and killing 

migratory birds includes foreseeable, 

direct taking and killing that is 

incidental to other activities. The 

proposed rule would also establish 

authorizations for otherwise prohibited 

take of migratory birds. 

Statement of Need: This proposed 

rulemaking action would amend FWS 

regulations by providing definitions to 

terms used in the Migratory Bird Treaty 

Act, as amended (MBTA). The proposed 

rule would clarify that the MBTA’s 

prohibitions on taking and killing 

migratory birds includes foreseeable, 

direct taking and killing that is 

incidental to other activities. The 

proposed rule would also establish 

authorizations for otherwise prohibited 

take of migratory birds. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 16 U.S.C. 

703 et seq. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

ANPRM ............... 10/04/21 86 FR 54667 

ANPRM Comment 

Period End.

12/03/21 

NPRM .................. 11/00/23 

Final Action ......... 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Jerome Ford, 

Assistant Director—Migratory Bird 

Program, Department of the Interior, 

United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 

5275 Leesburg Pike, MS–MB, Falls 

Church, VA 22041–3803, Phone: 703 

358–1050, Email: jerome_ford@fws.gov. 

RIN: 1018–BF71 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9415 

DOI—FWS 

120. Maintaining the Biological 

Integrity, Diversity, and Environmental 

Health of the National Wildlife Refuge 

System, Proposed Rule [1018–BG78] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 16 

U.S.C. 460k; 16 U.S.C. 664; 16 U.S.C. 

668dd–668ee; 16 U.S.C. 715i; Pub. L. 

115–20 

CFR Citation: 50 CFR 29. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: FWS proposes to 

promulgate regulations directing the 

management of the National Wildlife 

Refuge System (NWRS) to promote the 

biological integrity, diversity, and 

environmental health of all lands and 

waters under the jurisdiction of the 

NWRS. These regulations would be 

based on language in the National 

Wildlife Refuge System Administration 

Act of 1966, as amended by the National 

Wildlife Refuge System Improvement 

Act of 1997, directing the Service to 

ensure that the biological integrity, 

diversity, and environmental health of 

the System are maintained for the 

benefit of present and future generations 

of Americans. FWS has intentionally 

coordinated with State and Tribal 

partners to develop the proposed 

regulations. FWS solicited comments 

from States through the Association of 

Fish and Wildlife Agencies (AFWA) and 

held three meetings with AFWA and 

State leadership to discuss the proposed 

regulations. FWS also held two public 

webinars for Tribal partners across the 

country to discuss the proposed 

regulations and to gain their feedback. 

Statement of Need: FWS proposes to 

promulgate regulations directing the 

management of the National Wildlife 

Refuge System (NWRS) to promote the 

biological integrity, diversity, and 

environmental health of all lands and 

waters under the jurisdiction of the 

NWRS. These regulations would be 

based on language in the National 

Wildlife Refuge System Administration 

Act of 1966, as amended by the National 

Wildlife Refuge System Improvement 

Act of 1997, directing the Service to 

ensure that the biological integrity, 

diversity, and environmental health of 

the System are maintained for the 

benefit of present and future generations 

of Americans. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 5 U.S.C. 301, 

16 U.S.C. 460k, 16 U.S.C. 664, 16 U.S.C. 

668dd–668ee, 16 U.S.C. 715i, and 

Public Law 115–20. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 11/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Katherine Harrigan, 

Sportsmen’s Access Coordinator, 

Department of the Interior, United 

States Fish and Wildlife Service, Branch 

of Conservation Policy and Planning, 

National Wildlife Refuge System, 5275 

Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041– 

3803, Phone: 703 358–2440, Email: 

katherine_harrigan@fws.gov. 

RIN: 1018–BG78 

DOI—FWS 

Final Rule Stage 

121. Permits for Incidental Take of 

Eagles and Eagle Nests, Final Rule 

[1018–BE70] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 16 U.S.C. 668 to 668d 

CFR Citation: 50 CFR 22. 

Legal Deadline: Other, Judicial, 

September 15, 2021, For submission of 

an advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking to OFR. 

NPRM, Judicial, September 16, 2022. 

Final, Judicial, January 31, 2024. 

Abstract: FWS will finalize a 

proposed rule that set forth potential 

approaches for expediting and 

simplifying the permit process 

authorizing incidental take of eagles. 

The proposed rule would revise the 

regulations authorizing eagle incidental 

take and eagle nest take permits to 

increase the efficiency and effectiveness 

of permitting, facilitate and improve 

compliance, and increase the 

conservation benefit for eagles. The 

proposed rule would create general 

eagle permits for certain activities under 

prescribed conditions in addition to 

specific eagle permits authorized under 

current regulations. 

Statement of Need: FWS will finalize 

a proposed rule that set forth potential 

approaches for expediting and 

simplifying the permit process 

authorizing incidental take of eagles. 

The rule will revise the regulations 

authorizing eagle incidental take and 

eagle nest take permits to increase the 

efficiency and effectiveness of 

permitting, facilitate and improve 

compliance, and increase the 

conservation benefit for eagles. The rule 

will create general eagle permits for 

certain activities under prescribed 

conditions in addition to specific eagle 

permits authorized under current 

regulations. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 16 U.S.C. 

668 to 668d. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

ANPRM ............... 09/14/21 86 FR 51094 

ANPRM Comment 

Period End.

10/29/21 

NPRM .................. 09/30/22 87 FR 59598 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extended.

11/28/22 87 FR 72957 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

11/29/22 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extended End.

12/29/22 

Final Action ......... 01/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Local, 

State, Tribal. 

Agency Contact: Dr. Eric L. Kershner, 

Chief, Division of Conservation, 

Permits, and Regulations, Department of 

the Interior, United States Fish and 

Wildlife Service, 5275 Leesburg Pike, 

MS: MB, Falls Church, VA 22041, 

Phone: 703 358–2376, Fax: 703 358– 

2217, Email: eric_kershner@fws.gov. 

RIN: 1018–BE70 

DOI—FWS 

122. Regulations Pertaining to 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants [1018–BF88] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. 

CFR Citation: 50 CFR 17. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: Per section 2 of the 

Executive Order on Protecting Public 

Health and the Environment and 

Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate 

Crisis (E.O.13990), the Department of 

the Interior (the Department) initiated a 

review of the previous rulemaking 

action with the title, ‘‘Endangered and 

Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 

Regulations for Prohibitions to 

Threatened Wildlife and Plants’’ (84 FR 

44753; August 27, 2019) that revised 

portions of the regulations that address 

prohibition and protective regulations 

regarding the conservation of 

endangered and threatened species of 

fish, wildlife, and plants. As a result of 

that review, the Department proposed to 

revise those regulations (88 FR 40742, 

June 22, 2023) and after publication of 

that proposal, delivered a series of 

informational sessions to stakeholders 

including: Federal agencies, State 

agencies, federally recognized Tribes, 

Native Hawaiian community leaders, 

non-governmental organizations, 

conservation partners, industry groups, 

and Pacific Islander community leaders. 

FAQs and a recording of the 

presentation can be viewed on the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9416 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

website https://fws.gov/project/ 

endangered-species-act-regulationrevisions. 

Statement of Need: Per section 2 of 

the Executive Order on Protecting 

Public Health and the Environment and 

Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate 

Crisis (E.O.13990), the Department of 

the Interior (the Department) initiated a 

review of the previous rulemaking 

action with the title, ‘‘Endangered and 

Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 

Regulations for Prohibitions to 

Threatened Wildlife and Plants (84 FR 

44753; August 27, 2019) that revised 

portions of the regulations that address 

prohibition and protective regulations 

regarding the conservation of 

endangered and threatened species of 

fish, wildlife, and plants. As a result of 

that review, the Department proposed a 

new rulemaking. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 16 U.S.C. 

1531 et seq. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 06/22/23 88 FR 40742 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

08/21/23 

Final Action ......... 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

State. 

Agency Contact: Carey Galst, Chief, 

Branch of Listing Policy and Support, 

Department of the Interior, United 

States Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Ecological Services Program, 5275 

Leesburg Pike, MS: ES, Falls Church, 

VA 22041–3803, Phone: 703 358–1954, 

Fax: 703 358–1954, Email: carey_galst@

fws.gov. 

RIN: 1018–BF88 

DDOI—FWS 

123. Regulations for Listing Endangered 

and Threatened Species and 

Designating Critical Habitat, Final Rule 

[1018–BF95] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. 

CFR Citation: 50 CFR 424. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: Per section 2 of the 

Executive Order on Protecting Public 

Health and the Environment and 

Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate 

Crisis (E.O. 13990), and subsequent Fact 

Sheet: List of Agency Actions for 

Review, the Departments of Commerce 

and the Interior (the Departments) 

initiated a review of the previous 

rulemaking action with the title, 

‘‘Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Regulations for Listing 

Species and Designating Critical 

Habitat’’ (84 FR 45020; August 27, 2019) 

that revised the regulations for adding 

and removing species from the Lists of 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants and clarified procedures for 

designating critical habitat. As a result 

of that review, the Departments 

proposed to revise those regulations (88 

FR 40764, June 22, 2023), and after 

publication of that proposal, delivered a 

series of informational sessions to 

stakeholders including: Federal 

agencies, State agencies, federally 

recognized Tribes, Native Hawaiian 

community leaders, non-governmental 

organizations, conservation partners, 

industry groups, and Pacific Islander 

community leaders. FAQs and a 

recording of the presentation can be 

viewed on the website https://fws.gov/ 

project/endangered-species-actregulation-revisions. 

Statement of Need: Per section 2 of 

the Executive Order on Protecting 

Public Health and the Environment and 

Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate 

Crisis (E.O. 13990), and subsequent Fact 

Sheet: List of Agency Actions for 

Review, the Departments of Commerce 

and the Interior (the Departments) 

initiated a review of the previous 

rulemaking action with the title, 

‘‘Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Regulations for Listing 

Species and Designating Critical 

Habitat’’ (84 FR 45020; August 27, 

2019), that revised the regulations for 

adding and removing species from the 

Lists of Endangered and Threatened 

Wildlife and Plants and clarified 

procedures for designating critical 

habitat. As a result of that review, the 

Departments proposed a new 

rulemaking. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 16 U.S.C. 

1531 et seq. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 06/22/23 88 FR 40764 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

08/21/23 

Final Action ......... 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

State. 

Agency Contact: Carey Galst, Chief, 

Branch of Listing Policy and Support, 

Department of the Interior, United 

States Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Ecological Services Program, 5275 

Leesburg Pike, MS: ES, Falls Church, 

VA 22041–3803, Phone: 703 358–1954, 

Fax: 703 358–1954, Email: carey_galst@

fws.gov. 

Related RIN: Related to 0648–BK47 

RIN: 1018–BF95 

DOI—FWS 

124. Endangered and Threatened 

Wildlife and Plants; Interagency 

Cooperation [1018–BF96] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. 

CFR Citation: 50 CFR 402. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: Per section 2 of the 

Executive Order on Protecting Public 

Health and the Environment and 

Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate 

Crisis (E.O. 13990), and subsequent Fact 

Sheet: List of Agency Actions for 

Review, the Departments of Commerce 

and the Interior (the Departments) 

initiated a review of the previous 

rulemaking action with the title, 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Regulations for Interagency 

Cooperation’’ (84 FR 44976; August 27, 

2019) that revised portions of the 

regulations that implement section 7 of 

the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended. As a result of that review, the 

Departments proposed to revise those 

regulations (88 FR 40753; June 22, 

2023), and after publication of that 

proposal, delivered a series of 

informational sessions to stakeholders 

including: Federal agencies, State 

agencies, federally recognized Tribes, 

Native Hawaiian community leaders, 

non-governmental organizations, 

conservation partners, industry groups, 

and Pacific Islander community leaders. 

FAQs and a recording of the 

presentation can be viewed on the 

website https://fws.gov/project/ 

endangered-species-act-regulationrevisions. 

Statement of Need: Per section 2 of 

the Executive Order on Protecting 

Public Health and the Environment and 

Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate 

Crisis (E.O. 13990), and subsequent Fact 

Sheet: List of Agency Actions for 

Review, the Departments of Commerce 

and the Interior (the Departments) 

initiated a review of the August 27, 

2019, final rule (84 FR 44976) that 

revised portions of the regulations that 

implement section 7 of the Endangered 

Species Act of 1973, as amended. As a 

result of that review, the Departments 

proposed a new rulemaking. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 16 U.S.C. 

1531 et seq. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9417 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 06/22/23 88 FR 40753 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

08/21/23 

Final Action ......... 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal. 

Agency Contact: Craig Aubrey, Chief, 

Division of Environmental Review, 

Ecological Services Program, 

Department of the Interior, United 

States Fish and Wildlife Service, 5275 

Leesburg Pike, MS: ES, Falls Church, 

VA 22041, Phone: 703 358–2442, Fax: 

703 358–1800, Email: craig_aubrey@

fws.gov. 

Related RIN: Related to 0648–BH41, 

Related to 1018–BC87 

RIN: 1018–BF96 

DOI—FWS 

125. Endangered Species Act Section 10 

Regulations; Enhancement of Survival 

and Incidental Take Permits, Final 

Rule [1018–BF99] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. 

CFR Citation: 50 CFR 17. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: Pursuant to the Endangered 

Species Act of 1973 (ESA), this final 

rule will revise the regulations at 50 

CFR part 17 that implement section 

10(a)(1)(A) and 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA. 

This section pertains to, among other 

things, permit issuance for take of 

endangered and threatened wildlife 

species. This final rule incorporates and 

addresses public comments received in 

response to our proposed rule and 

informational webinars held with State 

agencies and Tribal nations. 

Statement of Need: Pursuant to the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA), 

this final rule will revise the regulations 

at 50 CFR part 17 that implement 

section 10 of the ESA. This section 

pertains to, among other things, permit 

issuance for take of endangered and 

threatened wildlife species. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 16 U.S.C. 

1531 et seq. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 02/09/23 88 FR 8380 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

04/10/23 

Final Action ......... 02/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal. 

Agency Contact: Elizabeth Maclin, 

Division of Restoration and Recovery, 

Department of the Interior, United 

States Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Ecological Services, 5275 Leesburg Pike, 

Falls Church, VA 22041–3803, Phone: 

703 358–2646, Fax: 703 358–1735, 

Email: elizabeth_maclin@fws.gov. 

RIN: 1018–BF99 

DOI—FWS 

126. Revision to the Section 4(d) Rule 

for the African Elephant, Final Rule 

[1018–BG66] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361 to 

1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531 to 1544; 16 U.S.C. 

4201 to 4245 

CFR Citation: 50 CFR 17.40(e). 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rule will revise the 

current regulations for the African 

elephant (Loxodonta africana) 

promulgated under section 4(d) of the 

Endangered Species Act (ESA). The 

purposes are to: (1) Increase protection 

for African elephants in response to the 

recent rise in international trade of live 

African elephants from range countries 

by establishing ESA permit 

requirements and enhancement 

standards for trade in live African 

elephants, (2) clarify the existing 

enhancement requirement during our 

evaluation of the application for a 

permit to import African elephant sporthunted trophies, and (3) incorporate a 

Party’s designation under the 

Convention on International Trade in 

Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and 

Flora (CITES) National Legislation 

Project into the decisionmaking process 

for the import of live African elephants, 

African elephant sport-hunted trophies, 

and African elephant parts and 

products. FWS conducted a virtual 

public hearing on January 5, 2023. The 

virtual public hearing was conducted in 

multiple languages, and several foreign 

countries expressed comments. The 

comment period for the proposed rule 

was extended due to comments 

expressed during the virtual public 

hearing. In addition to the public 

hearing, the agency has conducted 

several calls with foreign countries that 

have a stake in the proposed 

rulemaking. 

Statement of Need: This rule will 

revise the current regulations for the 

African elephant (Loxodonta africana) 

promulgated under section 4(d) of the 

Endangered Species Act (ESA). The 

purpose is to: (1) Increase protection for 

African elephants in response to the 

recent rise in international trade of live 

African elephants from range countries 

by establishing ESA permit 

requirements and enhancement 

standards for trade in live African 

elephants, (2) clarify the existing 

enhancement requirement during our 

evaluation of the application for a 

permit to import African elephant sporthunted trophies, and (3) incorporate a 

Party’s designation under the 

Convention on International Trade in 

Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and 

Flora (CITES) National Legislation 

Project into the decisionmaking process 

for the import of live African elephants, 

African elephant sport-hunted trophies, 

and African elephant parts and products 

other than ivory. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 16 U.S.C. 

1361 to 1407, 16 U.S.C. 1531 to 1544, 

and 16 U.S.C. 4201 to 4245. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 11/17/22 87 FR 68975 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

01/23/23 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extended.

01/17/23 88 FR 2597 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extended End.

03/30/23 

Final Action ......... 01/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

International Impacts: This regulatory 

action will be likely to have 

international trade and investment 

effects, or otherwise be of international 

interest. 

Agency Contact: Naimah Aziz, 

Manager, Division of Management 

Authority, Department of the Interior 

United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 

International Affairs, 5275 Leesburg 

Pike MS: IA, Falls Church, VA 22041– 

3808, Phone: 571 218–5019, Email: 

naimah_aziz@fws.gov. 

RIN: 1018–BG66 

DOI—FWS 

127. Establishment of a Nonessential 

Experimental Population of the Gray 

Wolf in the State of Colorado, Final 

Rule [1018–BG79] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. 

CFR Citation: 50 CFR 17. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: FWS will make a final 

determination on the proposal to 

establish a nonessential experimental 

population (NEP) of the gray wolf (Canis 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 

I I 
9418 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

lupus) in Colorado, under section 10(j) 

of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, 

as amended (Act). Establishment of this 

NEP will facilitate the State of 

Colorado’s reintroduction of gray 

wolves and provide for allowable legal 

incidental taking of the gray wolf within 

the NEP area. The best available data 

indicate that reintroduction of the gray 

wolf into Colorado is biologically 

feasible and will promote the 

conservation of the species. We held 

four public information meetings during 

a 60-day public comment period. This 

final determination is based on 

consideration of public comments and 

peer review received in response to our 

proposed rule. 

Statement of Need: FWS will make a 

final determination on the proposal to 

establish a nonessential experimental 

population (NEP) of the gray wolf (Canis 

lupus) in Colorado, under section 10(j) 

of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, 

as amended (Act). Establishment of this 

NEP will facilitate the State of 

Colorado’s reintroduction of gray 

wolves and provide for allowable legal 

incidental taking of the gray wolf within 

the NEP area. The best available data 

indicate that reintroduction of the gray 

wolf into Colorado is biologically 

feasible and will promote the 

conservation of the species. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 16 U.S.C. 

1531 et seq. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Notification of Intent to Prepare 

an EIS.

07/21/22 87 FR 43489 

Comment Period 

End.

08/22/22 

NPRM .................. 02/17/23 88 FR 10258 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

04/18/23 

Notification of 

Availability of 

FEIS and ROD.

09/19/23 88 FR 64399 

Final Action ......... 11/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

State. 

Agency Contact: Elizabeth Maclin, 

Division of Restoration and Recovery, 

Department of the Interior, United 

States Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Ecological Services, 5275 Leesburg Pike, 

Falls Church, VA 22041–3803, Phone: 

703 358–2646, Fax: 703 358–1735, 

Email: elizabeth_maclin@fws.gov. 

RIN: 1018–BG79 

DOI—FWS 

Completed Actions 

128. National Wildlife Refuge System; 

Station-Specific Hunting and Sport 

Fishing Regulations, 2023–24, Final 

Rule [1018–BG71] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 16 U.S.C. 460k to 

460k–4; 16 U.S.C. 668dd to 668ee 

CFR Citation: 50 CFR 32; 50 CFR 71. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rule revises the FWS 

station-specific regulations and expands 

hunting and sport fishing opportunities 

for the 2023–24 hunting and sport 

fishing season. This action is part of an 

annual update for the national wildlife 

refuge system and the national fish 

hatchery system that ensures adequate 

public notice of openings and changes. 

These changes and openings enhance 

conservation stewardship and outdoor 

recreation and improve the management 

of game species and their habitat. The 

FWS operates hunting and sport fishing 

programs on refuges to implement 

Congressional directives to facilitate 

compatible priority wildlife-dependent 

recreational opportunities. Although 

hatcheries are not part of the national 

wildlife refuge system, by regulation, 

the administrative provisions of refuge 

regulations are applied to national fish 

hatchery areas. The FWS coordinated 

closely with the Association of Fish and 

Wildlife Agencies when developing the 

rule. The FWS also engaged with 

stakeholder groups through the Hunting 

and Wildlife Conservation Council for 

input on hunting and fishing programs 

on FWS lands and waters. 

Statement of Need: This proposed 

rule would make additions and 

revisions to station-specific regulations 

and expand hunting and sport fishing 

opportunities for the 2023–24 hunting 

and sport fishing season. This action is 

part of an annual update for the national 

wildlife refuge system and the national 

fish hatchery system that ensures 

adequate public notice of openings and 

changes. These changes and openings 

enhance conservation stewardship and 

outdoor recreation and improve the 

management of game species and their 

habitat. The FWS operates hunting and 

sport fishing programs on refuges to 

implement congressional directives to 

facilitate compatible priority wildlifedependent recreational opportunities. 

Although hatcheries are not part of the 

national wildlife refuge system, by 

regulation, the administrative 

provisions of refuge regulations are 

applied to national fish hatchery areas. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 16 U.S.C. 

460k to 460k–4 and 16 U.S.C. 668dd to 

668ee. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 06/23/23 88 FR 41058 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

08/22/23 

Final Action Effective.10/27/23 

Final Action ......... 10/30/23 88 FR 74050 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State, Tribal. 

Agency Contact: Katherine Harrigan, 

Sportsmen’s Access Coordinator, 

Department of the Interior, United 

States Fish and Wildlife Service, Branch 

of Conservation Policy and Planning, 

National Wildlife Refuge System, 5275 

Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041– 

3803, Phone: 703 358–2440, Email: 

katherine_harrigan@fws.gov. 

RIN: 1018–BG71 

DOI—NATIONAL PARK SERVICE 

(NPS) 

Final Rule Stage 

129. Native American Graves 

Protection and Repatriation Act 

Regulations [1024–AE19] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 25 U.S.C. 3001 et seq. 

CFR Citation: 43 CFR 10. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This final rule revises the 

Native American Graves Protection and 

Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) 

implementing regulations. The rule 

eliminates ambiguities, correct 

inaccuracies, simplifies excessively 

burdensome and complicated 

requirements, clarifies timelines, and 

removes offensive terminology in the 

existing regulations that have inhibited 

the respectful repatriation of most 

Native American human remains. This 

rule simplifies and improves the 

regulatory process for repatriation and 

thereby advances the goals of racial 

justice, equity, and inclusion. The 

Department sought Tribal government 

input through communication under 

Executive Order 13175 criteria and the 

Department’s consultation policy on 

meaningful communication and 

collaboration with tribal officials. The 

Department held Consultation sessions 

with federally recognized Indian Tribes 

and a listening session for present, 

former, and prospective petitioners. 

Statement of Need: This rule will 

revise the Native American Graves 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9419 

Protection and Repatriation Act 

(NAGPRA) implementing regulations. 

The rule will eliminate ambiguities, 

correct inaccuracies, simplify 

excessively burdensome and 

complicated requirements, clarify 

timelines, and remove offensive 

terminology in the existing regulations 

that have inhibited the respectful 

repatriation of most Native American 

human remains. This rule will simplify 

and improve the regulatory process for 

repatriation and thereby advance the 

goals of racial justice, equity, and 

inclusion. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 25 U.S.C. 

3001 et seq. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 10/18/22 87 FR 63202 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extended.

01/10/23 88 FR 1344 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extended End.

01/31/23 

Final Rule ............ 12/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal. 

Additional Information: Since the 

passage of NAGPRA in 1990, it has been 

the policy of the United States that 

human remains of any ancestry must 

always be treated with dignity and 

respect. Yet in the last 30 years, less 

than half of the Native American human 

remains in collections have been 

repatriated to their traditional 

caretakers. The revisions to the existing 

regulatory requirements will respect the 

civil rights and sovereignty of Indian 

Tribes and Native Hawaiians to 

repatriate their ancestors and cultural 

items. The rule responds to regular and 

repeated requests for regulatory 

revisions and will reduce the regulatory 

burden on all parties by streamlining 

requirements in accessible language 

with clear timelines, removing 

ambiguity, and improving efficiency. 

The rule will likely have a positive net 

benefit, justifying any temporary cost 

increase. 

URL For More Information: 

www.nps.gov/nagpra. 

Agency Contact: Melanie O’Brien, 

National NAGPRA Program Manager, 

Department of the Interior, National 

Park Service, National NAGPRA 

Program, 1849 C Street NW, 

Washington, DC 20240, Phone: 202 354– 

2204, Email: melanie_o’brien@nps.gov. 

RIN: 1024–AE19 

DOI—NPS 

130. Alaska; Hunting and Trapping in 

National Preserves [1024–AE70] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 54 U.S.C. 100751 

CFR Citation: 36 CFR 13. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This final rule will amend 

regulations for sport hunting and 

trapping in national preserves in Alaska. 

This rule would prohibit certain harvest 

practices, including bear baiting; and 

prohibit predator control or predator 

reduction on national preserves. 

Statement of Need: This final rule 

will amend regulations for sport hunting 

and trapping in national preserves in 

Alaska. This rule would prohibit certain 

harvest practices, including bear baiting; 

and prohibit predator control or 

predator reduction on national 

preserves. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 54 U.S.C. 

100751. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 01/09/23 88 FR 1176 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

03/10/23 

NPRM Comment 

Period End Extended.

03/10/23 88 FR 14963 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extended End.

03/27/23 

Final Rule ............ 05/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: 

Undetermined. 

Agency Contact: Sarah Creachbaum, 

Alaska Regional Director, Department of 

the Interior, National Park Service, 240 

W 5th Avenue, Anchorage, AK 99501, 

Phone: 907 644–3510, Email: akr_

regulations@nps.gov. 

RIN: 1024–AE70 

DOI—BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS 

(BIA) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

131. Agricultural Leasing of Indian 

Land [1076–AF66] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 25 U.S.C. 380 to 635; 

25 U.S.C. 2201 et seq.; 25 U.S.C. 3701 

et seq.; 44 U.S.C. 3101 et seq. 

CFR Citation: 25 CFR 162. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rule would propose to 

update provisions addressing leasing of 

trust or restricted land (Indian land) for 

agricultural purposes to reflect updates 

that have been made to business and 

residential leasing provisions and 

address outdated provisions. 

Statement of Need: This rule would 

update provisions addressing leasing of 

trust or restricted land (Indian land) for 

agricultural purposes to reflect updates 

that have been made to business and 

residential leasing provisions and 

address outdated provisions. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 25 U.S.C. 

380 to 635, 25 U.S.C. 2201 et seq., 25 

U.S.C. 3701 et seq., and 44 U.S.C. 3101 

et seq. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 03/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: Tribal. 

Agency Contact: Oliver Whaley, 

Director, Office of Regulatory Affairs 

and Collaborative Action—Indian 

Affairs, Department of the Interior, 

Bureau of Indian Affairs, 1001 Indian 

School Road NW, Suite 229, 

Albuquerque, NM 87104, Phone: 202 

738–6065, Email: oliver.whaley@

bia.gov. 

RIN: 1076–AF66 

DOI—BIA 

132. Procedures for Federal 

Acknowledgment of Indian Tribes 

[1076–AF67] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 25 

U.S.C. 2, 9, 479A–1 

CFR Citation: 25 CFR 83. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This proposed rule would 

respond to recent Federal court 

decisions holding that the Department 

did not adequately explain its 

regulations prohibiting previously 

denied petitioners for Federal 

acknowledgment from petitioning again. 

The Department sought Tribal 

government input through 

communication under Executive Order 

13175 criteria and the Department’s 

consultation policy on meaningful 

communication and collaboration with 

tribal officials. The Department held 

Consultation sessions with federally 

recognized Indian Tribes and a listening 

session for present, former, and 

prospective petitioners. 

Statement of Need: This final rule 

will update the regulations in response 

to recent Federal court decisions to 

address whether previously denied 

petitioners for Federal acknowledgment 

may petition again. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9420 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Summary of Legal Basis: 5 U.S.C. 301, 

25 U.S.C. 2, 25 U.S.C. 9, and 25 U.S.C. 

479A–1. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 04/27/22 87 FR 24908 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

07/06/22 

Second NPRM .... 02/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Oliver Whaley, 

Director, Office of Regulatory Affairs 

and Collaborative Action—Indian 

Affairs, Department of the Interior, 

Bureau of Indian Affairs, 1001 Indian 

School Road, NW, Suite 229, 

Albuquerque, NM 87104, Phone: 202 

738–6065, Email: oliver.whaley@

bia.gov. 

George Patton, Department of the 

Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Indian 

Affairs—RACA, 1001 Indian School 

Road NW, Suite 312, Albuquerque, NM 

87104, Phone: 505 563–3805, Email: 

george.patton@bia.gov. 

RIN: 1076–AF67 

DOI—BIA 

133. Indian Arts and Crafts [1076– 

AF69] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 25 

U.S.C. 2; 25 U.S.C. 9; 25 U.S.C. 305 et 

seq. 

CFR Citation: 25 CFR 301; 25 CFR 

304; 25 CFR 307 to 310. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This proposed rule would 

modernize the Indian Arts and Crafts 

Board regulations to better meet the 

objectives of the Indian Arts and Crafts 

Act to promote the economic welfare of 

the Indian Tribes and Indian 

individuals through the development of 

Indian arts and crafts and the expansion 

of the market for the products of Indian 

art and craftsmanship. The Department 

is seeking Tribal government input 

through communication under 

Executive Order 13175 criteria and the 

Department’s policy on meaningful 

collaboration with Tribal officials. 

Statement of Need: This proposed 

rule would modernize the Indian Arts 

and Crafts Board regulations to better 

meet the objectives of the Indian Arts 

and Crafts Act to promote the economic 

welfare of the Indian Tribes and Indian 

individuals through the development of 

Indian arts and crafts and the expansion 

of the market for the products of Indian 

art and craftsmanship. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 5 U.S.C. 301, 

25 U.S.C. 2, 25 U.S.C. 9, and 25 U.S.C. 

305 et seq. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 03/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: Tribal. 

Agency Contact: Oliver Whaley, 

Director, Office of Regulatory Affairs 

and Collaborative Action—Indian 

Affairs, Department of the Interior, 

Bureau of Indian Affairs, 1001 Indian 

School Road NW, Suite 229, 

Albuquerque, NM 87104, Phone: 202 

738–6065, Email: oliver.whaley@

bia.gov. 

RIN: 1076–AF69 

DOI—BIA 

Final Rule Stage 

134. Mining of the Osage Mineral Estate 

for Oil and Gas [1076–AF59] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: Pub. L. 59–321; Pub. 

L. 66–360; Pub. L. 70–919; Pub. L. 75– 

711 

CFR Citation: 25 CFR 226. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This final rule revises the 

regulations in 25 CFR part 226 to 

strengthen the BIA’s management of the 

Osage Mineral Estate and improve 

accounting and production 

measurement standards; offer 

consistency in production valuation; 

address inadequate bonding; support 

the implementation of electronic 

reporting systems; enhance 

accountability; clarify lessees’ 

obligations; prevent waste; promote safe 

and environmentally sound operations; 

and protect resource values. The 

Department received Tribal government 

input through consultation sessions 

held pursuant to Executive Order 13175 

criteria and the Department’s policy on 

meaningful communication and 

collaboration with Tribal officials. 

Statement of Need: This final rule 

will revise the regulations in 25 CFR 

part 226 to advance the purposes of E.O. 

14058; and provide for the 

implementation of electronic royalty 

and production reporting systems, 

reducing administrative burdens on 

operators, purchasers, and the 

government, and streamlining 

accounting and reconciliation processes. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Public Law 

59–321, Public Law 66–360, Public Law 

70–919, and Public Law 75–711. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 01/13/23 88 FR 2430 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

03/17/23 

Final Action ......... 03/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

State, Tribal. 

Agency Contact: Oliver Whaley, 

Director, Office of Regulatory Affairs 

and Collaborative Action—Indian 

Affairs, Department of the Interior, 

Bureau of Indian Affairs, 1001 Indian 

School Road NW, Suite 229, 

Albuquerque, NM 87104, Phone: 202 

738–6065, Email: oliver.whaley@

bia.gov. 

RIN: 1076–AF59 

DOI—BIA 

135. Class III Tribal State Gaming 

Compact Process [1076–AF68] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 25 

U.S.C. 2; 25 U.S.C. 9; 25 U.S.C. 479a– 

1 

CFR Citation: 25 CFR 293. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This final rule will update 

procedures the Secretary of the Interior 

(Secretary) uses for reviewing Class III 

Tribal State Gaming compacts submitted 

for approval to clarify what law the 

Secretary applies and make the process 

more transparent. The Department 

received Tribal government input 

through consultations and listening 

sessions held under Executive Order 

13175 criteria and the Department’s 

policy on meaningful communication 

and collaboration with Tribal officials. 

Statement of Need: This final rule 

will improve the tranparency of 

procedures taken by the Secretary of the 

Interior (Secretary) to review Class III 

Tribal State Gaming compacts submitted 

for approval. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 5 U.S.C. 301, 

25 U.S.C. 2, 25 U.S.C. 9, and 25 U.S.C. 

479a–1. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 12/06/22 87 FR 74916 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

03/01/23 

Final Action ......... 02/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: State, 

Tribal. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9421 

Agency Contact: Oliver Whaley, 

Director, Office of Regulatory Affairs 

and Collaborative Action—Indian 

Affairs, Department of the Interior, 

Bureau of Indian Affairs, 1001 Indian 

School Road NW, Suite 229, 

Albuquerque, NM 87104, Phone: 202 

738–6065, Email: oliver.whaley@

bia.gov. 

George Patton, Department of the 

Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Indian 

Affairs—RACA, 1001 Indian School 

Road NW, Suite 312, Albuquerque, NM 

87104, Phone: 505 563–3805, Email: 

george.patton@bia.gov. 

RIN: 1076–AF68 

DOI—BIA 

136. Land Acquisitions [1076–AF71] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: R.S. 161, 5 U.S.C. 

301; 46 Stat. 1106, as amended; 46 Stat. 

1471, as amended; . . . 

CFR Citation: 25 CFR 151. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rule will advance the 

purposes of E.O. 13985 and address the 

Department’s jurisdiction to acquire 

land in trust for certain Tribes, 

streamline acquisitions on existing 

reservations, clarify Tribal jurisdiction, 

and promote Tribal conservation of 

lands. The Department received Tribal 

government input through consultations 

and listening sessions held under 

Executive Order 13175 criteria and the 

Department’s policy on meaningful 

communication and collaboration with 

Tribal officials. 

Statement of Need: This rule will 

advance the purposes of E.O. 13985 and 

address the Department’s jurisdiction to 

acquire land in trust for certain Tribes, 

streamline acquisitions on existing 

reservations, clarify Tribal jurisdiction, 

and promote Tribal conservation of 

lands. 

Summary of Legal Basis: R.S. 161, 5 

U.S.C. 301, 46 Stat. 1106, as amended, 

and 46 Stat. 1471, as amended. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 12/05/22 87 FR 74334 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

03/01/23 

Final Action ......... 02/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Tribal. 

Agency Contact: Oliver Whaley, 

Director, Office of Regulatory Affairs 

and Collaborative Action—Indian 

Affairs, Department of the Interior, 

Bureau of Indian Affairs, 1001 Indian 

School Road NW, Suite 229, 

Albuquerque, NM 87104, Phone: 202 

738–6065, Email: oliver.whaley@

bia.gov. 

George Patton, Department of the 

Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Indian 

Affairs—RACA, 1001 Indian School 

Road NW, Suite 312, Albuquerque, NM 

87104, Phone: 505 563–3805, Email: 

george.patton@bia.gov. 

RIN: 1076–AF71 

DOI—BUREAU OF OCEAN ENERGY 

MANAGEMENT (BOEM) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

137. • Fitness To Operate Standards for 

Oil and Gas Operators and Lessees on 

the Outer Continental Shelf [1010– 

AE21] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1331, OCS 

Lands Act 

CFR Citation: 30 CFR 550; 30 CFR 

556. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: In response to Executive 

Order 14008, Tackling the Climate 

Crisis at Home and Abroad, the 

Department of the Interior prepared 

Report on the Federal Oil and Gas 

Leasing Program. The report stated that 

the Bureau of Ocean Energy 

Management, through a new ‘‘Fitness to 

Operate’’ standard, would establish 

safety, environmental, and financial 

responsibilities for companies to meet 

in order to operate on the U.S. Outer 

Continental Shelf. 

This rule would establish safety, 

environmental, and financial 

responsibilities for oil and gas 

companies to meet in order to operate 

on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf. 

Statement of Need: In response to 

Executive Order 14008, Tackling the 

Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad, the 

Department of the Interior prepared a 

report on the Federal Oil and Gas 

Leasing Program. The report stated that 

the Bureau of Ocean Energy 

Management, through a new ‘‘Fitness to 

Operate’’ standard, would establish 

safety, environmental, and financial 

responsibilities for companies to meet 

in order to operate on the U.S. Outer 

Continental Shelf. 

This rule would establish safety, 

environmental, and financial 

responsibilities for oil and gas 

companies to meet in order to operate 

on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 43 U.S.C. 

1331, OCS Lands Act. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 09/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: Tribal. 

Federalism: Undetermined. 

Agency Contact: Kelley Spence, 

Department of the Interior, Bureau of 

Ocean Energy Management, 1849 C 

Street NW, Washington, DC 20240, 

Phone: 984 298–7345, Email: 

kelley.spence@boem.gov. 

RIN: 1010–AE21 

DOI—BOEM 

Final Rule Stage 

138. Renewable Energy Modernization 

Rule [1010–AE04] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1337(p) 

CFR Citation: 30 CFR 585. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This final rule will clarify 

BOEM’s renewable energy regulations 

facilitating offshore renewable energy 

development in a manner that is safe, 

environmentally sound, and provides 

fair return to U.S. taxpayers. This action 

also helps meet commitments of 

Executive Order 14008, Tackling the 

Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad, by 

supporting renewable energy 

production and in offshore waters. 

BOEM received a range of comments 

on the NPRM during the public 

comment period. In addition, BOEM 

held multiple staff-level and 

Government-to-Government Tribal 

Consultations. This final rule will 

address feedback received from public 

comment and Tribal Consultations. 

Statement of Need: This final rule 

will clarify BOEM’s renewable energy 

regulations facilitating offshore 

renewable energy development in a 

manner that is safe, environmentally 

sound, and provides fair return to U.S. 

taxpayers. This action also helps meet 

commitments of Executive Order 14008, 

Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and 

Abroad by supporting renewable energy 

production and in offshore waters. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 43 U.S.C. 

1337(p). 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 01/30/23 88 FR 5968 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

03/31/23 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 

I 
9422 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extension.

04/03/23 88 FR 19578 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extension End.

05/01/23 

Final Rule ............ 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: Tribal. 

Agency Contact: Karen Thundiyil, 

Chief, Office of Regulations, Department 

of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy 

Management, 1849 C Street NW, 

Washington, DC 20240, Phone: 202 742– 

0970, Email: karen.thundiyil@boem.gov. 

Related RIN: Merged with 1010– 

AD89, Merged with 1010–AD91 

RIN: 1010–AE04 

DOI—BOEM 

139. Protection of Marine 

Archaeological Resources [1010–AE11] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: NHPA–54 U.S.C. 

300101 et seq. 

CFR Citation: 30 CFR 550. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This final rule will revise 

when lessees and operators would need 

to conduct archaeological surveys. It 

would clarify when operators would 

submit an archaeological report with 

their applications and clarify the source 

and extent of the data utilized. 

Statement of Need: This final rule 

will revise when lessees and operators 

would need to conduct archaeological 

surveys. It would clarify when operators 

would submit an archaeological report 

with their applications and clarify the 

source and extent of the data utilized. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 30 CFR 550. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 02/15/23 88 FR 9797 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

04/17/23 

Final Rule ............ 05/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Peter Meffert, 

Regulatory Analyst, Department of the 

Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy 

Management, 45600 Woodland Road, 

Sterling, VA 20166, Phone: 703 787– 

1610, Email: peter.meffert@boem.gov. 

RIN: 1010–AE11 

DOI—BOEM 

140. Risk Management and Financial 

Assurance for OCS Lease and Grant 

Obligations [1010–AE14] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: OCSLA–43 U.S.C. 

1331 et seq. 

CFR Citation: 30 CFR 550; 30 CFR 

556. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This final rule will modify 

the evaluation criteria for determining 

whether oil, gas and sulfur lessees, 

right-of-use and easement grant holders, 

and pipeline right-of-way grant holders 

may be required to provide bonds or 

other financial assurance, above the 

regulatorily prescribed amounts for base 

bonds, to ensure compliance with their 

Outer Continental Shelf obligations. 

We held a Government-toGovernment consultation with the 

Indian Tribal Nation during the 

development of the NPRM and expect to 

have another consultation on the final 

rule. This final rule will address 

feedback received from public comment 

period and Tribal consultations. 

Statement of Need: This rule will 

modify the evaluation criteria for 

determining whether oil, gas and sulfur 

lessees, right-of-use and easement grant 

holders, and pipeline right-of-way grant 

holders may be required to provide 

bonds or other financial assurance, 

above the regulatorily prescribed 

amounts for base bonds, to ensure 

compliance with their Outer 

Continental Shelf obligations. 

Summary of Legal Basis: OCSLA—43 

U.S.C. 1331 et seq. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 06/29/23 88 FR 42136 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extension.

08/25/23 88 FR 58173 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

08/28/23 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extension End.

09/07/23 

Final Rule ............ 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: 

Undetermined. 

Agency Contact: Kelley Spence, 

Program Analyst, Department of the 

Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy 

Management, 1849 C Street NW, 

Washington, DC 20240, Phone: 948 298– 

7345, Email: kelley.spence@boem.gov. 

Related RIN: Split from 1082–AA02 

RIN: 1010–AE14 

DOI—OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING 

RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT 

(OSMRE) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

141. Emergency Preparedness for 

Impoundments [1029–AC82] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 30 U.S.C. 1201 

CFR Citation: 30 CFR 780; 30 CFR 

784; 30 CFR 816; 30 CFR 817. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This proposed rule would 

incorporate certain aspects of the 

Federal Guidelines for Dam Safety 

(Federal Guidelines) into OSMRE’s 

existing regulations. This proposed rule 

would relate to emergency preparedness 

for impounding structures and propose 

to include provisions for Emergency 

Action Plans (EAPs) and After-Action 

Reports (AARs) that are consistent with 

the Federal Guidelines. Also, OSMRE 

may add new provisions to the 

regulations explaining the EAP and 

AAR requirements and aligning the 

classification of impoundments with 

industry and other government agency 

standards. 

Statement of Need: This proposed 

rule would incorporate certain aspects 

of the Federal Guidelines for Dam Safety 

(Federal Guidelines) into OSMRE’s 

existing regulations. This proposed rule 

would relate to emergency preparedness 

for impounding structures and propose 

to include provisions for Emergency 

Action Plans (EAPs) and After-Action 

Reports (AARs) that are consistent with 

the Federal Guidelines. Also, OSMRE 

may add new provisions to the 

regulations explaining the EAP and 

AAR requirements and aligning the 

classification of impoundments with 

industry and other government agency 

standards. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 30 U.S.C. 

1201. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 01/00/24 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

02/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: 

Undetermined. 

Federalism: Undetermined. 

Agency Contact: Khalia Boyd, 

Regulatory Analyst, Department of the 

Interior, Office of Surface Mining 

Reclamation and Enforcement, 1951 

Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20240, Phone: 202 208–2823, Email: 

kboyd@osmre.gov. 

RIN: 1029–AC82 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9423 

DOI—OSMRE 

Final Rule Stage 

142. Ten-Day Notices [1029–AC81] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: Pub. L. 95–87; 30 

U.S.C. 1211(c)(2) 

CFR Citation: 30 CFR 733; 30 CFR 

842. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The final rule would amend 

OSMRE’s regulations on ten-day notices 

that went into effect on December 24, 

2020. The final rule would amend the 

existing rules about when OSMRE sends 

ten-day notices to State regulatory 

authorities regarding possible SMCRA 

violations. 

Statement of Need: The final rule 

would amend OSMRE’s regulations on 

ten-day notices that went into effect on 

December 24, 2020. The final rule 

would amend the existing rules about 

when OSMRE sends ten-day notices to 

State regulatory authorities regarding 

possible Surface Mining Control and 

Reclamation Act violations. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Public Law 

95–87 and 30 U.S.C. 1211(c)(2). 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 04/25/23 88 FR 24944 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

06/26/23 

Final Action ......... 02/00/24 

Final Action Effective.03/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: State. 

Agency Contact: Khalia Boyd, 

Regulatory Analyst, Department of the 

Interior, Office of Surface Mining 

Reclamation and Enforcement, 1951 

Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20240, Phone: 202 208–2823, Email: 

kboyd@osmre.gov. 

RIN: 1029–AC81 

DOI—BUREAU OF RECLAMATION 

(RB) 

Final Rule Stage 

143. Public Conduct on Bureau of 

Reclamation Facilities, Lands and 

Waterbodies [1006–AA58] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 43 U.S.C. 373 

CFR Citation: 43 CFR 423. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The revisions to this rule 

clarify regulations that maintain law 

and order and protect persons and 

property on Bureau of Reclamation 

facilities, lands, and waterbodies. The 

rule revises existing definitions for the 

use of aircraft and the possession of 

firearms; updates regulations on 

camping, swimming, and winter 

recreation for the wide range of 

circumstances found across Bureau of 

Reclamation facilities, lands, and 

waterbodies; and clarifies the permitting 

of memorials and reburials on Bureau of 

Reclamation lands. 

Statement of Need: This rule will 

revise existing definitions for the use of 

aircraft and the possession of firearms; 

update regulations on camping, 

swimming, and winter recreation for the 

wide range of circumstances found 

across Bureau of Reclamation facilities, 

lands, and waterbodies; and will clarify 

the permitting of memorials and 

reburials on Bureau of Reclamation 

lands. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 43 U.S.C. 

373. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 02/16/23 88 FR 10070 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

04/17/23 

Final Action ......... 11/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Jill Nagode, 

Regulatory Contact, Department of the 

Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Denver 

Federal Center, P.O. Box 25007, 

Building 67, Denver, CO 80225, Phone: 

303 445–2055, Email: jnagode@usbr.gov. 

RIN: 1006–AA58 

DOI—BUREAU OF LAND 

MANAGEMENT (BLM) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

144. Closure and Restriction Orders 

[1004–AE89] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1701 et 

seq.; 43 U.S.C. 315a; 16 U.S.C. 1281c; 16 

U.S.C. 877 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 4601–6a; 16 

U.S.C. 1241 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 7913; 16 

U.S.C. 1338; . . . 

CFR Citation: None. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The proposed rule would 

revise the visitor services regulations to 

enhance the BLM’s ability to issue 

closure and restriction orders. The 

proposed rule would also make BLM’s 

regulations more consistent with other 

Federal land management agencies’ 

closure and restriction authorities. 

Statement of Need: This proposed 

rule would allow the Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM) to better protect 

persons, property and public lands and 

resources by allowing the agency to 

close or restrict the use of public lands 

in a more timely manner. The rule 

would also make the BLM’s regulations 

more consistent with other Federal land 

management agencies’ closure and 

restriction authorities. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 43 U.S.C. 

1701 et seq., 43 U.S.C. 315a, 16 U.S.C. 

1281c, 16 U.S.C. 877 et seq., 16 U.S.C. 

4601–6a, 16 U.S.C. 1241 et seq., 16 

U.S.C. 7913, and 16 U.S.C. 1338. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 11/00/23 

Final Action ......... 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Tom Heinlein, 

Assistant Director, National Landscape 

Conservation System, Department of the 

Interior, Bureau of Land Management, 

760 Horizon Drive, Grand Junction, CO 

81506, Phone: 970 256–4954, Email: 

theinlein@blm.gov. 

RIN: 1004–AE89 

DOI—BLM 

145. Management and Protection of the 

National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska 

(Section 610 Review) [1004–AE95] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Legal Authority: Naval Petroleum 

Reserves Production Act of 1976 (42 

U.S.C. 6501 to 6508) 

CFR Citation: 43 CFR subpart 2361. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This proposed rule would 

assure maximum protection of Special 

Areas in the NPR–A pursuant to and 

consistent with the provisions of the 

Naval Petroleum Reserves Production 

Act of 1976 (90 Stat. 303; 42 U.S.C. 6501 

et seq.), Alaska National Interest Lands 

Conservation Act, and other applicable 

authorities. 

Statement of Need: The final rule will 

assure maximum protection of Special 

Areas in the NPR–A pursuant to and 

consistent with the provisions of the 

Naval Petroleum Reserves Production 

Act of 1976 (90 Stat. 303; 42 U.S.C. 6501 

et seq.), Alaska National Interest Lands 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
9424 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Conservation Act, and other applicable 

authorities. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Naval 

Petroleum Reserves Production Act of 

1976 (42 U.S.C. 6501 to 6508). 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 09/08/23 88 FR 62025 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

11/07/23 

Final Action ......... 03/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: Tribal. 

Federalism: This action may have 

federalism implications as defined in 

E.O. 13132. 

Agency Contact: Kyle W. Moorman, 

Division Chief for Regulatory Affairs 

and Directives, Department of the 

Interior, Bureau of Land Management, 

1849 C Street NW, Washington, DC 

20240, Phone: 202 527–2433, Email: 

kmoorman@blm.gov. 

RIN: 1004–AE95 

DOI—BLM 

Final Rule Stage 

146. Update of the Communications 

Uses Program, Right-of-Way Cost 

Recovery Fee Schedules and Section 

512 of FLPMA for Rights-of-Way [1004– 

AE60] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 30 U.S.C. 185 and 

189; 43 U.S.C. 1733; 43 U.S.C. 1740; 43 

U.S.C. 1763 

CFR Citation: 43 CFR 2800; 43 CFR 

2860; 43 CFR 2880; 43 CFR 2920. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The BLM is proposing to 

amend its right-of-way regulations to 

improve access to broadband 

communications and update the cost 

recovery fee schedules for ROW work 

activities. Additionally, this rule will 

implement vegetation management 

requirements to address fire risk from 

and to power line ROWs on public 

lands and national forests. 

Statement of Need: This proposed 

rule would address issues relating to (1) 

Idle iron by adding a definition of this 

term to clarify that it applies to idle 

wells and structures on active leases; (2) 

abandonment in place of subsea 

infrastructure by adding regulations 

addressing when BSEE may approve 

decommissioning-in-place instead of 

removal of certain subsea equipment; 

and (3) other operational considerations. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 30 U.S.C. 

185 and 189, 43 U.S.C. 1733, 43 U.S.C. 

1740, and 43 U.S.C. 1763. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 11/07/22 87 FR 67306 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

01/06/23 

Final Action ......... 12/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal. 

Agency Contact: Dominica VanKoten, 

Division Chief, Lands, HQ–35– (Lands, 

Realty, and Cadastral), Department of 

the Interior, Bureau of Land 

Management, 301 Dinosaur Trail, Santa 

Fe, NM 87508, Phone: 571 266–9585, 

Email: dvankote@blm.gov. 

Related RIN: Merged with 1004–AE69 

RIN: 1004–AE60 

DOI—BLM 

147. Rights-of-Way, Leasing and 

Operations for Renewable Energy 

[1004–AE78] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 30 U.S.C. ch. 23; 43 

U.S.C. 1733; 43 U.S.C. 1740; 43 U.S.C. 

1763; 30 U.S.C. 185 and 189; Pub. L. 

109–58; Division Z, Pub. L. 116–260; 

E.O. 14008; . . . 

CFR Citation: None. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The proposed rule would 

revise the BLM’s regulations for rightsof-way, leasing, and operations related 

to activities associated with solar and 

wind energy development. The Energy 

Act of 2020 and section 207 of 

Executive Order 14008 prioritize the 

Department of the Interior’s need to 

improve permitting activities and 

processes to facilitate increased 

renewable energy permitting and 

production on public lands. 

Statement of Need: The principal 

purpose of these amendments is to 

facilitate responsible solar and wind 

energy development on public lands 

managed by the BLM. The rule will 

adjust acreage rents and capacity fees 

for solar and wind energy, provide the 

BLM with more flexibility in how it 

processes applications for solar and 

wind energy development inside 

designated leasing areas, and update 

agency criteria on prioritizing solar and 

wind applications. The rule will also 

make technical changes, corrections, 

and clarifications to the existing rightof-way regulations. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 30 U.S.C. ch. 

23, 43 U.S.C. 1733, 43 U.S.C. 1740, 43 

U.S.C. 1763, 30 U.S.C. 185 and 189, 

Public Law 109–58 Division Z, Public 

Law 116–260, E.O. 14008. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 06/16/23 88 FR 39726 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

08/15/23 

Final Action ......... 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: 

Undetermined. 

Agency Contact: Ben Gruber, Deputy 

Assistant Director, Energy, Minerals, 

and Realty Mgmt., Department of the 

Interior, Bureau of Land Management, 

1849 C Street NW, Washington, DC 

20240, Phone: 951 269–9548, Email: 

begruber@blm.gov. 

RIN: 1004–AE78 

DOI—BLM 

148. Waste Prevention, Production 

Subject to Royalties, and Resource 

Conservation [1004–AE79] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 30 U.S.C. 181 et seq.; 

30 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; 43 U.S.C. 1701 

et seq.; 25 U.S.C. 396a et seq.; 25 U.S.C. 

2101 et seq.; 25 U.S.C. 396; E.O. 13990; 

E.O. 14008; . . . 

CFR Citation: None. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rule proposes updates 

to the BLM’s existing rules governing 

the venting and flaring of natural gas 

(methane) from onshore Federal and 

Indian oil and gas leases. The 

rulemaking will address the priorities 

associated with Executive Order 14008 

to address tackling the climate crisis. 

Per Executive Order 13990, the rule will 

address reducing methane emissions in 

the oil and gas sector. 

Statement of Need: The final rule will 

ensure that companies do not waste 

valuable Federal mineral resources in 

their extraction processes and would 

further address the priorities associated 

with Executive Order 14008, ‘‘Tackling 

the Climate Crisis at Home and 

Abroad.’’ 

Summary of Legal Basis: 30 U.S.C. 

181 et seq., 30 U.S.C. 1701 et seq., 43 

U.S.C. 1701 et seq., 25 U.S.C. 396a et 

seq., 25 U.S.C. 2101 et seq., 25 U.S.C. 

396, E.O. 13990, and E.O. 14008. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 11/30/22 87 FR 73588 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

01/30/23 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 

I I 

I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9425 

Action Date FR Cite 

Final Action ......... 01/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Ben Gruber, Deputy 

Assistant Director, Energy, Minerals, 

and Realty Mgmt., Department of the 

Interior, Bureau of Land Management, 

1849 C Street NW, Washington, DC 

20240, Phone: 951 269–9548, Email: 

begruber@blm.gov. 

RIN: 1004–AE79 

DOI—BLM 

149. Fluid Mineral Leases and Leasing 

Process [1004–AE80] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 30 U.S.C. 181 et seq.; 

30 U.S.C. 351 to 359 et seq.; 43 U.S.C. 

1701 et seq.; 30 U.S.C. 521 to 531 et 

seq.; 90 Stat. 1083 to 1092; 30 U.S.C. 

1701 et seq.; 92 Stat. 2073 to 2075; Pub. 

L. 102–486; Pub. L. 109–58; 25 U.S.C. 

396; 25 U.S.C. 396a–g; 25 U.S.C. 2101 to 

2108; 30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 

7101 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.; E.O. 

14008; . . . 

CFR Citation: None. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The proposed rule would 

revise the BLM’s oil and gas regulations 

to update fees, rents, royalties, and 

bonding requirements related to oil and 

gas leasing, development, and 

production. The proposed rule would 

also update the BLM’s process for 

leasing to ensure the protection and 

proper stewardship of the public lands, 

including addressing impacts associated 

with fossil fuel activities and ensuring 

a fair return to taxpayers. 

Statement of Need: This rule will 

revise the BLM’s oil and gas regulations 

to update the fees, rents, royalties, and 

bonding requirements related to oil and 

gas leasing, development, and 

production pursuant to the Inflation 

Reduction Act (Pub. L. 117–169). The 

rule will also update the BLM’s process 

for leasing to ensure the protection and 

proper stewardship of the public lands, 

including addressing impacts associated 

with fossil fuel activities and ensuring 

a fair return to taxpayers. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 30 U.S.C. 

181 et seq., 30 U.S.C. 351 to 359 et seq., 

43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq., 30 U.S.C. 521 to 

531 et seq., 90 Stat. 1083 to 1092, 30 

U.S.C. 1701 et seq., 92 Stat. 2073 to 

2075, Public Law 102–486, Public Law 

109–58, 25 U.S.C. 396, 25 U.S.C. 396a– 

g, 25 U.S.C. 2101 to 2108, 30 U.S.C. 

1201 et seq., 42 U.S.C. 7101 et seq., 42 

U.S.C. 4321 et seq., and E.O. 14008. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 07/24/23 88 FR 47562 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

09/22/23 

Final Action ......... 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Nick Douglas, 

Assistant Director, Energy, Minerals, 

and Realty Management Department of 

the Interior, Bureau of Land 

Management, 760 Horizon Drive, Grand 

Junction, CO 81506, Phone: 970 256– 

4918, Email: ndouglas@blm.gov. 

Ben Gruber, Deputy Assistant 

Director, Energy, Minerals, and Realty 

Mgmt., Department of the Interior 

Bureau of Land Management, 1849 C 

Street NW, Washington, DC 20240, 

Phone: 951 269–9548, Email: begruber@

blm.gov. 

RIN: 1004–AE80 

DOI—BLM 

150. Conservation and Landscape 

Health (Section 610 Review) [1004– 

AE92] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1732(a) 

CFR Citation: 43 CFR 6000; 43 CFR 

1610. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The proposed rule would 

clarify and support the principles of 

multiple use and sustained yield in the 

management of the public lands, 

incorporating climate resiliency and 

restoration through conservation and 

preservation in the management of the 

public lands pursuant to the Federal 

Land Policy and Management Act and 

other relevant authorities. The proposed 

rule is within 43 CFR 6000 and would 

provide an overarching framework that 

would cover multiple resource areas to 

ensure land health and sustained yield. 

Statement of Need: The principles of 

multiple use and sustained yield 

management govern the BLM’s 

stewardship of America’s public lands. 

This proposed rule interprets and 

implements a vital component of the 

BLM’s multiple use and sustained yield 

mission: addressing landscape 

resilience and using restoration and 

conservation as tools to ensure 

sustainable and productive natural 

resources for future generations. 

Identifying tools, standards, and 

procedures to appropriately achieve 

sustained yield is particularly important 

to ensure that the BLM can pursue is 

multiple use mission and maintain 

sustained yield in the face of the 

challenges posed by climate change, 

drought, fire, land use changes, and 

other factors impacting the health of 

land, waters, and ecosystems. This 

proposed rule addresses those concerns, 

defines conservation, and provides an 

operational definition of sustained yield 

in the context of changing landscapes. 

This rule also provides a framework for 

decision-making to appropriately 

implement conservation, including by 

identifying best practices to conserve 

and restore lands and waters to desired 

conditions based on land health 

standards and best available science. 

These proposed regulations will 

promote restoration opportunities with 

significant public involvement, honor 

the Bureau’s commitment to work 

closely with Tribes and other 

governmental entities, and respond 

more effectively to changing resource 

conditions and increasing demands on 

public lands and waters. Further, this 

rule will expand Areas of Critical 

Environmental Concern regulations to 

affirm statutory requirements. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Federal Land 

Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) 

provides BLM authority for the 

protection of ecological values (section 

102(8)), the preservation of certain lands 

in their natural condition (section 

102(8)), and the establishment of fish 

and wildlife development and 

utilization as one of six principal or 

major uses of public lands (section 

103(l)). These mandates in FLPMA 

provide BLM with general authority to 

conserve ecosystems across its 245 

million acres of public lands. FLPMA 

section 302(a), provides: The Secretary 

shall manage the public lands under 

principles of multiple use and sustained 

yield . . . except that where a tract of 

such public land has been dedicated to 

specific uses according to any other 

provisions of law it shall be managed in 

accordance with such law 43 U.S.C. 

1732(a) (emphasis added). The multiple 

use and sustained yield principles in 

section 102(a)(8) authorizes the BLM to 

implement the policies set forth in this 

rulemaking effort. 

Alternatives: N/A. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: TBD. 

Risks: TBD. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9426 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 04/03/23 88 FR 19583 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

06/20/23 

Final Action ......... 01/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Federalism: Undetermined. 

Agency Contact: Brian St. George, 

Acting Assistant Director, Directorate of 

Resources and Planning, Department of 

the Interior, Bureau of Land 

Management, 1849 C Street NW, 

Washington, DC 20240, Phone: 202 239– 

3741, Email: bstgeorge@blm.gov. 

RIN: 1004–AE92 

BILLING CODE 4334–63–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (DOJ)— 

FALL 2023 

Statement of Regulatory Priorities 

The mission of the Department of 

Justice is to uphold the rule of law, to 

keep our country safe, and to protect 

civil rights. In carrying out this mission, 

the Department is guided by the core 

values of integrity, fairness, and 

commitment to promoting the impartial 

administration of justice—including for 

those in historically underserved, 

vulnerable, or marginalized 

communities. Consistent with its 

mission and values, the Department is 

prioritizing activities that protect the 

public against foreign and domestic 

threats, strengthen enforcement of civil 

rights laws, defend against domestic and 

international terrorism, combat gun 

violence, prevent and control crime, and 

reform criminal justice systems. Because 

the Department of Justice is primarily a 

law enforcement agency, not a 

regulatory agency, it carries out its 

principal investigative, prosecutorial, 

and other enforcement activities 

through means other than the regulatory 

process. 

Regulatory action is, however, a 

significant aspect of the law 

enforcement mission of the Department. 

The regulatory priorities of the 

Department include initiatives in the 

areas of criminal justice reform, 

immigration, civil rights, and gun 

violence reduction, and are effectuated 

through rulemaking by the various 

components of the Department. These 

initiatives, as well as others important 

to components’ accomplishing key law 

enforcement priorities, are summarized 

below. 

In addition to the public participation 

and outreach efforts of the Department 

described below in the Civil Rights 

Division section, the Abstracts of 

various Justice rulemakings also include 

descriptions of the Department’s efforts 

in these areas including: 1105–AB69 

‘‘OVW Special Tribal Criminal 

Jurisdiction Reimbursement’’; 1105– 

AB40 ‘‘Telemedicine Prescribing of 

Controlled Substances When the 

Practitioner and the Patient Have not 

had a Prior In-Person Medical 

Evaluation’’; 1117–AB60 ‘‘Providing 

Controlled Substances to Ocean 

Vessels’’; 1117–AB63 ‘‘Termination of 

Registration Upon Discontinuation of 

Business or Change of Ownership’’; 

1117–AB69 ‘‘Operation of Automated 

Dispensing Systems at Long Term Care 

Facilities by Hospital/Clinic 

Pharmacies’’; 1117–AB72 ‘‘Changes to a 

Prescription’’; 1120–AB05 ‘‘District of 

Columbia Educational Good Time 

Credit’’; 1120–AB67 ‘‘Use of Chemical 

Agents or Other Less-Than-Lethal Force 

in Immediate Use of Force Situations’’; 

1120–AB71 ‘‘Inmate Discipline 

Program: Disciplinary Segregation and 

Prohibited Act Code Changes’’; and 

1121–AA89 ‘‘Updating Office for 

Victims of Crime Programs 

Regulations.’’ 

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms 

and Explosives (ATF) 

ATF issues regulations to enforce and 

implement federal laws relating to the 

manufacture, importation, sale, and 

other commerce in firearms and 

explosives. Such regulations are 

designed to promote the ATF mission to 

curb illegal traffic in, and criminal use 

of, firearms and explosives, and to assist 

state, local, Tribal, territorial, and other 

federal law enforcement agencies in 

reducing violent crime. 

ATF will continue, as a priority 

during fiscal year 2024, to seek 

modifications to its regulations 

governing commerce in firearms and 

explosives in furtherance of these 

important goals. 

The Department is undertaking a 

rulemaking to amend ATF’s regulations 

to conform with the changes made by 

Congress in the Bipartisan Safer 

Communities Act (Pub. L. 117–159) and 

parts of the Consolidated 

Appropriations Act of 2022 (Pub. L. 

117–109), which included the NICS 

Denial Notification Act of 2022 (RIN 

1140–AA57). The Department has also 

proposed to amend ATF’s regulations to 

further clarify what it means for a 

person to be ‘‘engaged in the business’’ 

of dealing in firearms, and to have the 

intent to ‘‘predominantly earn a profit’’ 

from the sale or disposition of firearms 

(RIN 1140–AA58). ATF is undertaking 

an amendment to 27 CFR part 555 to 

require that persons who store explosive 

materials annually notify the local 

authority that has jurisdiction for fire 

safety in the locality in which the 

explosive materials are being stored of 

the type, quantity, and location of each 

site where the explosive materials are 

being stored (RIN 1140–AA51). 

Bureau of Prisons (BOP) 

BOP issues regulations to enforce the 

Federal laws relating to its mission: to 

protect public safety by ensuring that 

federal offenders serve their sentences 

of imprisonment in facilities that are 

safe, humane, cost-efficient, and 

appropriately secure, and to provide 

reentry programming to ensure their 

successful return to the community. 

The First Step Act (FSA) of 2018, 

Public Law 115–391, 132 Stat. 5194 

(2018) has brought a host of regulatory 

changes for BOP. To date, BOP has 

successfully enacted FSA-related 

regulations (1) to enable eligible inmates 

to earn Time Credits towards prerelease 

custody or early transfer to supervised 

release, and (2) to modify the amount of 

Good Time Credit to which eligible 

inmates are entitled. BOP’s next FSArelated regulatory measure involves 

publishing a Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (NPRM) titled the 

Reservation of Funds for Reentry Under 

the First Step Act. This rule proposes to 

implement a specific FSA provision 

requiring BOP to reserve a portion of the 

compensation inmates would otherwise 

receive for working to assist these 

inmates with costs associated with 

release from prison. BOP anticipates the 

NPRM’s publication in the Federal 

Register by the end of 2023. 

Another important BOP regulatory 

measure involving management of 

inmate funds is the Inmate Financial 

Responsibility Program (IFRP). On 

January 10, 2023, BOP published an 

NPRM titled Inmate Financial 

Responsibility Program: Procedures, 

which proposes to withhold a portion of 

inmate work pay and money received by 

outside sources in order to pay 

restitution obligations toward victims 

and satisfy other lawful obligations. 

Specifically, the rule proposes 

withholding 75% of all communitysource deposits in inmates’ commissary 

account; withholding 50% of pay for 

inmates in grades 1 through 4 of 

UNICOR; withholding 25% of pay for 

inmates in grade 5 of UNICOR and 

inmates receiving performance pay for 

institution work; removing two 

penalties for failure to participate in the 

program; and adding one penalty for an 

inmate’s refusal to participate. BOP 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9427 

continues to carefully review and 

thoughtfully consider the 1,300 public 

comments received in response to the 

NPRM. 

In addition, BOP continues to actively 

pursue several proposed rules to update 

the inmate discipline program; revise 

technical sections of the regulation 

regarding filing of tort claims; clarify 

use of force policy for less-than-lethal 

munitions; and modify clinical 

guidelines related to infectious disease 

testing for affected inmates. Finally, 

BOP continues to explore procedural 

avenues to finalize interim final rules 

related to, for example, (1) exceptions to 

the filing requirements for certain 

administrative remedies, and (2) 

calculation of educational good time 

credit for eligible District of Columbia 

inmates. 

Civil Rights Division (CRT) 

CRT works to uphold the civil and 

constitutional rights of all persons in the 

United States, particularly some of the 

most vulnerable members of our society. 

Consistent with this mission, CRT plans 

to engage in five separate rulemakings 

on disability rights. 

First, CRT plans to adopt technical 

standards for public entities’ websites 

under title II of the Americans with 

Disabilities Act (ADA) to help public 

entities meet their existing ADA 

obligations to ensure their websites are 

accessible to people with disabilities 

(RIN 1190–AA79). The Department 

issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

on this topic in August 2023. To 

promote public engagement with the 

rulemaking, the Department also made 

available a fact sheet providing a plain 

language summary of the proposed rule. 

The fact sheet is intended to help the 

public get acquainted with the proposal 

so that the proposed rule feels more 

navigable and so that providing public 

comments feels more approachable. 

These resources were posted on the 

Department’s www.ada.gov website with 

information about how to submit 

comments. They were also posted on a 

web page created by HHS’s 

Administration for Community Living 

to track rulemakings implementing nondiscrimination requirements protecting 

people with disabilities. CRT also held 

a number of listening sessions to 

provide an overview of the proposal and 

hear the perspectives of a variety of 

stakeholders including disability 

groups, State and local government 

groups, and others. Second, CRT plans 

to amend the current DOJ regulation 

under section 504 of the Rehabilitation 

Act of 1973, which prohibits 

discrimination based on disability in 

programs and activities conducted by an 

executive agency, to bring it up to date 

(RIN 1190–AA73). Third, CRT will 

propose standards that address the 

accessibility of medical diagnostic 

equipment under title II of the ADA 

(RIN 1190–AA78). Fourth, CRT intends 

to propose requirements for pedestrian 

facilities in the public right-of-way, 

such as sidewalks and crosswalks, 

covered by part A of title II of the ADA 

that are consistent with the Access 

Board’s minimum Accessibility 

Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities in 

the Public Right-of-Way to help public 

entities meet their existing ADA 

obligations to make those facilities 

accessible (RIN 1190–AA77). Last, CRT 

plans to publish an advance notice of 

proposed rulemaking seeking public 

input on possible revisions to its ADA 

regulations to ensure the accessibility of 

equipment and furniture in public 

entities and public accommodations’ 

programs and services (RIN 1190– 

AA76). 

Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) 

DEA is the agency primarily 

responsible for coordinating the drug 

law enforcement activities of the United 

States and also assisting in the 

implementation of the President’s 

National Drug Control Strategy. DEA 

implements and enforces titles II and III 

of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse 

Prevention and Control Act of 1970 and 

the Controlled Substances Import and 

Export Act (21 U.S.C. 801–971), as 

amended, collectively referred to as the 

Controlled Substances Act (CSA). 

DEA’s mission is to enforce the 

controlled substances laws and 

regulations of the United States and 

bring to the criminal and civil justice 

system those organizations and 

individuals involved in the growing, 

manufacture, or distribution of 

controlled substances and listed 

chemicals appearing in or destined for 

illicit traffic in the United States. The 

CSA and its implementing regulations 

are designed to prevent, detect, and 

eliminate the diversion of controlled 

substances and listed chemicals into the 

illicit market while providing for the 

legitimate medical, scientific, research, 

and industrial needs of the United 

States. 

Pursuant to its statutory authority, 

DEA intends to continue with the 

following priority regulation that 

appeared on the Fall 2022 Unified 

Agenda: 

DEA published a Notice of Purposed 

Rulemaking (NPRM) on Telemedicine 

Prescribing of Controlled Substances 

when the Practitioner and the Patient 

Have Not Had a Prior In-Person Medical 

Evaluation, in March of 2023, and 

received a large volume of public 

comments. DEA then published a 

Temporary Rule on May 10 to extend 

the pandemic-era flexibilities through 

November 11, 2023. On October 10, 

2023, DEA published a second 

Temporary Rule to further extend the 

pandemic-era flexibilities through 

December 31, 2024. DEA is considering 

a new NPRM to promulgate effective 

regulations responsive to the general 

public and industry concerns. DEA may 

propose a regulation that would 

authorize the issuance of registrations 

for telemedicine, and to prescribe the 

circumstances in which they may be 

obtained and used (RIN 1117–AB40). 

DEA also intends to publish a 

proposed regulation to amend the 

reporting requirements found at 21 CFR 

1310.05(b)(2) mandating notification to 

DEA of domestic transactions involving 

tableting and encapsulating machines 

15-days before the seller ships the 

machine. The draft regulation also 

proposes to amend the definitions of a 

‘‘tableting machine’’ and an 

‘‘encapsulating machine’’ to include 

‘‘parts thereof.’’ Finally, the draft 

regulation seeks to modernize customer 

verification requirements for 

transactions and proposes modifications 

to DEA Form 452 to improve tracking of 

transactions of tableting and 

encapsulating machines (RIN 1117– 

AB80). 

In support of its regulatory function, 

DEA regularly engages with the 

registrant community, stakeholders, and 

the public at large. DEA launched 

‘‘Operation Engage’’ for its field offices 

to connect and collaborate with the 

communities they serve through local 

partnerships to implement strategies 

and activities regarding drug use 

prevention and education as well as 

bridging public safety and public health 

efforts to help lower drug overdose 

deaths. DEA also routinely interacts and 

engages with registrants by developing 

programs and presenting topics of 

interest in webinar sessions, industry 

meetings, and conferences. These 

outreach events facilitate open 

dialogues with stakeholders and allow 

DEA an opportunity to better 

understand new and upcoming issues 

faced by the registrant community. 

DEA also plans on improving and 

broadening community engagement and 

advancing participation of underserved 

communities by partnering with trusted 

members and leaders in the community, 

not-for-profit organizations, and patient 

advocacy groups, and by developing inperson and virtual listening sessions. 

Based on the feedback, comments, 

and industry concerns received from 

registrants, stakeholders, and the public 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9428 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

during presentations and routine 

engagement, DEA makes informed 

decisions to evaluate the need to update 

existing regulations or identify new 

ones that should be proposed. DEA will 

continue to broaden its public 

engagement to support the development 

of future regulatory actions. 

Executive Office for Immigration Review 

(EOIR) 

EOIR’s primary mission is to 

adjudicate immigration cases by fairly, 

expeditiously, and uniformly 

interpreting and administering the 

nation’s immigration laws. Under 

delegated authority from the Attorney 

General, EOIR conducts immigration 

court proceedings and appellate 

reviews. Immigration judges in EOIR’s 

Office of the Chief Immigration Judge 

adjudicate cases to determine whether 

noncitizens should be removed from the 

United States or whether they are 

eligible for relief from removal. The 

Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) has 

nationwide jurisdiction over appeals 

from decisions of immigration judges, as 

well as other matters specified by 

regulation. In addition, EOIR also 

conducts administrative hearings 

involving immigration-related 

employment practices, discrimination 

claims, and document fraud cases. 

Accordingly, the Department of Justice 

has a significant role in the 

administration of the nation’s 

immigration laws. The Attorney General 

also is responsible for civil litigation 

and criminal prosecutions relating to 

the immigration laws. 

EOIR is working to revise and update 

the regulations to increase 

administrative efficiency, while also 

safeguarding fairness interests. 

Specifically, EOIR has issued a 

proposed rule that would restore 

longstanding procedures in place before 

a prior rule (RIN 1125–AA96), including 

administrative closure, and clarify and 

codify other established practices. The 

rule will promote the efficient and 

expeditious adjudication of cases, afford 

immigration judges and the Board 

flexibility to efficiently allocate their 

limited resources, and protect due 

process for parties before immigration 

judges and the Board. 

EOIR and the Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS) are also 

drafting a joint proposed rule that 

would provide clarity and uniformity to 

DHS custody procedures and EOIR bond 

hearing procedures (RIN 1125–AB27). 

The Departments believe this 

rulemaking will help address litigation 

issues and resolve varying judicial 

interpretations of the existing custody 

and bond hearing procedures among 

Federal circuit courts. 

Additionally, EOIR is developing 

several regulations related to the asylum 

system. For example, EOIR and DHS 

intend to propose joint rules to 

withdraw prior rules that created 

obstacles to asylum, such as RIN 1125– 

AB08, which proposes to rescind a 

pandemic-era rule that categorically 

barred asylum for individuals fleeing 

political, religious, or other persecution 

solely based on their passage through a 

country in which a communicable 

disease is prevalent, regardless of 

whether an individual was exposed to 

the disease or was vaccinated, and RIN 

1125–AB22, which proposes to rescind 

or modify regulatory revisions made by 

a prior rule to procedures for asylum 

and withholding of removal. 

Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) 

The FBI is responsible for protecting 

and defending the United States against 

terrorist and foreign intelligence threats, 

upholding and enforcing the criminal 

laws of the United States, and providing 

leadership and criminal justice services 

to federal, state, local, tribal territorial, 

and international agencies and partners. 

Only in limited contexts does the FBI 

rely on rulemaking. 

For example, the FBI drafted a 

proposed rule to establish the criteria 

for use by a designated entity in 

deciding fitness as described under the 

Child Protection Improvements Act 

(CPIA), 34 U.S.C. 40102, Public Law 

115–141, div. S. title I, section 101(a)(1), 

Mar. 23, 2018, 132 Stat. 1123. 

The CPIA requires that the Attorney 

General, by rule, establish the criteria 

for use by designated entities in making 

a determination of fitness described in 

subsection (b)(4) of the Act concerning 

whether the provider has been 

convicted of, or is under pending 

indictment for, a crime that bears upon 

the provider’s fitness to have 

responsibility for the safety and 

wellbeing of children, the elderly, or 

individuals with disabilities and shall 

convey that determination to the 

qualified entity. Such criteria shall be 

based on the criteria established 

pursuant to section 108(a)(3)(G)(i) of the 

Prosecutorial Remedies and Other Tools 

to end the Exploitation of Children 

Today Act of 2003 (34 U.S.C. 40102 

note) and section 658H of the Child Care 

and Development Block Grant Act of 

1990 (42 U.S.C. 9858f). 

The FBI is also drafting rules to 

implement the Bipartisan Safer 

Communities Act of 2022 (BSCA), 28 

U.S.C. 534, 34 U.S.C. 40901, and 34 

U.S.C., Subt. IV, ch. 411, Refs. & Annos., 

Public Law 117–159, div A, title II, 

sections 12001(a) and 12004(h), June 25, 

2022, 136 Stat. 1313 and the National 

Instant Criminal Background Check 

System (NICS) Denial Notification Act 

(NDNA) of 2022, 18 U.S.C. 921, 18 

U.S.C. 925B through 925D, Public Law 

117–103, div. W, title XI, sections 1101 

through 1103, March 15, 2022, 136 Stat. 

919. 

In accordance with the BSCA, the FBI 

will propose regulatory amendments to 

include, but not be limited to: 

authorizing and establishing the process 

for federal firearm licensees (FFLs) to 

receive access to records of stolen 

firearms maintained in the FBI’s 

National Crime Information Center to 

verify if a firearm offered for sale to the 

FFL has been reported stolen; 

authorizing, and establishing the 

process for, FFLs to use NICS for the 

purpose of voluntary background checks 

of certain current and/or prospective 

employees of the FFL; and establishing 

the process when NICS has been 

contacted for the prospective transfer of 

a firearm to a person under the age of 

21. For NICS transactions involving 

persons under the age of 21, proposed 

regulation amendments will address, 

but may not be limited to, the BSCA 

provisions regarding: (A) the application 

of a delay, up to the tenth business day, 

if cause exists to further investigate a 

possibly disqualifying juvenile record; 

(B) the required collection (and any 

purge/retention) of residential address 

information submitted by an FFL so the 

FBI may comply with the expanded 

background checks of such persons; and 

(C) the process for conducting the 

expanded background checks to 

determine if certain entities where such 

persons reside (the state criminal 

history repository or juvenile justice 

information system, the state custodian 

of mental health adjudication records; 

and local law enforcement) have records 

establishing ‘‘cause’’ that such persons 

have possibly disqualifying juvenile 

records under 18 U.S.C., section 922(d). 

The NDNA mandates that, when the 

FBI denies a firearm transfer during a 

NICS transaction, the Attorney General 

is to report various information about 

that denial to local law enforcement 

authorities in the state or tribe where a 

firearm was sought for transfer and, if 

different, the local law enforcement 

authorities of the state or tribe where the 

person resides. ‘‘Local law enforcement 

authority’’ is defined by the NDNA at 18 

U.S.C., section 921(a). 

Regulatory amendments will be 

drafted outlining the process for 

submitting, and the contents of, such 

denial notifications, including language 

similar to the BSCA, addressing the 

required collection (and purge/ 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9429 

retention) of a prospective transferee’s 

residential address so the FBI may 

contact the proper local law 

enforcement authorities should the 

transaction be denied. Regulatory 

proposals based on the NDNA will also 

address denial notifications being sent 

to prosecution authorities in the 

jurisdiction where the firearm was 

sought and circumstances where 

authorities need to be updated that a 

person who was the subject of a denial 

notification has subsequently been 

determined to not be prohibited. 

Regulation proposals from the NDNA 

will also address the Attorney General’s 

new, annual report to Congress 

concerning denial notifications, and 

related statistics, from the previous year. 

DOJ—CIVIL RIGHTS DIVISION (CRT) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

151. Implementation of the ADA 

Amendments Act of 2008: Federally 

Conducted (Section 504 of the 

Rehabilitation Act of 1973) [1190– 

AA73] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: Pub. L. 110–325; 29 

U.S.C. 794 (sec. 504 of the Rehab. Act 

of 1973); E.O. 12250 (45 FR 72855) 

CFR Citation: 28 CFR 39. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: Section 504 of the 

Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended 

(29 U.S.C. 794), prohibits discrimination 

on the basis of disability in programs 

and activities conducted by an 

Executive agency. The Department 

plans to revise its 504 Federally 

conducted regulation at 28 CFR part 39 

to incorporate amendments to the 

statute, including the changes in the 

meaning and interpretation of the 

applicable definition of disability 

required by the ADA Amendments Act 

of 2008, Public Law 110–325, 122 Stat. 

3553 (Sep. 25, 2008); incorporate 

requirements and limitations stemming 

from judicial decisions; and make other 

non-substantive clarifying edits, 

including updating outdated 

terminology and references. 

Statement of Need: This rule is 

necessary to bring the Department’s 

prior section 504 Federally conducted 

regulation, which has not been updated 

in three decades, into compliance with 

judicial decisions establishing rights 

and limitations under section 504, as 

well as statutory amendments to the 

Rehabilitation Act, including the new 

definition of disability provided by the 

ADA Amendments Act of 2008, which 

became effective on January 1, 2009. 

Additionally, following the passage of 

the Americans with Disabilities Act 

(ADA), amendments to the 

Rehabilitation Act sought to ensure that 

the same precepts and values embedded 

in the ADA were also reflected in the 

Rehabilitation Act. To ensure the 

intended parity between the two laws, 

it is also necessary to update the 

Federally conducted regulation to align 

it with the relevant provisions of title II 

of the ADA. An updated Federally 

conducted regulation would consolidate 

the existing section 504 requirements in 

one place for easy reference. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The 

summary of the legal basis of authority 

for this regulation is set forth above in 

the abstract. 

Alternatives: There are no appropriate 

alternatives to issuing this NPRM since 

it implements requirements and 

limitations arising from the statute and 

judicial decisions. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

Because the NPRM would incorporate 

existing legal requirements and 

limitations in the Department’s section 

504 Federally conducted regulation, the 

Department does not anticipate any 

costs from this rule. 

Risks: Failure to update the 

Department’s section 504 Federally 

conducted regulation to conform to legal 

requirements and limitations provided 

under the statute and judicial decisions 

will interfere with the Department’s 

ability to meet its non-discrimination 

requirements under section 504. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 10/00/24 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

01/00/25 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal. 

Additional Information: Transferred 

from RIN 1190–AA60. 

Agency Contact: Rebecca Bond, Chief, 

Disability Rights Section, Department of 

Justice, Civil Rights Division, 4 

Constitution Square, 150 M Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20002, Phone: 202 307– 

0663. 

RIN: 1190–AA73 

DOJ—CRT 

152. Nondiscrimination on the Basis of 

Disability by State and Local 

Governments; Public Right-of-Way 

[1190–AA77] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 12134(a); 

42 U.S.C. 12134(c) 

CFR Citation: 28 CFR 35. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Department of Justice 

anticipates issuing a Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking that would establish 

accessibility requirements to help 

public entities meet their existing 

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) 

obligations to ensure that sidewalks and 

other pedestrian facilities in the public 

right-of-way are accessible to and usable 

by individuals with disabilities. The 

Architectural and Transportation 

Barriers Compliance Board (Access 

Board) has issued accessibility 

guidelines for pedestrian facilities in the 

public right-of-way, and the Department 

of Justice is required under the ADA to 

promulgate regulations that include 

standards that are consistent with the 

Access Board’s minimum guidelines. 

Statement of Need: This rule is 

necessary to help public entities meet 

their existing ADA obligations to ensure 

that pedestrian facilities in the public 

right-of-way are accessible to and usable 

by individuals with disabilities. The 

Access Board intends to issue minimum 

accessibility guidelines for pedestrian 

facilities in the public right-of-way, and 

the ADA requires the Department of 

Justice to include standards in its 

regulations implementing part A of title 

II of the ADA that are consistent with 

the minimum ADA guidelines issued by 

the Access Board. Accordingly, the 

Department of Justice intends to 

propose requirements for pedestrian 

facilities covered by part A of title II of 

the ADA that are consistent with the 

Access Board’s minimum Accessibility 

Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities in 

the Public Right-of-Way. These 

requirements would help ensure that 

people with disabilities have access to 

sidewalks, curb ramps, pedestrian street 

crossings, and other pedestrian facilities 

in the public right-of-way. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The 

summary of the legal basis for this 

regulation is set forth in the above 

abstract. 

Alternatives: There are no appropriate 

alternatives to issuing this NPRM 

because the ADA requires the 

Department of Justice to include 

standards in its regulations 

implementing part A of title II of the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
9430 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

ADA that are consistent with the 

minimum ADA guidelines issued by the 

Access Board. The Access Board’s 

accessibility guidelines will only 

become binding when the Department 

of Justice adopts them as legally 

enforceable requirements through 

rulemaking. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

Department anticipates costs to State 

and local governments given that this 

rule would require that pedestrian 

facilities in the public right-of-way 

comply with the Department’s 

accessibility requirements under part A 

of title II of the ADA. The Department 

also anticipates significant benefits to 

people with disabilities, who would 

obtain greater access to sidewalks and 

other pedestrian facilities in the public 

right-of-way. 

Risks: Failure to adopt requirements 

for pedestrian facilities covered by part 

A of title II of the ADA that are 

consistent with the Access Board’s 

minimum Accessibility Guidelines for 

Pedestrian Facilities in the Public Rightof-Way would mean that such Access 

Board guidelines would remain 

nonbinding and unenforceable. It would 

also mean that the Department would 

not be complying with its obligation to 

ensure that the standards in its 

regulations are consistent with the 

minimum ADA guidelines issued by the 

Access Board. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 10/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Small Entities Affected: Governmental 

Jurisdictions. 

Government Levels Affected: Local, 

State. 

Federalism: Undetermined. 

Agency Contact: Rebecca Bond, Chief, 

Disability Rights Section, Department of 

Justice, Civil Rights Division, 4 

Constitution Square, 150 M Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20002, Phone: 202 307– 

0663. 

RIN: 1190–AA77 

DOJ—CRT 

153. Nondiscrimination on the Basis of 

Disability by State and Local 

Governments: Medical Diagnostic 

Equipment [1190–AA78] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 12101 et 

seq. 

CFR Citation: 28 CFR 35. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: Title II of the Americans 

with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires 

State and local governments to provide 

services, programs, and activities in a 

manner that is accessible to people with 

disabilities. The Department will seek 

public comment on proposed changes to 

its regulations to adopt the U.S. 

Architectural and Transportation 

Barriers Compliance Board’s (Access 

Board) Standards for Medical Diagnostic 

Equipment (MDE) to ensure that MDE is 

accessible to persons with disabilities in 

their participation in or benefit of 

services, programs, and activities 

provided by public entities. The 

Department previously announced that 

it intended to issue an ANPRM, titled 

Nondiscrimination on the Basis of 

Disability by State and Local 

Governments and Places of Public 

Accommodation; Equipment and 

Furniture (RIN 1190–AA76) addressing 

possible revisions to its ADA 

regulations to ensure the accessibility of 

equipment and furniture generally. 

However, given the specialized nature 

of MDE, the Department has decided to 

publish a separate NPRM that addresses 

the accessibility of MDE. 

Statement of Need: MDE that is 

accessible to individuals with 

disabilities is often critical to a public 

entity’s ability to provide an individual 

with a disability with equal access to its 

health care services, programs, and 

activities. The Department’s ADA 

regulations contain the ADA Standards 

for Accessible Design (the ADA 

Standards), which include accessibility 

standards for some types of fixed or 

built-in equipment and furniture. 

However, there are no specific 

provisions in the ADA Standards or the 

ADA regulations explicitly addressing 

the accessibility of MDE. While 

manufacturers have begun to offer MDE 

that is more accessible to and usable by 

people with disabilities and the 

Department has sought to ensure people 

with disabilities have equal access to 

medical care under the ADA’s general 

regulatory provisions through 

enforcement and the issuance of 

technical assistance, the Department 

recognizes that more specific standards 

are necessary to guarantee full and equal 

access to health care services, programs, 

and activities. This rule is necessary to 

ensure that inaccessible MDE does not 

prevent people with disabilities from 

accessing title II entities’ services, 

programs, and activities. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The 

summary of the legal basis for this 

regulation is set forth in the above 

abstract. 

Alternatives: There are no appropriate 

alternatives to issuing this NPRM. The 

Access Board has issued standards on 

MDE, but these standards only become 

legally enforceable under the ADA 

when the Department adopts them 

through a rulemaking. Alternatively, the 

Department could create its own 

technical standards for MDE for which 

the Access Board does not adopt 

guidelines and implement them through 

a rulemaking. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

Department anticipates costs to covered 

entities (i.e., State and local 

governments). Entities may need to 

acquire new MDE to meet technical 

standards that the Department includes 

in its regulations. The Department also 

anticipates significant benefits to people 

with disabilities, who may obtain 

greater access to public entities’ 

services, programs, and activities, which 

may improve their health or potentially 

save their lives. 

Risks: Failure to adopt technical 

standards to ensure that people with 

disabilities have access to MDE in 

public entities’ programs, services, and 

activities will prevent people with 

disabilities from having the full and 

equal access to which they are entitled. 

The health of people with disabilities 

may suffer as a result of unequal access 

to medical care. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 11/00/23 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

12/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Small Entities Affected: Governmental 

Jurisdictions. 

Government Levels Affected: Local, 

State. 

Federalism: Undetermined. 

Agency Contact: Rebecca Bond, Chief, 

Disability Rights Section, Department of 

Justice, Civil Rights Division, 4 

Constitution Square, 150 M Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20002, Phone: 202 307– 

0663. 

Related RIN: Split from 1190–AA76 

RIN: 1190–AA78 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9431 

DOJ—CRT 

Final Rule Stage 

154. Nondiscrimination on the Basis of 

Disability: Accessibility of Web 

Information and Services of State and 

Local Government Entities [1190– 

AA79] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 12101 et 

seq. 

CFR Citation: 28 CFR 35. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Americans with 

Disabilities Act (ADA) states that ‘‘no 

qualified individual with a disability 

shall, by reason of such disability, be 

excluded from participation in or be 

denied the benefits of services, 

programs, or activities of a public entity, 

or be subjected to discrimination by any 

such entity.’’ 42 U.S.C. 12132. However, 

many public entities’ (i.e., State and 

local governments’) websites and mobile 

apps fail to incorporate or activate 

features that enable users with 

disabilities to access the public entity’s 

services, programs, and activities. The 

Department published a Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) 

proposing to amend its title II ADA 

regulation to provide technical 

standards to assist public entities in 

complying with their existing 

obligations to make their websites and 

mobile apps accessible to individuals 

with disabilities. The Department is 

working to issue a final regulation on 

this topic. 

Statement of Need: Just as steps 

exclude people who use wheelchairs 

from a building, inaccessible websites or 

mobile apps can exclude people with a 

range of disabilities from accessing 

critical State and local government 

services, programs, and activities. The 

Department is proposing technical 

requirements to provide concrete 

standards to public entities on how to 

fulfill their obligations under title II to 

provide access to all of their services, 

programs, and activities that are offered 

via the web or mobile apps. The 

Department believes the requirements 

described in this rule are necessary to 

ensure the equality of opportunity, full 

participation, independent living, and 

economic self-sufficiency for 

individuals with disabilities as set forth 

in the ADA. 42 U.S.C. 12101(a)(7). This 

is particularly necessary now that 

public entities increasingly rely on the 

web and mobile apps to provide their 

services, programs, and activities. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The 

summary of the legal basis for this 

regulation is set forth in the above 

abstract. 

Alternatives: There are no appropriate 

alternatives to issuing this rule. In the 

NPRM, the Department discussed 

various regulatory proposals that would 

ensure full access to websites and 

mobile apps of State and local 

governments and solicited public 

comments on these proposals. The 

Department will continue to evaluate 

these proposals as it works to issue a 

final regulation. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

Department anticipates that this rule 

will be economically significant (that is, 

that the rule will have an annual effect 

on the economy of $200 million or 

more, or adversely affect in a material 

way the economy, a sector of the 

economy, the environment, public 

health or safety, or State, local or tribal 

governments or communities). However, 

the Department believes that revising its 

title II rule to clarify the obligations of 

State and local governments to provide 

accessible websites and mobile apps 

will significantly increase equal access 

by providing citizens with disabilities 

the opportunity to participate in, and 

benefit from, State and local government 

services, programs, and activities. It will 

also ensure that individuals with 

disabilities have access to important 

services and information that are 

provided over the web or through 

mobile apps, such as benefits 

applications and emergency 

information. In drafting its NPRM, the 

Department attempted to minimize the 

compliance costs to State and local 

governments while maximizing the 

benefits of compliance to persons with 

disabilities and the Department will 

consider public comments it received 

on this issue when promulgating its 

final rule. 

Risks: If the Department does not 

revise its ADA title II regulations to 

address website and mobile app 

accessibility, persons with disabilities 

in many communities will continue to 

be unable to access their State and local 

governments’ services, programs, and 

activities in the same manner as citizens 

without disabilities, and in some cases 

persons with disabilities will not be able 

to access those services at all. 

Furthermore, State and local 

governments will not have specific 

information about how to meet their 

ADA obligations with respect to website 

and mobile app accessibility. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 08/04/23 88 FR 51948 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

10/03/23 

Final Action ......... 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Governmental 

Jurisdictions. 

Government Levels Affected: Local, 

State. 

Agency Contact: Rebecca Bond, Chief, 

Disability Rights Section, Department of 

Justice, Civil Rights Division, 4 

Constitution Square, 150 M Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20002, Phone: 202 307– 

0663. 

RIN: 1190–AA79 

DOJ—DRUG ENFORCEMENT 

ADMINISTRATION (DEA) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

155. Telemedicine Prescribing of 

Controlled Substances When the 

Practitioner and the Patient Have Not 

Had a Prior In-Person Medical 

Evaluation [1117–AB40] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 21 U.S.C. 831(h); 21 

U.S.C. 802(54); Pub. L. 115–271, sec. 

3232 

CFR Citation: 21 CFR 1301. 

Legal Deadline: Final, Statutory, 

October 24, 2019. 

Abstract: The Ryan Haight Online 

Pharmacy Consumer Protection Act of 

2008 (the Act) (Pub. L. 110–425) was 

enacted on October 15, 2008, and 

amended the Controlled Substances Act 

by adding various provisions to prevent 

the illegal distribution and dispensing 

of controlled substances by means of the 

internet. Among other things, the Act 

required an in-person medical 

evaluation as a prerequisite to 

prescribing or otherwise dispensing 

controlled substances by means of the 

internet, except in the case of 

practitioners engaged in the practice of 

telemedicine. The definition of the 

‘‘practice of telemedicine’’ includes 

seven distinct categories that involve 

circumstances in which the prescribing 

practitioner might be unable to satisfy 

the Act’s in-person medical evaluation 

requirement yet nonetheless has 

sufficient medical information to 

prescribe a controlled substance for a 

legitimate medical purpose in the usual 

course of professional practice. One 

specific category within the Act’s 

definition of the ‘‘practice of 

telemedicine’’ includes ‘‘a practitioner 

who has obtained from the [DEA 

Administrator] a special registration 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I 
9432 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

under [21 U.S.C. 831(h)].’’ 21 U.S.C. 

802(54)(E). The Act also specifies 

certain criteria that the DEA must 

consider when evaluating an 

application for such a registration. 

However, the Act contemplates that the 

DEA must issue regulations to effectuate 

this special registration provision. 

After publishing an NPRM on March 

1, 2023, and in response to the large 

volume of comments received, DEA has 

since published a Notice of Meeting to 

invite all interested persons, including 

medical practitioners, patients, 

pharmacy professionals, industry 

members, law enforcement, 

stakeholders, community leaders, and 

other third parties, to participate in 

listening sessions held on September 12 

and 13, 2023. The additional feedback 

received will assist DEA in potential 

rulemaking. 

Statement of Need: In light of the 

information and feedback received in 

public comments to the NPRM 

published on March 1, 2023, DEA is 

considering a new NPRM on 

Telemedicine Prescribing of Controlled 

Substances when the Practitioner and 

the Patient Have Not Had a Prior InPerson Medical Evaluation in order to 

promulgate effective regulations 

responsive to the general public and 

industry concerns. 

Summary of Legal Basis: DEA 

implements and enforces the CSA and 

the Controlled Substances Import and 

Export Act, (21 U.S.C. 801–971), as 

amended. DEA publishes the 

implementing regulations for these 

statutes in 21 CFR parts 1300 to end. 

These regulations are designed to ensure 

a sufficient supply of controlled 

substances for medical, scientific, and 

other legitimate purposes, and to deter 

the diversion of controlled substances 

for illicit purposes. 

As mandated by the CSA, DEA 

establishes and maintains a closed 

system of control for manufacturing, 

distribution, and dispensing of 

controlled substances, and requires any 

person who manufactures, distributes, 

dispenses, imports, exports, or conducts 

research or chemical analysis with 

controlled substances to register with 

DEA, unless they meet an exemption, 

pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 822. The CSA 

further authorizes the Administrator to 

promulgate regulations necessary and 

appropriate to execute the functions of 

subchapter I (Control and Enforcement) 

and subchapter II (Import and Export) of 

the CSA. 21 U.S.C. 871(b), 958(f). 

Alternatives: DEA is considering 

various alternatives, particularly the 

proposed requirements outlined in the 

March 1, 2023 NPRM. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: DEA 

anticipates this rule will not be 

economically significant (that is, that 

the rule will not have an annual effect 

on the economy of $200 million or 

more, or adversely affect in a material 

way the economy, a sector of the 

economy, productivity, competition, 

jobs, the environment, public health or 

safety, or State, local, territorial, or tribal 

governments or communities). DEA 

believes the rule will reduce the cost of 

providing and receiving medical care, 

increasing access, particularly for those 

patients where an in- person medical 

evaluation is difficult, such as patients 

in rural areas and with disabilities. 

Risks: Failing to issue a rule on 

telemedicine would interfere with 

DEA’s mission to prevent, detect, and 

investigate the diversion of controlled 

pharmaceuticals and listed chemicals 

from legitimate sources while ensuring 

an adequate and uninterrupted supply 

for legitimate medical, commercial, and 

scientific needs. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 03/01/23 88 FR 12875 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

03/31/23 

Temporary Rule .. 05/10/23 88 FR 30037 

Temporary Rule 

Effective.

05/11/23 

Second Temporary Rule.10/10/23 88 FR 69879 

Second Temporary Rule Effective.11/11/23 

NPRM .................. 12/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Additional Information: DEA Docket 

number 407. 

URL For More Information: DPW@

dea.gov. 

URL For Public Comments: 

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Scott A. Brinks, 

Section Chief, Regulatory Drafting and 

Support Section, Diversion Control 

Division, Department of Justice, Drug 

Enforcement Administration, 8701 

Morrissette Drive, Springfield, VA 

22152, Phone: 571 362–8209, Email: 

scott.a.brinks@dea.gov. 

RIN: 1117–AB40 

DOJ—DEA 

156. Import/Export and Domestic

Transactions of Tableting and

Encapsulating Machines [1117–AB80]

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 21 U.S.C. 802; 21 

U.S.C. 821; 21 U.S.C. 822; 21 U.S.C. 827; 

21 U.S.C. 830; 21 U.S.C. 871; 21 U.S.C. 

951 

CFR Citation: 21 CFR 1300.02; 21 CFR 

1310.05(b)(2); 21 CFR 1310.07. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This regulation would 

amend the reporting requirements found 

at 21 CFR 1310.05(b)(2) mandating 

notification to DEA of domestic 

transactions involving tableting and 

encapsulating machines 15-days before 

the seller ships the machine. The draft 

regulation also would amend the 

definitions of a tableting machine and 

an encapsulating machine to include 

parts thereof. Finally, the draft 

regulation seeks to modernize customer 

verification requirements for 

transactions and proposes modifications 

to DEA Form 452 to improve tracking of 

transactions of tableting and 

encapsulating machines. 

Statement of Need: In order to combat 

the opioid epidemic currently fueled by 

counterfeit pills, it is necessary for DEA 

to amend the reporting requirements for 

all imports, exports and domestic 

transactions involving tableting and 

encapsulating machines and their parts. 

The proposed amendments to Form 452 

are intended to capture more details 

about all transactions to allow DEA to 

closely monitor these machines and 

parts as they move throughout the 

United States. Additionally, this 

amended rule proposes to modify the 

verification methods for regulated 

persons transacting tableting and 

encapsulating machines, to reflect 

modern technological methods (e.g., 

internet search). The proposed rule 

amendments will minimize the 

diversion of tableting and encapsulating 

machines which will reduce the illegal 

manufacturing of illicit drugs. 

Summary of Legal Basis: DEA 

implements and enforces the CSA and 

the Controlled Substances Import and 

Export Act, (21 U.S.C. 801–971), as 

amended. DEA publishes the 

implementing regulations for these 

statutes in 21 CFR parts 1300 to end. 

These regulations are designed to ensure 

a sufficient supply of controlled 

substances for medical, scientific, and 

other legitimate purposes, and to deter 

the diversion of controlled substances 

for illicit purposes. 

As mandated by the CSA, DEA 

establishes and maintains a closed 

system of control for manufacturing, 

distribution, and dispensing of 

controlled substances, and requires any 

person who manufactures, distributes, 

dispenses, imports, exports, or conducts 

research or chemical analysis with 

controlled substances to register with 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9433 

DEA, unless they meet an exemption, 

pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 822. The CSA 

further authorizes the Administrator to 

promulgate regulations necessary and 

appropriate to execute the functions of 

subchapter I (Control and Enforcement) 

and subchapter II (Import and Export) of 

the CSA. 21 U.S.C. 871(b), 958(f). 

Alternatives: There are no appropriate 

alternatives to issuing this NPRM. This 

NPRM is being issued in accordance 

with statutory requirements. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: DEA 

anticipates this rule will not be 

economically significant (that is, that 

the rule will not have an annual effect 

on the economy of $200 million or 

more, or adversely affect in a material 

way the economy, a sector of the 

economy, productivity, competition, 

jobs, the environment, public health or 

safety, or State, local, territorial, or tribal 

governments or communities). DEA 

believes the rule will reduce the time 

necessary to properly complete and 

process the required forms for import 

and export of tabulation and 

encapsulation machines, reducing 

delays, while increasing the number of 

submissions. Any change to cost is 

expected to be de minimis. 

Risks: If this rule is not amended, 

tableting and encapsulating machines 

that enter U.S. ports have a greater 

chance of being diverted and used to 

illegally manufacture illicit drugs. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 03/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Additional Information: DEA Docket 

number 739. 

URL For More Information: DPW@

dea.gov. 

URL For Public Comments: http://

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Scott A. Brinks, 

Section Chief, Regulatory Drafting and 

Support Section, Diversion Control 

Division, Department of Justice, Drug 

Enforcement Administration, 8701 

Morrissette Drive, Springfield, VA 

22152, Phone: 571 362–8209, Email: 

scott.a.brinks@dea.gov. 

RIN: 1117–AB80 

DOJ—EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR 

IMMIGRATION REVIEW (EOIR) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

157. Clarifying Definitions and 

Analyses for Fair and Efficient Asylum 

and Other Protection Determinations 

[1125–AB13] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(42); 

8 U.S.C. 1158; 8 U.S.C. 1225; 8 U.S.C. 

1231 and 1231 note; Executive Order 

14010, 86 FR 8267 (Feb. 2, 2021) 

CFR Citation: 8 CFR 208; 8 CFR 235; 

8 CFR 244; 8 CFR 1208; 8 CFR 1244. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rule proposes to amend 

Department of Homeland Security 

(DHS) and Department of Justice (DOJ) 

(collectively, ‘‘the Departments’’) 

regulations that govern eligibility for 

asylum and withholding of removal. 

The amendments focus on portions of 

the regulations that address the 

definitions of membership in a 

particular social group and the 

interpretation of several other elements 

of eligibility for asylum that are often 

determinative in particular social group 

claims, including the requirements of a 

failure of State protection and 

determinations about whether 

persecution is on account of a protected 

ground. The rule will also propose to 

republish, modify or rescind portions of 

the Procedures for Asylum and 

Withholding of Removal; Credible Fear 

and Reasonable Fear Review final rule 

(RINs 1125–AA94 and 1615–AC42). 

This rule is consistent with Executive 

Order 14010 of February 2, 2021, which 

directs the Departments to promulgate 

joint regulations, consistent with 

applicable law, addressing the 

circumstances in which a person should 

be considered a member of a particular 

social group. 

Statement of Need: This rule provides 

guidance on a number of key 

interpretive issues of the refugee 

definition used by adjudicators deciding 

asylum and withholding of removal 

(withholding) claims. The interpretive 

issues include whether persecution is 

inflicted on account of a protected 

ground, the requirements for 

establishing the failure of State 

protection, and the parameters for 

defining membership in a particular 

social group. This rule will aid in the 

adjudication of claims made by 

applicants whose claims fall outside of 

the rubric of the protected grounds of 

race, religion, nationality, or political 

opinion. One example of such claims 

that often fall within the particular 

social group ground concerns people 

who have suffered or fear domestic 

violence. This rule is expected to 

consolidate issues raised in a proposed 

rule in 2000 and to address issues that 

have developed since the publication of 

the proposed rule. This rule should 

provide greater stability and clarity in 

this important area of the law. This rule 

will also provide guidance to the 

following adjudicators: USCIS asylum 

officers, DOJ Executive Office for 

Immigration Review (EOIR) immigration 

judges, and members of the EOIR Board 

of Immigration Appeals. 

Furthermore, on February 2, 2021, 

President Biden issued Executive Order 

14010 that directs DOJ and DHS [to] 

promulgate joint regulations, consistent 

with applicable law, addressing the 

circumstances in which a person should 

be considered a member of a ‘‘particular 

social group,’’ as that term is used in 8 

U.S.C. 1101(a)(42)(A), as derived from 

the 1951 Convention relating to the 

Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The purpose 

of this rule is to provide guidance on 

certain issues that have arisen in the 

context of asylum and withholding 

adjudications. The 1951 Geneva 

Convention relating to the Status of 

Refugees contains the internationally 

accepted definition of a refugee. United 

States immigration law incorporates an 

almost identical definition of a refugee 

as a person outside his or her country 

of origin ‘‘who is unable or unwilling to 

return to, and is unable or unwilling to 

avail himself or herself of the protection 

of, that country because of persecution 

or a well-founded fear of persecution on 

account of race, religion, nationality, 

membership in a particular social group, 

or political opinion.’’ Section 101(a)(42) 

of the Immigration and Nationality Act. 

Alternatives: Because this rulemaking 

is mandated by executive order, there 

are no feasible alternatives at this time. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: DOJ 

and DHS are currently considering the 

specific cost and benefit impacts of the 

proposed provisions. 

Risks: Without this rulemaking, the 

circumstances by which a person is 

considered a member of a particular 

social group will continue to be subject 

to judicial and agency interpretation, 

which may differ by circuit. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 01/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Additional Information: RIN 1125– 

AB14 ‘‘Procedures for Asylum and 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9434 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Withholding of Removal, Credible Fear 

and Reasonable Fear Review’’ has been 

consolidated into this RIN. 

URL For More Information: http://

www.regulations.gov. 

URL For Public Comments: http://

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Raechel Horowitz, 

Chief, Immigration Law Division, Office 

of Policy, Department of Justice, 

Executive Office for Immigration 

Review, 5107 Leesburg Pike, Suite 1800, 

Falls Church, VA 22041, Phone: 703 

305–0289, Email: pao.eoir@usdoj.gov. 

Related RIN: Related to 1125–AA94, 

Related to 1615–AC65, Related to 1615– 

AC42 

RIN: 1125–AB13 

DOJ—EOIR 

158. Appellate Procedures and 

Decisional Finality in Immigration 

Proceedings; Administrative Closure 

[1125–AB18] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 6 U.S.C. 

521; 8 U.S.C. 1101; 8 U.S.C. 1103; 8 

U.S.C. 1154–1155; 8 U.S.C. 1158; 8 

U.S.C. 1182; 8 U.S.C. 1226; 8 U.S.C. 

1229; 8 U.S.C. 1229a; 8 U.S.C. 1229b; 8 

U.S.C. 1229c; 8 U.S.C. 1231; 8 U.S.C. 

1254a; 8 U.S.C. 1255; 8 U.S.C. 1324d; 8 

U.S.C. 1330; 8 U.S.C. 1361–1362; 28 

U.S.C. 509–510; 28 U.S.C. 1746; sec. 2 

Reorg. Plan No. 2 of 1950, 3 CFR 1949– 

1953, Comp. p. 1002; sec. 203 of Pub. 

L. 105–100, 111 Stat. 2196–200; secs. 

1506 and 1510 of Pub. L. 106–386, 114 

Stat. 1527–29, 1531–32; sec. 1505 of 

Pub. L. 106–554, 114 Stat. 2763A–326 to 

–328 

CFR Citation: 8 CFR 1003; 8 CFR 

1239; 8 CFR 1240; . . . 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: On December 16, 2020, by a 

rule titled Appellate Procedures and 

Decisional Finality in Immigration 

Proceedings; Administrative Closure 

(RIN 1125–AA96) the Department of 

Justice (Department) amended its 

regulations regarding finality of case 

disposition at both the immigration 

court and appellate levels. The 

Department is planning to modify or 

rescind those regulations and to clarify 

the authority of immigration judges and 

the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) 

to administratively close, terminate, 

dismiss, and sua sponte reopen and 

reconsider a case. 

Statement of Need: On December 16, 

2020, the Department amended the 

regulations related to processing of 

appeals and EOIR adjudicator authority 

to administratively close cases. 

Appellate Procedures and Decisional 

Finality in Immigration Proceedings; 

Administrative Closure, 85 FR 81588 

(RIN 1125–AA96). The Department has 

reconsidered its position on those 

matters and proposed to revise the 

regulations accordingly and make other 

related amendments. This proposed rule 

will clarify immigration judge and the 

Board authority, including clarifying 

general authority to administratively 

close, terminate, or dismiss a case under 

certain circumstances and the authority 

to sua sponte reopen and reconsider 

cases. The proposed rule also revises 

Board of Immigration Appeals standards 

involving adjudication timelines, 

briefing schedules, self-certification, 

remands, background checks, 

administrative notice, and voluntary 

departure. Moreover, the proposed rule 

rescinds the EOIR Director’s authority to 

issue decisions in certain cases, rescinds 

procedures for immigration judges to 

certify cases for quality assurance, and 

revises procedures for background 

checks, remand procedures for 

adjudication of voluntary departure, and 

for the forwarding of the record on 

appeal, as well as other minor revisions. 

The Department believes that this 

proposed rule is needed to provide 

guidance to EOIR adjudicators about the 

necessary or appropriate exercise of 

their general authorities to promote 

fairness and efficiency in proceedings. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The Attorney 

General has general authority under 8 

U.S.C. 1103(g) to establish regulations 

related to the immigration and 

naturalization of noncitizens. Thus, this 

proposed rule utilizes such authority to 

propose revisions to the regulations 

regarding administrative determinations 

in immigration proceedings and the 

authorities of EOIR adjudicators. 

Alternatives: The December 2020 rule, 

85 FR 81588 (Dec. 16, 2020), was 

enjoined nationwide in March 2021. 

Nat’l Immigrant Just. Ctr. et al., v. EOIR 

et al., 21–CV–0056 (D.D.C. Jan 14, 

2021). Unless the Department relies on 

litigation, there are no feasible 

alternatives to revising the regulations. 

Relying on litigation could be extremely 

time consuming and may introduce 

confusion as to whether the regulation 

is in effect. Thus, the Department 

considers this alternative to be an 

inadequate and inadvisable course of 

action. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

Department is largely reinstating the 

briefing schedules and other appellate 

procedures that the December 2020 rule 

revised. As stated in the December 2020 

rule, 85 FR at 81650, the basic briefing 

procedures have remained across rules; 

thus, the Department believes the costs 

to the public will be negligible, if any, 

given that costs will revert back to those 

established for decades prior to the 

December 2020 rule. The proposed rule 

imposes no new additional costs, as 

much of the proposed rule involves 

internal case processing. For those 

provisions that constitute more than 

simple internal case processing 

measures, such as the amendments to 

the EOIR adjudicator’s administrative 

closure and termination authority, they 

likewise would not impose significant 

costs to the public. Indeed, such 

measures would generally reduce costs, 

as they facilitate and reintroduce 

various mechanisms for fair, efficient 

case processing. 

Risks: Without this rulemaking, the 

regulations will remain enjoined 

pending litigation (as described in the 

Alternatives section). This is 

inadvisable, as litigation typically takes 

an inordinate time to conclude. The 

Department strongly prefers proactively 

addressing the regulations through this 

proposed rule. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 09/08/23 88 FR 62242 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

11/07/23 

Final Action ......... 03/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Additional Information: Related to 

EOIR Docket No. 19–0022. 

URL For More Information: http://

www.regulations.gov. 

URL For Public Comments: http://

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Raechel Horowitz, 

Chief, Immigration Law Division, Office 

of Policy, Department of Justice, 

Executive Office for Immigration 

Review, 5107 Leesburg Pike, Suite 1800, 

Falls Church, VA 22041, Phone: 703 

305–0289, Email: pao.eoir@usdoj.gov. 

Related RIN: Related to 1125–AA96 

RIN: 1125–AB18 

DOJ—EOIR 

159. Hearing Requirements and 

Application Procedures for Asylum and 

Related Protection [1125–AB22] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1103(g); 8 

U.S.C. 1158; 8 U.S.C. 1229a 

CFR Citation: 8 CFR 1208.13; 8 CFR 

1208.14; 8 CFR 1240.11. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: On December 16, 2020, by 

the rule titled Procedures for Asylum 

and Withholding of Removal (RIN 1125- 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9435 

AA93) the Department of Justice 

(Department) amended the regulations 

governing the adjudication of 

applications for asylum and related 

protection before EOIR, including 

requirements for filing a complete 

application and consequences for filing 

an incomplete application, filing and 

adjudication timelines for asylum and 

related protection in certain proceedings 

before EOIR, and amendments related to 

the information an immigration judge 

may consider when adjudicating 

applications for asylum and related 

protection. To revise the regulations 

related to EOIR adjudicatory procedures 

for asylum and related protection, the 

Department initially considered two 

separate rulemakings to generally 

require immigration judges to hold 

evidentiary hearings for asylum and 

related protection before adjudicating 

such applications (RIN 1125–AB22) and 

to reconsider the provisions that focus 

on the filing and adjudication of such 

applications (RIN 1125–AB15). After 

determining that these regulatory 

actions both relate to the procedures for 

adjudicating applications for asylum 

and related protection, the Department 

has decided to combine the two 

regulatory actions into a single 

rulemaking under RIN 1125–AB22 to 

rescind or modify the regulatory 

revisions made by Procedures for 

Asylum and Withholding of Removal 

(RIN 1125–AA93) and clarify that 

immigration judges must generally 

conduct an evidentiary hearing prior to 

adjudicating an application for asylum 

or related protection, consistent with 

Matter of E–F–H–L–, 26 I&N Dec. 319 

(BIA 2014). 

Statement of Need: This proposed 

rule will revise the regulations related to 

adjudicatory procedures for asylum and 

withholding of removal, including 

changes to asylum evidentiary hearings 

and pretermission of such applications. 

On December 16, 2020, the Department 

amended the regulations governing 

asylum and withholding of removal, 

including changes to what must be 

included with an application for it to be 

considered complete and the 

consequences of filing an incomplete 

application, and changes related to the 

180-day asylum adjudications clock.

Procedures for Asylum and Withholding

of Removal, 85 FR 81698 (RIN 1125–

AA93). In light of Executive Orders

14010 and 14012, 86 FR 8267 (Feb. 2,

2021) and 86 FR 8277 (Feb. 2, 2021), the

Department reconsidered its position on

those matters and now issues this

proposed rule to revise the regulations

accordingly.

Summary of Legal Basis: The Attorney 

General has general authority under 8 

U.S.C. 1103(g) to establish regulations 

related to the immigration and 

naturalization of noncitizens. More 

specifically, under 8 U.S.C. 

1158(d)(5)(B), the Attorney General has 

authority to provide by regulation 

additional conditions and limitations 

consistent with the INA for the 

consideration of asylum applications. 

Thus, this proposed rule utilizes such 

authority to propose revisions to the 

regulations related to EOIR adjudicatory 

procedures for asylum and withholding 

of removal pursuant, in part, to 8 U.S.C. 

1229a(c)(4)(B). 

Alternatives: The December 2020 rule, 

85 FR 81698 (Dec. 16, 2020), was 

enjoined nationwide in January 2021. 

See Nat’l Immigrant Just. Ctr. et al., v. 

EOIR et al., 21–CV–0056 (D.D.C. Jan 14, 

2021). Unless the Department relies on 

litigation, there are no feasible 

alternatives to revising the regulations. 

Relying on litigation could be extremely 

time consuming and may introduce 

confusion as to whether the regulation 

is in effect. Additionally, without this 

proposed rule, the Department would 

have to rely on an uncertain legal and 

procedural landscape related to 

evidentiary hearings and pretermission. 

Thus, the Department considers this 

alternative to be an inadequate and 

inadvisable course of action. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

Department believes this proposed rule 

will not be economically significant. 

This proposed rule imposes no new 

additional costs to the Department or to 

respondents: respondents have always 

been required to submit complete 

asylum applications in order to have 

them adjudicated, and immigration 

judges have always maintained the 

authority to set deadlines. In addition, 

this proposed rule proposes no new 

fees. Additionally, evidentiary hearings 

for asylum and related protection are 

generally standard practice. Thus, the 

Department believes that the costs to the 

public will be negligible. Any new 

minimal cost would be limited to the 

cost of the public familiarizing itself 

with the proposed rule, although, as 

previously stated, the proposed rule 

restores most of the regulatory language 

to that which was in effect before the 

December 2020 rule. Further, an 

immigration judge’s ability to set filing 

deadlines is already established by 

regulation, and filing deadlines for both 

applications and supporting documents 

are already well-established aspects of 

immigration court proceedings guided 

by regulations and the Office of the 

Chief Immigration Judge Practice 

Manual. Thus, the Department expects 

little in the proposed rule to require 

extensive familiarization. 

Risks: Without this rulemaking, the 

regulations will remain enjoined 

pending litigation (as described in the 

Alternatives section). This is 

inadvisable, as litigation is 

unpredictable and often takes a long 

time to conclude. The Department 

strongly prefers proactively addressing 

the regulations through this proposed 

rule. Additionally, without this 

rulemaking, there will be a lack of 

clarity as to whether asylum hearings on 

the merits are a general practice or 

whether asylum applicants are generally 

entitled to such hearings. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite

NPRM .................. 11/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Additional Information: Former RIN 

1125–AB15 merged into this 

rulemaking. 

URL For More Information: http://

regulations.gov. 

URL For Public Comments: http://

regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Raechel Horowitz, 

Chief, Immigration Law Division, Office 

of Policy, Department of Justice, 

Executive Office for Immigration 

Review, 5107 Leesburg Pike, Suite 1800, 

Falls Church, VA 22041, Phone: 703 

305–0289, Email: pao.eoir@usdoj.gov. 

RIN: 1125–AB22 

DOJ—EOIR 

160. Clarifying and Revising Custody

Determination Procedures for

Noncitizens Subject to Discretionary

Detention (INA 236(a)/8 U.S.C. 1226

Detention) [1125–AB27]

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101; 8 

U.S.C. 1103; 8 U.S.C. 1226; . . . 

CFR Citation: 8 CFR 1003.19; 8 CFR 

1236.1; 8 CFR 236.1; 8 CFR 236.7; 8 CFR 

1236.7; 8 CFR 1240.10; 8 CFR 1003.8; 

. . . 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. 

Immigration and Customs Enforcement 

(ICE) and the Department of Justice 

(DOJ) Executive Office for Immigration 

Review (EOIR) (collectively, the 

Departments) are planning to amend the 

regulations that govern detention and 

release determinations for noncitizens 

subject to the custody provisions in 

section 236 of the Immigration and 

Nationality Act (Act), 8 U.S.C. 1226(a). 

The goal of the proposed regulation 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9436 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

would be to clarify the scope and 

applicability of section 236(a) of the 

Act, 8 U.S.C. 1226(a), and address the 

burden and standard of proof for 

continued detention at initial custody 

determinations and any custody 

redetermination hearings. This 

rulemaking is consistent with Executive 

Order 14058, which directs agencies to 

take actions that improve service 

delivery and customer experience by 

decreasing administrative burdens, 

enhancing transparency, and improving 

the efficiency and effectiveness of 

government. 

Statement of Need: The proposed rule 

is needed to bring clarity and uniformity 

to the procedures governing ICE initial 

custody decisions and IJ bond hearings 

for noncitizens subject to discretionary 

detention under INA 236(a). This rule 

will also revise the procedures for 

determining whether a noncitizen is 

properly subject to INA 236(c) 

detention. Additionally, this rule will 

clarify the detention authority that 

applies during the petition for review 

process for certain noncitizens seeking 

judicial review of their removal orders. 

Lastly, the proposed rule will make 

organizational changes to the structure 

of the EOIR regulations governing 

custody redetermination hearings and 

address outdated provisions in the 

Departments’ custody and bond 

regulations. The Departments believe 

this rulemaking will help address issues 

that frequently arise in litigation 

brought by noncitizens challenging the 

Departments’ existing custody and bond 

hearing procedures and it may also help 

to resolve differing interpretations 

among Federal circuit courts. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The Attorney 

General has general authority under 8 

U.S.C. 1103(g) to establish regulations 

related to the immigration and 

naturalization of noncitizens. More 

specifically, under section 441 of the 

Homeland Security Act (HSA), the 

Attorney General transferred the 

authority to oversee broad immigration 

enforcement functions, including 

detention and removal, to DHS. 

Additionally, pursuant to HSA 1101(a), 

the Attorney General retains and shares 

with DHS the authority to detain or 

authorize bond for noncitizens under 

INA 236(a). 

Alternatives: Unless the Departments 

rely on piecemeal litigation to resolve 

the various issues that arise with respect 

to the existing custody and bond 

hearing procedures, there are no feasible 

alternatives to this rulemaking. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: DOJ 

and DHS are currently considering the 

specific cost and benefit impacts of the 

proposed provisions. 

Risks: Without this rulemaking, the 

procedures and standards governing ICE 

custody procedures and IJ bond 

hearings will continue to be subject to 

litigation and judicial interpretation 

which results in a lack of nationwide 

uniformity. Moreover, the Departments 

are concerned that the current 

regulatory framework risk allocating 

ICE’s scarce detention resources on 

noncitizens whose flight risk, if any, 

could be managed effectively in the 

community, rather than on those whose 

detention is necessary. The Departments 

strongly prefer proactively addressing 

the regulations through this proposed 

rule. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 12/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal. 

Agency Contact: Raechel Horowitz, 

Chief, Immigration Law Division, Office 

of Policy, Department of Justice, 

Executive Office for Immigration 

Review, 5107 Leesburg Pike, Suite 1800, 

Falls Church, VA 22041, Phone: 703 

305–0289, Email: pao.eoir@usdoj.gov. 

RIN: 1125–AB27 

BILLING CODE 4410–BP–P 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Fall 2023 Statement of Regulatory 

Priorities 

Introduction 

The Department’s Fall 2023 

Regulatory Agenda represents Acting 

Secretary Su’s commitment to build a 

worker-centric economy and good jobs 

that change lives. These rules will 

advance the Department’s mission to 

foster, promote, and develop the welfare 

of the wage earners, job seekers, and 

retirees of the United States; improve 

working conditions; advance 

opportunities for profitable 

employment; and assure work-related 

benefits and rights. Under Acting 

Secretary Su’s leadership, the 

Department’s rulemaking is focused on 

centering workers and improving job 

quality, empowering and protecting 

workers and their families, and 

promoting equity in opportunity and 

pathways to good jobs for all workers. 

Since the start of the Biden 

Administration, the Department of 

Labor has pursued rulemaking to 

advance the Administration’s priorities. 

To create and sustain good jobs, the 

Department has focused rulemaking on 

worker health and safety, fair wages, 

and supporting unions and workers who 

are organizing unions. The Department 

is advancing equity and supporting 

marginalized communities through 

rulemaking that bolsters protections for 

workers from discrimination. To tackle 

the climate crisis, the Department is 

pursuing a rulemaking on heat illness 

prevention in the workplace. Under the 

Administration’s priority to improve 

service delivery, customer experience 

and reduce administrative burdens, the 

Department continues to regulate 

employer-provided retirement security 

and health care. These include the 

following rulemakings: 

• We issued a Final Rule to update 

the regulations implementing DavisBacon and Related Acts—the most 

comprehensive review of the regulation 

in 40 years—to ensure employers on 

federally funded or assisted 

construction projects pay locally 

prevailing wages to construction 

workers. The Final Rule will speed up 

prevailing wage updates, creating 

efficiencies in the current system and 

ensuring that prevailing wages keep up 

with actual wages. Over time, this 

would mean higher wages for workers, 

which is especially important given the 

administration’s investments under the 

Investing in America Agenda. 

• We finalized the rescission of 

certain provisions related to the 

religious exemption for federal 

contractors and subcontractors. The 

rescission returned OFCCP to its 

longstanding approach of ensuring that 

the religious exemption contained in 

Executive Order 11246 is applied 

consistently with nondiscrimination 

principles of Title VII of the Civil Rights 

Act of 1964, as amended. The rescission 

reaffirmed nondiscrimination 

protections for employees of federal 

contractors. 

• We finalized the rulemaking to 

modify the agency’s procedures for 

using resources strategically to remove 

barriers to equal employment 

opportunity. The rule strengthened 

OFCCP’s ability to resolve potential 

employment discrimination at federal 

contractor workplaces, which created 

hurdles to effective enforcement. 

• We issued a Final Rule that requires 

employers to check a box disclosing 

whether they are federal contractors or 

subcontractors on their ‘‘LM–10’’ forms, 

which are filed if they hire a consultant 

to persuade their workers about labor 

relations activities or to ‘‘surveil’’ 

employees or unions involved in a labor 

dispute. 

• We issued a proposed rule to 

amend the existing standards to better 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9437 

protect miners against occupational 

exposure to respirable crystalline silica, 

a carcinogenic hazard, and to improve 

respiratory protection for all airborne 

hazards. 

• We issued a proposed rule to 

provide guidance that would help 

employers and workers determine 

whether a worker is an employee or an 

independent contractor under the Fair 

Labor Standards Act. The proposed rule 

would combat employee 

misclassification that leads to workers 

being denied their rights and 

protections under federal labor 

standards. 

• Along with the Departments of 

Treasury and Health and Human 

Services, we issued a Final Rule 

implementing the No Surprises Act, 

which aims to protect consumers 

against surprise medical bills. The Final 

Rule makes certain medical claims 

payment processes more transparent for 

providers and clarifies the process for 

providers and health insurance 

companies to resolve their disputes. 

• Also, with the Departments of 

Treasury of Health and Human Services, 

we issued proposed rules to better 

ensure that people seeking coverage for 

mental health and substance use 

disorder care can access treatment as 

easily as people seeking coverage for 

medical treatments. The proposed rules 

aim to fully protect the rights of people 

seeking mental health and substance use 

disorder benefits, under the Mental 

Health Parity and Addition Equity Act, 

and to provide clear guidance to plans 

and issuers on how to comply with the 

law’s requirements. 

The 2023 Regulatory Plan highlights 

the Labor Department’s most 

noteworthy and significant rulemaking 

efforts, with each addressing the top 

priorities of its regulatory agencies: 

Employee Benefits Security 

Administration (EBSA), Employment 

and Training Administration (ETA), 

Mine Safety and Health Administration 

(MSHA), Office of Federal Contract 

Compliance Programs (OFCCP), 

Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration (OSHA), Office of 

Workers’ Compensation Programs 

(OWCP), and Wage and Hour Division 

(WHD). These regulatory priorities 

exemplify the Acting Secretary’s vision 

to center workers in the economy; 

protect workers’ rights, wages and safety 

on the job; and promote equity, job 

quality, and pathways to good jobs for 

all workers, especially those who have 

historically been left behind. 

The Department’s regulatory priorities 

also reflect our robust engagement 

process with stakeholders and our 

strong culture of evidence-based 

decision making. Through regular 

stakeholder meetings, public hearings, 

Small Business Advocacy Review 

Panels, and public comments on 

proposed regulations, the Department 

engages with diverse stakeholders to 

seek input on our regulatory agenda 

overall or feedback on proposed rules. 

We intentionally seek input from 

members of the public who have not 

typically participated in the regulatory 

process, including workers with 

disabilities, union members, small 

businesses, low-paid workers, and 

immigrant workers, both as a 

Department and in cooperation with 

federal partners like the SBA Office of 

Advocacy. Among the specific rules 

described below, we include further 

details on previous stakeholder 

engagement and future opportunities for 

stakeholder engagement. 

Centering Workers and Improving Job 

Quality 

The Department’s regulatory priorities 

reflect the Acting Secretary’s focus on 

centering workers in the economy and 

improving job quality. This means 

protecting workers right to organize and 

form a union and ensuring the creation 

of good jobs by upholding strong labor 

and equity standards across every aspect 

of hiring and employment. 

• WHD will finalize updates to the 

executive, administrative, and 

professional exemption for the Fair 

Labor Standards Act. Updating the 

salary threshold would ensure that 

middle class jobs pay middle class 

wages, extending important overtime 

pay protections to millions of workers 

and raising their pay. Prior to issuing 

the proposed rule, the Department 

conducted 27 virtual listening sessions 

around the country with more than 

2,000 participants to gather information 

and input about possible changes to the 

overtime regulations. In addition to 

reaching out to national stakeholders, 

the Wage and Hour Division conducted 

10 regional listening sessions for 

workers and worker advocates as well as 

employers and business leaders. This 

was an important and valuable step in 

the regulatory development process. 

• WHD will finalize regulations that 

offer certain employees employed under 

the federal service contracts a right of 

first refusal of employment when 

contracts change over, thereby 

promoting the retention of skilled 

workers in the federal services 

workforce. 

Empowering and Protecting Workers 

and Their Families 

The Department’s regulatory priorities 

reflect the Acting Secretary’s focus on 

protecting workers’ rights, wages and 

safety on the job and fighting 

discrimination in the workplace. This 

means leveling the playing field for 

America’s workers by ensuring all 

workers get the wages they’ve earned, 

especially those in low-wage and 

historically underserved communities. 

• WHD will finalize regulations that 

address and clarify the distinction 

between employees and independent 

contractors under the Fair Labor 

Standards Act. This proposed rule also 

benefited from extensive stakeholder 

engagement prior to its issuance. 

• ETA is proposing regulations that 

will ensure that H–2 visa programs 

promote worker voice and worker 

protections. 

Under this priority, the Department is 

also focusing on safeguarding workers’ 

hard-earned benefits and pensions and 

ensuring access to health benefits, 

including mental health and substance 

use disorder benefits. 

• EBSA will finalize joint rulemaking 

with the Departments of Health and 

Human Services and Treasury, 

implementing the Mental Health Parity 

and Addiction Equity Act (MHPAEA) 

will promote compliance and address 

amendments to the Act from the 

Consolidated Appropriations Act of 

2021 to ensure parity of mental health 

and substance abuse disorder benefits so 

workers can access mental health care 

as easily as other types of care. 

• EBSA, along with the Departments 

of Human and Human Services and 

Treasury, will finalize joint rulemaking 

regarding coverage of certain preventive 

services under the Affordable Care Act, 

which would establish a new pathway 

for individuals to obtain contraceptive 

services at no cost. 

• EBSA is proposing regulations to 

reevaluate the criteria for a group or 

association of employers to be able to 

sponsor a multiple employer group 

health plan. 

• EBSA is proposing to update the 

definition of the term ‘‘fiduciary’’ for a 

retirement plan to ensure retirement 

savers get sound investment advice free 

from conflicts of interest. 

The Department’s health and safety 

regulatory proposals are aimed at 

eliminating preventable workplace 

injuries, illnesses, and fatalities. 

Workplace safety also protects workers’ 

economic security, ensuring that illness 

and injury do not force families into 

poverty. Our efforts will prevent 

workers from having to choose between 

their lives and their livelihood. 

• OSHA will propose an Infectious 

Diseases rulemaking to protect 

employees in healthcare and other highrisk environments from exposure to and 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9438 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

transmission of persistent and new 

infectious diseases, ranging from 

ancient scourges such as tuberculosis to 

newer threats such as Severe Acute 

Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), the 2019 

Novel Coronavirus (COVID–19), and 

other diseases. 

• OSHA will complete small business 

consultations as its next step in 

advancing rulemaking on heat illness 

prevention to protect workers from heat 

hazards in the workplace. Increased 

temperatures are posing a serious threat 

to workers laboring outdoors and in 

non-climate controlled indoor settings. 

Exposure to excessive heat is not only 

a hazard in itself, causing heat illness 

and even death; it is also an indirect 

hazard linked to the loss of cognitive 

skills which can also lead to workplace 

injuries and worker deaths. Protecting 

workers will help to save lives while we 

confront the growing threat of climate 

change. 

• OSHA will propose regulations that 

update standards for emergency 

response and preparedness to reflect the 

full range of hazards or concerns 

currently facing emergency responders 

and other workers providing skilled 

support and the major changes in 

performance specifications for 

protective clothing and equipment. 

• MSHA will finalize a new silica 

standard to effectively address health 

hazards and prevent irreversible 

diseases with a goal of ensuring that all 

miners are safe at their workplaces. 

• MSHA will finalize a rule 

establishing that mine operators must 

develop and implement a written safety 

program for mobile and power haulage 

equipment used at surface mines and 

surface areas of underground mines, in 

order to reduce accidents and provide 

safer workplaces for miners. 

Promoting Equity in Opportunity and 

Pathways to Good Jobs for All Workers 

The Department’s regulatory priorities 

reflect the Acting Secretary’s focus on 

promoting access to good jobs free from 

discrimination and harassment, 

especially for those who have 

historically been left behind, and 

growing the workforce that brings in all 

of America, with a focus on expanding 

opportunities for women and people of 

color. 

• ETA will ensure job-seekers can 

more easily get the support they need by 

issuing final rules updating the WagnerPeyser Employment Service regulations. 

• ETA is focused on apprenticeship 

and is proposing regulations for a 

National Apprenticeship System that is 

more responsive to worker and 

employer needs. This proposed rule was 

extensively informed by the 

deliberations of the Department’s 

reconstituted Advisory Committee on 

Apprenticeships. 

DOL—WAGE AND HOUR DIVISION 

(WHD) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

161. Defining and Delimiting the 

Exemptions for Executive, 

Administrative, Professional, Outside 

Sales, and Computer Employees [1235– 

AA39] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Unfunded Mandates: This action may 

affect the private sector under Public 

Law 104–4. 

Legal Authority: 29 U.S.C. 201 et seq.; 

29 U.S.C. 213 

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 541. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Department of Labor 

(Department) proposes updating and 

revising the regulations issued under 

the Fair Labor Standards Act 

implementing the exemptions from 

minimum wage and overtime pay 

requirements for executive, 

administrative, professional, outside 

sales, and computer employees. 

Significant proposed revisions include 

increasing the standard salary level to 

the 35th percentile of weekly earnings 

of full-time salaried workers in the 

lowest-wage Census Region (currently 

the South) $1,059 per week ($55,068 

annually for a full-year worker) and 

increasing the highly compensated 

employee total annual compensation 

threshold to the annualized weekly 

earnings of the 85th percentile of fulltime salaried workers nationally 

($143,988). The Department is also 

proposing to add to the regulations an 

automatic updating mechanism that 

would allow for the timely and efficient 

updating of all the earnings thresholds. 

For additional information, please see 

the Department’s fall regulatory plan 

narrative statement. 

Statement of Need: One of the 

primary goals of this rulemaking is to 

update the salary level requirement of 

the section 13(a)(1) exemption. A salary 

level test has been part of the 

regulations since 1938 and it has been 

long recognized that the best single test 

of the employer’s good faith in 

attributing importance to the employee’s 

services is the amount they pay for 

those services. In prior rulemakings, the 

Department explained its commitment 

to update the standard salary level and 

Highly Compensated Employees (HCE) 

total compensation levels more 

frequently. Regular updates promote 

greater stability, avoid disruptive salary 

level increases that can result from 

lengthy gaps between updates and 

provide appropriate wage protection. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Section 

13(a)(1) of the FLSA, codified at 29 

U.S.C. 213(a)(1), exempts any employee 

employed in a bona fide executive, 

administrative, or professional capacity 

or in the capacity of outside salesman 

(as such terms are defined and 

delimited from time to time by 

regulations of the Secretary, subject to 

the provisions of the [Administrative 

Procedure Act.]) The FLSA does not 

define the terms executive, 

administrative, professional, or outside 

salesman. However, Congress explicitly 

delegated to the Secretary of Labor the 

power to define and delimit the specific 

terms of the exemptions through 

regulations. Accordingly, the 

Department issues regulations at 29 CFR 

part 541 defining the scope of the 

section 13(a)(1) exemptions. 

Alternatives: The Department 

considered a range of alternatives before 

selecting its proposed methods for 

updating the standard salary level and 

the HCE compensation level. The 

Department proposes to update the 

standard salary level using earnings for 

the 35th percentile of full-time salaried 

workers in the lowest range Census 

Region (the South), equivalent to $1,059 

per week based on current data. 

Alternatives considered for the standard 

salary level are: (1) 20th percentile of 

earnings of nonhourly full-time workers 

in the South Census region and the 

retail industry nationally equivalent to 

$822 per week; (2) 10th percentile of 

earnings of likely exempt workers, 

equivalent to $925 per week; (3) 40th 

percentile of earnings of nonhourly fulltime workers in the South Census 

region, equivalent to $1,145 per week; 

and (4) a methodology based on the 

historical short test salary level, 

equivalent to $1,378 per week. 

The Department proposes to update 

the HCE compensation level using 

earnings from the 85th percentile of all 

full-time salaried workers nationally, 

equivalent to $143,988 per year. The 

Department also considered the 

following alternative methods to set the 

HCE compensation levels: (1) 80th 

percentile of nonhourly full-time 

workers nationally, equivalent to 

$125,268 annually; and (2) 90th 

percentile of nonhourly full-time 

workers nationally, equivalent to 

$172,796 annually. 

The public is invited to provide 

comments on the proposed revisions 

and possible alternatives. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

Department quantified three direct costs 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9439 

to employers in this analysis: (1) 

regulatory familiarization costs; (2) 

adjustment costs; and (3) managerial 

costs. The Department estimated in Year 

1, regulatory familiarization costs would 

be $427.2 million, adjustment costs 

would be $240.8 million, and 

managerial costs would be $534.9 

million. Total direct employer costs in 

Year 1 would be $1.2 billion. The 

Department additionally estimated that 

the proposed rule over its first 10 years, 

would transfer approximately $1.3 

billion per year from employers to 

employees in the form of increased 

wages. 

Risks: This action does not affect 

public health, safety, or the 

environment. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 09/08/23 88 FR 62152 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

11/07/23 

Final Rule ............ 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses, 

Governmental Jurisdictions, 

Organizations. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State, Tribal. 

Agency Contact: Amy DeBisschop, 

Director of the Division of Regulations, 

Legislation, and Interpretation, 

Department of Labor, Wage and Hour 

Division, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, 

FP Building, Room S–3502, 

Washington, DC 20210, Phone: 202 693– 

0406. 

RIN: 1235–AA39 

DOL—WHD 

Final Rule Stage 

162. Nondisplacement of Qualified 

Workers Under Service Contracts 

[1235–AA42] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: E.O. 14055 

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 9. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: On November 18, 2021, 

President Biden signed Executive Order 

14055 requiring the Secretary of Labor 

to issue final regulations on the 

nondisplacement of qualified workers 

under service contracts. Implementation 

of this Executive Order will promote 

retention of experienced and skilled 

employees working on federal service 

contracts. Service work supporting 

federal government functions occurs all 

over the country, from federal building 

maintenance to services provided on 

military bases to skilled technicians 

operating and maintaining federal 

equipment. Under this Executive Order, 

when a federal service contract 

transitions from one contractor to 

another, the new contractor will be 

required to offer jobs to qualified 

employees who worked for the previous 

contractor and performed their jobs 

well. This prevents disruptions in 

federal services, makes it easier for 

employers to find workers who are 

already trained for the job, and saves 

taxpayer dollars. 

Statement of Need: Executive Order 

14055 requires the Secretary of Labor to 

issue regulations on the 

nondisplacement of qualified workers 

under service contracts. 

Summary of Legal Basis: President 

Biden issued Executive Order 14055 

pursuant to his authority under ‘‘the 

Constitution and the laws of the United 

States,’’ expressly including the 

Procurement Act. 86 FR 66397. The 

Procurement Act authorizes the 

President to ‘‘prescribe policies and 

directives that the President considers 

necessary to carry out’’ the statutory 

purposes of ensuring ‘‘economical and 

efficient’’ government procurement and 

administration of government property. 

40 U.S.C. 101.121(a). Executive Order 

14055 directs the Secretary to issue 

regulations to ‘‘implement the 

requirements of this order.’’ 86 FR 

66399. 

Alternatives: The Department has 

discussed a few specific provisions in 

which limited alternatives are possible. 

First, in cases where a prime contract 

is above the simplified acquisition 

threshold, but their subcontract falls 

below this threshold, the Department 

could potentially have discretion to 

exclude these subcontracts from the 

requirements of this proposed rule. 

However, the Department stated in the 

NPRM that, consistent with the 

language in the Executive Order, where 

a prime contract is covered by the rule, 

all subcontracts for services, regardless 

of size, would also be covered. Second, 

the Department has some discretion in 

defining the specific analysis that must 

be completed by contracting agencies 

regarding location continuity. The 

Department is considering whether to 

require contracting officers to analyze 

additional factors when determining 

whether to decline to require location 

continuity. Any requirement of a more 

in-depth analysis could potentially 

increase costs for contracting agencies. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

rule could result in costs for covered 

contractors and contracting agencies in 

the form of rule familiarization costs, 

implementation costs, and 

recordkeeping costs. The rule would 

increase the use of a carryover 

workforce which would reduce 

disruption in the delivery of services 

during the period of transition between 

contractors, maintains physical and 

information security, and provides the 

Federal Government with the benefits of 

an experienced and well-trained 

workforce that is familiar with the 

Federal Government’s personnel, 

facilities, and requirements. 

The Department estimated both 

familiarization costs, implementation 

costs and familiarization costs. Costs in 

Year 1 consists of $11,124,370 in rule 

familiarization costs, $35,471,685 in 

implementation costs ($7,518,342 for 

contractors and $27,953,342 for 

contracting agencies), and $6,014,674 in 

recordkeeping costs. Therefore, total 

Year 1 costs are $52,610,728. Costs in 

the following years consist only of 

implementation and recordkeeping 

costs and amount to $41,486,358. 

Average annualized costs over 10 years 

are $43 million using a 7 percent 

discount rate, and $52 million using a 

3 percent discount rate. 

Risks: This action does not affect the 

public health, safety, or the 

environment. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 07/15/22 87 FR 42552 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

08/15/22 

Final Rule ............ 11/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal. 

Agency Contact: Amy DeBisschop, 

Director of the Division of Regulations, 

Legislation, and Interpretation, 

Department of Labor, Wage and Hour 

Division, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, 

FP Building, Room S–3502, 

Washington, DC 20210, Phone: 202 693– 

0406. 

RIN: 1235–AA42 

DOL—WHD 

163. Employee or Independent 

Contractor Classification Under the 

Fair Labor Standards Act [1235–AA43] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Unfunded Mandates: This action may 

affect the private sector under Public 

Law 104–4. 

Legal Authority: 52 Stat. 1060, as 

amended; 29 U.S.C. 201–219 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 

I 
9440 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 795; 29 CFR 

780; 29 CFR 788. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: On January 7, 2021, the 

Department of Labor (Department) 

published a final rule on independent 

contractor status under the Fair Labor 

Standards Act (FLSA). See 86 FR 1168 

(2021 IC Rule). The Department 

subsequently published final rules to 

delay and withdraw the 2021 IC Rule on 

March 4, 2021, and May 6, 2021, 

respectively. See 86 FR 12535 (Delay 

Rule); 86 FR 24303 (Withdrawal Rule). 

On March 14, 2022, a district court in 

the Eastern District of Texas vacated the 

Department’s Delay and Withdrawal 

Rules, concluding that the 2021 IC Rule 

became effective as of March 8, 2021. 

The Department has appealed the 

district court’s decision. The 

Department continues to believe that the 

2021 IC Rule does not fully comport 

with the FLSA’s text and purpose as 

interpreted by courts and has proposed 

to rescind the 2021 IC rule and set forth 

an analysis for determining employee or 

independent contractor status under the 

Act that is more consistent with existing 

judicial precedent and the Department’s 

longstanding guidance prior to the 2021 

IC rule. The Department published an 

NPRM on October 13, 2022. For 

additional information, please see the 

Department’s fall regulatory plan 

narrative statement. 

Statement of Need: The Department 

believes it is appropriate to consider 

rescinding the 2021 IC Rule and setting 

forth an analysis for determining 

employee or independent contractor 

status under the Act that is more 

consistent with existing judicial 

precedent and the Department’s 

longstanding guidance prior to the 2021 

IC Rule. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The 

Department’s authority to interpret the 

analysis for determining whether 

workers are employees or independent 

contractors under the FLSA comes with 

its authority to administer and enforce 

the Act. See 29 U.S.C. 201–219; see also 

Herman v. Fabri-Centers of Am., Inc., 

308 F.3rd 580, 592–93 & n.8 (6th Cir. 

2002) (noting that ‘‘[t]he Wage and Hour 

Division of the Department of Labor was 

created to administer the Act’’ while 

agreeing with the Department’s 

interpretation of one of the Act’s 

provisions); Dufrene v. Browning-Ferris, 

Inc., 207 F.3rd 264, 267 (5th Cir. 2000) 

(‘‘By granting the Secretary of Labor the 

power to administer the FLSA, Congress 

implicitly granted him the power to 

interpret.’’); Condo v. Sysco Corp., 1 

F.3rd 599, 603 (7th Cir. 1993) (same). 

Alternatives: The Department 

assessed four regulatory alternatives in 

the proposed rule in addition to what it 

proposed. For the first alternative, the 

Department considered codifying the 

common law control test, which is used 

to distinguish between employees and 

independent contractors under some 

other Federal laws, such as the Internal 

Revenue Code. For the second 

alternative, the Department considered 

codifying an ABC test to determine 

independent contractor status under the 

FLSA similar to the ABC test recently 

adopted under California law. For the 

third alternative, the Department 

considered a proposed rule that would 

not fully rescind the 2021 IC Rule and 

instead retain some aspects of that rule. 

For the fourth alternative, the 

Department considered rescinding the 

2021 IC Rule and providing guidance on 

employee or independent contractor 

classification through subregulatory 

guidance instead of through new 

regulations. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

total one-time regulatory familiarization 

costs for establishments, governments, 

and independent contractors are 

estimated to be $408 million. Regulatory 

familiarization costs in future years 

were assumed to be de minimis. 

Employers and independent contractors 

would continue to familiarize 

themselves with the applicable legal 

framework in the absence of the rule, so 

this rulemaking would not be expected 

to impose costs after the first year. This 

would amount to a 10-year annualized 

cost of $56.4 million at a discount rate 

of 3 percent or $54.3 million at a 

discount rate of 7 percent. 

Benefits would include increased 

consistency with existing judicial 

precedent and the Department’s 

longstanding guidance, as well as 

possibly reducing the occurrence of 

misclassification. 

Risks: This action does not affect 

public health, safety, or the 

environment. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 10/13/22 87 FR 62218 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extended.

10/26/22 87 FR 64749 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extended End.

12/13/22 

Final Rule ............ 11/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses, 

Governmental Jurisdictions, 

Organizations. 

Government Levels Affected: 

Undetermined. 

Agency Contact: Amy DeBisschop, 

Director of the Division of Regulations, 

Legislation, and Interpretation, 

Department of Labor, Wage and Hour 

Division, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, 

FP Building, Room S–3502, 

Washington, DC 20210, Phone: 202 693– 

0406. 

RIN: 1235–AA43 

DOL—EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING 

ADMINISTRATION (ETA) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

164. Improving Protections for Workers 

in Temporary Agricultural Employment 

in the United States [1205–AC12] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1188; 29 

U.S.C. 49 et seq. 

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 501; 20 CFR 

651; 20 CFR 653; 20 CFR 654; 20 CFR 

655; 20 CFR 658. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Department of Labor’s 

(DOL) Employment and Training 

Administration and Wage and Hour 

Division propose to amend regulations 

to improve working conditions and 

protections for workers engaged in 

temporary agricultural employment in 

the United States; and strengthen 

protections in the recruitment, job order 

clearance, and oversight processes. The 

proposed regulatory changes involve the 

Employment Service and the H–2A nonimmigrant visa program at 29 CFR part 

501 and 20 CFR parts 651, 653, 654, 

655, and 658. 

The Department has identified a need 

to strengthen and clarify protections for 

all temporary agricultural workers, 

including U.S. workers and workers 

employed through the H–2A temporary 

agricultural program. The H–2A 

temporary agricultural program allows 

agricultural employers to perform 

agricultural labor or services of a 

temporary or seasonal nature so long as 

there are not sufficient able, willing, and 

qualified U.S. workers to perform the 

work and the employment of H–2A 

workers does not adversely affect the 

wages and working conditions of 

similarly employed workers in the 

United States. The use of the H–2A 

program has grown substantially in 

recent years and the Department is 

committed to protecting agricultural 

workers in light of their significant 

vulnerabilities. 

Statement of Need: The Department 

will propose revisions to the H–2A 

regulations and the Employment Service 

regulations that will strengthen 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9441 

protections for agricultural workers and 

enhance the Department’s enforcement 

capabilities against fraud and program 

violations. The Department has 

determined the proposed revisions will 

help prevent exploitation and abuse of 

agricultural workers and ensure that 

employers do not gain from their 

violations or contribute to economic and 

workforce instability by circumventing 

the law. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The 

Department’s proposals to strengthen 

protections and improve compliance are 

aimed at ensuring that the Department 

can better fulfill its statutory 

responsibility at 8 U.S.C. 1188(a)(1) to 

certify that: (1) there are not sufficient 

workers who are able, willing, and 

qualified, and who will be available at 

the time and place needed, to perform 

the labor or services involved in the 

petition; and (2) the employment of H– 

2A workers will not adversely affect the 

wages and working conditions of 

workers in the United States similarly 

employed, and its responsibility under 

the Wagner-Peyser Act at 29 U.S.C. 49b 

to effectively assist in coordinating the 

State public employment service offices 

throughout the country. 

Alternatives: The Department has 

considered alternatives but believes that 

rulemaking to update the H–2A 

regulations and the Employment Service 

regulations is a reasonable approach to 

better ensure the necessary worker 

protections are available and 

enforceable. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

Department estimates that the proposed 

rule would result in costs and transfer 

payments. As shown in Exhibit 1, the 

proposed rule is expected to have an 

annualized cost of $2.03 million and a 

total 10-year quantifiable cost of $14.24 

million, each at a discount rate of 7 

percent. The proposed rule is estimated 

to result in annual transfer payments 

from H–2A employers to H–2A 

employees of $12.81 million and total 

10-year transfer payments of $89.95 

million at a discount rate of 7 percent. 

The benefits are described above and 

include preventing exploitation of 

vulnerable workers and ensuring that 

employers do not benefit from 

exploitation. 

Risks: To be determined. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 09/15/23 88 FR 63750 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

11/14/23 

Final Rule ............ 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses, 

Governmental Jurisdictions. 

Government Levels Affected: Local, 

Tribal. 

Agency Contact: Brian Pasternak, 

Administrator, Department of Labor, 

Employment and Training 

Administration, 200 Constitution 

Avenue NW, Office of Foreign Labor 

Certification, Room N–5311, FP 

Building, Washington, DC 20210, 

Phone: 202 693–8200, Email: 

pasternak.brian@dol.gov. 

RIN: 1205–AC12 

DOL—ETA 

165. National Apprenticeship System 

Enhancements [1205–AC13] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: The National 

Apprenticeship Act, as amended (50 

Stat. 664) 29 U.S.C. 50 

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 29; 29 CFR 30. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The regulations at 29 CFR 

part 29 addressing labor standards of 

apprenticeship and the governance of 

the National Apprenticeship System 

were last updated in October 2008 to 

increase administrative flexibility, 

ensure program quality, and promote 

registered apprenticeship opportunity. 

The Department plans to revise these 

regulations to strengthen, expand, 

modernize, and diversify the National 

Apprenticeship System by enhancing 

worker protections and equity, 

improving the quality of registered 

apprenticeships, revising the state 

governance provisions, and more clearly 

establishing critical pipelines to 

registered apprenticeships such as preapprenticeships so that the National 

Apprenticeship System is more 

responsive to current worker and 

employer needs. The Department will 

also make technical and conforming 

adjustments to the current text of 29 

CFR part 30 (governing equal 

employment opportunity in 

apprenticeships) as appropriate. For 

additional information, please see the 

Department’s regulatory plan narrative 

statement. 

Statement of Need: The regulations 

governing the minimum labor standards 

for the registration of apprenticeship 

programs at Title 29 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations (CFR) part 29 have 

not been updated since 2008. With this 

action, the Department seeks to ensure 

that the regulatory framework for the 

Registered Apprenticeship System 

remains current with a range of 

emerging apprenticeship practices and 

program structures that have developed 

since that time. The proposed revisions 

will enable the Registered 

Apprenticeship System to continue its 

vital role in developing a skilled, 

competitive American workforce. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The National 

Apprenticeship Act of 1937 (also known 

as the Fitzgerald Act), 29 U.S.C. 50, 

gives the Secretary broad power to 

promote, create, and set standards for 

apprenticeship programs. The Act 

authorizes and directs the Secretary to 

formulate and promote the furtherance 

of labor standards necessary to 

safeguard the welfare of apprentices, to 

extend the application of such standards 

by encouraging the inclusion thereof in 

contracts of apprenticeship, to bring 

together employers and labor for the 

formulation of programs of 

apprenticeship, to cooperate with State 

agencies engaged in the formulation and 

promotion of standards of 

apprenticeship, and to cooperate with 

the Secretary of Education in 

accordance with section 17 of title 20. 

Alternatives: Alternatives are 

described in the text of the NPRM, and 

the public will be provided an 

opportunity to comment upon them. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

Registered apprenticeships provide 

individuals with valuable training and 

skill development, and provide 

businesses with a structure for 

developing a diverse pool of skilled 

workers. Although the Department is 

unable to quantify the anticipated 

benefits due to data limitations, the 

proposed rule is expected to result in 

annualized costs of $152 million during 

the first 10 years (2025–2034) at a 

discount rate of 7 percent based on 

preliminary estimates. 

Risks: This action does not affect 

public health, safety, or the 

environment. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 11/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses, 

Governmental Jurisdictions, 

Organizations. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

State. 

Federalism: This action may have 

federalism implications as defined in 

E.O. 13132. 

Agency Contact: John V. Ladd, 

Administrator, Office of 

Apprenticeship, Department of Labor, 

Employment and Training 

Administration, 200 Constitution 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
9442 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Avenue NW, FP Building, Room C– 

5311, Washington, DC 20210, Phone: 

202 693–2796, Fax: 202 693–3799, 

Email: ladd.john@dol.gov. 

RIN: 1205–AC13 

DOL—ETA 

Final Rule Stage 

166. Wagner-Peyser Act Staffing [1205– 

AC02] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: Wagner-Peyser Act 

sec. 12 (29 U.S.C. 49k) 

CFR Citation: 20 CFR 651; 20 CFR 

652; 20 CFR 653; 20 CFR 658. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Department proposed to 

revise the Wagner-Peyser Act 

regulations regarding Employment 

Services (ES) staffing to require that 

states use state merit staff to provide ES 

services, including Migrant and 

Seasonal Farmworker (MSFW) services, 

and to improve service delivery. 

Statement of Need: The Department 

identified areas of the regulation that 

changed to create a uniform standard of 

ES services provision for States. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The 

Department determined that it is vital 

for the ES to be administered so that 

States deliver services effectively and 

equitably to unemployment insurance 

beneficiaries and other ES customers. 

Alternatives: Two alternatives will be 

considered, and the public had the 

opportunity to comment on these 

alternatives during the comment period 

of the NPRM. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

proposed rule was estimated to have 

one-time rule familiarization costs of 

$4,205 in 2020 dollars, as well as 

unknown transition costs. The proposed 

rule also estimated the rule to have 

annual transfer payments of $9.6 

million for three of the five States that 

currently have non-State merit staff 

providing some labor exchange services; 

transfer payments are monetary 

payments from one group to another, 

such as wages shifting from one 

employer to another, that do not affect 

total resources available to society. The 

transfer payments for this proposed rule 

were the estimated wage cost increases 

to the States associated with employee 

wages and fringe benefits. In the NPRM, 

the Department solicited comments 

from stakeholders and the public on the 

unknown transition costs, plus transfer 

payments that would be incurred by any 

States with some non-State merit staff 

providing labor exchange services. 

Risks: This action does not affect the 

public health, safety, or the 

environment. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 04/20/22 87 FR 23700 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

06/21/22 

Final Rule ............ 11/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: State. 

Agency Contact: Kimberly Vitelli, 

Administrator, Office of Workforce 

Investment, Department of Labor, 

Employment and Training 

Administration, 200 Constitution 

Avenue NW, FP Building, Room C– 

4526, Washington, DC 20210, Phone: 

202 693–3980, Email: vitelli.kimberly@

dol.gov. 

RIN: 1205–AC02 

DOL—EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 

SECURITY ADMINISTRATION (EBSA) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

167. Retirement Security Rule: 

Definition of an Investment Advice 

Fiduciary [1210–AC02] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Unfunded Mandates: This action may 

affect the private sector under Public 

Law 104–4. 

Legal Authority: 29 U.S.C. 1002; 29 

U.S.C. 1135; Reorganization Plan No. 4 

of 1978, 5 U.S.C. App. 252 (2020) 

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 2510.3–21. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rulemaking would 

amend the regulatory definition of the 

term fiduciary set forth at 29 CFR 

2510.3–21(c) to more appropriately 

define when persons who render 

investment advice for a fee to employee 

benefit plans and IRAs are fiduciaries 

within the meaning of section 3(21) of 

ERISA and section 4975(e)(3) of the 

Internal Revenue Code. The amendment 

would take into account practices of 

investment advisers, and the 

expectations of plan officials and 

participants, and IRA owners who 

receive investment advice, as well as 

developments in the investment 

marketplace, including in the ways 

advisers are compensated that can 

subject advisers to harmful conflicts of 

interest. In conjunction with this 

rulemaking, EBSA also proposed 

amendments to existing prohibited 

transaction exemptions to ensure 

consistent protection of employee 

benefit plan and IRA investors. 

Statement of Need: Many protections, 

duties, and liabilities in ERISA hinge on 

fiduciary status; therefore, the 

determination of who is a fiduciary is of 

central importance. The Department’s 

existing regulatory definition of an 

investment advice fiduciary, adopted in 

1975, established a five-part test for 

status as a fiduciary. The 1975 

regulation’s five-part test is not founded 

in the statutory text of ERISA, does not 

take into account the current nature and 

structure of many individual account 

retirement plans and IRAs, is 

inconsistent with the reasonable 

expectations of plan officials and 

participants, and IRA owners who 

receive investment advice, and allows 

many investment advice providers to 

avoid status as a fiduciary under federal 

pension laws. Under ERISA, fiduciaries 

must avoid conflicts of interest or 

comply with a prohibited transaction 

exemption with conditions designed to 

protect retirement investors. A wide and 

compelling body of evidence shows that 

conflicts of interest and forms of 

compensation that can subject advisers 

to harmful conflicts of interest, if left 

unchecked, too often result in biased 

investment advice and resulting harm to 

retirement investors. In conjunction 

with this rulemaking, EBSA also 

proposed amendments to existing 

prohibited transaction exemptions to 

ensure consistent protection of 

employee benefit plan and IRA 

investors. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The 

Department is proposing the 

amendment to its regulation defining a 

fiduciary pursuant to authority in 

ERISA section 505 (29 U.S.C. 1135) and 

section 102 of Reorganization Plan No. 

4 of 1978, 5 U.S.C. App. 252 (2020). 

Alternatives: The Department 

considered as an alternative leaving the 

1975 regulation in place without 

change. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

proposed amendment to the 1975 

regulation would extend the protections 

associated with fiduciary status to more 

advice arrangements. The proposed 

regulation and associated prohibited 

transaction exemptions are expected to 

require providers of investment advice 

to adhere to a best interest standard, 

charge no more than reasonable 

compensation, eliminate or mitigate 

conflicts of interest, and make important 

disclosures to their customers, among 

other things. These protections would 

deliver substantial gains for retirement 

investors and economic benefits that 

more than justify the costs. The costs of 

the regulation are largely expected to 

stem from compliance with the 

associated prohibited transaction 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9443 

exemptions. Estimates of the cost of 

compliance are reflected in the notice of 

proposed rulemaking. 

Risks: The Department believes that 

the 1975 regulation must be revised to 

align with retirement investors’ 

reasonable expectations regarding their 

relationships with investment advice 

providers and to reflect developments in 

the investment advice marketplace since 

the 1975 regulation was adopted. 

Failure to appropriately define an 

investment advice fiduciary under 

ERISA is likely to expose retirement 

investors to conflicts of interest that will 

erode retirement savings. The risks are 

especially great with respect to 

recommendations to roll assets out of 

ERISA-covered plans to IRAs because of 

the central importance of retirement 

plan savings to workers, the relative size 

of rollover transactions, and the 

technical requirements of the current 

fiduciary regulation, which have 

encouraged advisers to argue that their 

advice falls outside the regulation’s 

purview regardless of its importance. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 11/03/23 88 FR 75890 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

01/02/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: 

Undetermined. 

Federalism: This action may have 

federalism implications as defined in 

E.O. 13132. 

Agency Contact: Karen E. Lloyd, 

Office of Regulations and 

Interpretations, Department of Labor, 

Employee Benefits Security 

Administration, 200 Constitution 

Avenue NW, FP Building, Room N– 

5655, Washington, DC 20210, Phone: 

202 693–8510. 

RIN: 1210–AC02 

DOL—EBSA 

168. Mental Health Parity and 

Addiction Equity Act and the 

Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 

[1210–AC11] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Unfunded Mandates: This action may 

affect the private sector under Public 

Law 104–4. 

Legal Authority: Pub. L. 116–260, 

Division BB, Title II; Pub. L. 110–343, 

secs. 511–512 

CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rule would finalize 

proposed amendments to the final rules 

implementing the Mental Health Parity 

and Addiction Equity Act (MHPAEA). 

The amendments clarify plans’ and 

issuers’ obligations under the law, 

promote compliance with MHPAEA, 

and update requirements to take into 

account experience with MHPAEA in 

the years since the rules were finalized. 

The rule would also finalize new 

regulations implementing amendments 

to MHPAEA recently enacted as part of 

the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 

2021 (CAA, 2021). 

Statement of Need: There have been 

a number of legislative enactments 

related to MHPAEA since issuance of 

the 2014 final rules, including the 21st 

Century Cures Act, the Support Act, and 

the CAA, 2021. This rule would propose 

amendments to the final rules and 

incorporate examples and modifications 

to account for this legislation and 

previously issued guidance and to take 

into account experience with MHPAEA 

in the years since the rules were 

finalized. This rule would also include 

new regulations implementing the 

nonquantitative treatment limitation 

(NQTL) comparative analyses 

requirements set forth under the CAA, 

2021. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The 

Department of Labor regulations would 

be adopted pursuant to the authority 

contained in 29 U.S.C. 1002, 1135, 1182, 

1185d, 1191a, 1191b, and 1191c; 

Secretary of Labor’s Order 1–2011, 77 

FR 1088 (Jan. 9, 2012). 

Alternatives: The Departments 

considered various approaches related 

to NQTLs as well as comparative 

analysis requirements. These 

alternatives included not expressly 

incorporating the statutory requirements 

that NQTLs be no more restrictive for 

MH/SUD than M/S and requiring plans 

to include specific data elements in 

their comparative analysis These 

alternatives will be included in the 

published final rule. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

Departments anticipate that the 

MHPAEA final rules would improve the 

quality of the comparative analyses 

conducted by plans and issuers, as 

required by the CAA, 2021, help plans 

and issuers better understand and fulfill 

their obligations under MHPAEA, and 

promote greater transparency regarding 

discrepancies between mental health 

and substance use disorder benefits and 

medical/surgical benefits. The 

Departments believe that the 

amendments could cause plans and 

issuers to revise their policies and 

remove limitations on treatments for 

mental health and substance use 

disorders. This will provide improved 

access for participants and beneficiaries 

seeking MH/SUD treatments which will 

result in better health outcomes. These 

expanded protections and clarifications 

will greatly benefit plans, participants 

and beneficiaries and more than justify 

the costs. The costs of the proposed rule 

include costs to the plans and issuers 

associated with expanded coverage and 

utilization, collecting, analyzing and 

documenting data under the revised 

NQTL comparative analyses 

requirements. 

Risks: Risks and areas of uncertainty 

regarding potential impacts will be 

included in the final rule. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 08/03/23 88 FR 51552 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extended.

09/28/23 88 FR 66728 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extended End.

10/17/23 

NPRM Analyze 

Comments.

11/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

State. 

Federalism: This action may have 

federalism implications as defined in 

E.O. 13132. 

Agency Contact: Amber Rivers, 

Director, Office of Health Plan 

Standards and Compliance Assistance, 

Department of Labor, Employee Benefits 

Security Administration, 200 

Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20210, Phone: 202 693–8335, Email: 

rivers.amber@dol.gov. 

RIN: 1210–AC11 

DOL—EBSA 

169. Definition of ‘Employer’ Under 

Section 3(5) of ERISA-Association 

Health Plans [1210–AC16] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 29 U.S.C. 1002; 29 

U.S.C. 1135 

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 2510.3–3, –5. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: In this rulemaking, the 

Department of Labor’s Employee 

Benefits Security Administration 

(EBSA) will explore whether to 

withdraw, or withdraw and replace, its 

regulation at 29 CFR 2510.3–5, 

published as a final rule in 2018, which 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
9444 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

established an alternative set of criteria 

for determining when an employer 

association may act indirectly in the 

interest of an employer under section 

3(5) of the Employee Retirement Income 

Security Act (ERISA) for purposes of 

establishing a multiple employer group 

health plan. The United States District 

Court for the District of Columbia 

vacated portions of the final rule in a 

2019 decision in New York v. United 

States Department of Labor, 363 F. 

Supp. 3d 109 (D.D.C. 2019). EBSA will 

reevaluate the criteria for a group or 

association of employers to be able to 

sponsor a multiple employer group 

health plan. 

Statement of Need: To be determined. 

Summary of Legal Basis: To be 

determined. 

Alternatives: To be determined. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: To be 

determined. 

Risks: To be determined. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 11/00/23 

Final Rule ............ 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: 

Undetermined. 

Federalism: Undetermined. 

Agency Contact: Jeffrey J. Turner, 

Deputy Director, Office of Regulations 

and Interpretations, Department of 

Labor, Employee Benefits Security 

Administration, 200 Constitution 

Avenue NW, FP Building, Room N– 

5655, Washington, DC 20210, Phone: 

202 693–8500. 

RIN: 1210–AC16 

DOL—EBSA 

Final Rule Stage 

170. Coverage of Certain Preventive 

Services Under the Affordable Care Act 

[1210–AC13] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Legal Authority: Pub. L. 111–148, sec. 

1001 

CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rule would finalize 

proposed amendments to the final rules 

regarding religious and moral 

exemptions and accommodations 

regarding coverage of certain preventive 

services under Title I of the Patient 

Protection and Affordable Care Act. 

Statement of Need: Previous rules, 

regulations, and court decisions have 

left many women without contraceptive 

coverage and access to contraceptive 

services without cost sharing. These 

rules would seek to resolve the longrunning litigation with respect to 

religious objections to providing 

contraceptive coverage by honoring the 

objecting entities’ religious objections 

while also ensuring that women 

enrolled in a group health plan 

established or maintained, or in health 

insurance covered offered or arranged, 

by an objecting entity have the 

opportunity to obtain contraceptive 

services at no cost. These rules would 

also eliminate the exemption for entities 

and individuals that object to 

contraceptive coverage based on nonreligious moral beliefs, which prevents 

access to contraceptive services without 

cost sharing. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The 

Department of Labor regulations would 

be adopted pursuant to the authority 

contained in 29 U.S.C. 1002, 1135, 1182, 

1185d, 1191a, 1191b, and 1191c; 

Secretary of Labor’s Order 1–2011, 77 

FR 1088 (Jan. 9, 2012). 

Alternatives: In developing this rule, 

the Departments considered various 

alternative approaches. The 

Departments considered maintaining 

the exemption (along with the existing 

accommodations and the proposed 

individual contraceptive arrangement) 

with respect to group health plans, 

health insurance issuers, and 

institutions of higher education that 

have a non-religious, moral objection to 

contraceptive coverage. With respect to 

individuals enrolled in coverage 

through entities that have a religious 

objection to contraceptive coverage, the 

Departments considered an approach 

under which contraceptive coverage 

would be available through separate 

individual insurance policies that cover 

only contraceptives and in which 

participants, beneficiaries, and enrollees 

would have to separately enroll if they 

desired contraceptive coverage. The 

Departments also considered an 

approach under which, if an objecting 

entity contracts for a health plan 

without contraceptive coverage, the 

contraceptive coverage requirement 

would apply directly to the issuer in the 

case of a fully insured plan, or the third 

party administrator in the case of a selfinsured plan. The issuer or third party 

administrator would then be required to 

fulfill its separate and independent 

obligation to provide contraceptive 

coverage. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: This 

rule is expected to increase access to 

contraceptive services without cost 

sharing through the individual 

contraceptive arrangement for eligible 

individuals and the elimination of the 

exemption for entities and individuals 

that object to contraceptive coverage 

based on non-religious moral beliefs. 

This rule would increase health equity 

given the disproportionate burden of 

out-of-pocket spending on contraceptive 

services currently faced by low-income 

individuals (as those individuals with 

lower incomes must spend a greater 

percentage of their incomes on 

contraceptive services). This rule would 

also lead to better health outcomes for 

eligible individuals by increasing access 

to contraceptive services and reducing 

unintended pregnancies. Participating 

providers of contraceptive services 

(including clinicians, facilities, and 

pharmacies) and issuers would incur 

costs associated with entering into 

signed agreements for reimbursement of 

costs associated with the provision of 

contraceptive services to eligible 

individuals, including costs of verifying 

consumer eligibility and other 

associated administrative costs. Eligible 

individuals would incur costs 

associated with participating in the 

individual contraception arrangement, 

including confirming eligibility to their 

provider of contraceptive services. HHS 

estimates the total cost to providers of 

contraceptive services, issuers, and 

eligible individuals to be approximately 

$30.2 million annually. The rule would 

also lead to a reduction in health care 

costs for individuals, issuers, group 

health plan sponsors, and states due to 

reductions in unintended pregnancies. 

Risks: Departments do not have 

information on the number of entities 

and individuals that have claimed a 

moral exemption to providing 

contraceptive coverage and are therefore 

uncertain of the amount of the potential 

transfer from plans and issuers to 

participants, beneficiaries, and enrollees 

due to reduced out-of-pocket spending 

on contraceptive services associated 

with the proposed elimination of the 

exemption for entities and individuals 

that object to contraceptive coverage 

based on nonreligious moral beliefs. The 

Departments estimate that the provision 

of the individual contraceptive 

arrangement could lead to a transfer 

from the Federal Government to 

individuals (via issuers to providers of 

contraceptive services) of approximately 

$49.9 million annually. This estimate is 

uncertain due to the limited information 

available in the 2019 user fee 

adjustment data. The Departments are 

uncertain as to how the number of 

participating providers might vary (for 

example, across rural and urban areas) 

and how this variation might affect 

access to services under the individual 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9445 

contraceptive arrangement. Due to the 

lack of data, the Departments are unable 

to develop a precise estimate of the 

number of eligible individuals who 

might participate in the individual 

contraceptive arrangement. This overall 

lack of data leads to uncertainty 

regarding the magnitudes of the total 

cost savings to eligible individuals and 

any resulting potential cost savings to 

states (associated with reduced 

spending on State-funded programs that 

provide contraceptive services or a 

potential reduction in the number of 

unintended pregnancies that would 

otherwise impose costs to states). 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 02/02/23 88 FR 7236 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

04/03/23 

Final Rule ............ 08/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State. 

Federalism: This action may have 

federalism implications as defined in 

E.O. 13132. 

Agency Contact: Amber Rivers, 

Director, Office of Health Plan 

Standards and Compliance Assistance, 

Department of Labor, Employee Benefits 

Security Administration, 200 

Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20210, Phone: 202 693–8335, Email: 

rivers.amber@dol.gov. 

RIN: 1210–AC13 

DOL—MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH 

ADMINISTRATION (MSHA) 

Final Rule Stage 

171. Respirable Crystalline Silica 

[1219–AB36] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 30 U.S.C. 811; 30 

U.S.C. 813(h); 30 U.S.C. 957 

CFR Citation: 30 CFR 56; 30 CFR 57; 

30 CFR 60; 30 CFR 70; 30 CFR 71; 30 

CFR 72; 30 CFR 75; 30 CFR 90. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: Many miners are exposed to 

respirable crystalline silica (RCS) in 

respirable dust. These miners can 

develop lung diseases such as chronic 

obstructive pulmonary disease, and 

various forms of pneumoconiosis, such 

as silicosis, progressive massive fibrosis, 

and rapidly progressive 

pneumoconiosis. 

These diseases are irreversible and 

may ultimately be fatal. MSHA’s 

existing standards limit miners’ 

exposures to RCS. MSHA will publish a 

final rule to address the existing 

permissible exposure limit of RCS for all 

miners and to update the existing 

respiratory protection standards under 

30 CFR 56, 57, and 72. 

Statement of Need: Many miners are 

exposed to respirable crystalline silica 

(RCS) in respirable dust, which can 

result in the onset of diseases such as 

silicosis and rapidly progressive 

pneumoconiosis. These lung diseases 

are irreversible and may ultimately be 

fatal. MSHA is examining the existing 

limit on miners’ exposures to RCS to 

safeguard the health of America’s 

miners. Based on MSHA’s experience 

with existing standards and regulations, 

as well as OSHA’s RCS standards and 

NIOSH research, MSHA will develop a 

rule applicable to metal, nonmetal, and 

coal operations. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Sections 

101(a), 103(h), and 508 of the Federal 

Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 

(Mine Act), as amended (30 U.S.C. 

811(a), 813(h), and 957). 

Alternatives: MSHA will examine one 

or two different levels of miners’ RCS 

exposure limit and assess the 

technological and economic feasibility 

of such option(s). 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: To be 

determined. 

Risks: Miners face impairment risk of 

health and functional capacity due to 

RCS exposures. MSHA will examine the 

existing RCS standard and determine 

ways to reduce the health risks associate 

with RCS exposure. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Request for Information (RFI).08/29/19 84 FR 45452 

RFI Comment Period End.10/28/19 

NPRM .................. 07/13/23 88 FR 44852 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extended.

08/14/23 88 FR 54961 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extended End.

09/11/23 

NPRM Notice of 

Public Hearings.

07/26/23 88 FR 48146 

NPRM Public 

Hearing in Arlington Virginia.

08/03/23 

NPRM Public 

Hearing in 

Beckley, West 

Virginia.

08/10/23 

NPRM Public 

Hearing in Denver, Colorado.

08/21/23 

Final Rule ............ 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses, 

Governmental Jurisdictions. 

Government Levels Affected: Local, 

State. 

Agency Contact: S. Aromie Noe, 

Director, Office of Standards, 

Regulations, and Variances, Department 

of Labor, Mine Safety and Health 

Administration, 201 12th Street S, Suite 

401, Arlington, VA 22202, Phone: 202 

693–9440, Fax: 202 693–9441. 

RIN: 1219–AB36 

DOL—MSHA 

172. Safety Program for Surface Mobile 

Equipment [1219–AB91] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 30 U.S.C. 811; 30 

U.S.C. 813(h); 30 U.S.C. 957 

CFR Citation: 30 CFR 56; 30 CFR 57; 

30 CFR 77. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: MSHA would require mine 

operators to establish a written safety 

program for mobile equipment and 

powered haulage equipment (except belt 

conveyors) used at surface mines and 

surface areas of underground mines. 

Under this proposal, mine operators 

would be required to assess hazards and 

risks and identify actions to reduce 

accidents related to surface mobile 

equipment. The operators would have 

flexibility to develop and implement a 

safety program that would work best for 

their mining conditions and operations. 

This proposed rule would reduce fatal 

and nonfatal injuries involving surface 

mobile equipment used at mines and 

improve miner safety and health. 

Statement of Need: Although mine 

accidents are declining, accidents 

involving mobile and powered haulage 

equipment are still a leading cause of 

fatalities in mining. To reduce fatal and 

nonfatal injuries involving surface 

mobile equipment used at mines, MSHA 

is proposing a regulation that would 

require mine operators employing six or 

more miners to develop a written safety 

program for mobile and powered 

haulage equipment (excluding belt 

conveyors) at surface mines and surface 

areas of underground mines. The 

written safety program would include 

actions mine operators would take to 

identify hazards and risks to reduce 

accidents, injuries, and fatalities related 

to surface mobile equipment. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Sections 

101(a), 103(h), and 508 of the Federal 

Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 

(Mine Act), as amended (30 U.S.C. 

811(a), 813(h), and 957). 

Alternatives: MSHA considered 

requiring all mines, regardless of size, to 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
9446 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

develop and implement a written safety 

program for surface mobile equipment. 

Based on the Agency’s experience, 

MSHA concluded that a mine operator 

with five or fewer miners would 

generally have a limited inventory of 

surface mobile equipment. These 

operators would also have less complex 

mining operations, with fewer mobile 

equipment hazards that would 

necessitate a written safety program. 

Thus, these mine operators are not 

required to have a written safety 

program, although MSHA would 

encourage operators with five or fewer 

miners to have safety programs. MSHA 

will consider comments and suggestions 

received on alternatives or best practices 

that all mines might use to develop 

safety programs (whether written or not) 

for surface mobile equipment. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

proposed rule would not be 

economically significant, and it would 

have some net benefits. 

Risks: Miners operating mobile and 

powered haulage equipment or working 

nearby face risks of workplace injuries, 

illnesses, or deaths. The proposed rule 

would allow a flexible approach to 

reducing hazards and risks specific to 

each mine so that mine operators would 

be able to develop and implement safety 

programs that work for their operation, 

mining conditions, and miners. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Request for Information (RFI).06/26/18 83 FR 29716 

Notice of Public 

Stakeholder 

Meetings.

07/25/18 83 FR 35157 

Stakeholder Meeting—Birmingham, AL.08/07/18 

Stakeholder Meeting—Dallas, TX.08/09/18 

Stakeholder Meeting (Webinar)— 

Arlington, VA.

08/16/18 

Stakeholder Meeting—Reno, NV.08/21/18 

Stakeholder Meeting—Beckley, 

WV.

09/11/18 

Stakeholder Meeting—Albany, 

NY.

09/20/18 

Stakeholder Meeting—Arlington, 

VA.

09/25/18 

RFI Comment Period End.12/24/18 

NPRM .................. 09/09/21 86 FR 50496 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

11/08/21 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM Reopening 

of the Rulemaking Record 

for.

Public Comments 

12/20/21 86 FR 71860 

Virtual Public 

Hearing.

01/11/22 

NPRM Comment 

Period Reopened End.

02/11/22 

Final Rule ............ 11/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: S. Aromie Noe, 

Director, Office of Standards, 

Regulations, and Variances, Department 

of Labor, Mine Safety and Health 

Administration, 201 12th Street S, Suite 

401, Arlington, VA 22202, Phone: 202 

693–9440, Fax: 202 693–9441. 

RIN: 1219–AB91 

DOL—OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND 

HEALTH ADMINISTRATION (OSHA) 

Prerule Stage 

173. Heat Illness Prevention in Outdoor 

and Indoor Work Settings [1218–AD39] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: Not Yet Determined 

CFR Citation: None. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: Heat is the leading weatherrelated killer. Excessive heat can cause 

heat stroke and even death if not treated 

properly. It also exacerbates existing 

health problems like asthma, kidney 

failure, and heart disease. Workers in 

agriculture and construction are at 

highest risk, but the problem affects all 

workers exposed to heat, including 

indoor workers without climatecontrolled environments. Essential jobs 

where employees are exposed to high 

levels of heat are disproportionately 

held by Black and Brown workers. 

Heat stress killed 815 U.S. workers 

and seriously injured more than 70,000 

workers from 1992 through 2017, 

according to the Bureau of Labor 

Statistics. However, this is likely a vast 

underestimate, given that injuries and 

illnesses are under reported in the U.S., 

especially in the sectors employing 

vulnerable and often undocumented 

workers. Further, heat is not always 

recognized as a cause of heat-induced 

injuries or deaths and can easily be 

misclassified, because many of the 

symptoms overlap with other more 

common diagnoses. 

To date, California, Oregon, 

Washington, Minnesota, and the US 

military have issued heat protections. 

OSHA currently relies on the general 

duty clause (OSH Act section 5(a)(1)) to 

protect workers from this hazard. 

Notably, from 2013 through 2017, 

California used its heat standard to 

conduct 50 times more inspections 

resulting in a heat-related violation than 

OSHA did nationwide under its general 

duty clause. It is likely to become even 

more difficult to protect workers from 

heat stress under the general duty clause 

in light of the 2019 Occupational Safety 

and Health Review Commission’s 

decision in Secretary of Labor v. A.H. 

Sturgill Roofing, Inc. 

OSHA was petitioned by Public 

Citizen for a heat stress standard in 

2011. The Agency denied this petition 

in 2012, but was once again petitioned 

by Public Citizen, on behalf of 

approximately 130 organizations, for a 

heat stress standard in 2018 and 2019. 

In 2019 and 2021, some members of the 

Senate also urged OSHA to initiate 

rulemaking to address heat stress. 

Given the potentially broad scope of 

regulatory efforts to protect workers 

from heat hazards, as well as a number 

of technical issues and considerations 

with regulating this hazard (e.g., heat 

stress thresholds, heat acclimatization 

planning, exposure monitoring, medical 

monitoring), OSHA published an 

ANPRM on Heat Injury and Illness 

Prevention in Outdoor and Indoor Work 

Settings (October 27, 2021) to begin a 

dialogue and engage with stakeholders 

to explore the potential for rulemaking 

on this topic. For additional 

information, please see the 

Department’s fall regulatory plan 

narrative statement. 

Statement of Need: Heat stress killed 

more than 900 US workers, and caused 

serious heat illness in almost 100 times 

as many, from 1992 through 2017, 

according to the Bureau of Labor 

Statistics. However, this is likely a vast 

underestimate, given that injuries and 

illnesses are underreported in the US, 

especially in the sectors employing 

vulnerable and often undocumented 

workers. Further, heat is not always 

recognized as a cause of heat-induced 

illnesses or deaths, which are often 

misclassified, because many of the 

symptoms overlap with other more 

common diagnoses. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The 

Occupational Safety and Health Act of 

1970 authorizes the Secretary of Labor 

to set mandatory occupational safety 

and health standards to assure safe and 

healthful working conditions for 

working men and women (29 U.S.C. 

651). 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9447 

Alternatives: One alternative to 

proposed rulemaking would be to take 

no regulatory action and instead rely 

upon the General Duty Clause (OSH Act 

Section 5(a)(1) for select enforcement 

activity). As OSHA develops more 

information, it will also make decisions 

relating to the scope of the standard and 

the requirements it may impose. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

estimates of costs and benefits are still 

under development. 

Risks: Analysis of risks is still under 

development. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

ANPRM ............... 10/27/21 86 FR 59309 

ANPRM Comment 

Period Extended.

12/02/21 86 FR 68594 

ANPRM Comment 

Period Extended End.

01/26/22 

Initiate SBREFA .. 06/02/23 

Complete 

SBREFA.

11/00/23 

Analyze SBREFA 

Report.

01/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: 

Undetermined. 

Agency Contact: Andrew Levinson, 

Director, Directorate of Standards and 

Guidance, Department of Labor, 

Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration, 200 Constitution 

Avenue NW, FP Building, Room N– 

3718, Washington, DC 20210, Phone: 

202 693–1950, Email: levinson.andrew@

dol.gov. 

RIN: 1218–AD39 

DOL—OSHA 

Proposed Rule Stage 

174. Infectious Diseases [1218–AC46] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 533; 29 

U.S.C. 657 and 658; 29 U.S.C. 660; 29 

U.S.C. 666; 29 U.S.C. 669; 29 U.S.C. 673 

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1910. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: Employees in health care 

and other high-risk environments face 

long-standing infectious disease hazards 

such as tuberculosis (TB), varicella 

disease (chickenpox, shingles), and 

measles, as well as new and emerging 

infectious disease threats, such as 

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome 

(SARS), the 2019 Novel Coronavirus 

(COVID–19), and pandemic influenza. 

Health care workers and workers in 

related occupations, or who are exposed 

in other high-risk environments, are at 

increased risk of contracting TB, SARS, 

Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus 

Aureus (MRSA), COVID–19, and other 

infectious diseases that can be 

transmitted through a variety of 

exposure routes. OSHA is examining 

regulatory alternatives for control 

measures to protect employees from 

infectious disease exposures to 

pathogens that can cause significant 

disease. Workplaces where such control 

measures might be necessary include: 

health care, emergency response, 

correctional facilities, homeless shelters, 

drug treatment programs, and other 

occupational settings where employees 

can be at increased risk of exposure to 

potentially infectious people. A 

standard could also apply to 

laboratories, which handle materials 

that may be a source of pathogens, and 

to pathologists, coroners’ offices, 

medical examiners, and mortuaries. 

Statement of Need: Employees in 

health care and other high-risk 

environments face long-standing 

infectious disease hazards such as 

tuberculosis (TB), varicella disease 

(chickenpox, shingles), and measles, as 

well as new and emerging infectious 

disease threats, such as Severe Acute 

Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), the 2019 

Novel Coronavirus (COVID–19), and 

pandemic influenza. Health care 

workers and workers in related 

occupations, or who are exposed in 

other high-risk environments, are at 

increased risk of contracting TB, SARS, 

Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus 

Aureus (MRSA), COVID–19, and other 

infectious diseases that can be 

transmitted through a variety of 

exposure routes. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The 

Occupational Safety and Health Act of 

1970 authorizes the Secretary of Labor 

to set mandatory occupational safety 

and health standards to assure safe and 

healthful working conditions for 

working men and women (29 U.S.C. 

651). 

Alternatives: One alternative is to take 

no regulatory action. OSHA is 

examining regulatory alternatives for 

control measures to protect employees 

from infectious disease exposures to 

pathogens that can cause significant 

disease. In addition to health care, 

workplaces where SERs suggested such 

control measures might be necessary 

include: emergency response, 

correctional facilities, homeless shelters, 

drug treatment programs, and other 

occupational settings where employees 

can be at increased risk of exposure to 

potentially infectious people. 

A standard could also apply to 

laboratories, which handle materials 

that may be a source of pathogens, and 

to pathologists, coroners’ offices, 

medical examiners, and mortuaries. 

OSHA offered several alternatives to the 

SBREFA panel when presenting the 

proposed Infectious Disease (ID) rule. 

OSHA considered a specification 

oriented rule rather than a performance 

oriented rule, but has preliminarily 

determined that this type of rule would 

provide less flexibility and would likely 

fail to anticipate all of the potential 

hazards and necessary controls for every 

type and every size of facility and 

would under-protect workers. OSHA 

also considered changing the scope of 

the rule by restricting the ID rule to 

workers who have occupational 

exposure during the provision of direct 

patient care in institutional settings but 

based on the evidence thus far analyzed, 

workers performing other covered tasks 

in both institutional and noninstitutional settings also face a risk of 

infection because of their occupational 

exposure. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

estimates of costs and benefits are still 

under development. 

Risks: Analysis of risks is still under 

development. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Request for Information (RFI).05/06/10 75 FR 24835 

RFI Comment Period End.08/04/10 

Analyze Comments.12/30/10 

Stakeholder Meetings.07/05/11 76 FR 39041 

Initiate SBREFA .. 06/04/14 

Complete 

SBREFA.

12/22/14 

NPRM .................. 06/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses, 

Governmental Jurisdictions. 

Government Levels Affected: Local, 

State. 

Federalism: Undetermined. 

Agency Contact: Andrew Levinson, 

Director, Directorate of Standards and 

Guidance, Department of Labor, 

Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration, 200 Constitution 

Avenue NW, FP Building, Room N– 

3718, Washington, DC 20210, Phone: 

202 693–1950, Email: levinson.andrew@

dol.gov. 

RIN: 1218–AC46 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9448 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

DOL—OSHA 

175. Emergency Response [1218–AC91] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 29 U.S.C. 655(b); 29 

U.S.C. 657; 5 U.S.C. 609 

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1910. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: OSHA currently regulates 

aspects of emergency response and 

preparedness; some of these standards 

were promulgated decades ago, and 

none were designed as comprehensive 

emergency response standards. 

Consequently, they do not address the 

full range of hazards or concerns 

currently facing emergency responders, 

and other workers providing skilled 

support, nor do they reflect major 

changes in performance specifications 

for protective clothing and equipment. 

The agency acknowledges that current 

OSHA standards also do not reflect all 

the major developments in safety and 

health practices that have already been 

accepted by the emergency response 

community and incorporated into 

industry consensus standards. OSHA is 

considering updating these standards 

with information gathered through an 

RFI and public meetings. 

Statement of Need: Emergency 

response is a dangerous activity with 

more than 100 responders killed, and 

hundreds of thousands injured each 

year. OSHA currently regulates aspects 

of emergency response and 

preparedness; some of these standards 

were promulgated decades ago, and 

none were designed as comprehensive 

emergency response standards. 

Consequently, they do not address the 

full range of hazards or concerns 

currently facing emergency responders, 

nor do they reflect major changes in 

performance specifications for 

protective clothing and equipment. The 

agency acknowledges that current 

OSHA standards also do not reflect all 

the major developments in safety and 

health practices that have already been 

accepted by the emergency response 

community and incorporated into 

industry consensus standards. OSHA is 

developing a proposed rule that 

updates, by replacing, the existing 

outdated fire brigade standard to reflect 

current consensus standards and 

industry best practices. The agency 

anticipates that compliance with the 

updated rule would significantly reduce 

injuries and fatalities. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The 

Occupational Safety and Health Act of 

1970 authorizes the Secretary of Labor 

to set mandatory occupational safety 

and health standards to assure safe and 

healthful working conditions for 

working men and women (29 U.S.C. 

651). 

Alternatives: One alternative to 

proposed rulemaking would be to take 

no regulatory action. As a program 

standard that is primarily performance 

based, alternatives would depend on 

each employer’s individual situation. 

There are no alternatives proposed in 

the NPRM under development. OSHA 

intends to seek stakeholder input for 

alternatives that could reduce the 

burden on small entities, and on entities 

with volunteer emergency responders 

who are treated as employees in some 

states with OSHA approved state OSH 

programs and would be impacted by a 

proposed rule. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

estimates of costs and benefits are still 

under development. 

Risks: Analysis of risks is still under 

development. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Stakeholder Meetings.07/30/14 

Convene 

NACOSH 

Workgroup.

09/09/15 

NACOSH Review 

of Workgroup 

Report.

12/14/16 

Initiate SBREFA .. 08/02/21 

Finalize SBREFA 12/02/21 

NPRM .................. 11/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Governmental 

Jurisdictions. 

Government Levels Affected: Local, 

State. 

Federalism: Undetermined. 

Agency Contact: Andrew Levinson, 

Director, Directorate of Standards and 

Guidance, Department of Labor, 

Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration, 200 Constitution 

Avenue NW, FP Building, Room N– 

3718, Washington, DC 20210, Phone: 

202 693–1950, Email: levinson.andrew@

dol.gov. 

RIN: 1218–AC91 

BILLING CODE 4510–HL–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

(DOT) 

Introduction: Departmental Mission 

The U.S. Department of 

Transportation (Department or DOT) has 

a mission to deliver the world’s leading 

transportation system, serving the 

American people and economy through 

the safe, efficient, sustainable, and 

equitable movement of people and 

goods. 

The Department’s Regulatory 

Philosophy, Initiatives, and Priorities 

DOT issues regulations to make 

America’s transportation the safest in 

the world for the benefit of all who use 

it, grow an inclusive and sustainable 

economy, reduce inequities across our 

transportation systems and the 

communities they affect, and help tackle 

the climate crisis. To accomplish this 

goal, DOT regulates safety in the 

aviation, motor carrier, railroad, motor 

vehicle, commercial space, transit, and 

pipeline transportation areas. The 

Department also regulates aviation 

consumer and economic issues and 

provides financial assistance and writes 

the necessary implementing rules for 

programs involving highways, airports, 

mass transit, the maritime industry, 

railroads, motor transportation and 

vehicle safety. DOT also has 

responsibility for developing policies 

that implement a wide range of 

regulations that govern Departmental 

programs such as acquisition and grants 

management, access for people with 

disabilities, environmental protection, 

energy conservation, information 

technology, occupational safety and 

health, property asset management, 

seismic safety, security, emergency 

response, and the use of aircraft and 

vehicles. In addition, DOT writes 

regulations to carry out a variety of 

statutes ranging from the Air Carrier 

Access Act and the Americans with 

Disabilities Act to Title VI of the Civil 

Rights Act. 

Safety is our North Star. The DOT 

Regulatory Plan reflects our 

commitment through a balanced 

regulatory approach grounded in 

reducing transportation-related fatalities 

and injuries. Our goals are to manage 

safety risks, reverse recent trends 

negatively affecting safety, and build on 

the successes that have already been 

achieved to make our transportation 

system safer than it has ever been. The 

regulatory plan laid out below also 

reflects a careful balance that 

emphasizes the Department’s priorities 

in responding to the urgent challenges 

facing our nation. 

The safe and efficient movement of 

goods and passengers requires us not 

just to maintain, but to improve our 

national transportation infrastructure. 

Accordingly, our Regulatory Plan 

incorporates regulatory actions that 

increase competition and consumer 

protection, as well as enable the next 

generation of automation technology for 

commercial motor vehicles. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9449 

1 Guidance on Communication with Parties 

outside of the Federal Executive Branch (Ex Parte 

Communications) at 5, available at: https://

www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2022-04/ 

Guidance-on-Communication-with-Parties-outsideof-the-Federal-Executive-Branch-%28Ex-ParteCommunications%29.pdf. See also OIRA 

Memorandum on Broadening Public Participation 

and Community Engagement in the Regulatory 

Process, available at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/ 

wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Broadening-PublicParticipation-and-Community-Engagement-in-theRegulatory-Process.pdf. 

Climate change is one of the most 

urgent challenges facing our Nation. As 

discussed in the next section, the 

Department has engaged in significant 

regulatory activities to address this 

challenge. 

Ensuring that the transportation 

system equitably benefits underserved 

communities is a top priority. This work 

is guided by the Departmental and 

interagency work being done pursuant 

to Executive Order 13985, Advancing 

Racial Equity and Support for 

Underserved Communities Through the 

Federal Government. As discussed in 

the next section, the Department is 

working on multiple regulatory changes 

to ensure access to transportation for 

people with disabilities. 

When developing regulations and 

establishing our regulatory priorities, 

the Department fosters active 

participation and engagement from 

members of the public and affected 

communities. In our Regulatory Plan, 

we detail engagement efforts that have 

helped to inform our priorities to date, 

as well as future engagement tools we 

plan to use. The Department is ensuring 

that we hear from members of the public 

who have not typically participated in 

the regulatory process. To that end, in 

April 2022, the Department issued new 

ex parte guidance that encourages DOT 

personnel to have meetings or other 

contacts with outside parties during 

rulemaking and states that DOT 

personnel ‘‘should ensure, through 

appropriate affirmative outreach where 

necessary, that the opportunity to 

engage in ex parte communications is 

equitable to all parties, including 

stakeholders who might otherwise be 

less represented in that process.’’ 1

The Department carries out its 

responsibilities through the Office of the 

Secretary (OST) and the following 

operating administrations (OAs): 

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA); 

Federal Highway Administration 

(FHWA); Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration (FMCSA); Federal 

Railroad Administration (FRA); Federal 

Transit Administration (FTA); Maritime 

Administration (MARAD); National 

Highway Traffic Safety Administration 

(NHTSA); Pipeline and Hazardous 

Materials Safety Administration 

(PHMSA); and Great Lakes St. Lawrence 

Seaway Development Corporation 

(GLS). Since each OA has its own area 

of focus, we summarize the regulatory 

priorities of each below. More 

information about each of the rules 

discussed below can be found in the 

DOT Unified Agenda. 

Office of the Secretary of 

Transportation 

OST oversees the regulatory processes 

for the Department. OST implements 

the Department’s regulatory policies and 

procedures and is responsible for 

ensuring the involvement of senior 

officials in regulatory decision making. 

Through the Office of the General 

Counsel (OGC), OST is also responsible 

for ensuring that the Department 

complies with the Administrative 

Procedure Act, Executive Orders 12866, 

13563 and 14094, DOT’s Regulatory 

Policies and Procedures, and other legal 

and policy requirements affecting the 

Department’s rulemaking activities. In 

addition, OST has the lead role in 

matters concerning aviation consumer 

and economic rules, Title VI of the Civil 

Rights Act, the Americans with 

Disabilities Act, and rules that affect 

multiple elements of the Department. 

OST provides guidance and training 

regarding compliance with regulatory 

requirements and processes for 

personnel throughout the Department. 

OST also plays an instrumental role in 

the Department’s efforts to improve our 

economic analyses; risk assessments; 

regulatory flexibility analyses; other 

related analyses; retrospective reviews 

of rules; and data quality, including 

peer reviews. OGC is the lead office that 

works with the Office of Management 

and Budget’s (OMB) Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs 

(OIRA) to comply with Executive Order 

12866 for significant rules, coordinates 

the Department’s response to OMB’s 

intergovernmental review of other 

agencies’ significant rulemaking 

documents, and other relevant 

Administration rulemaking directives. 

OGC also works closely with 

representatives of other agencies, the 

White House, and congressional staff to 

provide information on how various 

proposals would affect the ability of the 

Department to perform its safety, 

infrastructure, and other missions. 

The Department has recently 

completed a rulemaking to ensure that 

people with disabilities will be able to 

access lavatories on single-aisle aircraft. 

This rule was heavily informed by 

feedback from persons with disabilities, 

as it was developed as part of a 

negotiated rulemaking. Stakeholders, 

including numerous disability advocacy 

organizations, directly developed the 

features of the rule, which DOT then 

implemented through a recently issued 

final rule. DOT also reached out to the 

U.S. Access Board to develop new safety 

and accessibility standards for on-board 

wheelchairs. The Department held a 

joint public meeting with the Access 

Board to solicit further comment on the 

provisions of the rule relating to onboard wheelchairs. 

In addition, the Department is 

working on: (1) a rulemaking to enhance 

the safety of air travel for individuals 

with disabilities who use wheelchairs; 

and (2) a rulemaking to ensure that 

disabled persons have equitable access 

to transit facilities. In the rulemaking to 

enhance air travel safety for wheelchair 

users, the Department is considering, 

among other things, options to ensure 

that assistance provided to individuals 

with disabilities be provided in a safe 

manner and that disabled individuals’ 

assistive devices not be mishandled. 

Executive Order 14036 directs the 

Department to take actions that would 

promote competition and deliver 

benefits to America’s consumers, 

including initiating a rulemaking to 

ensure that air consumers have ancillary 

fee information, including ‘‘baggage 

fees,’’ ‘‘change fees,’’ ‘‘cancellation 

fees,’’ and fees for seating adjacent to 

young children at the time of ticket 

purchase. Among a number of steps to 

further the Administration’s goals in 

this area, the Department has initiated a 

rulemaking to enhance consumers’ 

ability to determine the true cost of 

travel, titled ‘‘Enhancing Transparency 

of Airline Ancillary Service Fees.’’ This 

rulemaking is informed by feedback 

received at three different public 

meetings: two meetings of the Aviation 

Consumer Protection Advisory 

Committee on December 8, 2022, and 

January 12, 2023, and one public 

hearing on March 30, 2023. All meetings 

were open to the public, and attendees 

had the option to provide live input at 

the December 8 and March 30 meetings. 

The docket for this rule was also open 

to public comment submission for 

approximately 120 days. 

To further enhance consumer 

protection, the Department is also 

working on a rulemaking that would 

clarify, under the Department’s rules 

requiring airlines to provide prompt 

refunds, when carriers and ticket agents 

must provide prompt ticket refunds to 

passengers when a carrier cancels or 

makes a significant change to a flight. 

This rulemaking would also require 

airlines to refund checked baggage fees 

when they fail to deliver the bags in a 

timely manner. This rulemaking is 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9450 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

informed by feedback received at four 

public meetings: three meetings of the 

Aviation Consumer Protection Advisory 

Committee on August 22, 2022, 

December 8, 2022, and January 12, 2023, 

and one public hearing on March 21, 

2023. The docket for this rule was also 

open to public comment submission for 

approximately 130 days. 

Federal Aviation Administration 

FAA is charged with safely and 

efficiently operating and maintaining 

the most complex aviation system in the 

world. To enhance aviation safety, FAA 

is working on a rulemaking that would 

require a safety management system for 

certain aircraft, engine, and propeller 

manufacturers; certificate holders 

conducting common carriage 

operations; and persons conducting 

certain, specific types of air tour 

operations. This rulemaking is informed 

by feedback that FAA received from an 

Aviation Rulemaking Committee 

comprised of members from across the 

aviation industry. In addition, FAA will 

proceed with a rulemakings to enable 

powered lift operations and to further 

advance the integration of unmanned 

aircraft systems into the national 

airspace system. 

Federal Highway Administration 

FHWA carries out the Federal 

highway program in partnership with 

State and local agencies to meet the 

Nation’s transportation needs. FHWA’s 

mission is to improve the quality and 

performance of our Nation’s highway 

system and its intermodal connectors. 

Consistent with this mission, FHWA 

has finalized its National Electric 

Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Formula 

Program regulation as required by the 

Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (enacted 

as the Infrastructure Investment and 

Jobs Act) (Pub. L. 117–58) (Nov. 15, 

2021). This regulation will enable States 

to implement federally-funded charging 

station projects in a standardized 

fashion across a national Electric 

Vehicle (EV) charging network that can 

be utilized by all EVs regardless of 

vehicle brand. Such standards will 

provide consumers with reliable 

expectations for travel in an EV across 

and throughout the United States and 

support a national workforce skilled and 

trained in EV supply equipment 

installation and maintenance. This rule 

was informed by feedback provided 

through two webinars hosted by FHWA 

that were advertised, in part, to 

communities interested in alternative 

fuels and sustainable transportation. 

FHWA is also working on a rulemaking 

that would establish a method for the 

measurement and reporting of 

greenhouse gas emissions associated 

with transportation. In addition, FHWA 

is working on a Buy America 

rulemaking to encourage the use of 

American-manufactured products. 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration 

The mission of FMCSA is to reduce 

crashes, injuries, and fatalities involving 

commercial trucks and buses. FMCSA 

regulations establish minimum safety 

standards for motor carriers, commercial 

drivers, commercial motor vehicles, and 

State agencies receiving certain motor 

carrier safety grants and issuing 

commercial drivers’ licenses. 

FMCSA will continue to coordinate 

efforts on the development of 

autonomous vehicle technologies and is 

currently working on a rulemaking to 

revise existing regulations to identify 

changes that might be needed to ensure 

that DOT regulations ensure safety and 

keep pace with innovations. This 

rulemaking is informed by feedback that 

FMCSA received at two separate 

listening sessions held with 

stakeholders and members of the public. 

Additionally, in support of the 

NHTSA automatic emergency braking 

(AEB) rulemaking for heavy trucks, 

FMCSA will seek information and 

comment concerning the maintenance 

and operation of AEB by motor carriers. 

FMCSA has also been engaged in 

activities to advance the voluntary 

adoption of AEB for heavy vehicles, 

primarily through the Tech-Celerate 

Now (TCN) program. This program 

focuses on accelerating the adoption of 

Advanced Driver Assistance Systems 

(ADAS), such as AEB, by the trucking 

industry to reduce fatalities and prevent 

injuries and crashes, in addition to 

realizing substantial return-oninvestment through reducing costs 

associated with such crashes for the 

motor carrier. Initiated in September 

2019 and completed in February 2022, 

the first phase of this program 

encompassed research into ADAS 

technology adoption barriers; a national 

outreach, educational, and awareness 

campaign; and data collection and 

analysis. Outreach accomplishments 

included development of training 

materials for fleets, drivers, and 

maintenance personnel related to AEB 

technology and return-on-investment 

(ROI) guides; educational videos on 

ADAS braking, steering, warning, and 

monitoring technologies; a web-based 

TCN ADAS-specific ROI calculator; four 

articles on ADAS technologies; and a 

program website to host the training 

materials. Planning is underway for the 

second phase of the TCN program, 

which includes an expanded national 

outreach and education campaign, 

additional research into the barriers to 

ADAS adoption by motor carriers, and 

evaluation of the outreach campaign. 

FMCSA is also working on a rulemaking 

that would set a maximum speed for 

certain commercial motor vehicles. 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

NHTSA pursues policies that enable 

safety; establish light-, medium-, and 

heavy-duty vehicle fuel economy and 

fuel efficiency standards; enhance 

equity; and improve mobility to save 

lives, prevent injuries, and reduce 

economic and social costs due to 

roadway crashes. The statutory 

responsibilities of NHTSA relating to 

motor vehicles include reducing the 

number, and mitigating the effects, of 

motor vehicle crashes and related 

fatalities and injuries; providing safetyrelevant information to aid prospective 

purchasers of vehicles, child restraints, 

and tires; and improving fuel economy 

and fuel efficiency standards 

requirements. NHTSA develops safety 

standards and other regulations driven 

by data and research. NHTSA’s 

regulatory priorities focus on issues 

related to safety, climate, equity, and 

vulnerable road users. 

Relative to climate and equity, 

NHTSA plans to propose a rulemaking 

to address the next phase of Fuel 

Efficiency and Greenhouse Gas 

Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty 

Engines and Vehicles, pursuant to 

Executive Order 14037. Also pursuant 

to Executive Order 14037, NHTSA has 

proposed the next phase of NHTSA’s 

corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) 

standards for passenger cars and light 

trucks. To enhance the safety of 

vulnerable road users and vehicle 

occupants, NHTSA has issued a 

proposal to require automatic 

emergency braking (AEB) on light 

vehicles, including Pedestrian AEB. For 

heavy trucks, NHTSA also proposed a 

rulemaking, in coordination with 

FMCSA, to require AEB. NHTSA’s 

rulemakings are informed by the public 

outreach that it regularly engaged in 

while a rule is in development, 

including with Federal partners; State, 

local, and tribal governments; and a 

wide range of interested stakeholders— 

some of whom represent underserved 

communities. 

Federal Railroad Administration 

FRA exercises regulatory authority 

over all areas of railroad safety and, 

where feasible, incorporates flexible 

performance standards. The current 

FRA regulatory program continues to 

reflect a number of pending proceedings 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9451 

to satisfy mandates resulting from the 

Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (2021). 

These actions support a safe, highperforming passenger rail network, 

protect worker safety, and encourage 

innovation and the adoption of new 

technology to improve rail safety. 

To further enhance safety, FRA is 

working on a rulemaking that would 

address the potential safety impact of 

one-person train operations, including 

appropriate measures to mitigate an 

accident’s impact and severity. This 

rulemaking would address the issue of 

minimum requirements for the size of 

train crews, depending on the type of 

operations. To inform this rulemaking, 

FRA conducted outreach on its 

proposed rule that resulted in about 99 

percent of the written comments 

submitted to the docket being from 

individual commenters who were not 

filing their comment officially on behalf 

of an organization, group, or business. 

FRA also held a public hearing that 

allowed more than 225 people to watch 

live testimony from labor organization 

leaders, railroads, and rail associations, 

in addition to the approximately 60 

speakers and other physically present 

attendees. 

Federal Transit Administration 

The mission of FTA is to improve 

public transportation for America’s 

communities. To further that end, FTA 

provides financial and technical 

assistance to local public transit 

systems, including buses, subways, light 

rail, commuter rail, trolleys, and ferries, 

oversees safety measures, and helps 

develop next-generation technology 

research. FTA’s regulatory activities 

implement the laws that apply to 

recipients’ uses of Federal funding and 

the terms and conditions of FTA grant 

awards. 

Maritime Administration 

MARAD administers Federal laws and 

programs to improve and strengthen the 

maritime transportation system to meet 

the economic, environmental, and 

security needs of the Nation. To that 

end, MARAD’s efforts are focused upon 

ensuring a strong American presence in 

the domestic and international trades 

and to expanding maritime 

opportunities for American businesses 

and workers. 

MARAD’s regulatory objectives and 

priorities reflect the Agency’s 

responsibility for ensuring the 

availability of water transportation 

services for American shippers and 

consumers and, in times of war or 

national emergency, for the U.S. armed 

forces. MARAD will continue its work 

increasing the efficiency of program 

operations by updating and clarifying 

implementing rules and program 

administrative procedures. 

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 

Safety Administration 

PHMSA has responsibility for 

rulemaking focused on hazardous 

materials transportation and pipeline 

safety. In addition, PHMSA administers 

programs under the Federal Water 

Pollution Control Act, as amended by 

the Oil Pollution Act of 1990. 

PHMSA will continue working on the 

Gas Pipeline Leak Detection and Repair 

rulemaking, which would amend the 

Pipeline Safety Regulations to enhance 

requirements for detecting and repairing 

leaks on new and existing natural gas 

distribution, gas transmission, and gas 

gathering pipelines. PHMSA anticipates 

that the amendments proposed in this 

rulemaking would reduce methane 

emissions arising from leaks and 

incidents from natural gas pipelines and 

address environmental justice concerns 

by improving the safety of natural gas 

pipelines near environmental justice 

communities and mitigating the risks for 

those communities arising from climate 

change. This rulemaking is informed by 

feedback that PHMSA received at a 

virtual public meeting. PHMSA staff 

also attended a Methane Detection 

Technology Workshop hosted by EPA in 

August 2021. In addition, in November 

2023, PHMSA intends to hold a Gas 

Pipeline Advisory Committee meeting 

to discuss the leak detection 

rulemaking, including the comments 

received on the NPRM. 

DOT—FEDERAL AVIATION 

ADMINISTRATION (FAA) 

Final Rule Stage 

176. Safety Management Systems 

[2120–AL60] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f); 49 

U.S.C. 44701(a)(5) 

CFR Citation: 14 CFR 135; 14 CFR 21; 

14 CFR 91. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rulemaking would 

apply the requirements of 14 CFR part 

5, with appropriate modifications. As a 

result, this rulemaking would require 

persons engaged in the design and 

production of aircraft, engines, or 

propellers; certificate holders that 

conduct common carriage operations 

under part 135; and persons conducting 

certain, specific types of air tour 

operations under part 91 to implement 

a Safety Management System. 

Statement of Need: Recent incidents 

and accidents have indicated the need 

for action to improve safety in the 

National Airspace System (NAS). In 

addition, recommendations from the 

National Transportation Safety Board 

(NTSB), mandates in the Aircraft 

Certification Safety and Accountability 

(ACSA) Act (Pub. L. 116–260, December 

27, 2020), agreements in International 

Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) 

Annexes and Standards and 

Recommended Practices (SARPs), and 

recommendations from previous 

Aviation Rulemaking Committees 

(ARCs) indicate that expanded 

application of SMS is needed. Further, 

the successful implementation of Safety 

Management Systems (SMS) in part 121 

suggests the potential benefit to 

expansion of SMS into other sectors of 

the aviation system. Therefore, the 

Federal Aviation Administration has 

determined that expanding the 

application of part 5 is necessary. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The FAA’s 

authority to issue rules on aviation 

safety is found in title 49 of the United 

States Code (U.S.C.). Subtitle I, section 

106 describes the authority of the FAA 

Administrator. This rulemaking is 

promulgated under the authority 

described in 49 U.S.C. 106(f), which 

establishes the authority of the 

Administrator to promulgate regulations 

and rules. Subtitle VII, Aviation 

Programs, describes in more detail the 

scope of the Agency’s authority. This 

rulemaking is also promulgated under 

49 U.S.C. 44701(a)(5), 49 U.S.C. 

44701(d)(1)(A), 49 U.S.C. 44701(a)(2), 49 

U.S.C. 44707(2), 49 U.S.C. 44702 and 49 

U.S.C 44704. In addition, the Airport 

Certification, Safety, and Accountability 

Act, (the Act), Public Law 116–260, 

division V, title I, sec. 102 (December 

27, 2020) requires the FAA to initiate a 

rulemaking to require that 

manufacturers that hold both a type 

certificate and a production certificate 

issued pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 44704 have 

a safety management system consistent 

with standards and recommended 

practices established by ICAO. This 

rulemaking is within the scope of the 

aforementioned authorities because it 

requires certain entities to develop and 

maintain an SMS to improve the safety 

of their operations. The development 

and implementation of SMS ensures 

safety in air transportation, 

manufacturing, and maintenance by 

helping certain entities proactively 

identify and mitigate safety hazards, 

thereby reducing the possibility or 

recurrence of accidents in air 

transportation. 

Alternatives: The proposed expansion 

of the applicability of part 5 furthers the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9452 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Administrator’s mission of promoting 

the safe flight of civil aircraft in air 

commerce and reducing or eliminating 

the possibility or recurrence of 

accidents in air transportation. The FAA 

is currently exploring several 

alternatives to determine how the 

revised applicability would extend SMS 

requirements to parts 21, 91, 135, and 

145. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The FAA is 

in the process of determining the costs 

and benefits associated with the 

proposed rule. 

Risks: An SMS is a formalized 

approach to managing safety by 

developing an organization-wide safety 

policy, developing formal methods of 

identifying hazards, analyzing and 

mitigating risk, developing methods for 

ensuring continuous safety 

improvement, and creating 

organization-wide safety promotion 

strategies. An SMS provides an 

organization’s management with a set of 

decision-making tools that can be used 

to plan, organize, direct, and control its 

business activities in a manner that 

enhances safety and ensures compliance 

with regulatory standards. Adherence to 

standard operating procedures, 

proactive identification and mitigation 

of hazards and risks, and effective 

communications are crucial to 

continued operational safety. The FAA 

envisions an SMS would provide those 

covered by the proposed rule with an 

added layer of safety to help reduce the 

number of incidents, and accidents. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 01/11/23 88 FR 1932 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extended.

01/30/23 88 FR 5812 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

03/13/23 

Second NPRM 

Comment Period End.

04/11/23 

Analyzing Comments.06/30/23 

Final Action ......... 07/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

URL For More Information: 

www.regulations.gov. 

URL For Public Comments: 

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Scott VanBuren, 

Office of Accident Investigation and 

Prevention, Department of 

Transportation, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591, 

Phone: 202 494–8417, Email: 

scott.vanburen@faa.gov. 

RIN: 2120–AL60 

BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 

Statement of Regulatory Priorities 

The primary mission of the 

Department of the Treasury is to 

maintain a strong economy and create 

economic and job opportunities by 

promoting the conditions that enable 

economic growth and stability at home 

and abroad, strengthen national security 

by combatting threats and protecting the 

integrity of the financial system, and 

manage the U.S. Government’s finances 

and resources effectively. 

Consistent with this mission, 

regulations of the Department and its 

constituent bureaus are promulgated to 

interpret and implement the laws as 

enacted by Congress and signed by the 

President. It is the policy of the 

Department to comply with applicable 

requirements to issue a Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking and carefully 

consider public comments before 

adopting a final rule. Also, the 

Department invites interested parties to 

submit views on rulemaking projects 

while a proposed rule is being 

developed. 

To the extent permitted by law, it is 

the policy of the Department to adhere 

to the regulatory philosophy and 

principles set forth in Executive Orders 

12866, 13563, and 13609 and to develop 

regulations that maximize aggregate net 

benefits to society while minimizing the 

economic and paperwork burdens 

imposed on persons and businesses 

subject to those regulations. 

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade 

Bureau 

The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and 

Trade Bureau (TTB) issues regulations 

to implement and enforce Federal laws 

relating to alcohol, tobacco, firearms, 

and ammunition excise taxes and 

certain non- tax laws relating to alcohol. 

TTB’s mission and regulations are 

designed to: 

(1) Collect the taxes on alcohol, 

tobacco products, firearms, and 

ammunition; 

(2) Protect the consumer by ensuring 

the integrity of alcohol products; 

(3) Ensure only qualified businesses 

enter the alcohol and tobacco industries; 

and 

(4) Prevent unfair and unlawful 

market activity for alcohol and tobacco 

products. 

In FY 2024, TTB will continue its 

multi-year Regulations Modernization 

effort by prioritizing projects that reduce 

regulatory burdens, streamline and 

simplify requirements, and improve 

service to regulated businesses. These 

actions include rulemaking on 

streamlining permit and qualification 

requirements for distilled spirits plants, 

wineries, and breweries, and completing 

rulemaking to modernize the regulations 

regarding wine labeling and to authorize 

additional wine treating materials and 

processes. 

In addition, TTB will also prioritize 

publishing rulemaking to implement 

recommendations of the Department of 

the Treasury’s February 2022 report on 

Competition in the Markets for Beer, 

Wine, and Spirits, which was issued in 

response to Executive Order 14036, 

‘‘Promoting Competition in the 

American Economy.’’ These actions 

focus on soliciting public comment on 

trade practice regulations that prevent 

anticompetitive practices and maintain 

a ‘‘level playing field’’ across the 

alcohol industry, and labeling and 

advertising regulations that would 

require alcohol beverage labels to 

include specific, content-related 

information on alcohol content, 

allergens, and other ingredients. They 

also include finalizing rulemaking on 

proposed new approved container sizes 

(‘‘standards of fill’’) for wine and 

distilled spirits. 

The specific projects TTB plans to 

prioritize in FY 2024 are described 

below: 

• Streamlining and Modernizing the 

Permit Application Process (RINs: 1513– 

AC46, 1513–AC47, and 1513–AC48, 

Modernization of Permit and 

Registration Application Requirements 

for Distilled Spirits Plants, Permit 

Applications for Wineries, and 

Qualification Requirements for Brewers, 

respectively). 

In FY 2022, TTB proposed regulatory 

changes to eliminate or streamline 

application and qualification 

requirements for distilled spirits plants 

and breweries. In FY 2024, TTB intends 

to publish a similar proposal for 

wineries, and to publish final rules to 

implement the changes for distilled 

spirits plants and breweries. These 

changes are expected to reduce the 

amount of information industry 

members must submit to TTB in 

connection with permit and similar 

applications to engage in regulated 

businesses and reduce the types of 

operational activities that require prior 

approval, and overall reduce the 

regulatory burden on both new and 

existing businesses. 

• Modernizing the Alcohol Beverage 

Labeling and Advertising Requirements 

(RIN: 1513–AC67, Modernization of 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9453 

Wine Labeling and Advertising 

Regulations). 

The Federal Alcohol Administration 

Act requires that alcohol beverages 

introduced in interstate commerce have 

a label approved under regulations 

prescribed by the Secretary of the 

Treasury. TTB conducted an analysis of 

its alcohol beverage labeling regulations 

to identify any that might be outmoded, 

ineffective, insufficient, or excessively 

burdensome, and to modify, streamline, 

expand, or repeal them in accordance 

with that analysis. These regulations 

were also reviewed to assess their 

applicability to the modern alcohol 

beverage marketplace. As a result of this 

review, in FY 2019, TTB proposed 

revisions to the regulations concerning 

the labeling requirements for wine, 

distilled spirits, and malt beverages. 

TTB anticipated that these regulatory 

changes would assist industry in 

voluntary compliance, decrease 

industry burden, and result in the 

regulated industries being able to bring 

products to market without undue 

delay. TTB received over 1,100 

comments in response to the notice, 

which included suggestions for further 

revisions. In FY 2020, TTB published in 

the Federal Register (85 FR 18704) a 

final rule amending its regulations to 

make permanent certain of the proposed 

liberalizing and clarifying changes, and 

to provide certainty with regard to 

certain other proposals that commenters 

generally opposed and that TTB did not 

intend to adopt. In FY 2022, TTB 

published in the Federal Register (87 

FR 7526) a final rule that addressed 

remaining issues related to the labeling 

of distilled spirits and malt beverages 

and reorganized those regulations to 

make them easier to read and 

understand, for which industry 

members expressed support. In FY 

2024, TTB intends to complete this 

modernization initiative by publishing a 

final rule to similarly reorganize the 

wine labeling regulations, address the 

remaining labeling issues related to 

wine, and finalize the regulations 

related to the advertising of wine, 

distilled spirits, and malt beverages. 

• Authorizing the Use of Additional 

Wine Treating Materials and Soliciting 

Comments on Proposed Changes to the 

Limits on the Use of Wine Treating 

Materials to Reflect ‘‘Good 

Manufacturing Practice’’ (1513–AC75). 

TTB intends to propose to amend its 

regulations pertaining to the production 

of wine to authorize additional 

treatments that may be applied to wine 

and to juice from which wine is made. 

These proposed amendments are in 

response to requests from wine industry 

members. Although TTB may 

administratively approve such 

treatments without amending the 

regulations, administrative approval 

does not guarantee acceptance in foreign 

markets of any wine so treated. Under 

certain international agreements, 

authorization of wine treatments 

through public notice facilitates the 

acceptance of exported wine made using 

those treatments in foreign markets. 

TTB also intends to propose for public 

comment additional changes to the 

regulations in response to a petition to 

allow more wine treating materials to be 

used within the limitations of ‘‘good 

manufacturing practice’’ rather than 

within specified numerical limits, 

thereby providing additional flexibility 

to winemakers. 

• Consideration of Updates to Trade 

Practice Regulations (RIN: 1513–AC92). 

In FY 2023, TTB issued an advance 

notice of proposed rulemaking to seek 

public comment on TTB’s trade practice 

regulations related to the Federal 

Alcohol Administration Act’s exclusive 

outlet, tied house, commercial bribery, 

and consignment sales prohibitions. 

Executive Order 14036 (‘‘Promoting 

Competition in the American 

Economy’’), the Department of the 

Treasury’s related February 2022 report 

(‘‘Competition in the Markets for Beer, 

Wine, and Spirits’’), and public 

comments related to that report have 

raised questions about whether these 

regulations could be improved. In FY 

2024, TTB intends to review and 

consider the comments received in 

formulating potential proposals to 

amend the regulations. 

• Labeling and Advertising of Alcohol 

Beverages with Alcohol and Nutritional 

Content, Allergens, and Ingredients 

(RIN: 1513–AC93, Labeling and 

Advertising of Distilled Spirits, Wines, 

and Malt Beverages With Statements of 

Alcohol and Nutritional Content; RIN: 

1513–AC94, Major Food Allergen 

Labeling for Wines, Distilled Spirits, and 

Malt Beverages; and 1513–AC95, 

Ingredient Labeling of Distilled Spirits, 

Wines, and Malt Beverages). 

TTB intends to request public 

comment on possible changes to its 

labeling and advertising regulations 

governing alcohol beverage products 

related to statements of alcohol and 

nutritional content, allergen labeling, 

and ingredient labeling. The February 

2022 report issued by the Department of 

the Treasury (‘‘Competition in the 

Markets for Beer, Wine, and Spirits’’) 

discussed past and potential future 

proposals related to the labeling of 

alcohol beverage products with ‘‘serving 

facts’’ information. The report stated 

that TTB should revive or initiate 

rulemaking proposing mandatory 

information on alcohol content, 

nutritional content, and appropriate 

serving sizes for alcohol beverage 

products, as well as ingredient labeling. 

TTB intends to publish two notices of 

proposed rulemaking (one on alcohol 

content and nutrition facts, and another 

on allergens) and an advance notice of 

proposed rulemaking on ingredientlabeling. 

• Standards of Fill for Wine and 

Distilled Spirits (RIN: 1513–AC86). 

TTB plans to publish a final rule to 

address its proposal published May 25, 

2022 (87 FR 31787) to amend the 

regulations governing wine and distilled 

spirits containers. TTB proposed to add 

10 additional authorized standards of 

fill for wine in response to requests it 

has received for such standards, and to 

be consistent with a Side Letter 

included as part of a U.S.–Japan Trade 

Agreement that addresses issues related 

to market access and, specifically, to 

alcohol beverage standards of fill. TTB 

also solicited comments on an 

alternative proposal to eliminate all but 

a minimum standard of fill for wine 

containers and all but a minimum and 

maximum for distilled spirits. 

Office of the Comptroller of the 

Currency 

The Office of the Comptroller of the 

Currency (OCC) charters, regulates, and 

supervises all national banks and 

Federal savings associations (FSAs). The 

agency also supervises the Federal 

branches and agencies of foreign banks. 

The OCC’s mission is to ensure that 

national banks and FSAs operate in a 

safe and sound manner, provide fair 

access to financial services, treat 

customers fairly, and comply with 

applicable laws and regulations. 

Regulatory priorities for fiscal year 

2024 are described below. 

• Regulatory Capital Rule: 

Amendments Applicable to Large 

Banking Organizations and to Banking 

Organizations with Significant Trading 

Activity (12 CFR part 3). 

The OCC, the Federal Reserve Board, 

and the FDIC issued a joint notice of 

proposed rulemaking that would 

comprehensively revise the agencies’ 

risk-based capital rules, including 

revisions to the current standardized 

and advanced approaches capital rules. 

• Capital Requirements for Market 

Risk; Fundamental Review of the 

Trading Book (12 CFR part 3). 

The OCC, the Federal Reserve Board, 

and the FDIC issued a joint notice of 

proposed rulemaking to revise their 

respective capital requirements for 

market risk, which are generally applied 

to banking organizations with 

substantial trading activity. The OCC 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9454 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

expects the revisions to be generally 

consistent with the standards set forth 

in the Fundamental Review of the 

Trading Book published by the Basel 

Committee on Bank Supervision. 

• Long-term Debt Requirements for 

Large Bank Holding Companies, Certain 

Intermediate Holding Companies of 

Foreign Banking Organizations, and 

Large Insured Depository Institutions. 

The OCC, the Federal Reserve Board, 

and the FDIC, plan to issue a joint 

notice of proposed rulemaking that 

would require certain large depository 

institution holding companies, U.S. 

intermediate holding companies of 

foreign banking organizations, and 

certain insured depository institutions, 

to issue and maintain outstanding a 

minimum amount of long-term debt. 

The proposed rule would improve the 

resolvability of these firms in case of 

failure, reduce costs to the Depository 

Insurance Fund and mitigate financial 

stability and contagion risks by reducing 

the risk of loss to uninsured depositors. 

Customs Revenue Functions 

The Homeland Security Act of 2002 

(the Act) provides that, although many 

functions of the former United States 

Customs Service were transferred to the 

Department of Homeland Security, the 

Secretary of the Treasury retains sole 

legal authority over customs revenue 

functions. The Act also authorizes the 

Secretary of the Treasury to delegate any 

of the retained authority over customs 

revenue functions to the Secretary of 

Homeland Security. By Treasury 

Department Order No. 100–16, the 

Secretary of the Treasury delegated to 

the Secretary of Homeland Security 

authority to prescribe regulations 

pertaining to the customs revenue 

functions subject to certain exceptions, 

but further provided that the Secretary 

of the Treasury retained the sole 

authority to approve such regulations. 

During fiscal year 2024, CBP and 

Treasury plan to give priority to 

regulatory matters involving the 

customs revenue functions which 

streamline CBP procedures, protect the 

public, or are required by either statute 

or Executive Order. Examples of these 

efforts are described below. 

• Investigation of Claims of Evasion 

of Antidumping and Countervailing 

Duties. 

Treasury and CBP plan to finalize 

interim regulations (81 FR 56477) which 

amended CBP regulations implementing 

section 421 of the Trade Facilitation and 

Trade Enforcement Act of 2015, which 

set forth procedures to investigate 

claims of evasion of antidumping and 

countervailing duty orders. 

• Enforcement of Copyrights and the 

Digital Millennium Copyright Act. 

Treasury and CBP plan to finalize 

proposed amendments to the CBP 

regulations pertaining to importations of 

merchandise that violate or are 

suspected of violating the copyright 

laws, including the Digital Millennium 

Copyright Act (DMCA), in accordance 

with Title III of the Trade Facilitation 

and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015 

(TFTEA) and Executive Order 13785, 

‘‘Establishing Enhanced Collection and 

Enforcement of Anti-dumping and 

Countervailing Duties and Violations of 

Trade and Customs Laws.’’ 

The proposed amendments are 

intended to enhance CBP’s enforcement 

efforts against increasingly sophisticated 

piratical goods, clarify the definition of 

piracy, simplify the detention process 

relative to goods suspected of violating 

the copyright laws, and prescribe new 

regulations enforcing the DMCA. 

• Merchandise Produced by Convict 

or Forced Labor or Indentured Labor 

under Penal Sanctions. 

Treasury and CBP plan to publish a 

proposed rule to update, modernize, 

and streamline the process for enforcing 

the prohibition in 19 U.S.C. 1307 

against the importation of merchandise 

that has been mined, produced, or 

manufactured, wholly or in part, in any 

foreign country by convict labor, forced 

labor, or indentured labor under penal 

sanctions. The proposed rule would 

generally bring the forced labor 

regulations and detention procedures 

into alignment with other statutes, 

regulations, and procedures that apply 

to the enforcement of restrictions 

against other types of prohibited 

merchandise. 

• Non-Preferential Origin 

Determinations for Merchandise 

Imported From Canada or Mexico for 

Implementation of the Agreement 

Between the United States of America, 

the United Mexican States, and Canada 

(USMCA). 

Treasury and CBP plan to finalize a 

proposed rule to harmonize nonpreferential origin determinations for 

merchandise imported from Canada or 

Mexico. Such determinations would be 

made using certain tariff-based rules of 

origin to determine when a good 

imported from Canada or Mexico has 

been substantially transformed resulting 

in an article with a new name, 

character, or use. Once finalized, the 

rule is intended to reduce 

administrative burdens and 

inconsistency for non-preferential origin 

determinations for merchandise 

imported from Canada or Mexico for 

purposes of the implementation of the 

USMCA. 

• Automated Commercial 

Environment (ACE) Required for 

Electronic Entry/Entry Summary (Cargo 

Release and Related Entry) Filings. 

Treasury and CBP plan to finalize 

interim regulations (80 FR 61278) which 

amended CBP regulations to name the 

Automated Commercial Environment 

(ACE) as a CBP-authorized electronic 

data interchange (EDI) system for the 

processing of electronic entry and entry 

summary filings. 

• Elimination of Paper-Based Bond 

Applications and the Automated 

Processing of Bond Applications. 

Treasury and CBP plan to publish a 

proposed rule to replace the paperbased bond application and approval 

process with a streamlined electronic 

process. The proposed rule would 

implement the successful National 

Customs Automation Program (NCAP) 

test of the electronic bond process. 

Financial Crimes Enforcement Network 

As administrator of the Bank Secrecy 

Act (BSA), the Financial Crimes 

Enforcement Network (FinCEN) is 

responsible for developing and 

implementing regulations that are the 

core of the Department’s anti-money 

laundering (AML) and countering the 

financing of terrorism (CFT) efforts. 

FinCEN’s responsibilities and objectives 

are linked to, and flow from, that role. 

In fulfilling this role, FinCEN seeks to 

enhance U.S. national security by 

making the financial system 

increasingly resistant to abuse by money 

launderers, terrorists and their financial 

supporters, and other perpetrators of 

crime. 

The Secretary of the Treasury, 

through FinCEN, is authorized by the 

BSA to issue regulations requiring 

financial institutions to file reports and 

keep records that are highly useful in 

criminal, tax, or regulatory 

investigations, risk assessments, or 

proceedings, or intelligence or counterintelligence activities, including 

analysis, to protect against terrorism. 

The BSA also authorizes FinCEN to 

require that designated financial 

institutions establish AML/CFT 

programs and compliance procedures. 

Recent legislation has given FinCEN the 

added authority and responsibility to 

develop a system for reporting the 

beneficial owners of certain legal 

entities in the United States. To 

implement and realize its mission, 

FinCEN has established regulatory 

objectives and priorities to safeguard the 

financial system from the abuses of 

financial crime, including terrorist 

financing, proliferation financing, 

money laundering, and other illicit 

activity. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9455 

These objectives and priorities 

include: (1) issuing, interpreting, and 

enforcing compliance with regulations 

implementing the BSA; (2) supporting, 

working with, and as appropriate 

overseeing compliance examination 

functions delegated by FinCEN to other 

Federal regulators; (3) managing the 

collection, processing, storage, and 

dissemination of data related to the BSA 

and beneficial ownership; (4) 

maintaining government-wide access 

services to that same data for authorized 

users with a range of interests; (5) 

conducting analysis in support of 

policymakers, law enforcement, 

regulatory and intelligence agencies, 

and (for compliance purposes) the 

financial sector; and (6) coordinating 

with and collaborating on AML/CFT 

initiatives with domestic law 

enforcement and intelligence agencies, 

as well as foreign financial intelligence 

units. 

FinCEN’s regulatory priorities for 

fiscal year 2024 include: 

• Beneficial Ownership Information 

Reporting Deadline Extension for 

Reporting Companies Created or 

Registered in 2024. 

FinCEN intends to finalize an 

amendment, proposed on September 28, 

2023, to the beneficial ownership 

information (BOI) reporting rule 

(Reporting Rule) that FinCEN published 

on September 30, 2022. The amendment 

will extend the BOI filing deadline for 

entities created or registered on or after 

January 1, 2024, and before January 1, 

2025, from 30 days to 90 days. This 

reporting extension will provide those 

entities with additional time to 

understand the new BOI reporting 

obligation and collect the necessary 

information to complete their filings. 

Entities created or registered on or after 

January 1, 2025, will have 30 days to file 

their BOI reports with FinCEN, as 

required under the original Reporting 

Rule. 

• Beneficial Ownership Information 

Access and Safeguards. 

FinCEN intends to issue a final rule 

entitled ‘‘Beneficial Ownership 

Information Access and Safeguards.’’ 

The final rule will establish protocols to 

protect the security and confidentiality 

of the beneficial ownership information 

(BOI) that will be reported to FinCEN 

pursuant to the Bank Secrecy Act, as 

amended by Section 6403(a) of the 

Corporate Transparency Act, and will 

establish the framework for authorized 

recipients’ access to the BOI reported. 

• Revisions to Customer Due 

Diligence Requirements for Financial 

Institutions. 

FinCEN intends to issue a notice of 

proposed rulemaking entitled 

‘‘Revisions to Customer Due Diligence 

Requirements for Financial 

Institutions,’’ relating to Section 6403(d) 

of the Corporate Transparency Act 

(CTA). Section 6403(d) of the CTA 

requires FinCEN to revise its customer 

due diligence requirements for financial 

institutions to account for the changes 

created by the BOI reporting and access 

requirements set out in the CTA. 

• Exempting a System of Records 

from Certain Provisions of the Privacy 

Act of 1974. 

FinCEN intends to issue a final rule 

amending 31 CFR 1.36 to exempt a new 

system of records, entitled ‘‘FinCEN 

.004—Beneficial Ownership Information 

System,’’ from certain provisions of the 

Privacy Act of 1974. The Beneficial 

Ownership Information (BOI) System is 

being established to implement the BOI 

reporting and access requirements set 

out in the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), as 

amended by the Corporate Transparency 

Act. The exemptions are intended to 

increase the value of the system for law 

enforcement purposes and to comply 

with the BSA’s prohibitions against 

unauthorized disclosure of certain 

information. 

• Residential Real Estate Transaction 

Reports and Records. 

FinCEN intends to issue a notice of 

proposed rulemaking to address money 

laundering threats in the U.S. 

residential real estate sector. 

• Anti-Money Laundering Program 

and Suspicious Activity Report Filing 

Requirement for Investment Advisers. 

FinCEN intends to issue a notice of 

proposed rulemaking that would 

prescribe minimum standards for antimoney laundering programs to be 

established by certain investment 

advisers and to require such investment 

advisers to report suspicious activity to 

FinCEN pursuant to the Bank Secrecy 

Act. 

• Section 6101. Establishment of 

National Exam and Supervision 

Priorities. 

FinCEN intends to issue a notice of 

proposed rulemaking as part of the 

establishment of national exam and 

supervision priorities. The proposed 

rule implements Section 6101(b) of the 

Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2020 

that requires the Secretary of the 

Treasury to issue and promulgate rules 

for financial institutions to carry out the 

government-wide anti-money 

laundering and countering the financing 

of terrorism priorities (AML/CFT 

Priorities). The proposed rule: (i) 

incorporates a risk assessment 

requirement for financial institutions; 

(ii) requires financial institutions to 

incorporate AML/CFT Priorities into 

risk-based programs; and (iii) provides 

for certain technical changes. Once 

finalized, this proposed rule will affect 

all financial institutions subject to 

regulations under the Bank Secrecy Act 

that have AML/CFT program 

obligations. 

• Section 6314. Updating 

Whistleblower Incentives and 

Protection. 

FinCEN intends to issue a notice of 

proposed rulemaking to establish a 

whistleblower award program for 

eligible individuals that provide 

information regarding certain violations 

of the Bank Secrecy Act and U.S. 

economic sanctions. The proposed 

regulations would implement section 

6314 of the Anti- Money Laundering Act 

of 2020 and the Anti-Money Laundering 

Whistleblower Improvement Act. 

Pursuant to the proposed regulations, 

potential whistleblowers would 

voluntarily provide information 

regarding relevant violations to FinCEN, 

the Department of Justice, or a 

whistleblower’s employer. The 

proposed regulations would also govern 

the award phase of the whistleblower 

program. Potential whistleblowers 

would apply for an award following the 

successful enforcement of a covered 

judicial or administrative action. 

FinCEN would adjudicate such award 

applications pursuant to the proposed 

regulations and would pay awards to 

eligible whistleblowers from the 

Financial Integrity Fund (Fund). As set 

forth in 31 U.S.C. 5323, the structure of 

the Fund is such that monetary 

sanctions collected by the Secretary or 

Attorney General in any judicial or 

administrative action under title 31, 

chapter 35 or section 4305 or 4312 of 

title 50, or the Foreign Narcotics 

Kingpin Designation Act will be 

deposited into the Fund, (or an amount 

equal to those sanctions will be credited 

to the Fund), unless the balance of the 

Fund at the time the monetary sanction 

is collected exceeds $300,000,000. 

• Commercial Real Estate 

Transaction Reports and Records. 

FinCEN intends to issue a notice of 

proposed rulemaking to address money 

laundering threats in the U.S. 

commercial real estate sector. 

• Other Requirements. 

FinCEN also will continue to issue 

proposed and final rules pursuant to 

section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act, 

as appropriate. Finally, FinCEN expects 

that it may propose various technical 

and other regulatory amendments in 

conjunction with ongoing efforts with 

respect to a comprehensive review of 

existing regulations to enhance 

regulatory efficiency required by 

Section 6216 of the Anti-Money 

Laundering Act of 2020. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9456 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Bureau of the Fiscal Service 

The Bureau of the Fiscal Service 

(Fiscal Service) administers regulations 

pertaining to the Government’s financial 

activities, including: (1) implementing 

Treasury’s borrowing authority, 

including regulating the sale and issue 

of Treasury securities; (2) administering 

Government revenue and debt 

collection; (3) administering 

government-wide accounting programs; 

(4) managing certain Federal 

investments; (5) disbursing the majority 

of Government electronic and check 

payments; (6) assisting Federal agencies 

in reducing the number of improper 

payments; and (7) providing 

administrative and operational support 

to Federal agencies through franchise 

shared services. 

During fiscal year 2024, Fiscal Service 

will accord priority to the following 

regulatory projects: 

• Revision of the Federal Claims 

Collection Standards 

Fiscal Service is proposing to amend 

the Federal Claims Collections 

Standards (FCCS), codified in 31 CFR 

parts 900–904, which is jointly 

administered by Treasury and the 

Department of Justice. The FCCS set 

standards for administrative collection, 

compromise, and suspension or 

termination of collection activity for 

federal nontax debts. They also set 

standards for referring federal nontax 

debts to DOJ for litigation. The proposed 

amendments, which have been jointly 

prepared by Treasury and DOJ, include 

revisions for equity and updates to 

conform to developments since the last 

publication of the regulations in 2000. 

• Amendment of Electronic Payment 

Regulation 

Fiscal Service will be publishing a 

final rule to amend 31 CFR part 208, 

Management of Federal Agency 

Disbursements—Fiscal Service’s 

regulation that implements a statutory 

mandate requiring the Federal 

Government to deliver non-tax 

payments by electronic funds transfer 

(EFT) unless a waiver is available. 

Among other things, the final rule 

strengthens the EFT requirement by 

narrowing the scope of existing waivers 

from the EFT mandate or requiring 

agencies to obtain Fiscal Service’s 

approval to invoke certain existing 

waivers. The use of electronic payments 

has expanded significantly since the 

waivers from the EFT mandate were 

first published in 1998 and the final rule 

appropriately adjusts the waivers given 

the broad availability of safe and secure 

electronic payment options currently 

available. 

Internal Revenue Service 

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS), 

working with Treasury’s Office of Tax 

Policy, promulgates regulations that 

interpret and implement the Internal 

Revenue Code (Code), and other internal 

revenue laws of the United States. The 

purpose of these regulations is to carry 

out the tax policy determined by 

Congress in a fair, impartial, and 

reasonable manner, taking into account 

the intent of Congress, the realities of 

relevant transactions, the need for the 

Government to administer the rules and 

monitor compliance, and the overall 

integrity of the Federal tax system. The 

goal is to make the regulations practical 

and as clear and simple as possible, 

which reduces the burdens on taxpayers 

and the IRS. 

During fiscal year 2024, the priority of 

the IRS and the Office of Tax Policy is 

to provide guidance, including 

proposed and final rules in certain 

cases, regarding implementation of key 

tax provisions of several public laws, 

including Public Law 117–169, known 

as the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 

(IRA), the CHIPS and Science Act of 

2022, Public Law 117–167, the 

Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, 

Public Law 117–58, the Setting Every 

Community Up for Retirement 

Enhancement Act of 2019 (SECURE 

Act), enacted as Division O of the 

Further Consolidated Appropriations 

Act, 2020, Public Law 116–94, and the 

SECURE 2.0 Act of 2022 (SECURE 2.0 

Act), enacted as Division T of the 

Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023, 

Public Law 117–328. 

With regard to the following key 

provisions of the Code enacted by the 

IRA, Treasury and the IRS intend to 

issue guidance, including proposed and 

final rules in certain cases: 

• The credit for alternative fuel 

refueling property under § 30C of the 

Code. 

• The consumer vehicle credits under 

§§ 25E and 30D of the Code. 

• The credit for sustainable aviation 

fuel under § 40B of the Code. 

• The prevailing wage rate and 

apprenticeship requirements in § 45(b) 

as applicable for purposes of §§ 30C, 45, 

45L, 45Q, 45U, 45V, 45Y, 48, 48C, 48E, 

and 179D of the Code. 

• The domestic content 

enhancements for purposes of §§ 45, 

45Y, 48, 48E. 

• The energy community 

enhancements for purposes of §§ 45, 

45Y, 48, 48E. 

• The extension and modification of 

the credit for carbon oxide sequestration 

under § 45Q of the Code. 

• The zero-emission nuclear power 

PTC under § 45U of the Code. 

• The clean hydrogen PTC under 

§ 45V of the Code. 

• The credit for qualified commercial 

clean vehicles under § 45W of the Code. 

• The advanced manufacturing PTC 

under § 45X of the Code. 

• The clean electricity PTC under 

§ 45Y of the Code. 

• The clean fuels production credit 

under § 45Z of the Code. 

• The extension and modification of 

the investment tax credit (ITC) for 

energy property under § 48 of the Code. 

• The allocation of amounts of 

environmental justice solar and wind 

capacity limitation to qualified solar 

and wind facilities under § 48(e) of the 

Code. 

• The qualifying advanced energy 

project credit under § 48C of the Code. 

• The advanced manufacturing ITC 

under § 48D of the Code as enacted by 

the CHIPS Act of 2022. 

• The corporate alternative minimum 

tax under §§ 53, 55, 56, and 56A of the 

Code. 

• The energy efficient commercial 

buildings deduction under § 179D of the 

Code. 

• The excise tax on the repurchase of 

corporate stock under § 4501 of the 

Code. 

• The elective payment and transfer 

of credits for energy property & 

electricity produced from certain 

renewable resources under §§ 6417 and 

6418 of the Code. 

Consistent with the Administration’s 

goals of equity and fairness in tax 

administration, using new funding 

provided by the Inflation Reduction Act, 

the IRS will continue to reduce burdens 

for taxpayers. Underpayments by tax 

evaders shift burdens onto honest, hardworking Americans who follow the law 

as well as onto future generations. The 

funding is being used to help ensure 

that everyone pays their fair share. 

Pursuant to the Inflation Reduction Act, 

billions of dollars will go toward 

substantial service improvements for 

taxpayers as they interact with the IRS. 

The IRS is improving customer service, 

answering more calls, processing 

returns and refunds faster, updating 

computer systems, and simplifying tax 

filing. The IRS is also expanding the 

customer callback capability, which 

gives taxpayers an alternative to waiting 

on hold. This reduces burden and 

frustration for taxpayers. 

Although taxpayers can still choose to 

use paper-based processes to file 

returns, the IRS is transitioning to 

digital platforms, with better data tools 

to make more filings and processes 

available electronically, reducing audits 

and retiring paper-based processes. IRS 

employees still need to manually 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9457 

transcribe millions of paper returns. 

However, the IRS is automating the 

scanning of millions of individual paper 

returns into digital copies. For 

taxpayers, this means faster processing 

and, ultimately, faster refunds for paper 

filers. 

The IRS is expanding the use of issue 

resolution tools so that taxpayers can 

access their own online account and get 

the information they need without the 

need of an IRS assistor. The new IRS 

Online Account features make it easier 

to communicate with the IRS where 

most issues can be resolved online. 

Every year, Treasury and the IRS 

identify guidance projects that are 

priorities for allocation of resources 

during the year in the Priority Guidance 

Plan (PGP) (available on irs.gov and 

regulations.gov). The plan represents 

projects that Treasury and the IRS 

intend to actively work on during the 

plan year. See, for example, the 2022– 

2023 Priority Guidance Plan (May 5, 

2023). To facilitate and encourage 

suggestions, Treasury and the IRS have 

developed an annual process for 

soliciting public input for guidance 

projects. The annual solicitation is done 

through the issuance of a notice inviting 

recommendations from the public for 

items to be included on the PGP for the 

upcoming plan year. See, for example, 

Notice 2023–36 (May 4, 2023). We also 

invite the public to provide us with 

their comments and suggestions for 

guidance projects throughout the year. 

BILLING CODE 4810–AK–P 

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS 

AFFAIRS (VA) 

Statement of Regulatory Priorities 

The Department of Veterans Affairs 

(VA) administers services and benefit 

programs that recognize the important 

federal obligations to those who served 

this Nation. VA’s regulatory 

responsibility is almost solely confined 

to carrying out mandates of the laws 

enacted by Congress relating to 

programs for veterans and their families. 

VA’s major regulatory objective is to 

implement these laws with fairness, 

justice, and efficiency. 

Most of the regulations issued by VA 

involve at least one of three VA 

components: the Veterans Benefits 

Administration, the Veterans Health 

Administration, and the National 

Cemetery Administration. The primary 

mission of the Veterans Benefits 

Administration is to provide highquality and timely nonmedical benefits 

to eligible veterans and their 

dependents. The primary mission of the 

Veterans Health Administration is to 

provide high-quality health care on a 

timely basis to eligible veterans through 

its system of medical centers, nursing 

homes, domiciliaries, and outpatient 

medical and dental facilities. The 

primary mission of the National 

Cemetery Administration is to 

memorialize eligible veterans, members 

of the Reserve components, and their 

dependents in VA National Cemeteries 

and to maintain those cemeteries as 

national shrines in perpetuity as a final 

tribute of a grateful Nation to 

commemorate their service and sacrifice 

to our Nation. 

VA’s regulatory priorities also reflect 

our robust engagement process with 

stakeholders and our strong culture of 

evidence-based decision making. 

Through regular stakeholder meetings, 

public hearings, Small Business 

Advocacy Review Panels, and public 

comments on proposed regulations, the 

Department engages with diverse 

stakeholders to seek input on our 

regulatory agenda overall or feedback on 

proposed rules. When VA publishes a 

proposed rule, it is current practice to 

send a Plain Language Summary 

Document (PLSD) to VSOs, Congress 

and Intergovernmental Affairs offices 

notifying them that a proposed rule is 

open for public comment. We also do 

this for Final rules and in some 

instances, we send a Press Release 

document in lieu of the PLSD. A Press 

Release and a PLSD is a summary of the 

published rule, its impacts, why the rule 

is necessary and who the rule impacts. 

Among the specific rules described 

below, we include further details on 

previous stakeholder engagement and 

future opportunities for stakeholder 

engagement. VA’s regulatory priority 

plan consists of thirteen (13) priority 

regulations. The regulations listed 

below are not in any priority order. 

BILLING CODE 8320–01–P 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9458 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2EP09FE24.000</GPH>

1 

2 

3 

4 

AR96 -Amendments to the Caregivers Program 

Summary: The rule will propose amendments to the eligibility criteria, definitions used, and consider 

other changes to evaluation processes for the Program of Comprehensive Assistance for Family 

Caregivers, which provides services and benefits, including a monthly stipend, for eligible caregivers of 

veterans who sustained a serious injury or illness in the line of duty. 

Rule Type: Proposed Rule 

EO 12866: 3(f)(1) Significant 

EO 14094: Yes 

Estimated Publication Date: 3/00/24 

AS00 - Revision of Veterans Community Care Program (VCCP) Access Standards 

Summary: VA proposes to revise its designated access standards for purposes of the Veterans 

Community Care Program to consider a veteran's preference for telehealth when scheduling 

appointments. VA additionally proposes to consider whether and how to address standards for when a 

VA provider is not available within the existing average drive time standards. 

Rule Type: Proposed Rule 

EO 12866: Other Significant 

EO 14094: No 

Estimated Publication Date: 4/00/24 

AQ95 - Update and Clarify Regulatory Bars to Benefits Based on Character of Discharge 

Summary: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is amending its regulations regarding character of 

discharge determinations. The amendments will modify the regulatory framework for discharges 

considered "dishonorable" for VA benefit eligibility purposes, such as discharges due to "willful and 

persistent misconduct," an offense involving "moral turpitude," and homosexual acts involving 

aggravating circumstances or other factors affecting the "performance of duty." This rule contains early 

public participation/engagement in the rulemaking process in accordance with Executive Order 14094. 

Rule Type: Final Rule 

EO 12866: 3(f)(1) Significant 

EO 14094: Yes 

Estimated Publication Date: 1/00/24 

AR10 - Updating VA Adjudication Regulations for Disability or Death Benefit Claims Related to 

Herbicide Exposure. 

Summary: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) proposes to amend its adjudication regulations 

relating to exposure to herbicides, such as Agent Orange, in order to incorporate the provisions of the 

Blue Water Navy Vietnam Veterans Act of 2019 (the BWN Act). This proposed rule would extend the 

presumed area of exposure to the offshore waters of the Republic of Vietnam and expand the date 

ranges for presumption of exposure in the Republic of Vietnam and Korea. This rule would also clarify 

the definition of a Nehmer class member and establish entitlement to spina bifida benefits for children of 

certain veterans who served in Thailand. On the basis of VA's general rulemaking authority, VA also 

proposes to establish a presumption of herbicide exposure for certain veterans who served in Thailand 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9459 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2EP09FE24.001</GPH>

5 

and also proposes to codify longstanding procedures for searching for payees entitled to Nehmer class 

action settlement payments. This proposed rule incorporates the provisions contained in VA's RIN 2900-

AR45, titled, "Diseases Associated with Exposure to Certain Herbicide Agents (Bladder Cancer, 

Parkinsonism, and Hypothyroidism)" as a result of VA withdrawing RIN 2900-AR45 from the Fall 2022 

Unified Agenda. A future regulation will be published to all of VA's adjudication regulations with 

controlling statute. This future regulation will also ensure that eligible Veterans are not denied the 

benefits they are entitled to and will allow VA to correct previous improper denials of service connection. 

Rule Type: Proposed Rule 

EO 12866: Section 3(f)(1) Significant 

EO 14094: No 

Estimated Publication Date: 1/00/24 

AR25 - Presumptive Service Connection for Respiratory Conditions Due to Exposure to 

Particulate Matter 

Summary: This rulemaking adopts as final, with changes, an interim final rule that amended the 

Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) adjudication regulations governing presumptive service connection 

based on presumed exposures to fine particulate matter. The amendment was necessary to provide 

health care, services, and benefits to Gulf War Veterans who were exposed to fine particulate matter 

associated with deployment to the Southwest Asia theater of operations, as well as Afghanistan, Syria, 

Djibouti, and Uzbekistan. The amendment eased the evidentiary burden of Gulf War Veterans who file 

claims with VA for asthma, rhinitis, and sinusitis, to include rhinosinusitis. 

Rule Type: Final Rule 

EO 12866: 3(f)(1) Significant 

EO 14094: No 

Estimated Publication Date: 9/1/23 

AR44 - Presumptive Service Connection for Rare Respiratory Cancers Due to Exposure to Fine 

Particulate. 

Summary: This rulemaking adopts as final, without changes, an interim final rule amending the 

Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) adjudication regulations to establish presumptive service connection 

for nine rare respiratory cancers in association with presumed exposure to fine particulate matter. These 

presumptions apply to Veterans with a qualifying period of service, i.e., who served on active military, 

naval, or air service in the Southwest Asia theater of operations during the Persian Gulf War (hereinafter 

Gulf War), from August 2, 1990, onward, as well as in Afghanistan, Syria, Djibouti, or Uzbekistan, on or 

after September 19, 2001, during the Gulf War. This rulemaking implements a decision by the Secretary 

of Veterans Affairs that determined there is sufficient evidence to support these cancers as presumptive 

based on exposure to fine particulate matter during service in the Southwest Asia theater of operations, 

6 Afghanistan, Syria, Djibouti, or Uzbekistan during certain periods and the subsequent development of the 

following rare respiratory cancers: squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the larynx, sec of the trachea, 

adenocarcinoma of the trachea, salivary gland-type tumors of the trachea, adenosquamous carcinoma of 

the lung, large cell carcinoma of the lung, salivary gland-type tumors of the lung, sarcomatoid carcinoma 

of the lung, and typical and atypical carcinoid of the lung. The intended effect of this rulemaking is to 

ease the evidentiary burden of this population of Veterans who file claims with VA for these nine rare 

respiratory cancers. 

Rule Type: Final Rule 

EO 12866: Other Significant 

EO 14094: No 

Estimated Publication Date: 11/00/23 
9460 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2EP09FE24.002</GPH>

7 

AR47 - Expanding Veterans Cemetery Grant Program (VCGP) Grants to Include Training Costs. 

Summary: VA proposes to amend its regulations regarding aid for the establishment, expansion, and 

improvement, or operation and maintenance of Veterans cemeteries to implement new authorities 

provided in section 2208 of The Veterans Health Care and Benefits Improvement Act of 2020. 

Rule Type: Proposed Rule 

EO 12866: Other Significant 

EO 14094: No 

Estimated Publication Date: 6/00/24 

AR68 - Veteran and Spouse Transitional Assistance Grant Program 

Summary: VA, as authorized under the Johnny Isakson and David P. Roe, M.D. Veterans Health Care 

and Benefits Improvement Act of 2020, amends its regulations to establish the Veteran Transitional 

Assistance Grant Program (VTAGP). VA will establish grant application procedures and evaluative 

criteria for determining whether to issue funding to eligible organizations providing transition services to 

8 members of the Armed Forces who are separated, retired, or discharged, as well as their spouses. 

9 

Rule Type: Final Rule 

EO 12866: Other Significant 

EO 14094: No 

Estimated Publication Date: 11/00/23 

AR75 - Updating VA Adjudication Regulations for Disability or Death Benefits Based on Toxic 

Exposure. 

Summary: The Department of Veterans Affairs is proposing to amend its adjudication regulations to 

implement provisions of the Sergeant First Class Heath Robinson Honoring our Promise to Address 

comprehensive Toxics Act of 2022, Public Law 117-168 (PACT Act). The statute amended procedures 

applicable to claims based on toxic exposure and modified or established presumptions of service 

connection related to toxic exposure. Pursuant to the Act, VA is proposing to remove the manifestation 

period requirement and the minimum compensable evaluation requirement from Gulf War claims based 

on undiagnosed illness and medically unexplained chronic multi-symptom illnesses. VA is also proposing 

to expand the definition of a Persian Gulf Veteran and update the list of locations eligible for a 

presumption of exposure to toxic substances, chemicals, or hazards based on Gulf War service. To 

implement additional provisions of the Act, VA is also proposing to codify the procedure for determining 

when examinations and medical nexus opinions are required for claims based on toxic exposure. 

Rule Type: Proposed Rule 

EO 12866: Other Significant 

EO 14094: No 

Estimated Publication Date: 1/00/24 

AR76 - Reevaluation of Claims for Dependency and Indemnity Compensation Based on Public 

Law 117-168 

Summary: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) amends its adjudication regulations concerning 

certain awards of Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC). Under this amendment, relevant 

10 claimants will be eligible to elect to have certain previously denied DIC claims reevaluated pursuant to 

changes that establish or modify a presumption of service connection. Any award as a result of the 

reevaluation may be made retroactive as if the establishment or modification of the presumption of 

service connection had been in effect on the date of the submission of the original claim. This 

amendment incorporates legislative changes enacted by the PACT Act and will bring Federal regulations 

into conformance with those changes. 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9461 

BILLING CODE 8320–01–C 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2EP09FE24.003</GPH>

Rule Type: Final Rule 

EO 12866: Section 3(f)(1) Significant 

EO 14094: No 

Estimated Publication Date: 11/00/23 

AR91 - Evidence Requirements for Direct Service Connection of Covered Mental Health 

Conditions Based on In-Service Personal Trauma. 

Summary: VA is proposing to amend regulations concerning the type of evidence that may be used to 

support a veteran's statement regarding the occurrence of an in-service personal trauma. VA is also 

proposing to define key terms relevant to such claims. These amendments will provide greater specificity 

and clarity to the regulatory text and aid claims processors who develop and decide claims based on in11 service personal trauma. The intent of this change is to ease the evidentiary requirements for veterans 

claiming a mental health condition based on in-service personal trauma. 

12 

Rule Type: Proposed Rule 

EO 12866: Other Significant 

EO 14094: No 

Estimated Publication Date: 2/00/24 

AR73 - Technical Revisions to Expand Health Care for Certain Toxic Exposure and Overseas 

Contingency Service (Section 103 PACT Act) 

Summary: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is issuing this rule to amend its medical regulations 

governing eligibility for VA health care and copayment requirements to conform to recent statutory 

changes made by section 103 of the Sergeant First Class Heath Robinson Honoring our Promise to 

Address Comprehensive Toxics Act of 2022, Public Law 117-168 (PACT Act). VA is changing its medical 

benefits enrollment criteria to include toxic-exposed veterans and veterans who supported certain 

overseas contingency operations, to exempt such veterans from copayments for certain care, and to 

provide per diem for nursing home care for such veterans. 

Rule Type: Proposed Rule 

EO 12866: Other Significant 

EO 14094: No 

Estimated Publication Date: 8/00/24 

AQ30 - Modifying Copayments for Veterans at High Risk for Suicide 

Summary: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is finalizing a proposed rules to amend its medical 

regulations governing copayments for VA outpatient medical care and medications (to include outpatient 

medical care and medications provided by VA directly or community care obtained by VA through 

contracts, provider agreements or sharing agreements) by eliminating the copayment for outpatient care 

and reducing the copayment for medications dispensed to veterans identified by VA as being at high risk 

13 for suicide. These copayment changes will be applied until VA determines that the veteran is no longer at 

high risk for suicide. 

Rule Type: Final Rule 

EO 12866: Other Significant 

EO 14094: No 

Estimated Publication Date: 9/00/24 
9462 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

VA 

Proposed Rule Stage 

177. Updating VA Adjudication 

Regulations for Disability or Death 

Benefit Claims Related to Herbicide 

Exposure [2900–AR10] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 38 U.S.C. 1116; 38 

U.S.C. 1116A; 38 U.S.C. 1116B; 38 

U.S.C. 1821; 38 U.S.C. 1822 

CFR Citation: 38 CFR 3.30; 38 CFR 

3.309; 38 CFR 3.105; 38 CFR 3.114; 38 

CFR 3.313; 38 CFR 3.81. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Department of Veterans 

Affairs (VA) proposes to amend its 

adjudication regulations relating to 

exposure to herbicides, such as Agent 

Orange, in order to incorporate the 

provisions of the Blue Water Navy 

Vietnam Veterans Act of 2019 (the BWN 

Act). This proposed rule would extend 

the presumed area of exposure to the 

offshore waters of the Republic of 

Vietnam and expand the date ranges for 

presumption of exposure in the 

Republic of Vietnam and Korea. This 

rule would also clarify the definition of 

a Nehmer class member and establish 

entitlement to spina bifida benefits for 

children of certain veterans who served 

in Thailand. On the basis of VA’s 

general rulemaking authority, VA also 

proposes to establish a presumption of 

herbicide exposure for certain veterans 

who served in Thailand and also 

proposes to codify longstanding 

procedures for searching for payees 

entitled to Nehmer class action 

settlement payments. This proposed 

rule incorporates the provisions 

contained in VA’s RIN 2900–AR45, 

titled, ‘‘Diseases Associated with 

Exposure to Certain Herbicide Agents 

(Bladder Cancer, Parkinsonism, and 

Hypothyroidism)’’ as a result of VA 

withdrawing RIN 2900–AR45 from the 

Fall 2022 Unified Agenda. A future 

Interim Final Rule will be published to 

align all of VA’s adjudication 

regulations with controlling statute. 

This future regulation will also ensure 

that eligible Veterans are not denied the 

benefits they are entitled to and will 

allow VA to correct previous improper 

denials of service connection. 

Statement of Need: The Department of 

Veterans Affairs (VA) is proposing to 

amend its regulations for the following 

purposes: (1) extend the presumption of 

herbicide exposure to the offshore 

waters of the Republic of Vietnam and 

to define those boundaries; (2) expand 

the dates for presumption of herbicide 

exposure for service in the Korean 

Demilitarized Zone; (3) establish 

entitlement to spina bifida benefits for 

children of certain Veterans who served 

in Thailand; (4) codify the presumption 

of herbicide exposure for certain 

locations identified where herbicide 

agents were used, tested, or stored 

outside of Vietnam; (5) codify 

longstanding procedures for searching 

for payees entitled to class-action 

settlements under Nehmer v. 

Department of Veterans Affairs; (6) 

apply the definition of Republic of 

Vietnam offshore waters to presumptive 

service connection claims for nonHodgkin’s lymphoma; (7) add bladder 

cancer, hypothyroidism, and 

Parkinsonism as presumptive herbicide 

diseases; and (8) recognize hypertension 

and monoclonal gammopathy of 

undetermined significant as 

presumptive herbicide diseases. 

Summary of Legal Basis: 

Promulgation of these regulations is 

necessitated by the Blue Water Navy 

Vietnam Veterans Act of 2019, Public 

Law 116–123; Fiscal Year 2021 National 

Defense Authorization Act; and the 

Sergeant First Class Heath Robinson 

Honoring our Promise to Address 

Comprehensive Toxics Act of 2022 

(PACT Act), Public Law 117–168. VA’s 

general rulemaking authority under 38 

U.S.C. 501(a) is also utilized in 

effectuating these regulations. 

Alternatives: The comprehensive 

framework of the enacted laws requires 

VA to issue regulations to ensure that 

claims processors accurately and 

consistently adjudicate claims pursuant 

to the intent and text of the legislation. 

The absence of regulations would cause 

confusion amongst adjudicators leading 

to benefit decision errors, as well as 

incurring significant litigation risk if the 

only instruction concerning application 

of the aforementioned laws is subregulatory guidance that did not go 

through notice-and-comment as 

required by the Administrative 

Procedures Act. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: VA has 

estimated that there are both transfers 

and costs associated with the provisions 

of this rulemaking. The total transfers 

are estimated to be $59.9 billion over 10 

years. Actual transfers and costs will be 

determined and reflected in this section 

of ROCIS once the Reg is formally sent 

to OMB for a formal Executive Order 

12866 review. 

Risks: None. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 01/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

URL For More Information: 

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Robert Parks, 

Department of Veterans Affairs, 1800 G 

Street NW, Washington, DC 20006, 

Phone: 202 461–9700, Email: 

robert.parks3@va.gov. 

RIN: 2900–AR10 

VA 

178. Expanding Veterans Cemetery 

Grant Program (VCGP) Grants To 

Include Training Costs [2900–AR47] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 605(b); 2 

U.S.C. 1532; 38 U.S.C. 101; 25 U.S.C. 

450b(l) 

CFR Citation: 38 CFR 39.34. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: VA proposes to amend its 

regulations regarding aid for the 

establishment, expansion, and 

improvement, or operation and 

maintenance of Veterans cemeteries to 

implement new authorities provided in 

section 2208 of The Veterans Health 

Care and Benefits Improvement Act of 

2020. The Act authorizes VA to expand 

the use of Veterans Cemetery Grant 

Program (VCGP) funds to include 

training costs for State and Tribal 

cemetery personnel to participate in 

training provided by the National 

Cemetery Administration (NCA). 

Statement of Need: This rulemaking is 

needed for the Department of Veteran 

Affairs (VA) to amend its regulations, in 

accordance with 38 U.S.C. 501, to 

implement new authorities enacted in 

Section 2208 of Public Law 116–315, 

The Veterans Health Care and Benefits 

Improvement Act of 2020. That Public 

Law amended section 2408 of title 38, 

United States Code (U.S.C.). 

Summary of Legal Basis: VA proposes 

to amend its regulations regarding aid 

for the establishment, expansion, and 

improvement, or operation and 

maintenance of Veterans cemeteries to 

implement new authorities provided in 

section 2208. The Act authorized VA to 

expand the use of Veterans Cemetery 

Grant Program (VCGP) funds to include 

training costs for State and Tribal 

cemetery personnel to participate in 

training provided by the National 

Cemetery Administration (NCA). 

Alternatives: Because VA must 

implement new grants authority in 

regulation, there are no practical 

alternatives to rulemaking. Grantees can 

choose to apply for training grant funds 

or expend their own resources to send 

employees to attend NCA training. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9463 

However, as mentioned above, because 

many grantees lack sufficient fiscal 

resources for their employees to attend 

NCA training, VA anticipates increased 

participation from grantee-cemetery 

employees. The proposed approach 

limits the number of employees the 

State or Tribal Organizations can have 

attending training and those entities 

will continue to have difficulty meeting 

the same national shrine standards and 

measures as VA national cemeteries. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

primary benefit of this program 

expansion will assist VA grant-funded 

State and Tribal Veterans’ cemeteries in 

meeting NCA operational standards and 

measures. This includes the appearance 

in the key cemetery areas of cleanliness, 

height and alignment of headstones and 

markers, leveling of gravesites, and turf 

conditions. VA estimates transfers of 

$89,916 for Fiscal Year (FY) 2023 and 

$458,661 for FY 2023–FY 2027. 

Risks: TBD. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 06/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

URL For More Information: 

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: George Eisenbach, 

Director, Veterans Cemetery Grants 

Program, National Cemetery 

Administration, Department of Veterans 

Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue NW, 

Washington, DC 20420, Phone: 202 632– 

7369, Email: george.eisenbach@va.gov. 

RIN: 2900–AR47 

VA 

179. Technical Revisions To Expand 

Health Care for Certain Toxic Exposure 

and Overseas Contingency Service 

[2900–AR73] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 38 U.S.C. 1710; Pub. 

L. 117–168 sec. 103(a) 

CFR Citation: 38 CFR 17.36; 38 CFR 

17.108; 38 CFR 17.110; 38 CFR 17.111; 

38 CFR 51.50. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Department of Veterans 

Affairs (VA) proposes to amend its 

medical regulations governing eligibility 

for VA health care and copayment 

requirements to conform to recent 

statutory changes made by section 103 

of the Sergeant First Class Heath 

Robinson Honoring our Promise to 

Address Comprehensive Toxics Act of 

2022, Public Law 117–168 (PACT Act). 

VA is changing its medical benefits 

enrollment criteria to include toxicexposed veterans and veterans who 

supported certain overseas contingency 

operations, to exempt such veterans 

from copayments for certain care, and to 

provide per diem for nursing home care 

for such veterans. 

Statement of Need: This rulemaking is 

necessary to implement the provisions 

of section 103(a) of the Honoring our 

Promise to Address Comprehensive 

Toxics Act of 2022, Public Law 117–168 

(PACT Act), which expanded the 

provision of health care and nursing 

home care to new groups of toxicexposed veterans. This rule would also 

amend VA’s medical regulations to 

exempt such veterans from copayments 

for certain care. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Pursuant to 

38 U.S.C. 1710, VA proposes to amend 

its medical regulations and regulations 

on per diem for nursing home care of 

veterans in State homes. This would 

conform with changes made to 38 U.S.C. 

1710 by section 103 of the PACT Act. 

Alternatives: TBD. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: TBD. 

Risks: Delayed access to health care 

for these toxic-exposed veterans that 

would be newly-eligible for VA health 

care. These additional groups of toxicexposed veterans who are already 

enrolled in VA health care would 

continue to be charged copayments for 

care of illness related to their toxic 

exposures until these changes are made. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 08/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

URL For More Information: 

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Ryan Heiman, Acting 

Deputy Director, VHA Member Services, 

Department of Veterans Affairs, 3401 

SW 21st Street, Building 9, Topeka, KS 

66604, Phone: 785 817–2719, Email: 

ryan.heiman@va.gov. 

RIN: 2900–AR73 

VA 

180. Updating VA Adjudication 

Regulations for Disability or Death 

Benefits Based on Toxic Exposure 

[2900–AR75] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 38 U.S.C. 1117; 38 

U.S.C. 1119; 38 U.S.C. 1120; 38 U.S.C. 

501 

CFR Citation: 38 CFR 3.159; 38 CFR 

3.317; 38 CFR 3.320. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Department of Veterans 

Affairs is proposing to amend its 

adjudication regulations to implement 

provisions of the Sergeant First Class 

Heath Robinson Honoring our Promise 

to Address Comprehensive Toxics Act 

of 2022, Public Law 117–168 (PACT 

Act). The statute amended procedures 

applicable to claims based on toxic 

exposure and modified or established 

presumptions of service connection 

related to toxic exposure. Pursuant to 

the Act, VA is proposing to remove the 

manifestation period requirement and 

the minimum compensable evaluation 

requirement from Gulf War claims based 

on undiagnosed illness and medically 

unexplained chronic multi-symptom 

illnesses. VA is also proposing to 

expand the definition of a Persian Gulf 

Veteran and update the list of locations 

eligible for a presumption of exposure to 

toxic substances, chemicals, or hazards 

based on Gulf War service. To 

implement additional provisions of the 

Act, VA is also proposing to codify the 

procedure for determining when 

examinations and medical nexus 

opinions are required for claims based 

on toxic exposure. 

Statement of Need: The Department of 

Veterans Affairs is proposing to amend 

its adjudication regulations to 

implement provisions of the Sergeant 

First Class Heath Robinson Honoring 

our Promise to Address Comprehensive 

Toxics Act of 2022, Public Law 117–168 

(PACT Act). The statute amended 

procedures applicable to claims based 

on toxic exposure and modifies or 

establishes presumptions of service 

connection related to toxic exposure. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The new 

provisions of regulation are authorized 

by sections 302, 303, 405 and 406 of 

Public Law 117–168. VA must publish 

regulations to carry out the laws 

administered by the Department as 

required by 38 U.S.C. 501(a). 

Alternatives: The comprehensive 

framework of the enacted law requires 

VA to issue regulations to ensure that 

claims processors accurately and 

consistently adjudicate claims pursuant 

to the intent and text of the legislation. 

The absence of regulations would cause 

confusion amongst adjudicators leading 

to benefit decision errors, as well as 

incurring significant litigation risk if the 

only instruction concerning application 

of the aforementioned law is subregulatory guidance that did not go 

through notice-and-comment as 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9464 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

required by the Administrative 

Procedures Act. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Actual 

costs and transfers will be determined 

and reflected in this section of ROCIS 

once the rule is formally sent to OMB 

for a formal Executive Order 12866 

review. 

Risks: None. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 01/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

URL For More Information: 

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Robert Parks, 

Department of Veterans Affairs, 1800 G 

Street NW, Washington, DC 20006, 

Phone: 202 461–9700, Email: 

robert.parks3@va.gov. 

RIN: 2900–AR75 

VA 

181. Evidence Requirements for Direct 

Service Connection of Covered Mental 

Health Conditions Based on In-Service 

Personal Trauma [2900–AR91] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501 

CFR Citation: 38 CFR 3.304. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: VA is proposing to amend 

regulations concerning the type of 

evidence that may be used to support a 

veteran’s statement regarding the 

occurrence of an in-service personal 

trauma. VA is also proposing to define 

key terms relevant to such claims. These 

amendments will provide greater 

specificity and clarity to the regulatory 

text and aid claims processors who 

develop and decide claims based on inservice personal trauma. The intent of 

this change is to ease the evidentiary 

requirements for veterans claiming a 

mental health condition based on inservice personal trauma. 

Statement of Need: TBD—The 

statement of need is still pending but 

will be determined and reflected in this 

section of ROCIS once the Reg is 

formally sent to OMB for a formal 

Executive Order 12866 review. 

Summary of Legal Basis: TBD—The 

legal basis for this Reg is still pending 

but will be determined and reflected in 

this section of ROCIS before the Reg is 

formally sent to OMB for a formal 

Executive Order 12866 review. 

Alternatives: TBD—Alternatives are 

still pending but will be determined and 

reflected in this section of ROCIS before 

the Reg is formally sent to OMB for a 

formal Executive Order 12866 review. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: TBD— 

Actual costs and transfers are still 

pending but will be determined and 

reflected in this section of ROCIS before 

the Reg is formally sent to OMB for a 

formal Executive Order 12866 review. 

Risks: TBD—Risks are still pending 

but will be determined and reflected in 

this section of ROCIS before the Reg is 

formally sent to OMB for a formal 

Executive Order 12866 review. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 02/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Robert Parks, 

Department of Veterans Affairs, 1800 G 

Street NW, Washington, DC 20006, 

Phone: 202 461–9700, Email: 

robert.parks3@va.gov. 

RIN: 2900–AR91 

VA 

182. Amendments to the Caregivers 

Program [2900–AR96] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 38 U.S.C. 1720G 

CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The rule will propose 

amendments to the eligibility criteria, 

definitions used, and consider other 

changes to evaluation processes for the 

Program of Comprehensive Assistance 

for Family Caregivers, which provides 

services and benefits, including a 

monthly stipend, for eligible caregivers 

of veterans who sustained a serious 

injury or illness in the line of duty. 

Statement of Need: This rulemaking is 

necessary to implement several changes 

to VA’s Program of Comprehensive 

Assistance for Family Caregivers 

(PCAFC) and Program of General 

Caregiver Support Services (PGCSS) to 

improve program operations, update 

eligibility criteria, and expand access to 

the programs for eligible veterans and 

servicemembers and their caregivers 

and comply with Executive Order 

14095, Increasing Access to HighQuality Care and Supporting Caregivers, 

issued April 18, 2023, that required the 

Secretary of Veterans Affairs consider 

issuing a notice of proposed rulemaking 

by the end of this fiscal year that would 

make any appropriate modifications to 

eligibility criteria for PCAFC. In 

accordance with Executive Order 14094, 

VA briefed the Veterans Service 

Organizations (VSO) on June 30th, 2023, 

during the rulemaking process. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Pursuant to 

its authority in 38 U.S.C. 1720G, VA 

proposes to amend its regulations under 

38 CFR part 71, which governs PCAFC, 

a program that provides Family 

Caregivers of eligible veterans benefits, 

such as training, respite care, 

counseling, technical support, 

beneficiary travel, and for Primary 

Family Caregivers, provides a monthly 

stipend payment, and access to health 

care; and PGCSS, which is available to 

caregivers of covered veterans of all eras 

of military service. Proposed 

amendments would comply with the 

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal 

Circuit decision in Veteran Warriors, 

Inc. v. Sec’y of Veterans Affairs, 29 

F.4th 1320 (Fed. Cir. 2022), which set 

aside a portion of VA’s regulations 

concerning PCAFC eligibility criteria, 

specifically VA’s definition of need for 

supervision, protection, and instruction 

as that term is used throughout 38 CFR 

part 71. VA proposes to remove 

conflicting language from its 

regulations. 

Alternatives: There are no acceptable 

policy alternatives to issuing this 

regulation. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: VA is 

still determining costs but anticipates 

costs to be over $200 million in any 

given year of the 10-year estimate; VA 

anticipates this rule would be a section 

3(f)(1) significant rule under Executive 

Order 12866. 

This rulemaking would expand access 

to caregiver benefits for eligible veterans 

based on proposed changes in eligibility 

criteria. Actual costs will be determined 

and reflected in this section of ROCIS 

once the Reg is formally sent to OMB for 

a formal Executive Order 12866 review. 

Risks: Delayed access to PCAFC for 

eligible veterans and their Family 

Caregivers. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 03/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

URL For More Information: 

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Colleen Richardson 

PsyD, Executive Director, Caregiver 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9465 

Support Program, Patient Care Services, 

Veterans Health Administration, 

Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 

Vermont Avenue NW, Washington, DC 

20420, Phone: 202 461–7337, Email: 

colleen.richardson2@va.gov. 

RIN: 2900–AR96 

VA 

183. • Revision of Veterans Community 

Care Program (VCCP) Access Standards 

[2900–AS00] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 38 U.S.C. 1703; 38 

U.S.C. 1703B 

CFR Citation: 38 CFR 17.4040. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: VA proposes to revise its 

designated access standards for 

purposes of the Veterans Community 

Care Program to consider a veteran’s 

preference for telehealth when 

scheduling appointments. VA 

additionally proposes to consider 

whether and how to address standards 

for when a VA provider is not available 

within the existing average drive time 

standards. 

Statement of Need: This rulemaking is 

needed to implement certain provisions 

of section 125 of Division U of the 

Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023, 

the Joseph Maxwell Cleland and Robert 

Joseph Dole Memorial Veterans Benefits 

and Health Care Improvement Act of 

2022 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). 

Summary of Legal Basis: Pursuant to 

38 U.S.C. 1703 and 1703B and subject 

to regulations at 38 CFR 17.4000– 

17.4040, VA administers the Veterans 

Community Care Program (VCCP) to 

furnish care in the community to 

covered Veterans at their election and 

subject to the availability of 

appropriations. Consistent with 38 

U.S.C. 1703(d)(1)(D) and 1703B, current 

38 CFR 17.4010(a)(4) establishes 

eligibility for the VCCP if a covered 

veteran has contacted VA to request 

required care or services, but VA has 

determined it is not able to furnish such 

care or services in a manner that 

complies with VA’s designated access 

standards in 17.4040. Section 125 of the 

Act amended section 1703B(f) to require 

VA to meet the access standards 

established under section 1703B(a) 

when furnishing care through VCCP and 

ensure that meeting such access 

standards is reflected in the contractual 

requirements of third-party 

administrators (TPA). 

Alternatives: VA does not interpret 

that there is an alternative to 

implementing certain provisions of 

section 125 of the Act. VA does not 

interpret that there is an alternative to 

a two-stage rulemaking because current 

VCCP regulations do not apply VA 

access standards to eligible entities and 

providers (non-VA providers) under 

TPA agreements, and to do so requires 

notice and comment prior to being 

implemented. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: VA 

does not anticipate this rulemaking 

would result in $200 million or more in 

costs or savings. VA anticipates benefits 

for Veterans as eligible entities and 

providers participating in VCCP would 

also be subject to measurable access 

standards designed to improve Veteran’s 

access to care. Actual costs will be 

determined and reflected in this section 

of ROCIS once the Reg is formally sent 

to OMB for a formal Executive Order 

12866 review. 

Risks: None identified. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

URL For More Information: 

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Joseph Duran, 

Director of Policy and Planning 

(10D1A1) Department of Veterans 

Affairs, 3773 Cherry Creek North Drive, 

Denver, CO 80209, Phone: 303 370– 

1637, Email: joseph.duran2@va.gov. 

RIN: 2900–AS00 

VA 

Final Rule Stage 

184. Modifying Copayments for 

Veterans at High Risk for Suicide 

[2900–AQ30] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 38 U.S.C. 1710(g); 38 

U.S.C. 1722A 

CFR Citation: 38 CFR 17.108; 38 CFR 

17.110. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Department of Veterans 

Affairs (VA) is finalizing a proposed 

rule to amend its medical regulations 

governing copayments for VA outpatient 

medical care and medications (to 

include outpatient medical care and 

medications provided by VA directly or 

community care obtained by VA 

through contracts, provider agreements 

or sharing agreements) by eliminating 

the copayment for outpatient care and 

reducing the copayment for medications 

dispensed to veterans identified by VA 

as being at high risk for suicide. These 

copayment changes will be applied 

until VA determines that the veteran is 

no longer at high risk for suicide. 

Statement of Need: This rulemaking is 

needed because a change in the current 

regulation is called for by the policy 

outlined in Executive Order 13822, 

which provides that our Government 

must improve mental healthcare and 

access to suicide prevention resources 

available to veterans. Healthcare 

research has provided extensive 

evidence that copayments can be 

barriers to healthcare for vulnerable 

patients, which places the change in 

line with the goals of the Executive 

order. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Executive 

Order 13822. 

Alternatives: The express intent of the 

rulemaking is to reduce barriers to 

mental health care for Veterans at high 

risk for suicide. To defer 

implementation of the regulation would 

be to undermine its purpose. However, 

alternative regulatory approaches were 

considered. It was considered whether 

VHA national or local policy changes 

could effectively meet the intent of the 

regulation. It was found that policy 

change is not a viable alternative due to 

regulatory constraints that prevent 

changes to copayment requirements. 

The timing of rulemaking was 

considered. There were no potential 

cost savings or other net benefits 

identified that would lead to a more 

beneficial option. A phase-in period for 

the regulation was considered. There 

were no burdens, likely failures, or 

negative comments identified that a 

phase-in period would help mitigate. 

There were no potential cost savings or 

other net benefits identified that would 

make phasing in the regulation a more 

beneficial option. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

Outpatient medical care and medication 

copayments will be reduced for 

Veterans determined to be at high risk 

for suicide. VA strongly believes, based 

on extensive empirical evidence, that 

the provisions of this rulemaking will 

decrease the likelihood of fatal or 

medically serious overdoses from VA 

prescribed medications among Veterans 

who are at a high risk of suicide. VA 

also strongly believes, based on the 

evidence, that the provisions of this 

rulemaking will significantly increase 

the engagement of Veterans who are at 

a high risk of suicide in outpatient 

health care, which is known to decrease 

the risk of suicide and other adverse 

outcomes. Actual costs and/or transfers 

will be determined and reflected in this 

section of ROCIS once the Reg is 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9466 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

formally sent to OMB for a formal 

Executive Order 12866 review. 

Risks: None. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 01/05/22 87 FR 418 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

03/07/22 

Final Action ......... 09/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

URL For More Information: 

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Julie Wildman, 

Informatics Educator, Department of 

Veterans Affairs, 795 Willow Road, 

Building 321, Room A124, Menlo Park, 

CA 94304, Phone: 650 493–5000, Email: 

julie.wildman@va.gov. 

RIN: 2900–AQ30 

VA 

185. Update and Clarify Regulatory 

Bars to Benefits Based on Character of 

Discharge [2900–AQ95] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501 

CFR Citation: 38 CFR 3.12. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Department of Veterans 

Affairs (VA) is amending its regulations 

regarding character of discharge 

determinations. The amendments will 

modify the regulatory framework for 

discharges considered ‘‘dishonorable’’ 

for VA benefit eligibility purposes, such 

as discharges due to ‘‘willful and 

persistent misconduct,’’ an ‘‘offense 

involving moral turpitude,’’ and 

‘‘homosexual acts involving aggravating 

circumstances or other factors affecting 

the performance of duty.’’ The 

amendments will also extend a 

‘‘compelling circumstances’’ exception 

to certain regulatory bars to benefits in 

order to ensure fair character of 

discharge determinations in light of all 

pertinent factors. VA’s amendments will 

take into consideration the public 

comments received on the published 

proposed rule (85 FR 41471), comments 

that VA receives from a published 

Request for Information (86 FR 50513) 

and comments received during two 

scheduled listening sessions, which are 

described in aforementioned Request for 

Information. 

Statement of Need: TBD. In 

accordance with Executive Order 14094, 

VA published a Request for Information 

(RFI) on September 9, 2021, 86 FR 

50513 (2021) after the NPRM published. 

Specifically, the RFI asked questions 

about compelling circumstances, willful 

and persistent misconduct, moral 

turpitude, benefit eligibility and 

removing the regulatory bars. In 

addition to and subsequent of the RFI, 

VA held a two-day listening session in 

October 2021 to receive oral comments 

on the RFI questions. 

Summary of Legal Basis: TBD. 

Alternatives: TBD. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: TBD. 

Risks: TBD. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 07/10/20 85 FR 41471 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

09/08/20 

Request For Information (RFI).09/09/21 86 FR 50513 

RFI Comment Period End.10/12/21 

Final Action ......... 01/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

URL For More Information: 

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Olumayowa 

Famakinwa, Department of Veterans 

Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue NW, 

Washington, DC 20420, Phone: 202 461– 

9700, Email: olumayowa.famakinwa@

va.gov. 

RIN: 2900–AQ95 

VA 

186. Veteran and Spouse Transitional 

Assistance Grant Program [2900–AR68] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 601 to 612; 

31 U.S.C. 302 

CFR Citation: 38 CFR 63.6309. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: VA, as authorized under the 

Johnny Isakson and David P. Roe, M.D. 

Veterans Health Care and Benefits 

Improvement Act of 2020, amends its 

regulations to establish the Veteran 

Transitional Assistance Grant Program 

(VTAGP). VA will establish grant 

application procedures and evaluative 

criteria for determining whether to issue 

funding to eligible organizations 

providing transition services to 

members of the Armed Forces who are 

separated, retired, or discharged, as well 

as their spouses. 

Statement of Need: The Department of 

Veterans Affairs (VA) has determined 

this rulemaking is necessary, in 

accordance with authority established 

by Public Law (Pub. L.) 116–315 4304 

and 38 U.S.C. 501, 512 to implement 

Public Law 116315 4304, the Johnny 

Isakson and David P. Roe, M.D. Veterans 

Health Care and Benefits Improvement 

Act of 2020 (January 5, 2021). VA 

proposes to amend title 38 Pensions, 

Bonuses, and Veterans’ Relief by adding 

part 80 and new sections 80.1 through 

80.17 to the Code of Federal Regulations 

(CFR) to implement this new grant 

authority. 

Summary of Legal Basis: VA proposes 

regulations to establish the Veteran and 

Spouse Transitional Assistance Grant 

Program (VSTAGP). VA will establish 

grant application procedures and 

evaluative criteria for determining 

whether to issue funding to eligible 

organizations providing transition 

services to members of the Armed 

Forces who are separated, retired, or 

discharged, as well as their spouses. 

Alternatives: VA discussed how to 

implement provisions of 4304 of Public 

Law 116–315. A rulemaking is the 

preferred option as VA grant programs 

have historically been established 

utilizing the rulemaking process. If this 

regulation were not enacted, VA would 

struggle to implement the mandates put 

forth in Public Law 116–315 with 

current available resources and 

therefore, the agency would not be in 

compliance with the law. Alternatively, 

participants would continue to access 

existing transition services that may 

limit services to Veterans as defined in 

38 U.S.C. 101(2). VA also considered an 

alternative title to this rulemaking, 

however after discussions with external 

partners it was determined to include 

the term spouse in the title. VSTAGP 

intends to provide transition services to 

members of the Armed Forces who are 

separated, retired, or discharged from 

the Armed Forces, and spouses of such 

members, by identifying employment 

barriers and developing individualized 

employment plans to overcome barriers. 

The program will also link participants 

to necessary support services. Also, a 

rulemaking will notify the public and 

interested parties of VA’s new authority 

and allow for notice and comment. 

Public Law 116–315 requires grant 

recipients to provide matching funding 

from non-Federal sources that are at 

least equal to Federal grant funds 

awarded by VA. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Each 

year, approximately 200,000 men and 

women leave the U.S. military service 

and return to their lives as civilians, a 

process known as the military-tocivilian transition. This rulemaking 

benefits former Service members who 

are discharged, retired, or separated, 

and their spouses (referred to as 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9467 

participants), by establishing a grants 

program focused on improving 

transition services. Transition services 

would include resume assistance, 

interview training, job recruitment 

training and related services that would 

result in a successful transition as 

determined by the Secretary. Related 

services would include, but are not 

limited to, employment placement 

services, employment education and/or 

training and employment referrals. VA 

has determined there are costs and 

transfers associated with this 

rulemaking. The total regulatory budget 

impact associated with this rulemaking 

is estimated to be $6.9 million in FY 

2024 and $38.3 million over 5 years as 

reflected in Table 1 below. Costs 

associated with this rulemaking are 

estimated at $1.9 million in FY 2024 

and $13.3 million over 5 years to 

include an information technology (IT) 

solution to manage grants. The net 

transfers for the creation of VSTAGP are 

$5 million for FY 2024 and $25 million 

over 5 years. 

Risks: None. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 07/05/23 88 FR 42891 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

08/04/23 

Final Action ......... 11/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

URL For More Information: 

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Kenneth Fenner, 

Program Analyst, Office of Outreach, 

Transition and Economic Dev., 

Department of Veterans Affairs, 1800 G 

Street SW, Washington, DC 20420, 

Phone: 800 877–8339, Email: 

kenneth.fenner@va.gov. 

RIN: 2900–AR68 

VA 

187. Reevaluation of Claims for 

Dependency and Indemnity 

Compensation Based on Public Law 

117–168 [2900–AR76] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501; 38 

U.S.C. 1305 

CFR Citation: 38 CFR 3.817. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Department of Veterans 

Affairs (VA) amending its adjudication 

regulations concerning certain awards of 

Dependency and Indemnity 

Compensation (DIC). Relevant claimants 

will be eligible to elect a reevaluation of 

certain previously denied DIC 

determinations pursuant to changes that 

establish or modify a presumption of 

service-connection. Any award 

following reevaluation may be made 

retroactive to the date of a previously 

denied claim as if the establishment or 

modification of the presumption of 

service- connection had been in effect 

on the date of the submission of the 

original claim. With respect to new or 

initial awards of DIC pending before VA 

on or after August 10, 2022, VA will 

utilize the most advantageous effective 

date amongst 38 CFR 3.114 and 3.400, 

to potentially grant an award earlier 

than August 10, 2022, if applicable. 

Lastly, as the PACT Act is silent with 

respect to changes in the accrued or 

substitution process as it relates to the 

reevaluation of DIC claims, VA will be 

utilizing the regular processes regarding 

accrued and substitution benefits 

contained in 38 U.S.C. 5121 and 5121A. 

The amendments within this final 

rulemaking incorporate legislative 

updates enacted by the Sergeant First 

Class Heath Robinson Honoring our 

Promise to Address Comprehensive 

Toxics Act of 2022, or the Honoring our 

PACT Act of 2022 (Pub. L. 117–168) 

(PACT Act) and will bring federal 

regulations into conformance with the 

statutory changes. The amendments in 

this regulation are in accordance with 

the President’s priorities to address 

toxic exposure. Also improve service 

delivery, customer experience, and 

reduce administrative burdens for those 

accessing public benefits and services. 

Statement of Need: The Department of 

Veterans Affairs has determined the 

need to amend its regulations, in 

accordance with 38 U.S.C. 501, to 

incorporate legislative updates enacted 

by Section 204 of the Sergeant First 

Class Heath Robinson Honoring our 

Promise to Address Comprehensive 

Toxics Act of 2022 or the Honoring our 

PACT Act of 2022 (Pub. L. 117–168). 

Summary of Legal Basis: This 

amendment to the Dependency and 

Indemnity Compensation benefit 

program is authorized by section 204 of 

Public Law 117–168. VA must publish 

regulations for matters related to 

benefits as required by 38 U.S.C. 501(d). 

Alternatives: VBA has considered an 

alternative policy to this final rule. VBA 

could choose not to act at this time and 

codify a new regulation at a later date. 

However, this would have a negative 

effect on VA’s effectiveness in 

processing benefits claims as the current 

regulations do not align with the 

updated statutes. This new adjudication 

regulation is needed to appropriately 

determine eligibility to certain VA 

benefits based on these statutory 

changes. Therefore, the final rule of 

adding a new adjudication regulation 

which will provide relevant claimants 

the ability to elect a reevaluation of 

certain previously denied DIC 

determinations pursuant to changes that 

establish or modify a presumption of 

service connection to conform with the 

statutory changes within the PACT Act 

is VA’s preferred policy approach. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: TBD. 

Risks: None. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 03/22/23 88 FR 17166 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

05/22/23 

Final Action ......... 11/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

URL For More Information: 

www.regulations.gov. 

Agency Contact: Eric Baltimore, 

Program Analyst, Pension and Fiduciary 

Service, Veterans Benefits 

Administration, Department of Veterans 

Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue NW, 

Washington, DC 20420, Phone: 202 632– 

8863, Email: eric.baltimore@va.gov. 

RIN: 2900–AR76 

VA 

Completed Actions 

188. Presumptive Service Connection 

for Respiratory Conditions Due to 

Exposure to Particulate Matter [2900– 

AR25] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

CFR Citation: 38 CFR 3.319 (new). 

Abstract: This rulemaking adopts as 

final, with changes, an interim final rule 

that amended the Department of 

Veterans Affairs (VA) adjudication 

regulations governing presumptive 

service connection based on presumed 

exposures to fine particulate matter. The 

amendment was necessary to provide 

health care, services, and benefits to 

Gulf War Veterans who were exposed to 

fine particulate matter associated with 

deployment to the Southwest Asia 

theater of operations, as well as 

Afghanistan, Syria, Djibouti, and 

Uzbekistan. The amendment eased the 

evidentiary burden of Gulf War Veterans 

who file claims with VA for asthma, 

rhinitis, and sinusitis, to include 

rhinosinusitis. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I 
9468 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Statement of Need: The amendment is 

necessary, in accordance with 38 U.S.C. 

501(a), to provide health care, services, 

and benefits to Gulf War Veterans who 

were potentially exposed to fine 

particulate matter associated with 

deployment to the Southwest Asia 

theater of operations, as well as 

Afghanistan, Syria, Djibouti, and 

Uzbekistan. 

Summary of Legal Basis: This 

rulemaking adopts as final, with 

changes, an interim final rule that 

amended the Department of Veterans 

Affairs (VA) adjudication regulations 

governing presumptive service 

connection based on presumed 

exposures to fine particulate matter. The 

amendment was necessary to provide 

health care, services, and benefits to 

Gulf War Veterans who were exposed to 

fine particulate matter associated with 

deployment to the Southwest Asia 

theater of operations, as well as 

Afghanistan, Syria, Djibouti, and 

Uzbekistan. The amendment eased the 

evidentiary burden of Gulf War Veterans 

who file claims with VA for asthma, 

rhinitis, and sinusitis, to include 

rhinosinusitis. 

Alternatives: None. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

intended effect of this amendment is to 

address the needs and concerns of Gulf 

War Veterans and service members who 

have served and continue to serve in 

these locations as military operations in 

the Southwest Asia theater of operations 

have been ongoing from August 1990 

until the present time. Neither Congress 

nor the President has established an end 

date for the Gulf War. Therefore, to 

provide immediate health care, services, 

and benefits to current and future Gulf 

War Veterans who may be affected by 

particulate matter due to their military 

service, VA intends to provide 

presumptive service connection for the 

chronic disabilities of asthma, rhinitis, 

and sinusitis, to include rhinosinusitis, 

as well as a presumption of exposure to 

fine, particulate matter. This will ease 

the evidentiary burden of Gulf War 

Veterans who file claims with VA for 

these three conditions, which are among 

the most commonly claimed respiratory 

conditions. VA has determined that 

both transfers and costs are associated 

with this final rulemaking. The total 

budgetary impact is estimated to be $1.5 

billion in FY 2023, $12.4 billion over 

five years, and $30.4 billion over 10 

years, as detailed in Table 1 below. 

Transfers are estimated to be $1.3 

billion in 2023, $11.2 billion over five 

years, and $28.5 billion over 10 years. 

Risks: TBD. 

Completed: 

Reason Date FR Cite 

Final Action ......... 09/01/23 88 FR 60336 

Final Action Effective.10/31/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Jane Allen, Policy 

Analyst, Robert Parks, Chief, Part 3 

Regulations Staff (211), Department of 

Veterans Affairs, Compensation Service 

(21C), 810 Vermont Avenue NW, 

Washington, DC 20420, Phone: 202 461– 

9700. 

RIN: 2900–AR25 

VA 

189. Presumptive Service Connection 

for Rare Respiratory Cancers Due to 

Exposure to Fine Particulate Matter 

[2900–AR44] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

CFR Citation: 38 CFR 3.317(e)(2); 38 

CFR 3. 

Abstract: This rulemaking adopts as 

final, without changes, an interim final 

rule amending the Department of 

Veterans Affairs (VA) adjudication 

regulations to establish presumptive 

service connection for nine rare 

respiratory cancers in association with 

presumed exposure to fine particulate 

matter. These presumptions apply to 

Veterans with a qualifying period of 

service, i.e., who served on active 

military, naval, or air service in the 

Southwest Asia theater of operations 

during the Persian Gulf War (hereinafter 

Gulf War), from August 2, 1990, 

onward, as well as in Afghanistan, 

Syria, Djibouti, or Uzbekistan, on or 

after September 19, 2001, during the 

Gulf War. This rulemaking implements 

a decision by the Secretary of Veterans 

Affairs that determined there is 

sufficient evidence to support these 

cancers as presumptive based on 

exposure to fine particulate matter 

during service in the Southwest Asia 

theater of operations, Afghanistan, 

Syria, Djibouti, or Uzbekistan during 

certain periods and the subsequent 

development of the following rare 

respiratory cancers: squamous cell 

carcinoma (SCC) of the larynx, SCC of 

the trachea, adenocarcinoma of the 

trachea, salivary gland-type tumors of 

the trachea, adenosquamous carcinoma 

of the lung, large cell carcinoma of the 

lung, salivary gland-type tumors of the 

lung, sarcomatoid carcinoma of the 

lung, and typical and atypical carcinoid 

of the lung. The intended effect of this 

rulemaking is to ease the evidentiary 

burden of this population of Veterans 

who file claims with VA for these nine 

rare respiratory cancers. 

Statement of Need: The Department of 

Veterans Affairs (VA) is issuing this 

final rule to amend its adjudication 

regulations to establish presumptive 

service connection for nine rare 

respiratory cancers in association with 

presumed exposures to fine particulate 

matter. This amendment is necessary to 

implement a decision of the Secretary of 

Veterans Affairs that there is a plausible 

relationship between service in the 

Southwest theater of operations, 

Afghanistan, Syria, Djibouti, or 

Uzbekistan during certain periods and 

the subsequent development of the 

following rare respiratory cancers: 

squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of 

larynx, SCC of trachea, adenocarcinoma 

of trachea, salivary gland-type tumors of 

trachea, adenosquamous carcinoma of 

lung, large cell carcinoma of lung, 

salivary gland-type tumors of lung, 

sarcomatoid carcinoma of lung, and 

typical and atypical carcinoid of the 

lung. The intended effect of this 

amendment is to ease the evidentiary 

burden of Gulf War Veterans who file 

claims with VA for these nine rare 

respiratory cancers. 

Summary of Legal Basis: VA amends 

its adjudication regulations to establish 

presumptive service connection for nine 

rare respiratory cancers in association 

with presumed exposures to PM2.5 for 

certain Veterans. This amendment is 

necessary to implement a decision of 

the Secretary of Veterans Affairs that 

there is a plausible relationship between 

service in the Southwest Asia theater of 

operations, Afghanistan, Syria, Djibouti, 

or Uzbekistan during certain periods 

and the subsequent development of the 

following rare respiratory cancers: 

squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the 

larynx, SCC of the trachea, 

adenocarcinoma of the trachea, salivary 

gland-type tumors of the trachea, 

adenosquamous carcinoma of the lung, 

large cell carcinoma of the lung, salivary 

gland-type tumors of the lung, 

sarcomatoid carcinoma of the lung, and 

typical and atypical carcinoid of the 

lung. The intended effect of this 

rulemaking is to ease the evidentiary 

burden of this population of Veterans 

who file claims with VA for these nine 

rare respiratory cancers. 

Alternatives: None. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: This 

rulemaking allows VA to provide access 

to immediate health care services and 

benefits such as disability compensation 

and life insurance to current and future 

Gulf War Veterans who may be affected 

by fine particulate matter due to their 

military service, and to ease the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9469 

evidentiary burden of Gulf War Veterans 

who file claims with VA for these nine 

rare respiratory cancers. This 

rulemaking will also provide access to 

benefits such as health care, survivor 

compensation, and burial benefits to 

eligible survivors. 

VA has determined that both transfers 

and costs are associated with this 

rulemaking. Transfers are estimated to 

be $54.2 million in 2023, $301.1 million 

over five years, and $704.6 million over 

ten years. Costs are estimated to be $3.9 

million in 2023, $16.8 million over five 

years, and $35.2 million over ten years. 

The total budgetary impact is estimated 

to be $58.1 million in 2023, $317.9 

million over five years, and $739.9 

million over ten years. 

Risks: None. 

Completed: 

Reason Date FR Cite 

Final Rule ............ 11/03/23 88 FR 75498 

Final Rule Effective.11/03/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Robert Parks, 

Department of Veterans Affairs, 1800 G 

Street NW, Washington, DC 20006, 

Phone: 202 461–9700, Email: 

robert.parks3@va.gov. 

RIN: 2900–AR44 

BILLING CODE 8320–01–P 

CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND 

COMMUNITY SERVICE (AMERICORPS) 

Fall 2023 Statement of Regulatory 

Priorities 

Overview 

The Corporation for National and 

Community Service, operating as 

AmeriCorps, is the Federal agency for 

national service and volunteerism. 

AmeriCorps provides opportunities for 

individuals to address some the nation’s 

most pressing challenges, improve lives 

and communities, and strengthen civic 

engagement. AmeriCorps offers 

individuals and organizations flexible 

ways to make a local and lasting impact 

through its programs, such as 

AmeriCorps State and National, 

AmeriCorps VISTA, AmeriCorps NCCC, 

the Volunteer Generation Fund, and 

AmeriCorps Seniors RSVP, Foster 

Grandparents, Senior Companions and 

Senior Demonstration programs. 

AmeriCorps also supports volunteerism 

through the national 9/11 Day of Service 

and Martin Luther King, Jr., Day of 

Service. AmeriCorps’ authorizing 

statutes and regulations provide the 

necessary legal framework for its 

programs. AmeriCorps’ regulatory 

priorities are guided by its Strategic 

Plan (available at americorps.gov/about/ 

agency-overview/strategic-plan) and 

Administration priorities. 

Highlights of Americorps’ Regulatory 

Plan 

This Regulatory Plan provides 

highlights of AmeriCorps’ upcoming 

regulatory actions. Please refer to 

AmeriCorps’ Semiannual Regulatory 

Agenda for the full spectrum of 

AmeriCorps’ upcoming regulatory 

actions. 

Among other objectives, AmeriCorps’ 

Strategic Plan establishes a goal of 

partnering with communities to 

alleviate poverty and advance racial 

equity. This past year, AmeriCorps 

finalized updates to its AmeriCorps 

VISTA regulations (3045–AA79) in 

support of this goal. The AmeriCorps 

VISTA program promotes economic 

resilience and address persistent 

poverty by encouraging and enabling 

persons from all walks of life to perform 

volunteer service to assist in the 

solution of poverty and poverty-related 

problems and secure and increase 

opportunities for self-advancement by 

persons affected by such problems. 

Recently finalized updates to VISTA’s 

regulations add programmatic and 

grantmaking flexibilities to better reach 

underserved communities, reduce 

barriers to participation in national 

service, and provide those communities 

with access to the benefits of service to 

reduce poverty. 

AmeriCorps is planning two proposed 

regulatory actions in further support of 

partnering with communities to 

alleviate poverty and advance racial 

equity: 

First, AmeriCorps State and National 

Updates (3045–AA84) will consider 

additional programmatic and 

grantmaking flexibilities, including 

waivers and exceptions for individuals 

who may benefit from additional 

education and training, such as those 

reentering society after a period of 

incarceration, to participate in national 

service while acquiring skills and 

knowledge to ease their transition into 

the workplace. 

And second, AmeriCorps Seniors 

Updates (3045–AA81) will consider 

removing barriers to service for 

individuals, particularly for low-income 

individuals, and increasing flexibility 

for sponsors to determine the best mix 

of staffing and resources to accomplish 

project goals. 

BILLING CODE 6050–28–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY (EPA) 

Statement of Priorities 

Overview 

EPA works to ensure that all 

Americans are protected from 

significant risks to human health and 

the environment, including climate 

change, and that overburdened and 

underserved communities and 

vulnerable individuals—in particular, 

communities with environmental justice 

concerns—are meaningfully engaged 

and benefit from focused efforts to 

protect their communities from 

pollution. EPA acts to ensure that all 

efforts to reduce environmental harms 

are based on the best available scientific 

information, that federal laws protecting 

human health and the environment are 

enforced equitably and effectively, and 

that the United States plays a leadership 

role in working with other nations to 

protect the global environment. EPA is 

committed to environmental protection 

that builds and supports more diverse, 

equitable, sustainable, resilient, and 

productive communities and 

ecosystems. 

By taking advantage of the latest 

science, the newest technologies and the 

most cost-effective and sustainable 

solutions, EPA and its federal, tribal, 

state, local, and community partners 

have made important progress in 

addressing pollution where people live, 

work, play, and learn. By cleaning up 

contaminated waste sites, reducing 

greenhouse gases, lowering emissions of 

mercury and other air pollutants, and 

investing in water and wastewater 

treatment, EPA’s efforts have resulted in 

tangible benefits to the American 

public. Efforts to reduce air pollution 

alone have produced hundreds of 

billions of dollars in benefits in the 

United States, and tremendous progress 

has been made in cleaning up our 

nation’s land and waterways. But much 

more needs to be done to implement the 

nation’s environmental statutes and 

ensure that all individuals and 

communities benefit from EPA’s efforts 

to protect human health and the 

environment and to address the climate 

crisis. 

EPA will use its regulatory 

authorities, along with grant- and 

incentive-based programs, technical and 

compliance assistance, and research and 

educational initiatives, to address the 

following priorities set forth in EPA’s 

Strategic Plan: 

• Tackle the Climate Crisis 

• Take Decisive Action to Advance 

Environmental Justice and Civil 

Rights 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
9470 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

• Enforce Environmental Laws and 

Ensure Compliance 

• Ensure Clean and Healthy Air for All 

Communities 

• Ensure Clean and Healthy Water for 

All Communities 

• Safeguard and Revitalize 

Communities 

• Ensure Safety of Chemicals for People 

and the Environment 

As EPA develops regulations, we seek 

to increase participation and 

engagement of members of the public 

affected by our regulations, including in 

the development of our regulatory 

priorities. In our Regulatory Plan we 

detail engagement efforts that have 

helped to inform our priorities to date, 

as well as future engagement efforts we 

have planned. Throughout our 

engagement, EPA would particularly 

like to hear from members of the public 

who have not typically participated in 

the regulatory process, including 

families and communities affected by 

climate change, rural workers, and 

others. 

All this work will be undertaken with 

a strong commitment to scientific 

integrity, the rule of law and 

transparency, the health of children and 

other vulnerable populations, and with 

special focus on supporting and 

achieving environmental justice at 

federal, tribal, state, and local levels. 

Highlights of EPA’s Regulatory Plan 

This Regulatory Plan highlights our 

most important upcoming regulatory 

actions. As always, our Semiannual 

Regulatory Agenda contains information 

on a broader spectrum of EPA’s 

upcoming regulatory actions. 

Tackle the Climate Crisis 

EPA is taking appropriate regulatory 

action under existing statutory 

authorities to reduce emissions from our 

nation’s largest sources of greenhouse 

gases (GHG) to respond to the severe 

and urgent threat of climate change. The 

impacts of climate change are affecting 

people in every region of the country, 

threatening lives and livelihoods and 

damaging infrastructure, ecosystems, 

and social systems. Overburdened and 

underserved communities and 

individuals are particularly vulnerable 

to these impacts, including low-income 

communities and communities of color, 

children, the elderly, tribes, and 

indigenous people. 

Exercising its authority under the 

Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA will address 

major sources of GHGs that are driving 

these impacts by taking regulatory 

action to minimize emissions of 

methane from new and existing sources 

in the oil and natural gas sector; reduce 

GHGs from new and existing fossil fuelfired power plants; and limit GHGs from 

new light-duty vehicles and heavy-duty 

trucks. EPA will also carry out the 

mandates of the American Innovation 

and Manufacturing (AIM) Act to 

implement, and where appropriate 

accelerate, a national phasedown in the 

production and consumption of 

hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), which are 

highly potent GHGs. Further, these 

regulatory priorities complement the 

commitment to holistically and 

aggressively combat damaging climate 

pollution while supporting the creation 

of good jobs and lowering energy costs 

for families together with 

implementation of relevant climate 

provisions of the Inflation Reduction 

Act. 

• New Source Performance Standards 

and Emission Guidelines for Crude Oil 

and Natural Gas Facilities: Climate 

Review. 

On November 15, 2021, the EPA 

proposed new source performance 

standards and emission guidelines for 

crude oil and natural gas facilities that 

would secure major climate and health 

benefits for all Americans by reducing 

emissions of methane and other harmful 

air pollution from both new and existing 

sources in the oil and natural gas 

industry. (86 FR 63110). This action was 

in response to the January 20, 2021, 

Executive Order titled ‘Protecting Public 

Health and the Environment and 

Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate 

Crisis.’ The 2021 action proposed to 

update and strengthen methane and 

VOC standards on the books for new 

sources, add standards for currently 

unregulated new sources, and establish 

the first nationwide Emission 

Guidelines for states to regulate existing 

sources. On December 6, 2022, EPA 

issued a supplemental proposal to 

update, strengthen and expand its 

November 2021 proposal (87 FR 74702). 

The supplemental proposal would 

achieve more comprehensive emissions 

reductions from oil and natural gas 

operations by improving standards in 

the 2021 proposal and adding proposed 

requirements for sources not previously 

covered. Specific proposed 

requirements include fugitive emissions 

monitoring and repair at well sites, 

stronger requirements for flares, zero 

emissions standards for pneumatic 

pumps, new standards for dry seal 

compressors, and a program to allow 

approved third parties to identify superemitting events for prompt mitigation. 

The supplemental proposal also 

promotes innovation in methane 

detection technology by allowing for the 

use of advanced methane detection 

systems. The proposal included details 

for implementing the Emissions 

Guidelines. EPA received more than 

515,000 public comments on the 2022 

supplemental proposal, in addition to 

470,000 comments received on the 2021 

proposal. EPA held multi-day virtual 

public hearings on both proposals and 

has conducted numerous trainings and 

webinars for communities, members of 

Tribal Nations, tribal environmental 

professionals and small businesses. The 

Agency expects to issue a final rule later 

this year. 

• NSPS for GHG Emissions from New, 

Modified, and Reconstructed Fossil 

Fuel-Fired EGUs; Emission Guidelines 

for GHG Emissions from Existing Fossil 

Fuel-Fired EGUs; and Repeal of the ACE 

Rule. 

Fossil fuel-fired electric generating 

units (EGUs) are the nation’s second 

largest source of greenhouse gas (GHG) 

pollution. In May 2023, EPA proposed 

to set limits for new gas-fired 

combustion turbines, existing coal, oil 

and gas-fired steam generating units, 

and certain existing gas-fired 

combustion turbines. Consistent with 

EPA’s traditional approach to 

establishing pollution standards for 

power plants under section 111 of the 

Clean Air Act, the proposed standards 

are based on technologies such as 

carbon capture and sequestration/ 

storage (CCS), low-GHG hydrogen cofiring, and natural gas co-firing, which 

can be applied directly to power plants 

that use fossil fuels to generate 

electricity. As laid out in section 111 of 

the Clean Air Act, the proposed new 

source performance standards (NSPS) 

and emission guidelines reflect the 

application of the best system of 

emission reduction (BSER) that, taking 

into account costs, energy requirements, 

and other statutory factors, is adequately 

demonstrated for the purpose of 

improving the emissions performance of 

the covered electric generating units. 

The comment period for the proposed 

rule concluded on August 8, 2023. EPA 

intends to issue a final rule in spring 

2024. 

• Management of Certain 

Hydrofluorocarbons and Substitutes 

under Subsection (h) of the American 

Innovation and Manufacturing Act of 

2020. 

This proposed rulemaking would 

establish requirements for the 

management of certain HFCs and their 

substitutes under subsection (h) of the 

AIM Act. Specifically, this proposal 

considers provisions to control, where 

appropriate, practices, processes, or 

activities regarding the servicing, repair, 

disposal, or installation of equipment, 

for the purposes of maximizing the 

reclamation and minimizing the release 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9471 

of certain HFCs from equipment and 

ensuring the safety of technicians and 

consumers. Among other provisions, 

EPA is proposing emissions reduction 

requirements for certain equipment 

containing HFCs and their substitutes as 

well as requirements to increase the 

reclaiming of HFCs. 

• Application-Specific Review and 

Renewal Rule. 

The AIM Act identifies six 

applications that are to receive ‘‘the full 

quantity of [HFC] allowances necessary, 

based on projected, current, and 

historical trends,’’ under the allowance 

allocation program through the end of 

2025. The six applications are a 

propellant in metered dose inhalers, 

defense sprays, structural composite 

preformed polyurethane foam for 

marine use and trailer use, the etching 

of semiconductor material or wafers and 

the cleaning of chemical vapor 

deposition chambers within the 

semiconductor manufacturing sector, 

mission-critical military end uses, and 

onboard aerospace fire suppression. 

EPA can renew this status for up to five 

years at a time based on statutory 

criteria outlined in the AIM Act. This 

proposed rule will review and consider 

whether to renew eligibility for each of 

the six applications, consistent with this 

statutory process under AIM subsection 

(e)(4)(B). Additionally, EPA intends to 

establish how it will review eligibility if 

petitioned for inclusion of additional 

applications and to consider revisions to 

existing regulatory requirements. 

• Greenhouse Gas Emissions 

Standards for Heavy-Duty Engines and 

Vehicles—Phase 3. 

• Transportation is the largest source 

of GHG emissions in the United States 

and heavy-duty (HD) vehicles are the 

second-largest contributor in the sector. 

GHG emissions have significant impacts 

on public health and welfare as 

evidenced by the well-documented 

scientific record and as set forth in 

EPA’s Endangerment and Cause or 

Contribute Findings under section 

202(a) of the CAA. GHG reductions 

would benefit all U.S. residents, 

including populations such as people of 

color, low-income populations, 

indigenous peoples, and/or children 

that may be especially vulnerable to 

various forms of damages associated 

with climate change. On April 12, 2023, 

EPA announced a proposal for more 

stringent standards to reduce 

greenhouse gas emissions from HD 

vehicles beginning in model year (MY) 

2027. The new standards would be 

applicable to HD vocational vehicles 

(such as delivery trucks, refuse haulers, 

public utility trucks, transit, shuttle, 

school buses, etc.) and tractors (such as 

day cabs and sleeper cabs on tractortrailer trucks). Specifically, EPA 

proposed stronger CO2 standards for 

MY 2027 HD vehicles that go beyond 

the current standards that apply under 

the HD Phase 2 Greenhouse Gas 

program. EPA also proposed an 

additional set of CO2 standards for HD 

vehicles that would begin to apply in 

MY 2028, with progressively more 

stringent standards each model year 

through 2032. This proposed ‘‘Phase 3’’ 

greenhouse gas program maintains the 

flexible structure created in EPA’s Phase 

2 greenhouse gas program, which is 

designed to reflect the diverse nature of 

the heavy-duty industry. EPA has 

conducted outreach with a wide range 

of interested stakeholders to gather 

input which we have considered in 

developing this proposal, and we will 

continue to engage with the public and 

all interested stakeholders as part of our 

regulatory development process. 

• Multi-Pollutant Emissions 

Standards for Model Years 2027 and 

Later Light-Duty and Medium-Duty 

Vehicles. 

On April 12, 2023, EPA announced a 

proposal for new, more ambitious 

multipollutant emissions standards to 

further reduce harmful air pollutant 

emissions from light-duty passenger 

cars and light trucks and Class 2b and 

3 vehicles (‘‘medium-duty vehicles’’ or 

MDVs) under its authority in section 

202(a) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 

U.S.C. 7521(a), starting with model year 

2027. The proposal builds upon EPA’s 

final standards for federal greenhouse 

gas emissions standards for passenger 

cars and light trucks for model years 

2023 through 2026 and leverages 

advances in clean car technology which 

would result in significant benefits to 

Americans ranging from reducing 

climate pollution, to improving public 

health, to saving drivers money through 

reduced fuel and maintenance costs. 

The proposed standards phased in over 

model years 2027 through 2032. EPA 

conducted outreach with a wide range 

of interested stakeholders to gather 

input which was considered in 

developing the proposal and will 

continue to engage with the public and 

all interested stakeholders as part of our 

regulatory development process as we 

develop the final rule. 

Ensure Clean and Healthy Air for All 

Communities 

• All people regardless of race, 

ethnicity, national origin, or income 

deserve to breathe clean air. EPA has the 

responsibility to protect the health of 

vulnerable and sensitive populations, 

such as children, the elderly, and 

persons overburdened by pollution or 

adversely affected by persistent poverty 

or inequality. Since enactment of the 

CAA, EPA has made significant progress 

in reducing harmful air pollution even 

as the U.S. population and economy 

have grown. Between 1970 and 2022, 

the combined emissions of six key 

pollutants dropped by 78%, while the 

U.S. economy remained strong as GDP 

grew 304% over that time period. As 

required by the CAA, EPA will continue 

to build on this progress and work to 

ensure clean air for all Americans, 

including those in underserved and 

overburdened communities. Among 

other things, EPA will take regulatory 

action to review and implement healthbased air quality standards for criteria 

pollutants such as particulate matter 

(PM); limit emissions of harmful air 

pollution from both stationary and 

mobile sources; address sources of 

hazardous air pollution (HAP), such as 

ethylene oxide, that disproportionately 

affect communities with environmental 

justice concerns; and protect downwind 

communities from linked sources of air 

pollution that cross state lines. Along 

with the full set of CAA actions listed 

in the regulatory agenda, the following 

high priority actions will allow EPA to 

continue its progress in reducing 

harmful air pollution. 

• National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards for Particulate Matter 

Reconsideration (PM NAAQS 

Reconsideration). 

Under the Clean Air Act Amendments 

of 1977, EPA is required to review and 

if appropriate revise the air quality 

criteria for the primary (health-based) 

and secondary (welfare-based) national 

ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) 

every 5 years. On December 18, 2020, 

the EPA published a final decision 

retaining the NAAQS for particulate 

matter (PM), which was the subject of 

several petitions for reconsideration as 

well as petitions for judicial review. As 

directed in Executive Order 13990, 

‘‘Protecting Public Health and the 

Environment and Restoring Science to 

Tackle the Climate Crisis,’’ signed by 

President Biden on January 20, 2021, 

EPA is undertaking a reconsideration of 

the December 2020 decision to retain 

the PM NAAQS because the available 

scientific evidence and technical 

information indicate that the current 

standards may not be adequate to 

protect public health and welfare, as 

required by the Clean Air Act. As part 

of this reconsideration, EPA developed 

a Supplement to the 2019 PM Integrated 

Science Assessment (ISA) and a Policy 

Assessment to take into account the 

most up-to-date science on public 

health impacts of PM and engaged with 

the chartered Clean Air Scientific 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9472 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Advisory Committee (CASAC) and a 

newly constituted expert CASAC PM 

panel. The notice of proposed 

rulemaking was signed on January 5, 

2023. The EPA proposed to revise the 

primary annual PM2.5 standard from its 

current level of 12.0 mg/m3 to within the 

range of 9.0 to 10.0 mg/m3, while 

proposing to retain the primary 24-hour 

PM2.5 standard, the primary 24-hour 

PM10 standard, and the secondary PM 

standards. The EPA also proposed 

revisions to the Air Quality Index (AQI) 

and to the PM2.5 monitoring network. 

The EPA held a public hearing in 

February 2023, where more than 300 

individuals provided oral testimony. 

The EPA also received more than 

700,000 written public comments from 

individuals, environmental and public 

health organizations, industries, federal, 

state, and local representatives, and 

tribes and tribal groups. The EPA has 

also provided other opportunities for 

public engagement throughout the 

reconsideration, including public 

meetings of the CASAC, and tribal 

consultation offers and informational 

meetings. EPA intends to issue a final 

rule in fall 2023. 

• Review of the Secondary National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards for 

Ecological Effects of Oxides of Nitrogen, 

Oxides of Sulfur and Particulate Matter 

(Ecological Effects of NOX, SOX and PM 

Secondary NAAQS Review). 

Under the Clean Air Act, the EPA is 

required to review and, if appropriate, 

revise the air quality criteria and 

national ambient air quality standards 

(NAAQS) every 5 years. On April 3, 

2012, the EPA published a final rule in 

which the Agency determined to retain 

the current secondary standards 

(welfare-based) for nitrogen oxides 

(NOX) and for sulfur oxides (SOX). On 

January 15, 2013, the EPA published a 

final rule in which the Agency retained 

the secondary standards for particulate 

matter. The current review of the air 

quality criteria and secondary standards 

for ecological effects of SOX, NOX and 

particulate matter includes the 

preparation of an Integrated Science 

Assessment and a Policy Assessment by 

the EPA, with opportunities for review 

by the EPA’s Clean Air Scientific 

Advisory Committee (CASAC) and the 

public. These documents will inform 

the Administrator’s proposed decision 

as to whether to retain or revise the 

standards. The proposed decision 

would be published in the Federal 

Register with opportunity provided for 

public comment. The Administrator’s 

final decisions would take into 

consideration these documents, CASAC 

advice, and public comment on the 

proposed decision. Opportunities for 

public engagement and sharing of 

information concerning this NAAQS 

review will include public hearings, 

tribal consultation, informational 

meetings, and through the CASAC 

public meetings. 

• NESHAP: Coal-and Oil-Fired 

Electric Utility Steam Generating UnitsReview of the Residual Risk and 

Technology Review. 

• On February 16, 2012, EPA 

promulgated National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

for Coal- and Oil-fired Electric Utility 

Steam Generating Units (77 FR 9304). 

The rule (40 CFR part 63, subpart 

UUUUU), commonly referred to as the 

Mercury and Air Toxics Standards 

(MATS), includes standards to control 

hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions 

from new and existing coal- and oilfired electric utility steam generating 

units (EGUs) located at both major and 

area sources of HAP emissions. There 

have been several regulatory actions 

regarding MATS since February 2012, 

including a May 22, 2020, action that 

withdrew EPA’s threshold finding that 

it is appropriate and necessary to 

regulate hazardous air pollution from 

power plants under section 112 of the 

CAA, and finalized the residual risk and 

technology review (RTR) conducted for 

the Coal- and Oil-Fired EGU source 

category regulated under MATS (85 FR 

31286). As directed by Executive Order 

13990, EPA has reviewed the May 2020 

final action. After this review, based on 

the best available science, EPA issued a 

final action on February 15, 2023, that 

reinstated the Agency’s appropriate and 

necessary finding for MATS. Following 

a review of the RTR portion of the May 

2020 final action, EPA also proposed to 

update and strengthen the MATS on 

April 24, 2023 (88 FR 24854). (88 FR 

13956). The proposal reflects feedback 

EPA received from representatives from 

local and state governments, industry 

groups, and environmental 

organizations. Additional public input 

will inform EPA as the final regulation 

is developed. For example, the Agency 

held a virtual public hearing on May 9, 

2023, where 93 speakers provided oral 

testimony. EPA also participated in a 

National Tribal Air Association/EPA Air 

Policy Update Call on May 25, 2023, to 

inform attendees about the rule and how 

to submit comments to the docket. 

Written comments were accepted during 

the 60-day comment period until June 

23, 2023. EPA intends to issue a final 

rule addressing the RTR in 2024. 

• National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants: Ethylene 

Oxide Commercial Sterilization and 

Fumigation Operations. 

In this action, EPA is conducting the 

second residual risk and technology 

review for the National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

for ethylene oxide commercial 

sterilizers and considering potential 

updates to the rule. The proposed rule 

was published in April 2023 (88 FR 

22790). If finalized as proposed, the rule 

would reduce ethylene oxide emissions 

by 80% and would reduce lifetime 

cancer risk in all impacted communities 

to acceptable levels, many of which 

have environmental justice concerns. 

Prior to proposal, EPA issued an 

advance notice of proposed rulemaking 

that solicited comment from 

stakeholders, undertook a Small 

Business Advocacy Review panel, 

which is needed when there is the 

potential for significant economic 

impacts to small businesses from any 

regulatory actions being considered, and 

conducted outreach meetings within the 

communities affected by the highest-risk 

facilities as well as engagement with 

state and local governments. The 

comment period for this proposal 

concluded on June 27, 2023, and EPA 

intends to issue a final rule by March 

2024. 

• Review of Final Rule 

Reclassification of Major Sources as 

Area Sources Under Section 112 of the 

Clean Air Act. 

In 2019, EPA issued a proposed rule 

that would allow major sources of 

hazardous air pollutants (HAP) subject 

to National Emissions Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) to 

reclassify to area source status by taking 

limits on their potential to emit such 

that they are no longer subject to major 

source NESHAP. The final rule, 

Reclassification of Major Sources as 

Area Sources Under section 112 of the 

Clean Air Act (Major MACT to AreaMM2A final rule), was promulgated on 

November 19, 2020. (See 85 FR 73854) 

The MM2A final rule became effective 

on January 19, 2021. As directed by 

Executive Order 13990, ‘‘Protecting 

Public Health and the Environment and 

Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate 

Crisis,’’ EPA has reviewed the MM2A 

action and published for comment a 

notice of proposed rulemaking to 

determine whether changes are 

necessary for sources seeking to 

reclassify from major source status to 

area source status. This proposal reflects 

engagement with state and local 

agencies, representatives of 

communities, and other stakeholders. 

• Revisions to the Air Emission 

Reporting Requirements (AERR). 

On August 8, 2023 (88 FR 54118), the 

EPA proposed revisions to the Air 

Emissions Reporting Requirements in 40 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9473 

CFR part 51, subpart A. The existing 

AERR rule was last revised on February 

19, 2015 (80 FR 8787). EPA is proposing 

new requirements to improve the 

quality and completeness of HAP 

emissions data from stationary sources 

and all pollutant emissions from 

prescribed fires. Specifically, the EPA is 

proposing to require certain sources 

report information regarding emission of 

hazardous air pollutants (HAP); certain 

sources to report criteria air pollutants, 

their precursors and HAP; and to 

require State, local, and certain tribal air 

agencies to report prescribed fire data. 

Further, EPA is considering how best to 

quantify emissions from intermittent 

sources such as backup generators; how 

to obtain data from permitted facilities 

in Indian Country when a Tribe is not 

required to report emissions data; and 

how to address known data gaps, 

streamline processes, and improve data 

quality, documentation, and 

transparency for nonpoint and mobile 

sources. The proposed revisions also 

include changes for reporting data on 

airports, rail yards, commercial marine 

vessels, locomotives, and nonpoint 

sources. This proposed action would 

allow for EPA to annually collect 

(starting in 2027), hazardous air 

pollutant (HAP) emissions data for point 

sources in addition to continuing the 

criteria air pollutant and precursor 

(CAP) collection in place under the 

existing AERR. The proposed 

amendments would ensure that EPA has 

sufficient information to identify and 

solve air quality and exposure problems 

and ensure that communities have the 

data needed to understand significant 

environmental risks that may be 

impacting them. 

• NSPS for the Synthetic Organic 

Chemical Manufacturing Industry and 

NESHAP for the Synthetic Organic 

Chemical Manufacturing Industry and 

Group I & II Polymers and Resins 

Industry. 

This action will address the agency’s 

technology review under Clean Air Act 

(CAA) section 112(d)(6) of the National 

Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 

Pollutants (NESHAP) for four subparts 

in 40 CFR part 63 (subparts F, G, H, and 

I) which are commonly referred to 

together as the Hazardous Organic 

NESHAP (HON) and that apply to the 

Synthetic Organic Chemical 

Manufacturing Industry (SOCMI) and to 

equipment leaks from certain nonSOCMI processes. This action will also 

address the agency’s technology review 

of the NESHAP for two subparts in 40 

CFR part 63 (subparts U and W) that 

apply to the Group I and Group II 

Polymers and Resins industries. The 

HON standards were most recently 

updated when the agency conducted a 

residual risk and technology review 

(RTR) on December 21, 2006. Similarly, 

the Group I and II Polymers and Resins 

NESHAP were most recently updated 

when the agency conducted its RTR on 

December 16, 2008, and April 21, 2011. 

The HON and Group I and II Polymers 

and Resins NESHAP contain maximum 

achievable control technology (MACT) 

standards for controlling emissions of 

hazardous air pollutants (HAP) from 

process vents, storage vessels, transfer 

operations, heat exchange systems, 

wastewater streams, and equipment 

leaks. The HAP emitted from these 

emission sources include, but are not 

limited to, ethylene oxide, benzene, 1,3- 

butadiene, vinyl chloride, ethylene 

dichloride, methanol, hexane, toluene, 

xylenes, and chloroprene. 

The agency also plans to consider 

risks from the SOCMI source category 

and from the Neoprene Production 

source category in the Group I Polymers 

and Resins NESHAP during its 

technology review and to ensure the 

standards continue to provide an ample 

margin of safety to protect public health. 

Lastly, this action will also address the 

agency’s review, under CAA section 

111(b)(1)(B), of four New Source 

Performance Standards (NSPS) in 40 

CFR part 60 (subparts III, NNN, RRR, 

and VVa) for emissions of Volatile 

Organic Compound (VOC) from SOCMI 

air oxidation unit processes, SOCMI 

distillation operations, SOCMI reactor 

processes, and equipment leaks located 

at SOCMI sources. These subparts were 

originally promulgated pursuant to 

section 111(b) of the CAA on June 

29,1990 (subparts III and NNN), August 

31, 1993 (subpart RRR), and November 

16, 2007 (subpart VVa). On April 25, 

2023, the EPA published a proposed 

rulemaking in the Federal Register (see 

88 FR 25080) for this action. In addition, 

the EPA has conducted public outreach 

activities, including hosting an 

informational webinar on April 13, 

2023, and holding a public hearing on 

the proposed rulemaking on May 16, 

2023. EPA intends to publish the final 

action by March 2024. 

Ensure Clean and Healthy Water for All 

Communities 

The Nation’s water resources are the 

lifeblood of our communities, 

supporting our health, economy, and 

way of life. Clean and safe water is a 

vital resource that is essential to the 

protection of human health. EPA is 

committed to ensuring clean and safe 

water for all, including low-income 

communities and communities of color, 

children, the elderly, tribes, and 

indigenous people. Since the enactment 

of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and the 

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), EPA 

and its state and tribal partners have 

made significant progress toward 

improving the quality of our waters and 

ensuring a safe drinking water supply. 

Along with the full set of water actions 

listed in the regulatory agenda, the 

regulatory initiatives listed below will 

help ensure that this important progress 

continues. 

• Effluent Limitations Guidelines and 

Standards for the Steam Electric Power 

Generating Point Source Category. 

• On March 29, 2023, EPA published 

a proposed rule to potentially 

strengthen the Steam Electric Effluent 

Limitations Guidelines and Standards 

(ELGs) (40 CFR 423). EPA previously 

revised the Steam Electric ELGs in 2015 

and 2020. The proposed rule would 

establish more stringent ELGs for two 

wastestreams addressed in the 2020 

‘‘Steam Electric Reconsideration Rule’’ 

(flue gas desulfurization wastewater and 

bottom ash transport water). In addition, 

the proposal would establish more 

stringent effluent limitations and 

standards for an additional wastestream 

(combustion residual leachate) and 

takes comment on potential revisions to 

limitations and standards for a fourth 

wastestream (legacy wastewater). The 

first two wastestreams mentioned above 

are the subject of current litigation 

pending in the U.S. Court of Appeals for 

the Fourth Circuit. Appalachian Voices, 

et al. v. EPA, No. 20–2187 (4th Cir.). The 

2015 limitations for combustion 

residual leachate and legacy wastewater 

discharged by existing sources were 

vacated by the U.S. Court of Appeals for 

the Fifth Circuit in Southwestern 

Electric Power Co., et al. v. EPA, 920 

F.3d 999 (5th Cir. 2019). EPA has 

conducted outreach with Tribal 

governments, state governments and 

governmental organizations, and 

potential communities with 

environmental justice concerns on this 

rulemaking. 

• Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances 

(PFAS): Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) 

and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid 

(PFOS) National Primary Drinking 

Water Regulation Rulemaking. 

• On March 3, 2021, EPA published 

the Fourth Regulatory Determinations 

(86 FR 12272), including a 

determination to regulate 

perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and 

perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) in 

drinking water. EPA is finalizing a 

National Primary Drinking Water 

Regulation (NPDWR) for PFOA, PFOS, 

and other PFAS as part of this action. 

EPA proposed the NPDWR for public 

comment in March 2023. The Agency 

anticipates issuing a final regulation in 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9474 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

late 2023 after considering public 

comments on the proposal. 

• National Primary Drinking Water 

Regulations for Lead and Copper: 

Regulatory Revisions. 

EPA promulgated the final Lead and 

Copper Rule Revision (LCRR) on 

January 15, 2021, (86 FR 4198) and 

subsequently reviewed those revisions 

to further evaluate whether the LCRR 

fully protected families and 

communities (86 FR 71574; December 

17, 2021) particularly those that have 

been disproportionately impacted by 

lead in drinking water. Through this 

review, the Agency concluded that there 

are significant opportunities to improve 

the LCRR. EPA is developing a new 

proposed NPDWR, the Lead and Copper 

Rule Improvements (LCRI), to 

strengthen the regulatory framework 

and address lead in drinking water. EPA 

expects to issue the proposed LCRI in 

Fall 2023. The Agency anticipates 

issuing a final regulation prior to 

October 16, 2024, after considering 

public comments on the proposal. 

• Federal Baseline Water Quality 

Standards for Indian Reservations. 

On April 27, 2023, the EPA 

Administrator signed a proposed rule to 

establish federal baseline water quality 

standards (WQS) for waters on Indian 

reservations that do not have WQS 

under the CWA. This proposed rule 

would help advance President Biden’s 

commitment to strengthening the 

nation-to-nation relationships with 

Indian country. Fifty years after 

enactment of the CWA, over 80% of 

Indian reservations do not have this 

foundational protection expected by 

Congress as laid out in the CWA for 

their waters. Addressing this lack of 

CWA-effective WQS for the waters of 

more than 250 Indian reservations is a 

priority for EPA, given that WQS are 

central to implementing the water 

quality framework of the CWA. 

Promulgating baseline WQS would 

provide more scientific rigor and 

regulatory certainty to National 

Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 

(NPDES) permits for discharges to these 

waters. Consistent with EPA’s 

regulations, the baseline WQS include 

designated uses, water quality criteria to 

protect those uses, and antidegradation 

policies to protect high quality waters. 

EPA consulted with tribes in the 

summer of 2021 during the pre-proposal 

phase and in the summer of 2023, 

concurrent with the public comment 

period associated with the proposal. 

• Water Quality Standards Regulatory 

Revisions to Protect Tribal Reserved 

Rights. 

• Many tribes hold reserved rights to 

resources on lands and waters where 

states establish WQS, through treaties, 

statutes, or other sources of federal law. 

The U.S. Constitution defines treaties as 

the supreme law of the land. On 

November 28, 2022, the EPA 

Administrator signed a proposed rule 

that would, if finalized, revise the 

federal WQS regulation to ensure that 

WQS do not impair tribal reserved 

rights by giving clear direction on how 

to develop WQS where tribes hold 

reserved rights. This proposed rule 

would help EPA ensure protection of 

resources reserved to tribes in treaties, 

statutes, or other sources of federal law 

when establishing, revising, and 

reviewing WQS. The development of 

this rule helps advance President 

Biden’s commitment to strengthening 

the nation-to-nation relationships with 

tribes. EPA consulted with tribes in the 

summer of 2021 during the pre-proposal 

phase and in the winter of 2023, 

concurrent with the public comment 

period for the proposed rule. EPA is 

working to expeditiously finalize the 

proposed rule, taking into account 

public comments. 

Safeguard and Revitalize Communities 

EPA works to improve the health and 

livelihood of all Americans by cleaning 

up and returning land to productive use, 

preventing contamination, and 

responding to emergencies. EPA 

collaborates with other federal agencies, 

industry, states, tribes, and local 

communities to enhance the livability 

and economic vitality 15 of 

neighborhoods. Challenging and 

complex environmental problems 

persist at many contaminated 

properties, including contaminated soil, 

sediment, surface water, and 

groundwater that can cause human 

health concerns. EPA acts under several 

different statutory authorities, including 

the Resource Conservation and 

Recovery Act (RCRA), and the 

Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation, and Liability 

Act (CERCLA). EPA’s regulatory 

program works to incorporate new 

technologies and approaches to cleaning 

up land to provide for an 

environmentally sustainable future 

more efficiently and effectively, as well 

as to strengthen climate resilience and 

to integrate environmental justice and 

equitable development when returning 

sites to productive use. Along with the 

other land and emergency management 

actions in the regulatory agenda, EPA 

will take the following priority actions 

to address the contamination of soil, 

sediment, surface water, and 

groundwater. 

• PFAS: RCRA Listing and CERCLA 

Designation. 

Based on public health and 

environmental protection concerns and 

in response to several petitions which 

requested EPA to take regulatory action 

on PFAS under RCRA, EPA is 

evaluating the existing toxicity and 

health effects data on four PFAS 

constituents to determine if they should 

be listed as RCRA Hazardous 

Constituents. If the existing data for the 

four PFAS constituents support listing 

any or all of these constituents as RCRA 

hazardous constituents, EPA will 

propose to list the constituents in a 

Federal Register notice for public 

comment. The four PFAS chemicals 

EPA will evaluate are: perfluorooctanoic 

acid (PFOA), perfluorooctane sulfonic 

acid (PFOS), perfluorobutane sulfonic 

acid (PFBS), hexafluoropropylene oxide 

dimer acid (HFPO–DA or GenX). EPA 

has communicated with interested 

stakeholders about this action and will 

do conduct additional outreach with the 

public, organizations, states, tribal 

groups, and affected parties following 

publication of a proposed rule. 

Under the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act of 

1980, as amended (‘‘CERCLA’’ or 

‘‘Superfund’’), the Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) 

is moving to finalize the designation of 

perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and 

perfluoro octane sulfonic acid (PFOS), 

including their salts and structural 

isomers, as hazardous substances. 

CERCLA authorizes the Administrator 

to promulgate regulations designating as 

hazardous substances such elements, 

compounds, mixtures, solutions, and 

substances which, when released into 

the environment, may present 

substantial danger to the public health 

or welfare or the environment. Such a 

designation would ultimately facilitate 

cleanup of contaminated sites and 

reduce human exposure to these 

‘‘forever’’ chemicals. 

• Hazardous and Solid Waste 

Management System: Addressing Coal 

Combustion Residues from Electric 

Utilities. 

On April 17, 2015, the Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) 

promulgated national minimum criteria 

for existing and new coal combustion 

residuals (CCR) landfills and existing 

and new CCR surface impoundments. 

On August 21, 2018, the D.C. Circuit 

Court of Appeals issued its opinion in 

the case of Utility Solid Waste Activities 

Group, et al. v. EPA, which vacated and 

remanded the provision that exempted 

inactive impoundments at inactive 

facilities from the CCR rule. In May 

2023, EPA proposed regulations to 

implement this part of the court 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9475 

decision for inactive CCR surface 

impoundments at inactive utilities, or 

‘‘legacy CCR surface impoundments’’. 

This proposal included adding a new 

definition for legacy CCR surface 

impoundments. EPA also proposed to 

require such legacy CCR surface 

impoundments to follow existing 

regulatory requirements for fugitive 

dust, groundwater monitoring, and 

closure, or other technical requirements. 

Finally, EPA proposed requirements for 

CCR management units including a 

facility evaluation and to follow existing 

regulatory requirements for groundwater 

monitoring, corrective action, and 

closure for all CCR contamination 

(regardless of how or when that CCR 

was placed) at a regulated facility. After 

reviewing the public comments on the 

proposed rule, EPA will take final 

action. 

• Accidental Release Prevention 

Requirements: Risk Management 

Programs Under Clean Air Act, as 

amended; Safer Communities by 

Chemical Accident Prevention. 

• On August 31, 2022, the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

published proposed amendments to its 

Risk Management Program (RMP) 

regulations as a result of Agency review. 

The proposed revisions included several 

changes and amplifications to the 

accident prevention program 

requirements, enhancements to the 

emergency preparedness requirements, 

increased public availability of chemical 

hazard information, and several other 

changes to certain regulatory definitions 

or points of clarification. Such 

amendments seek to improve chemical 

process safety; assist in planning, 

preparedness, and responding to RMPreportable accidents; and improve 

public awareness of chemical hazards at 

regulated sources. EPA aims to release 

the final rule by the end of 2023. 

• Revisions to Standards for the Open 

Burning/Open Detonation of Waste 

Explosives. 

• This rulemaking proposes to revise 

regulations will consider revisions to 

the regulations that allow for the open 

burning and detonation (OB/OD) of 

waste explosives. This allowance or 

‘‘variance’’ to the prohibition on the 

open burning of hazardous waste was 

established at a time when there were 

no alternatives to the safe treatment of 

waste explosives. However, recent 

findings from the National Academies of 

Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 

and the EPA have determined identified 

that safe alternatives that are potentially 

applicable to many energetic/explosive 

waste streams. Because there are 

potentially safe alternatives in use today 

that capture and treat emissions prior to 

release, the EPA is considering revising 

regulations to promote the broader use 

of these alternatives, where applicable. 

As part of the rule development process, 

EPA has held two rounds of engagement 

with states, territories, tribes, 

environmental and community groups, 

and owners/operators of OB/OD units. 

• Definition of Hazardous Waste 

Applicable to Corrective Action for 

Solid Waste Management Units EPA is 

considering a proposed rule that would 

modify the regulations at 40 CFR part 

264 to clarify that the definition of 

hazardous waste found in RCRA section 

1004(5) is applicable to corrective action 

for releases from solid waste 

management units. The proposed rule 

would codify in regulation EPA’s 

interpretation of its authority under 

RCRA section 3004(u) and (v). 

• Hazardous Substance Response 

Worst Case Discharge Planning. 

The Clean Water Act (CWA) provides 

that regulations shall be issued ‘‘which 

require an owner or operator of a tank 

vessel or facility . . . to prepare and 

submit . . . a plan for responding, to the 

maximum extent practicable, to a worst 

case discharge, and to a substantial 

threat of such a discharge, of . . . a 

hazardous substance.’’ EPA was sued for 

failure to fulfill this mandatory duty 

imposed by Congress. This regulatory 

action is being conducted under the 

terms of a consent decree entered into 

on March 12, 2020, which requires that 

a proposed action is signed within 24 

months of the final agreement and that 

a final action follow within 30 months 

of the publication of the proposed rule. 

Subsequently, the Environmental 

Protection Agency proposed a 

regulatory action to require planning for 

worst case discharges of CWA 

hazardous substances under section 

311(j)(5)(A). EPA plans to promulgate a 

final rule by Spring 2024 meet the terms 

of the Consent Decree. 

Ensure Safety of Chemicals for People 

and the Environment 

EPA is responsible for ensuring the 

safety of chemicals and pesticides for all 

people at all life stages. Chemicals and 

pesticides released into the environment 

as a result their manufacture, 

processing, distribution, use, or disposal 

can threaten human health and the 

environment. EPA gathers and assesses 

information about the risks associated 

with chemicals and pesticides and acts 

to minimize risks and prevent 

unreasonable risks to individuals, 

families, and the environment. EPA acts 

under several different statutory 

authorities, including the Federal 

Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide 

Act (FIFRA), the Federal Food, Drug and 

Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), the Toxic 

Substances Control Act (TSCA), the 

Emergency Planning and Community 

Right-to-Know-Act (EPCRA), and the 

Pollution Prevention Act (PPA). Using 

best available science, the Agency will 

continue to satisfy its overall directives 

under these authorities and highlights 

the following rulemakings intended for 

release in FY2024: 

• Collecting Data to Better 

Understand the Environmental and 

Human Health Impacts of Per- and 

Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS). 

Building on EPA’s completion of 

actions identified in the PFAS Strategic 

Roadmap that the EPA Administrator 

announced on October 18, 2021, the 

Agency is considering whether to add 

PFAS chemicals to the list of chemicals 

required to report to the Toxics Release 

Inventory (TRI) Program under EPCRA 

section 313 in furtherance of section 

7321(d) of the National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 

(NDAA), which directs EPA to add any 

PFAS that EPA determines meet the 

listing criteria by December 2023. 

• Improving Procedures for Assessing 

the Risks of New and Existing Chemical 

Substances under TSCA. 

As amended in 2016, TSCA requires 

EPA to assess the risks of each new 

chemical substance for which a notice 

was received under TSCA section 

5(a)(1) of the law and make an 

affirmative determination on whether 

such a new chemical substance presents 

an unreasonable risk to human health or 

the environment under known, 

intended or reasonably foreseen 

conditions of use before the submitter 

may commence manufacturing or 

processing of the chemical substance 

that is the subject of the submitted 

notice, and to take action as required in 

association with the determination. On 

May 26, 2023, EPA proposed to amend 

the new chemicals procedural 

regulations in 40 CFR parts 720, 721, 

723, and 725 for the purpose of aligning 

EPA’s processes and procedures with 

the 2016 TSCA amendments and to 

clarify and improve the efficiency of the 

Agency’s review process (RIN 2070– 

AK65). One of the major objectives of 

the rulemaking is to reduce the need to 

redo all or part of the risk assessment for 

a new chemical by increasing the 

quality of information initially 

submitted in new chemicals notices, 

ensuring that the Agency’s processes 

result in the timely, effective 

completion of new chemical risk 

assessments. Another key objective of 

the rulemaking is to improve the review 

process for low volume exemptions 

(LVEs) and low release and exposure 

exemptions (LoREXs), which include 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9476 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

requiring EPA approval of an exemption 

notice prior to commencement of 

manufacture, making per- and 

polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) 

categorically ineligible for these 

exemptions, and providing that 

persistent, bioaccumulative, toxic (PBT) 

chemical substances are also ineligible 

for these exemptions, consistent with 

EPA’s 1999 PBT policy. EPA expects to 

promulgate final revisions to the new 

chemicals procedural regulations in 

November 2024. 

In addition, the 2016 TSCA 

amendments require EPA to evaluate 

the safety of existing chemicals via a 

three-stage process: prioritization, risk 

evaluation, and risk management. EPA 

first prioritizes chemicals as either highor low-priority for risk evaluation. EPA 

then evaluates high-priority chemicals 

for unreasonable risk. As a result of 

litigation challenging the 2017 final rule 

that established EPA’s procedural 

framework for conducting existing 

chemical risk evaluations under TSCA, 

and in consideration of Executive Order 

13990, the Agency proposed to amend 

that framework in order to better align 

the Agency’s processes with the 

statutory text and structure and 

Congress’ intent in the 2016 

amendments to TSCA (RIN 2070– 

AK90). Key provisions of the proposed 

rule include clarifications regarding the 

required scope of risk evaluations, 

considerations related to peer review, 

the process for revisiting a completed 

risk evaluation, requirements for 

manufacturer-requested risk evaluations 

and related information-gathering 

provisions, provisions addressing 

violations and penalties, and other 

aspects based on lessons learned in the 

process of carrying out the first 10 TSCA 

risk evaluations. EPA expects to 

promulgate final revisions in April 

2024. 

• Addressing the Unreasonable Risk

of Existing Chemical Substances under 

TSCA. 

• Upon determining that an existing

chemical presents an unreasonable risk 

of injury to health or the environment, 

the Agency must immediately initiate 

an action to apply, by rule, requirements 

under TSCA to eliminate the 

unreasonable risk. EPA may consider a 

range of risk management options under 

TSCA in such a rule, including labeling, 

recordkeeping or notice requirements, 

actions to reduce human exposure or 

environmental release, or a ban of the 

chemical or of certain uses. After 

determining that the chemical 

substances present unreasonable risk 

under their conditions of use, the 

Agency intends to propose risk 

management regulations for addressing 

the unreasonable risks of 1- 

bromopropane (RIN 2070–AK73) and nmethylpyrrolidone (RIN 2070–AK85) 

and promulgate final rules addressing 

the unreasonable risks of chrysotile 

asbestos (RIN 2070–AK86), methylene 

chloride (RIN 2070–AK70), and 

trichloroethylene (RIN 2070–AK83) by 

Spring 2024, and to issue final risk 

management regulations addressing the 

unreasonable risks of carbon 

tetrachloride (RIN 2070–AK82) and 

perchloroethylene (RIN 2070–AK84) in 

Summer 2024. The Agency has 

undertaken extensive outreach and 

consultation efforts throughout the 

development of these actions. In 

addition to stakeholder outreach 

conducted throughout the risk 

evaluation and risk management 

rulemaking processes for these chemical 

substances, EPA also consulted with 

State, local, and Tribal government 

officials, and held public environmental 

justice consultations to further 

opportunities for underserved and 

overburdened communities to share 

information and input with the Agency 

prior to proposal. When applicable, EPA 

also convened Small Business Advocacy 

Review Panels and consulted with small 

entity representatives as required under 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 

601, et seq.) to provide advice and 

recommendations to ensure that EPA 

carefully considers small entity 

concerns. Further, the Agency has 

hosted public webinars to brief 

stakeholders on proposed risk 

management regulations that have 

published in the Federal Register and to 

receive additional public input in 

addition to written public comments 

submitted to the rulemaking dockets. 

EPA’s chemical risk management efforts 

reflect the feedback we have received 

from the various stakeholders and 

government officials, and the Agency 

will continue these practices of sharing 

information and seeking input. For more 

information about the Agency’s public 

involvement efforts, please visit https:// 

www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managingchemicals-under-tsca/risk-managementexisting-chemicals-under-tsca#meetings 

and https://www.epa.gov/reg-flex/smallbusiness-advocacy-review-sbar-panels. 

• Reevaluating Changes to the DustLead Hazard Standards and Dust-Lead 

Post-Abatement Clearance Levels under 

TSCA. 

The Agency’s dust-lead hazard 

standards (DLHS) provide the basis for 

risk assessors to determine whether 

dust-lead hazards are present, and apply 

to target housing (i.e., most pre-1978 

housing) and child-occupied facilities 

(pre-1978 non-residential properties 

where children 6 years of age or under 

spend a significant amount of time such 

as daycare centers and kindergartens). 

EPA’s dust-lead clearance levels (DLCL) 

indicate the amount of lead in dust on 

a surface following the completion of an 

abatement activity. On July 9, 2019, EPA 

promulgated a final rule to lower the 

DLHS, and on January 6, 2021, EPA 

promulgated a final rule to lower the 

DLCL. On May 14, 2021, the United 

States Court of Appeals for the Ninth 

Circuit issued an opinion to remand 

without vacatur the 2019 DLHS final 

rule and directed EPA to reconsider the 

2019 DLHS rule in conjunction with a 

reconsideration of the DLCL. Notably, 

the Court instructed EPA to consider 

only health factors when setting the 

DLHS while affirming that the Agency 

is able to consider reliability, 

effectiveness, and safety, including nonhealth factors such as laboratory 

capabilities/capacity and achievability, 

when setting the DLCL. As part of EPA’s 

efforts to reduce childhood lead 

exposure, and in accordance with the 

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth 

Circuit 2021 opinion, EPA proposed on 

August 1, 2023, to lower the DLHS from 

10 micrograms per square foot (mg/ft2) 

and 100 mg/ft2 for floors and window 

sills to any reportable level as analyzed 

by a laboratory recognized by EPA’s 

National Lead Laboratory Accreditation 

Program. EPA also proposed to change 

the DLCL from 10 mg/ft2, 100 mg/ft2 and 

400 mg/ft2 for floors, windowsills, and 

window troughs to 3 mg/ft2, 20 mg/ft2, 

and 25 mg/ft2, respectively. The Agency 

consulted with State, local and Tribal 

government officials during the 

rulemaking. EPA expects to promulgate 

final revisions to the DLHS and DLCL 

(RIN 2070–AK91) in October 2024 and 

will continue its efforts to engage its 

partners to ensure the successful 

implementation of the amended hazard 

standards and clearance levels. 

Rules Expected To Affect Small Entities 

By better coordinating small business 

activities, EPA aims to improve its 

technical assistance and outreach 

efforts, minimize burdens to small 

businesses in its regulations, and 

simplify small businesses’ participation 

in its voluntary programs. Actions that 

may affect small entities can be tracked 

on EPA’s Regulatory Flexibility website 

(https://www.epa.gov/reg-flex) at any 

time. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9477 

EPA—OFFICE OF AIR AND RADIATION 

(OAR) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

190. Review of the Secondary National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards for 

Ecological Effects of Oxides of Nitrogen, 

Oxides of Sulfur and Particulate Matter 

[2060–AS35] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Clean Air Act 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 50. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: Under the Clean Air Act, the 

EPA is required to review and, if 

appropriate, revise the air quality 

criteria and national ambient air quality 

standards (NAAQS) every 5 years. On 

April 3, 2012, the EPA published a final 

rule in which the Agency determined to 

retain the current secondary standards 

(welfare-based) for nitrogen oxides 

(NOX) and for sulfur oxides (SOX). On 

January 15, 2013, the EPA published a 

final rule in which the Agency retained 

the secondary standards for particulate 

matter. The current review of the air 

quality criteria and secondary standards 

for ecological effects of SOX, NOX and 

particulate matter includes the 

preparation of an Integrated Science 

Assessment and a Policy Assessment by 

the EPA, with opportunities for review 

by the EPA’s Clean Air Scientific 

Advisory Committee (CASAC) and the 

public. These documents will inform 

the Administrator’s proposed decision 

as to whether to retain or revise the 

standards. The proposed decision 

would be published in the Federal 

Register with opportunity provided for 

public comment. The Administrator’s 

final decisions would take into 

consideration these documents, CASAC 

advice, and public comment on the 

proposed decision. Opportunities for 

public engagement and sharing of 

information concerning this NAAQS 

review will include public hearings, 

tribal consultation, informational 

meetings, and through the CASAC 

public meetings. 

Statement of Need: Under the Clean 

Air Act Amendments of 1977, EPA is 

required to review and if appropriate 

revise the air quality criteria and 

national ambient air quality standards 

(NAAQS) every 5 years. On April 3, 

2012, EPA published a final rule 

retaining the Secondary NAAQS for 

NO2 and SO2, without revision. On 

August 29, 2013, EPA announced that it 

is reviewing the April 2012 decision on 

the secondary air quality standards for 

NO2 and SO2. On December 3, 2014, 

EPA announced it is reviewing the 

secondary air quality standards for 

particulate matter. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Under the 

Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977, 

EPA is required to review and if 

appropriate revise the air quality criteria 

and the primary (health-based) and 

secondary (welfare-based) national 

ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) 

every 5 years. 

Alternatives: The main alternatives for 

the Administrator’s decision on the 

review of the secondary national 

ambient air quality standards for NOX, 

SOX and PM include retaining or 

revising the existing standards. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: When 

the Agency proposes revisions to the 

standards, the Agency prepares a 

Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) to 

provide the public with illustrative 

estimates of the potential costs and 

health and welfare benefits of attaining 

the revised standards. However, the 

Clean Air Act makes clear that the 

economic and technical feasibility of 

attaining standards are not to be 

considered in setting or revising the 

NAAQS, although such factors may be 

considered in the development of state 

plans to implement the standards. 

Risks: The review builds on the 

review of the NOX and SOX NAAQS, 

completed in 2012, and includes 

preparation by EPA of an Integrated 

Review Plan, an Integrated Science 

Assessment, and a Policy Assessment, 

which includes a risk/exposure 

assessment, with opportunities for 

review by the EPA’s Clean Air Scientific 

Advisory Committee (CASAC) and the 

public. The final versions of these 

documents will inform the 

Administrator’s proposed decisions on 

whether to revise or retain the 

Secondary NOX SOX and PM NAAQS. 

The Administrator’s final decisions on 

whether to revise or retain the 

Secondary NOX SOX and PM NAAQS 

will take into consideration the 

scientific evidence and quantitative 

analyses presented in these documents, 

CASAC advice, and public comment on 

the proposed decision. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Notice .................. 08/22/18 83 FR 42497 

Notice .................. 05/31/23 88 FR 34852 

NPRM .................. 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: 

Undetermined. 

Additional Information: 

Agency Contact: Ginger Tennant, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Air and Radiation 109 T.W. 

Alexander Drive, Mail Code C504–06, 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, 

Phone: 919 541–4072, Fax: 919 541– 

0237, Email: tennant.ginger@epa.gov. 

Karen Wesson, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Air and 

Radiation, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, 

Mail Code C504–06, Research Triangle 

Park, NC 27711, Phone: 919 541–3515, 

Email: wesson.karen@epa.gov. 

RIN: 2060–AS35 

EPA–OAR 

191. NSPS for GHG Emissions From 

New, Modified, and Reconstructed 

Fossil Fuel—Fired EGUS; Emission 

Guidelines for GHG Emissions From 

Existing Fossil Fuel—Fired EGUS; and 

Repeal of the ACE RULE [2060–AV09] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7411 Clean 

Air Act; 42 U.S.C. 7414 and 7601 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 60, subpart 

TTTT; 40 CFR 60 subpart UUUUa. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: Fossil fuel-fired electric 

generating units (EGUs) are the nation’s 

second largest source of greenhouse gas 

(GHG) pollution. In May 2023, EPA 

proposed to set limits for new gas-fired 

combustion turbines, existing coal, oil 

and gas-fired steam generating units, 

and certain existing gas-fired 

combustion turbines. Consistent with 

EPA’s traditional approach to 

establishing pollution standards for 

power plants under section 111 of the 

Clean Air Act, the proposed standards 

are based on technologies such as 

carbon capture and sequestration/ 

storage (CCS), low-GHG hydrogen cofiring, and natural gas co-firing, which 

can be applied directly to power plants 

that use fossil fuels to generate 

electricity. As laid out in section 111 of 

the Clean Air Act, the proposed new 

source performance standards (NSPS) 

and emission guidelines reflect the 

application of the best system of 

emission reduction (BSER) that, taking 

into account costs, energy requirements, 

and other statutory factors, is adequately 

demonstrated for the purpose of 

improving the emissions performance of 

the covered electric generating units. 

EPA anticipates promulgating final 

rules by spring 2024. 

Statement of Need: New EGUs are a 

significant source of GHG emissions. 

This action will evaluate options to 

reduce those emissions. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Clean Air 

Act section 111(b) provides the legal 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
9478 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

framework for establishing greenhouse 

gas emission standards for new electric 

generating units. 

Alternatives: EPA evaluated several 

options for reducing GHG emissions 

from new EGUs including carbon 

capture and sequestration/storage (CCS), 

low-GHG hydrogen co-firing, natural gas 

co-firing, efficient generation, and use of 

clean fuels. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

Undetermined. 

Risks: Undetermined. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 05/23/23 88 FR 33240 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

07/24/23 

Supplemental 

NPRM.

11/20/23 88 FR 80682 

Supplemental 

Comment Period End.

12/20/23 

Final Rule ............ 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

State. 

Federalism: This action may have 

federalism implications as defined in 

E.O. 13132. 

Energy Effects: Statement of Energy 

Effects planned as required by Executive 

Order 13211. 

International Impacts: This regulatory 

action will be likely to have 

international trade and investment 

effects, or otherwise be of international 

interest. 

Additional Information: 

Sectors Affected: 22111 Electric 

Power Generation; 221112 Fossil Fuel 

Electric Power Generation. 

URL For More Information: https://

www.federalregister.gov/d/2023-10141. 

Agency Contact: Lisa Thompson, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Air and Radiation, 109 T.W. 

Alexander Drive, Mail Code D243–01, 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, 

Phone: 919 541–9775, Email: 

thompson.lisa@epa.gov. 

Nick Hutson, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Air and 

Radiation, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, 

Mail Code D243–01, Research Triangle 

Park, NC 27711, Phone: 919 541–2968, 

Fax: 919 541–4991, Email: hutson.nick@

epa.gov. 

Related RIN: Related to 2060–AT56 

RIN: 2060–AV09 

EPA—OAR 

192. Review of Final Rule 

Reclassification of Major Sources as 

Area Sources Under Section 112 of the 

Clean Air Act [2060–AV20] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

CAA; 42 U.S.C. 7414; 42 U.S.C. 7601 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 63.1. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The final rule, 

Reclassification of Major Sources as 

Area Sources Under Section 112 of the 

Clean Air Act (Major MACT to AreaMM2A final rule), was promulgated on 

November 19, 2020. (See 85 FR 73854) 

The MM2A final rule became effective 

on January 19, 2021. On January 20, 

2021, President Biden issued Executive 

Order 13990 Protecting Public Health 

and the Environment and Restoring 

Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis. 

The EPA has identified the MM2A final 

rule as an action being considered 

pursuant section (2)(a) of Executive 

Order 13990. Under this review, EPA, as 

appropriate and consistent with the 

Clean Air Act section 112, published for 

comment a notice of proposed 

rulemaking reviewing the MM2A final 

rule. As the Agency developed this 

proposal, we sought to increase 

participation and engagement of 

members of the public affected by this 

action. The agency held multiple preproposal outreach meetings with 

environmental non-governmental 

organizations representing communities 

as well as associations of state/local 

government agencies. 

Statement of Need: The EPA issued a 

notice of proposed rulemaking of EPA’s 

review of the final rule Reclassification 

of Major Sources as Area Sources Under 

section 112 of the Clean Air Act (Major 

MACT to Area- MM2A final rule) 

pursuant Executive Order 13990. 

Pursuant section (2)(a) of Executive 

Order 13990 Protecting Public Health 

and the Environment and Restoring 

Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis, the 

EPA is to review the MM2A final rule 

and as appropriate and consistent with 

the Clean Air Act section 112, to 

publish for comment a notice of 

proposed rulemaking either suspending, 

revising, or rescinding the MM2A final 

rule. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The EPA 

issued a final rulemaking on November 

19, 2020. The final MM2A rule provides 

that a major source can be reclassified 

to area source status at any time upon 

reducing its potential to emit (PTE) 

hazardous air pollutants (HAP) to below 

the major source thresholds (MST) of 10 

tons per year (tpy) of any single HAP 

and 25 tpy of any combination of HAP. 

Pursuant section (2)(a) of Executive 

Order 13990 Protecting Public Health 

and the Environment and Restoring 

Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis, the 

EPA is to review the MM2A final rule 

and as appropriate and consistent with 

the Clean Air Act section 112, to 

publish for comment a notice of 

proposed rulemaking either suspending, 

revising, or rescinding the MM2A final 

rule. 

Alternatives: The EPA will take 

comments on the review of the final 

MM2A and EPA’s proposed rulemaking 

either suspending, revising, or 

rescinding the MM2A final rule. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

proposed action does not have 

quantified costs or benefits. 

Risks: The proposed action does not 

address public health risks. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 09/27/23 88 FR 66336 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

11/13/23 

Final Rule ............ 05/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State, Tribal. 

Additional Information: 

Agency Contact: Nathan Topham, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Air and Radiation, 109 T.W. 

Alexander Drive, Mail Code D243–02, 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, 

Phone: 919 541–0483, Fax: 919 541– 

4991, Email: topham.nathan@epa.gov. 

Brian Shrager, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Air and 

Radiation, E143–01, Research Triangle 

Park, NC 27711, Phone: 919 541–7689, 

Fax: 919 541–5450, Email: 

shrager.brian@epa.gov. 

Related RIN: Related to 2060–AM75 

RIN: 2060–AV20 

EPA–OAR 

193. Phasedown of 

Hydrofluorocarbons: Management of 

Certain Hydrofluorocarbons and 

Substitutes Under Subsection (H) of the 

American Innovation and 

Manufacturing Act of 2020 [2060– 

AV84] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Unfunded Mandates: This action may 

affect the private sector under Public 

Law 104–4. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7675 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 84. 

Legal Deadline: None. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9479 

Abstract: This proposed rulemaking 

would establish requirements for the 

management of certain HFCs and their 

substitutes under subsection (h) of the 

AIM Act. Specifically, this proposal 

considers provisions to control, where 

appropriate, practices, processes, or 

activities regarding the servicing, repair, 

disposal, or installation of equipment, 

for the purposes of maximizing the 

reclamation and minimizing the release 

of certain HFCs from equipment and 

ensuring the safety of technicians and 

consumers. Among other provisions, 

EPA is proposing emissions reduction 

requirements for certain equipment 

containing HFCs and their substitutes as 

well as requirements for the reclaiming 

of HFCs. 

Statement of Need: The EPA issued a 

notice of proposed rulemaking to meet 

the statutory provisions of subsection 

(h) of the American Innovation and 

Manufacturing (AIM) Act of 2020. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The 

American Innovation and 

Manufacturing (AIM) Act, enacted on 

December 27, 2020, provides EPA new 

authorities to address 

hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) in three 

main areas: phasing down the 

production and consumption of listed 

HFCs, maximizing reclamation and 

minimizing releases of these HFCs and 

their substitutes in equipment (e.g., 

refrigerators and air conditioners), and 

facilitating the transition to nextgeneration technologies by restricting 

the use of HFCs in particular sectors or 

subsectors. Subsection (h) of the AIM 

Act requires EPA to establish 

regulations to control, where 

appropriate, practices, processes, or 

activities regarding the servicing, repair, 

disposal, or installation of equipment, 

for the purpose of maximizing the 

reclamation and minimizing the release 

of certain HFCs from equipment and 

ensuring the safety of technicians and 

consumers. 

Alternatives: In the proposed rule, 

EPA requested comments on alternative 

approaches and compliance dates for 

the various provisions. For example, 

EPA requested comment on alternative 

compliance dates for the proposed fire 

suppression requirements. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

Agency prepared a Regulatory Impact 

Analysis (RIA) Addendum. Taking into 

account both benefits and compliance 

costs over the 2025–2050 time period, it 

is estimated that the proposed rule 

would result in present value net benefit 

(benefits minus compliance costs), of 

$6.1 billion (with compliance costs 

discounted at three percent). 

Risks: EPA is still evaluating the 

scope and risks associated with a 

prospective rule. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Notice .................. 10/17/22 87 FR 62843 

NPRM .................. 10/19/23 88 FR 72216 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

12/18/23 

Final Rule ............ To Be Determined 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal. 

International Impacts: This regulatory 

action will be likely to have 

international trade and investment 

effects, or otherwise be of international 

interest. 

Agency Contact: Annie Kee, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Air and Radiation, 1200 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20460, Phone: 202 564–2056, Email: 

kee.annie@epa.gov. 

Christian Wisniewski, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Air and 

Radiation, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW, Washington, DC 20460, Phone: 202 

564–0417, Email: wisniewski.christian@

epa.gov. 

RIN: 2060–AV84 

EPA—OAR 

194. Phasedown of 

Hydrofluorocarbons: Review and 

Renewal of Eligibility for Application– 

Specific Allowances [2060–AV98] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: American Innovation 

and Manufacturing (AIM) Act of 2020 

(42 U.S.C. 7675) 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 84. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The AIM Act identifies six 

applications that are to receive ‘‘the full 

quantity of [HFC] allowances necessary, 

based on projected, current, and 

historical trends,’’ under the allowance 

allocation program through the end of 

2025. The six applications are a 

propellant in metered dose inhalers, 

defense sprays, structural composite 

preformed polyurethane foam for 

marine use and trailer use, the etching 

of semiconductor material or wafers and 

the cleaning of chemical vapor 

deposition chambers within the 

semiconductor manufacturing sector, 

mission-critical military end uses, and 

onboard aerospace fire suppression. 

EPA can renew this status for up to five 

years at a time based on statutory 

criteria outlined in the AIM Act. This 

proposed rule will review and consider 

whether to renew eligibility for each of 

the six applications, consistent with this 

statutory process under AIM subsection 

(e)(4)(B). Additionally, EPA intends to 

establish how it will review eligibility if 

petitioned for inclusion of additional 

applications and to consider revisions to 

existing regulatory requirements. 

Statement of Need: This rule is 

required to meet the statutory 

provisions of subsection (e) of the AIM 

Act. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The 

American Innovation and 

Manufacturing (AIM) Act, enacted on 

December 27, 2020, provides EPA 

authority to address hydrofluorocarbons 

(HFCs) in three main areas: phasing 

down the production and consumption 

of listed HFCs, maximizing reclamation 

and minimizing releases of these HFCs 

and their substitutes in equipment (e.g., 

refrigerators and air conditioners), and 

facilitating the transition to nextgeneration technologies by restricting 

the use of HFCs in particular sectors or 

subsectors. Subsection (e)(iv)(B) 

requires EPA to allocate the full 

quantity of allowances necessary for 6 

applications. Five years after enactment 

of the AIM Act, the statute requires that 

EPA review the 6 applications, and, if 

the statutory criteria are met, authorize 

the production or consumption, as 

applicable, of any regulated substance 

used in the application for renewable 

periods of not more than 5 years for 

exclusive use in the application. 

Alternatives: The alternatives for 

establishing a subsection (e)(4)(B) rule 

are, for each application, to either 

authorize the production or 

consumption, as applicable, of any 

regulated substance used in an 

application for a renewable period of 

not more than 5 years for exclusive use 

in that application or to not extend the 

provisions under (e)(4)(B)(iv). 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: EPA is 

still evaluating the potential costs and 

benefits of this prospective action, but 

does not expect that this rule will have 

a significant economic effect. 

Risks: EPA is still evaluating the 

scope and risks associated with a 

prospective rule. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 07/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal. 

Agency Contact: Nikita Naik, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Air and Radiation, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9480 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Washington, DC 20460, Phone: 202 564– 

4957, Email: naik.nikita@epa.gov. 

RIN: 2060–AV98 

EAP—OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY 

AND POLLUTION PREVENTION 

(OCSPP) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

195. 1-Bromopropane (1-BP);

Regulation Under the Toxic Substances

Control Act (TSCA) [2070–AK73]

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2605 Toxic 

Substances Control Act 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 751. 

Legal Deadline: NPRM, Statutory, 

August 12, 2021, TSCA section 6(c). 

Final, Statutory, August 12, 2022, 

TSCA section 6(c). 

Abstract: This proposed rulemaking 

will address the unreasonable risk of 

injury to health presented by 1- 

bromopropane (1–BP). Section 6(a) of 

the Toxic Substances Control Act 

(TSCA) requires EPA address by rule 

any unreasonable risk identified in a 

TSCA risk evaluation and apply 

requirements to the extent necessary so 

the chemical no longer presents 

unreasonable risk. The Agency’s 

development of this rule incorporates 

significant stakeholder outreach and 

public participation, including over 40 

external meetings as well as required 

Federalism, Tribal, and Environmental 

Justice consultations and a Small 

Businesses Advocacy Review Panel. 

EPA’s risk evaluation for 1–BP, 

describing the conditions of use, is in 

docket EPA–HQ–OPPT–2019–0235, 

with the 2022 unreasonable risk 

determination and additional materials 

in docket EPA–HQ–OPPT–2016–0741. 

Statement of Need: This rulemaking is 

needed to address the unreasonable risk 

of 1-bromopropane that were identified 

following a risk evaluation completed 

under TSCA section 6(b). EPA reviewed 

the exposures and hazards of 1- 

bromopropane, the magnitude of risk, 

exposed populations, severity of the 

hazard, uncertainties, and other factors. 

EPA sought input from the public and 

peer reviewers as required by TSCA and 

associated regulations. 

Summary of Legal Basis: In 

accordance with TSCA section 6(a), if 

EPA determines in a final risk 

evaluation completed under TSCA 6(b) 

that the manufacture, processing, 

distribution in commerce, use, or 

disposal of a chemical substance or 

mixture, or that any combination of 

such activities, presents an 

unreasonable risk of injury to health or 

the environment, the Agency must issue 

regulations requiring one or more of the 

following actions to the extent necessary 

so that the chemical substance no longer 

presents an unreasonable risk: (1) 

Prohibit or otherwise restrict 

manufacture, processing, or distribution 

in commerce of the substance, or limit 

the amount of the substance which may 

be manufactured, processed, or 

distributed in commerce; (2) Prohibit or 

otherwise restrict manufacture, 

processing, or distribution in commerce 

of the substance for a particular use or 

for a particular use above a set 

concentration, or limit the amount of 

the substance which may be 

manufactured, processed, or distributed 

in commerce for a particular use or for 

a particular use above a set 

concentration; (3) Require minimum 

warnings and instructions with respect 

to use, distribution in commerce, or 

disposal; (4) Require recordkeeping or 

testing by manufacturers or processors; 

(5) Prohibit or regulate any manner or

method of commercial use; (6) Prohibit

or regulate any manner or method of

disposal for commercial purposes; and/

or (7) Direct manufacturers or

processors to give notice of the

unreasonable risk to distributors, other

persons, and the public and replace or

repurchase the substance.

Alternatives: TSCA section 6(a) 

requires EPA to address by rule 

chemical substances that the Agency 

determines present unreasonable risk 

upon completion of a final risk 

evaluation. As required under TSCA 

section 6(c), EPA will consider one or 

more primary alternative regulatory 

actions as part of the development of a 

proposed rule. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: EPA 

will prepare a regulatory impact 

analysis as the Agency develops the 

proposed rule. 

Risks: The 2020 Risk Evaluation for 

1–BP identified potential health effects 

from short- and long-term exposure to 

1–BP including non-cancer adverse 

health effects such as liver toxicity, 

kidney toxicity, reproductive toxicity, 

developmental toxicity, and 

neurotoxicity. Relative to cancer effects, 

the risk evaluation identified cancers 

hazards from carcinogenicity as well as 

genotoxicity, particularly for skin, 

intestinal, and lung tumors. For acute 

inhalation and dermal exposure 

scenarios, EPA identified non-cancer 

developmental effects (i.e., decreased 

live litter size, and increases in post 

implantation loss) as the most sensitive 

endpoints. In the final 2022 

Unreasonable Risk Determination, EPA 

determined that 1–BP presents an 

unreasonable risk of injury to health. 

The unreasonable risk determination, 

based on developmental toxicity and 

cancer, is driven by risks to workers and 

occupational non-users (workers who 

do not directly handle the chemical but 

perform work in an area where the 

chemical is present) due to occupational 

exposures to 1–BP (i.e., during 

manufacture, processing, industrial and 

commercial uses, and disposal); and to 

consumers and bystanders associated 

with consumer uses of 1–BP due to 

exposures from consumer use of 1–BP 

and 1–BP-containing products. EPA 

must issue risk management 

requirements so that this chemical 

substance no longer presents an 

unreasonable risk. For more 

information, visit: https://www.epa.gov/ 

assessing-and-managing-chemicalsunder-tsca/risk-management-existingchemicals-under-tsca. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite

NPRM .................. 01/00/24 

Final Rule ............ 05/00/25 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

State. 

Federalism: This action may have 

federalism implications as defined in 

E.O. 13132. 

International Impacts: This regulatory 

action will be likely to have 

international trade and investment 

effects, or otherwise be of international 

interest. 

Additional Information: EPA–HQ– 

OPPT–2020–0471. 

Sectors Affected: 325 Chemical 

Manufacturing. 

URL For More Information: https://

www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managingchemicals-under-tsca/risk-evaluation-1- 

bromopropane-1-bp. 

Agency Contact: Amy Shuman, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution 

Prevention, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW, Mail Code 7404M, Washington, DC 

20460, Phone: 202 564–2978, Email: 

shuman.amy@epa.gov. 

Joel Wolf, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Office of Chemical Safety and 

Pollution Prevention, 1200 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Mail Code 

7404M, Washington, DC 20460, Phone: 

202 564–0432, Email: wolf.joel@epa.gov. 

RIN: 2070–AK73 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9481 

EPA—OCSPP 

196. Trichloroethylene; Regulation 

Under the Toxic Substances Control Act 

(TSCA) [2070–AK83] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2605 Toxic 

Substances Control Act 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 751. 

Legal Deadline: NPRM, Statutory, 

November 30, 2021, TSCA section 6(c). 

Final, Statutory, November 30, 2022, 

TSCA section 6(c). 

Abstract: On October 31, 2023, the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

proposed to address the unreasonable 

risk of injury to human health presented 

by trichloroethylene (TCE) under its 

conditions of use as documented in 

EPA’s November 2020 Risk Evaluation 

for TCE and January 2023 revised 

Unreasonable Risk Determination for 

TCE pursuant to the Toxic Substances 

Control Act (TSCA). TCE is widely used 

as a solvent in a variety of industrial, 

commercial and consumer applications 

including for hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) 

production, vapor and aerosol 

degreasing, and in lubricants, greases, 

adhesives, and sealants. TSCA requires 

that when EPA determines a chemical 

substance presents unreasonable risk 

that EPA address by rule the 

unreasonable risk of injury to health or 

the environment and apply 

requirements to the extent necessary so 

the chemical no longer presents 

unreasonable risk. EPA determined that 

TCE presents an unreasonable risk of 

injury to health due to the significant 

adverse health effects associated with 

exposure to TCE, including non-cancer 

effects (liver toxicity, kidney toxicity, 

neurotoxicity, immunotoxicity, 

reproductive toxicity, and 

developmental toxicity) as well as 

cancer (liver, kidney, and non-Hodgkin 

lymphoma) from chronic inhalation and 

dermal exposures to TCE. TCE is a 

neurotoxicant and is carcinogenic to 

humans by all routes of exposure. The 

most sensitive adverse effects of TCE 

exposure are non-cancer effects 

(developmental toxicity and 

immunosuppression) for acute 

exposures and developmental toxicity 

and autoimmunity for chronic 

exposures. To address the identified 

unreasonable risk, EPA proposed to: 

prohibit all manufacture (including 

import), processing, and distribution in 

commerce of TCE and industrial and 

commercial use of TCE for all uses, with 

longer compliance timeframes and 

workplace controls for certain 

processing and industrial and 

commercial uses (including proposed 

phaseouts and time-limited 

exemptions); prohibit the disposal of 

TCE to industrial pre-treatment, 

industrial treatment, or publicly owned 

treatment works, with a time-limited 

exemption for cleanup projects; and 

establish recordkeeping and 

downstream notification requirements. 

The Agency’s development of this rule 

incorporates significant stakeholder 

outreach and public participation, 

including over 40 external meetings as 

well as required Federalism, Tribal, and 

Environmental Justice consultations and 

a Small Businesses Advocacy Review 

Panel. EPA’s risk evaluation for TCE, 

describing TCE’s conditions of use is in 

docket EPA–HQ–OPPT–2019–0500, 

with the January 2023 unreasonable risk 

determination and additional materials 

in docket EPA–HQ–OPPT–2016– 

0737.55 

Statement of Need: This rulemaking is 

needed to address the unreasonable risk 

from TCE that was identified following 

a risk evaluation completed under 

TSCA section 6(b). EPA reviewed the 

exposures and hazards of TCE, the 

magnitude of risk, exposed populations, 

severity of the hazard, uncertainties, 

and other factors. EPA sought input 

from the public and peer reviewers as 

required by TSCA and associated 

regulations. 

Summary of Legal Basis: In 

accordance with TSCA section 6(a), if 

EPA determines in a final risk 

evaluation completed under TSCA 6(b) 

that the manufacture, processing, 

distribution in commerce, use, or 

disposal of a chemical substance or 

mixture, or that any combination of 

such activities, presents an 

unreasonable risk of injury to health or 

the environment, the Agency must issue 

regulations requiring one or more of the 

following actions to the extent necessary 

so that the chemical substance no longer 

presents an unreasonable risk: (1) 

Prohibit or otherwise restrict 

manufacture, processing, or distribution 

in commerce of the substance, or limit 

the amount of the substance which may 

be manufactured, processed, or 

distributed in commerce; (2) Prohibit or 

otherwise restrict manufacture, 

processing, or distribution in commerce 

of the substance for a particular use or 

for a particular use above a set 

concentration, or limit the amount of 

the substance which may be 

manufactured, processed, or distributed 

in commerce for a particular use or for 

a particular use above a set 

concentration; (3) Require minimum 

warnings and instructions with respect 

to use, distribution in commerce, or 

disposal; (4) Require recordkeeping or 

testing by manufacturers or processors; 

(5) Prohibit or regulate any manner or 

method of commercial use; (6) Prohibit 

or regulate any manner or method of 

disposal for commercial purposes; and/ 

or (7) Direct manufacturers or 

processors to give notice of the 

unreasonable risk to distributors, other 

persons, and the public and replace or 

repurchase the substance if required. 

Alternatives: TSCA section 6(a) 

requires EPA to address by rule 

chemical substances that the Agency 

determines present unreasonable risk 

upon completion of a final risk 

evaluation. TSCA section 6(c) requires 

that EPA consider one or more primary 

alternative regulatory actions as part of 

the development of a proposed rule 

under TSCA section 6(a). The primary 

alternative regulatory action would 

prohibit the manufacture (including 

import) and processing of TCE for all 

uses; prohibit the distribution in 

commerce and industrial and 

commercial use of TCE, as well as 

prohibitions on the disposal of TCE to 

industrial pre-treatment, industrial 

treatment, or publicly owned treatment 

works. The primary alternative 

regulatory action would involve longer 

timeframes for the prohibition of some 

industrial and commercial uses and for 

the associated manufacturing (including 

import) and processing. For all 

manufacturing (including import), 

processing, and industrial and 

commercial use of TCE that would 

continue more than one year after the 

publication of the final rule, workplace 

chemical protection program (WCPP) 

requirements, which would include a 

requirement to meet inhalation 

exposure concentration limits and 

exposure monitoring as well as 

requirements to reduce dermal 

exposures to TCE for certain continued 

conditions of use of TCE would be in 

effect until the respective prohibition 

compliance dates or, if applicable, 

expiration of the TSCA section 6(g) 

exemptions. The inhalation exposure 

concentration limits under the primary 

alternative regulatory action would be 

based on the immunotoxicity endpoint 

instead of the developmental toxicity 

endpoint as under the proposed 

regulatory action. The primary 

alternative regulatory action provides 

certain time-limited exemptions from 

requirements for uses of TCE that are 

critical or essential. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

monetized costs for this proposed rule 

are estimated to range from $33.1 

million annualized over 20 years at a 

3% discount rate and $40.5 million 

annualized over 20 years at a 7% 

discount rate. The monetized benefits 

are estimated to be $18.0 to $21.5 

million annualized over 20 years at a 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9482 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

3% discount rate and $8.2 million to 

$10.3 million annualized over 20 years 

at a 7% discount rate. EPA believes that 

the balance of costs and benefits of this 

proposal cannot be fairly described 

without considering the additional, nonmonetized benefits of mitigating the 

non-cancer adverse effects. These effects 

may include neurotoxicity, kidney 

toxicity, liver toxicity, immunotoxicity 

effects, reproductive effects, and 

developmental effects. 

Risks: The 2020 Risk Evaluation for 

TCE identified significant adverse 

health effects associated with short- and 

long-term exposure to TCE, including 

non-cancer effects (immunosuppression 

and developmental toxicity) from acute 

inhalation exposures and dermal 

exposures, and non-cancer effects (liver 

toxicity, kidney toxicity, neurotoxicity, 

autoimmunity, reproductive toxicity, 

and developmental toxicity) and cancer 

(liver, kidney, and non-Hodgkin 

lymphoma) from chronic inhalation 

exposures to TCE. In the 2023 Final 

Unreasonable Risk Determination, EPA 

determined that TCE presents an 

unreasonable risk of injury to health. 

The unreasonable risk determination, 

based on immunotoxicity and cancer, is 

driven by risks to workers and ONUs 

(workers who do not directly handle the 

chemical but perform work in an area 

where the chemical is present) due to 

occupational exposures to TCE (i.e., 

during manufacture, processing, 

industrial and commercial uses, and 

disposal); and to consumers and 

bystanders associated with consumer 

uses of TCE due to exposures from 

consumer use of TCE and TCEcontaining products. For more 

information, visit: https://www.epa.gov/ 

assessing-and-managing-chemicalsunder-tsca/risk-management-existingchemicals-under-tsca. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 10/31/23 88 FR 74712 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

12/15/23 

Final Rule ............ 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

State. 

Federalism: This action may have 

federalism implications as defined in 

E.O. 13132. 

International Impacts: This regulatory 

action will be likely to have 

international trade and investment 

effects, or otherwise be of international 

interest. 

Additional Information: EPA–HQ– 

OPPT–2020–0642. 

Sectors Affected: 325 Chemical 

Manufacturing. 

URL For More Information: https://

www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managingchemicals-under-tsca/risk-managementtrichloroethylene-tce. 

Agency Contact: Gabriela Rossner, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution 

Prevention, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW, Mail Code 7404M, Washington, DC 

20460, Phone: 202 564–2426, Email: 

rossner.gabriela@epa.gov. 

Joel Wolf, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Office of Chemical Safety and 

Pollution Prevention, 1200 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Mail Code 

7404M, Washington, DC 20460, Phone: 

202 564–0432, Email: wolf.joel@epa.gov. 

RIN: 2070–AK83 

EPA—OCSPP 

197. N-Methylpyrrolidone (NMP);

Regulation Under the Toxic Substances

Control Act (TSCA) [2070–AK85]

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2605 Toxic 

Substances Control Act 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 751. 

Legal Deadline: NPRM, Statutory, 

December 23, 2021, TSCA sec. 6(c). 

Final, Statutory, December 23, 2022, 

TSCA sec. 6(c). 

Abstract: This proposed rulemaking 

will address the unreasonable risk of 

injury to health presented by nmethylpyrrolidone (NMP). Section 6(a) 

of the Toxic Substances Control Act 

(TSCA) requires EPA to address by rule 

any unreasonable risk identified in a 

TSCA section 6(b) risk evaluation by 

applying requirements to the extent 

necessary so the chemical no longer 

presents unreasonable risk. The 

Agency’s development of this rule 

incorporates significant stakeholder 

outreach and public participation, 

including over 40 external meetings as 

well as required Federalism, Tribal, and 

Environmental Justice consultations and 

a Small Businesses Advocacy Review 

Panel. EPA’s 2020 risk evaluation for 

NMP, describing its conditions of use is 

in docket EPA–HQ–OPPT–2019–0236, 

with the 2022 revised unreasonable risk 

determination and additional materials 

in docket EPA–HQ–OPPT–2016–0743.6 

Statement of Need: This rulemaking is 

needed to address the unreasonable risk 

from NMP that were identified 

following a risk evaluation completed 

under TSCA section 6(b). EPA reviewed 

the exposures and hazards of NMP, the 

magnitude of risk, exposed populations, 

severity of the hazard, uncertainties, 

and other factors. EPA sought input 

from the public and peer reviewers as 

required by TSCA and associated 

regulations. 

Summary of Legal Basis: In 

accordance with TSCA section 6(a), if 

EPA determines in a final risk 

evaluation completed under TSCA 6(b) 

that the manufacture, processing, 

distribution in commerce, use, or 

disposal of a chemical substance or 

mixture, or that any combination of 

such activities, presents an 

unreasonable risk of injury to health or 

the environment, the Agency must issue 

regulations requiring one or more of the 

following actions to the extent necessary 

so that the chemical substance no longer 

presents an unreasonable risk: (1) 

Prohibit or otherwise restrict 

manufacture, processing, or distribution 

in commerce of the substance, or limit 

the amount of the substance which may 

be manufactured, processed, or 

distributed in commerce; (2) Prohibit or 

otherwise restrict manufacture, 

processing, or distribution in commerce 

of the substance for a particular use or 

for a particular use above a set 

concentration, or limit the amount of 

the substance which may be 

manufactured, processed, or distributed 

in commerce for a particular use or for 

a particular use above a set 

concentration; (3) Require minimum 

warnings and instructions with respect 

to use, distribution in commerce, or 

disposal; (4) Require recordkeeping or 

testing by manufacturers or processors; 

(5) Prohibit or regulate any manner or

method of commercial use; (6) Prohibit

or regulate any manner or method of

disposal for commercial purposes; and/

or (7) Direct manufacturers or

processors to give notice of the

unreasonable risk to distributors, other

persons, and the public and replace or

repurchase the substance if required.

Alternatives: TSCA section 6(a) 

requires EPA to address by rule 

chemical substances that the Agency 

determines present unreasonable risk 

upon completion of a final risk 

evaluation. As required under TSCA 

section 6(c), EPA will consider one or 

more primary alternative regulatory 

actions as part of the development of a 

proposed rule. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: EPA 

will prepare an economic analysis as the 

Agency develops the proposed rule. 

Risks: The 2020 Risk Evaluation for 

NMP identified potential health effects 

for NMP including non-cancer adverse 

health effects such as liver toxicity, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9483 

kidney toxicity, immunotoxicity, 

reproductive toxicity, developmental 

toxicity, neurotoxicity, and irritation 

and sensitization. In the 2022 Final 

Unreasonable Risk Determination, EPA 

determined that NMP presents an 

unreasonable risk of injury to health. 

The unreasonable risk determination is 

driven by risks to workers due to 

occupational exposures to NMP (i.e., 

during manufacture, processing, 

industrial and commercial uses, and 

disposal); and to consumers due to 

exposures from consumer use of NMP 

and NMP-containing products. For more 

information, visit: https://www.epa.gov/ 

assessing-and-managing-chemicalsunder-tsca/risk-management-existingchemicals-under-tsca. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 02/00/24 

Final Rule ............ 12/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

State, Tribal. 

Federalism: This action may have 

federalism implications as defined in 

E.O. 13132. 

International Impacts: This regulatory 

action will be likely to have 

international trade and investment 

effects, or otherwise be of international 

interest. 

Additional Information: EPA–HQ– 

OPPT–2020–0744. 

Sectors Affected: 325 Chemical 

Manufacturing. 

URL For More Information: https://

www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managingchemicals-under-tsca/risk-managementn-methylpyrrolidone-nmp. 

Agency Contact: Clara Hull, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution 

Prevention, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW, Mail Code 7404M, Washington, DC 

20460, Phone: 202 564–3954, Email: 

hull.clara@epa.gov. 

Joel Wolf, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Office of Chemical Safety and 

Pollution Prevention, 1200 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Mail Code 

7404M, Washington, DC 20460, Phone: 

202 564–0432, Email: wolf.joel@epa.gov. 

RIN: 2070–AK85 

EPA—OCSPP 

198. Procedures for Chemical Risk

Evaluation Under the Toxic Substances

Control Act (TSCA) [2070–AK90]

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2605 Toxic 

Substances Control Act 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 702. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: As required under section 

6(b)(4) of the Toxic Substances Control 

Act (TSCA), EPA published a final rule 

in 2017 that established a process for 

conducting risk evaluations to 

determine whether a chemical 

substance presents an unreasonable risk 

of injury to health or the environment, 

without consideration of costs or other 

non-risk factors, including an 

unreasonable risk to a potentially 

exposed or susceptible subpopulation, 

under the conditions of use. This 

process incorporates the science 

requirements of the amended statute, 

including best available science and 

weight of the scientific evidence. The 

final rule established the steps of a risk 

evaluation process including: scope, 

hazard assessment, exposure 

assessment, risk characterization, and 

risk determination. The Agency has 

reconsidered the procedural framework 

rule for conducting such risk 

evaluations and determined that certain 

aspects of that framework should be 

revised to better align with applicable 

court decisions and the statutory text, to 

reflect the Agency’s experience 

implementing the risk evaluation 

program following enactment of the 

2016 TSCA amendments, and to allow 

for consideration of future scientific 

advances in the risk evaluation process 

without need to further amend the 

Agency’s procedural rule. 

Statement of Need: EPA’s 2017 final 

rule that established a process for 

conducting risk evaluations under 

TSCA was challenged by several nongovernmental organizations. In 

November 2019, the court in Safer 

Chemicals, Healthy Families v. U.S. 

EPA, 943 F.3d 397 (9th Cir. 2019) 

remanded certain provisions of the rule 

to EPA. Additionally, the 2017 rule was 

identified for review in accordance with 

Executive Order 13990, Protecting 

Public Health and the Environment and 

Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate 

Crisis (86 FR 7037, January 25, 2021). 

Consistent with the Court’s direction 

and opinion in Safer Chemicals, 

Healthy Families v. U.S. EPA, and 

incorporating lessons learned in the 

process carrying out the first ten TSCA 

risk evaluations, the Agency is now 

considering revisions to the procedural 

framework and will solicit public 

comment on those changes through a 

notice of proposed rulemaking. 

Summary of Legal Basis: TSCA 

section 6(b)(4) directed EPA to establish 

the process for conducting risk 

evaluations on chemical substances 

under TSCA to identify any 

unreasonable risk of injury to health or 

the environment. Agencies have 

inherent authority to reconsider past 

decisions and to revise, replace, or 

repeal a decision to the extent permitted 

by law and supported by a reasoned 

explanation. FCC v. Fox Television 

Stations, Inc., 556 U.S. 502, 515 (2009). 

EPA is now exercising its inherent 

authority to reconsider past decisions 

and as such is considering revisions to 

that final rule based on the Court’s 

opinion in Safer Chemicals, Healthy 

Families v. U.S. EPA to ensure that 

TSCA risk evaluations are supported by 

the best available science, aligned with 

the statutory requirements, and 

consistent with Congress’ intent in the 

2016 TSCA amendments. 

Alternatives: Alternatives will not be 

developed as part of the development of 

a proposed rule. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: EPA 

will analyze the incremental impacts 

associated with proposed amendments 

to requirements for manufacturerrequested risk evaluations as part of the 

development of a proposed rule. 

Risks: This is a procedural rule related 

to risk evaluations and is not intended 

to directly address any particular risk. 

However, the rule would establish 

procedures by which EPA will evaluate 

whether a chemical substance presents 

an unreasonable risk of injury to health 

or the environment, including 

unreasonable risk to a potentially 

exposed or susceptible subpopulation. 

Rigorous procedures that support 

accurate identification of unreasonable 

risk are necessary to inform subsequent 

risk management action. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite

NPRM .................. 10/30/23 88 FR 74292 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

12/14/23 

Final Rule ............ 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Additional Information: 

Sectors Affected: 325 Chemical 

Manufacturing; 324110 Petroleum 

Refineries. 

URL For More Information: https://

www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managingchemicals-under-tsca. 

Agency Contact: Susanna Blair, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution 

Prevention, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW, Mail Code 7401M, Washington, DC 

20460, Phone: 202 564–4371, Email: 

blair.susanna@epa.gov. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I 
9484 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Ryan Schmit, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Chemical 

Safety and Pollution Prevention, 1200 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Mail Code 

7101M, Washington, DC 20460, Phone: 

202 564–0610, Fax: 202 566–0471, 

Email: schmit.ryan@epa.gov. 

RIN: 2070–AK90 

EPA—OFFICE OF LAND AND 

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT (OLEM) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

199. Revisions to Standards for the 

Open Burning/Open Detonation of 

Waste Explosives [2050–AH24] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 40 CFR 131; 42 

U.S.C. 6924 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 264 and 265. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This rulemaking will 

consider revisions to the regulations 

that allow for the open burning and 

detonation (OB/OD) of waste explosives. 

The allowance or ‘‘variance’’ to the 

prohibition on the open burning of 

hazardous waste was established at a 

time when there were no alternatives to 

the safe treatment of waste explosives. 

However, recent findings from the 

National Academies of Sciences, 

Engineering, and Medicine and the EPA 

have identified safe alternatives that are 

potentially available to many energetic/ 

explosive waste streams. Because there 

are potential safe alternatives in use 

today that capture and treat emissions 

prior to release, the EPA is considering 

revising regulations to promote the 

broader use of these alternatives, where 

applicable. As part of the rule 

development process, EPA has held two 

rounds of engagement with states, 

territories, tribes, environmental and 

community groups, and owners/ 

operators of OB/OD units. 

Statement of Need: Technological 

advances have been made since the 

1980 Interim Status regulations were 

issued that banned the open burning of 

hazardous wastes but created an 

exception to allow open burning/open 

detonation (OB/OD) of waste explosives 

due to a lack of other safe modes of 

treatment. In 2019, EPA and the 

National Academies of Science, 

Engineering, and Medicine published 

reports documenting safe and available 

alternative treatment technologies that 

could potentially be used in lieu of OB/ 

OD. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The 

proposed rule would be established 

under the authority of the Solid Waste 

Disposal Act of 1970, as amended by the 

Resource Conservation and Recovery 

Act of 1976 (RCRA), as amended by the 

Hazardous and Solid Waste 

Amendments of 1984 (HWSA). 

Alternatives: Based on recent 

information regarding availability of 

safe alternatives, we are revising the 

existing regulation to explicitly state 

how a demonstration of eligibility must 

be made. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

Agency will evaluate anticipated costs 

and benefits as part of the rule 

development process. 

Risks: The Agency will evaluate risk 

reductions and impacts as part of the 

rule development process. It is currently 

early in the process to make such 

determinations. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 11/00/23 

Final Rule ............ 09/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State. 

Federalism: Undetermined. 

Additional Information: 

Sectors Affected: 325920 Explosives 

Manufacturing; 562211 Hazardous 

Waste Treatment and Disposal; 926150 

Regulation, Licensing, and Inspection of 

Miscellaneous Commercial Sectors; 

56291 Remediation Services; 562910 

Remediation Services; 56221 Waste 

Treatment and Disposal. 

Agency Contact: Paul Diss, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Land and Emergency 

Management, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Avenue NW, Mail Code 5303T, 

Washington, DC 20460, Phone: 202 566– 

0321, Email: diss.paul@epa.gov. 

Sasha Gerhard, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Land and 

Emergency Management, 1200 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Mail Code 

5304T, Washington, DC 20460, Phone: 

202 566–0346, Fax: 703 308–8686, 

Email: gerhard.sasha@epa.gov. 

RIN: 2050–AH24 

EPA—OLEM 

200. Listing of PFOA, PFOS, PFBS, and 

GenX as Resource Conservation and 

Recovery Act (RCRA) Hazardous 

Constituents [2050–AH26] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6912 (a); 42 

U.S.C. 6921; 42 U.S.C. 6924 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 261. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: Based on public health and 

environmental protection concerns and 

in response to several petitions which 

requested EPA to take regulatory action 

on PFAS under RCRA, EPA is 

evaluating the existing toxicity and 

health effects data on four PFAS 

constituents to determine if they should 

be listed as RCRA Hazardous 

Constituents. If the existing data for the 

four PFAS constituents support listing 

any or all of these constituents as RCRA 

hazardous constituents, EPA will 

propose to list the constituents in a 

Federal Register notice for public 

comment. The four PFAS chemicals 

EPA will evaluate are: perfluorooctanoic 

acid (PFOA), perfluorooctane sulfonic 

acid (PFOS), perfluorobutane sulfonic 

acid (PFBS), hexafluoropropylene oxide 

dimer acid (HFPO–DA or GenX). EPA 

has communicated with interested 

stakeholders about this action and will 

do conduct additional outreach with the 

public, organizations, states, tribal 

groups, and affected parties following 

publication of a proposed rule 

Statement of Need: EPA has received 

three petitions recently requesting 

regulatory action on PFAS under the 

Resource Conservation and Recovery 

Act (RCRA), including a petition from 

the Governor of New Mexico on June 23, 

2021. The New Mexico petition 

incorporated by reference the two other 

petitions received previously by EPA 

from Public Employees for 

Environmental Responsibility (PEER) 

and the Environmental Law Clinic at the 

University of California, Berkeley 

School of Law (et al.). This proposed 

rulemaking is in response to the three 

petitions and, if finalized, will list 

specific PFAS as RCRA hazardous 

constituents subject to corrective action 

requirements at hazardous waste 

treatment, storage, and disposal 

facilities (TSDFs). 

Summary of Legal Basis: EPA has 

received three petitions recently 

requesting regulatory action on PFAS 

under the Resource Conservation and 

Recovery Act (RCRA), including a 

petition from the Governor of New 

Mexico on June 23, 2021. The New 

Mexico petition incorporated by 

reference the two other petitions 

received previously by EPA from Public 

Employees for Environmental 

Responsibility (PEER) and the 

Environmental Law Clinic at the 

University of California, Berkeley 

School of Law (et al.). This proposed 

rulemaking is in response to the three 

petitions and, if finalized, will list 

specific PFAS as RCRA hazardous 

constituents subject to corrective action 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9485 

requirements at hazardous waste 

treatment, storage, and disposal 

facilities (TSDFs). 

Alternatives: We have reviewed and 

evaluated the toxicity and health effects 

information for specific PFAS to 

determine if they should be proposed to 

be listed as RCRA hazardous 

constituents on Appendix VIII, and 

there are no other alternatives. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

Agency will evaluate anticipated costs 

and benefits as part of the rule 

development process. 

Risks: The Agency will evaluate risk 

reductions and impacts as part of the 

rule development process. It is currently 

too early in the process to make such 

determinations. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 12/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: State, 

Federal. 

Agency Contact: Narendra Chaudhari, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Land and Emergency 

Management, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Avenue NW, Mail Code 5304T, 

Washington, DC 20460, Phone: 202 566– 

0495, Email: chaudhari.narendra@

epa.gov. 

Daniel Lowrey, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Land and 

Emergency Management, 1200 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Mail Code 

5304T, Washington, DC 20460, Phone: 

202 566–1015, Email: lowrey.daniel@

epa.gov. 

RIN: 2050–AH26 

EPA—OLEM 

201. Definition of Hazardous Waste 

Applicable to Corrective Action for 

Solid Waste Management Units [2050– 

AH27] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6921; 42 

U.S.C. 6912 (a); 42 U.S.C. 6938; 42 

U.S.C. 6934; 42 U.S.C. 6939g; 42 U.S.C. 

6937; 42 U.S.C. 6939; 42 U.S.C. 6935; 42 

U.S.C. 6974; 42 U.S.C. 6924; 42 U.S.C. 

6925; 42 U.S.C. 6927 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 260; 40 CFR 

261; 40 CFR 270. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: EPA is considering a 

proposed rule that would modify the 

regulations at 40 CFR part 260, 261 and 

270 to clarify that the definition of 

hazardous waste found in RCRA section 

1004(5) is applicable to corrective action 

for releases from solid waste 

management units. The proposed rule 

would more clearly implement EPA’s 

longstanding interpretation of its 

authority under RCRA section 3004(u) 

and (v). 

Statement of Need: This regulatory 

modification is necessary so that 40 CFR 

264.101 appropriately reflects the scope 

of corrective action cleanup 

requirements for hazardous waste 

treatment, storage, and disposal 

facilities as required by RCRA section 

3004(u) and (v). The revision is 

expected to clarify that releases of 

hazardous wastes that are not regulatory 

hazardous wastes but meet the 

definition of hazardous waste in RCRA 

section 1004(5), must be addressed in 

the same manner as regulatory 

hazardous wastes under the corrective 

action program. This rulemaking is 

expected to impact the release of certain 

PFAS substances and is included as part 

of EPA’s broader PFAS Strategic 

Roadmap. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The 

proposed rule would be established 

under the authority of sections 3004(u) 

and (v) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act 

of 1965, as amended by subsequent 

enactments including the Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 

(RCRA), as amended by the Hazardous 

and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 

(HWSA). 

Alternatives: We have reviewed the 

applicable regulations and no 

alternatives have been identified. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

Agency will evaluate anticipated costs 

and benefits as part of the rule 

development process. 

Risks: The Agency will evaluate risk 

reductions and impacts as part of the 

rule development process. It is currently 

too early in the process to make such 

determinations. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 11/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

State. 

Agency Contact: Barbara Foster, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Land and Emergency 

Management, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460, 

Phone: 202 566–0382, Email: 

foster.barbara@epa.gov. 

RIN: 2050–AH27 

EPA—OFFICE OF WATER (OW) 

Proposed Rule Stage 

202. National Primary Drinking Water 

Regulations for Lead and Copper: 

Improvements (LCRI) [2040–AG16] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Unfunded Mandates: This action may 

affect State, local or tribal governments 

and the private sector. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 300f et seq. 

Safe Drinking Water Act 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 141; 40 CFR 

142. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: The Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) published the 

final Lead and Copper Rule Revision 

(LCRR) on January 15, 2021. EPA 

reviewed the LCRR and decided to 

initiate a new rulemaking process to 

improve the rule. This new National 

Primary Drinking Water Regulation is 

called the Lead and Copper Rule 

Improvements (LCRI). EPA is 

developing LCRI to strengthen the 

regulatory framework and address lead 

in drinking water. 

Statement of Need: The EPA 

promulgated the final Lead and Copper 

Rule Revision (LCRR) on January 15, 

2021 (86 FR 4198). Consistent with the 

directives of Executive Order 13990, the 

EPA is currently considering revising 

this rulemaking. The EPA will complete 

its review of the rule in accordance with 

those directives and conduct important 

consultations with affected parties. The 

EPA understands that the benefits of 

clean water are not shared equally by all 

communities and this review of the 

LCRR will be consistent with the policy 

aims set forth in Executive Order 13985, 

‘‘Advancing Racial Equity and Support 

for Underserved Communities through 

the Federal Government.’’ 

Summary of Legal Basis: The Safe 

Drinking Water Act, section 1412, 

National Primary Drinking Water 

Regulations, authorizes EPA to initiate 

the development of a rulemaking if the 

agency has determined that the action 

maintains or improves the public 

health. 

Alternatives: To be determined. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: To be 

determined. 

Risks: To be determined. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 11/00/23 

Final Rule ............ 10/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9486 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State, Tribal. 

Federalism: This action may have 

federalism implications as defined in 

E.O. 13132. 

Additional Information: 

Sectors Affected: 23711 Water and 

Sewer Line and Related Structures 

Construction; 2213 Water, Sewage and 

Other Systems. 

Agency Contact: Michael Goldberg, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Water, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Avenue NW, 4601M, Washington, DC 

20460, Phone: 202 564–1137, Email: 

goldberg.michael@epa.gov. 

Related RIN: Related to 2040–AF15 

RIN: 2040–AG16 

EPA—OFFICE OF AIR AND RADIATION 

(OAR) 

Final Rule Stage 

203. National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants: Ethylene 

Oxide Commercial Sterilization and 

Fumigation Operations [2060–AU37] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7607(d); 42 

U.S.C. 7414, 7601 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 63, subpart O. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: In December 1994, pursuant 

to section 112(d) of the Clean Air Act, 

EPA promulgated the National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

(NESHAP) for Ethylene Oxide (EtO) 

Commercial Sterilization and 

Fumigation Operations (59 FR 62585). 

The NESHAP established standards for 

both major and area sources. EPA 

completed a residual risk and 

technology review for the NESHAP in 

2006 and, at that time, concluded that 

no revisions to the standards were 

necessary. In this action, EPA will 

conduct the second technology review 

for the NESHAP, as required by law, 

and consider potential updates to the 

rule. To aid in this effort, EPA issued an 

advance notice of proposed rulemaking 

that solicited comment from 

stakeholders, undertook a Small 

Business Advocacy Review panel, 

which is needed when there is the 

potential for significant economic 

impacts to small businesses from any 

regulatory actions being considered, and 

has conducted outreach meetings within 

the communities affected by the highestrisk facilities as part of the development 

of this action. These meetings involved 

informing community members of the 

risk from EtO emissions and explaining 

how they can be involved in the rule 

writing process. EPA also held a 

national webinar on this proposal. 

Accommodations were made for 

Spanish-language speaking 

communities, which are 

disproportionately affected by these EtO 

emissions. This proposal also reflects 

feedback EPA has received from 

representatives from local and state 

governments. For more information, 

please visit https://www.epa.gov/ 

stationary-sources-air-pollution/ 

ethylene-oxide-emissions-standardssterilization-facilities. 

Statement of Need: The National Air 

Toxics Assessment (NATA) released in 

August 2018 identified ethylene oxide 

(EtO) emissions as a potential concern 

in several areas across the country. The 

latest NATA estimates that EtO 

significantly contributes to potential 

elevated cancer risks in some census 

tracts. These elevated risks are largely 

driven by an EPA risk value that was 

updated in December 2016. Further 

investigation on NATA inputs and 

results led to the EPA identifying 

commercial sterilization using EtO as a 

source category contributing to some of 

these risks. Over the past two years, the 

EPA has been gathering additional 

information to help evaluate 

opportunities to reduce EtO emissions 

in this source category through potential 

NESHAP revisions. In this rule, EPA 

will address EtO emissions from 

commercial sterilizers. 

Summary of Legal Basis: CAA section 

112, 42 U.S.C. 7412, provides the legal 

framework and basis for regulatory 

actions addressing emissions of 

hazardous air pollutants from stationary 

sources. CAA section 112(d)(6) requires 

EPA to review, and revise as necessary, 

emission standards promulgated under 

CAA section 112(d) at least every 8 

years, considering developments in 

practices, processes, and control 

technologies. 

Alternatives: EPA is evaluating 

various options for reducing EtO 

emissions from commercial sterilizers 

under the NESHAP, such as pollution 

control equipment, reducing fugitive 

emissions, or monitoring. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Based 

on conversations with regulated entities 

who have been working to reduce 

emissions, the potential costs of 

controlling some emissions sources 

could be substantial. 

Risks: As part of this rulemaking, EPA 

has been updating information 

regarding EtO emissions and the 

specific emission points within the 

source category. Preliminary analyses 

suggest that fugitive emissions from 

commercial sterilizers may substantially 

contribute to health risks associated 

with exposure to EtO. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

ANPRM ............... 12/12/19 84 FR 67889 

NPRM .................. 04/13/23 88 FR 22790 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

06/12/23 

Final Rule ............ 03/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Additional Information: EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2019–0178. 

Sectors Affected: 311423 Dried and 

Dehydrated Food Manufacturing; 33911 

Medical Equipment and Supplies 

Manufacturing; 561910 Packaging and 

Labeling Services; 325412 

Pharmaceutical Preparation 

Manufacturing; 311942 Spice and 

Extract Manufacturing. 

Agency Contact: Jon Witt, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Air and Radiation, 109 T.W. 

Alexander Drive, Mail Code E143–05, 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, 

Phone: 919 541–5645, Email: witt.jon@

epa.gov. 

Kusondra King, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Air and 

Radiation, Research Triangle Park, NC 

27711, Phone: 919 541–4373, Email: 

king.kusondra@epa.gov. 

RIN: 2060–AU37 

EPA—OAR 

204. New Source Performance 

Standards and Emission Guidelines for 

Crude Oil and Natural Gas Facilities: 

Climate Review [2060–AV16] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7411 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 60; subpart 

OOOO, OOOOa, OOOOb, OOOOc, KKK; 

app. K. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: On November 15, 2021, the 

EPA published a proposed rule to 

mitigate climate-destabilizing pollution 

and protect human health by reducing 

greenhouse gas and VOC emissions from 

the Crude Oil and Natural Gas source 

category (86 FR 63110). This action was 

in response to the January 20, 2021, 

Executive Order titled ‘‘Protecting 

Public Health and the Environment and 

Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate 

Crisis.’’ In the November 2021 Proposal, 

pursuant to CAA section 111 the EPA 

proposed new standards of performance 

for greenhouse gases (in the form of 

methane limitations) and volatile 

organic compounds emissions and 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9487 

Emission Guidelines for greenhouse gas 

emissions (in the form of methane 

limitations) from existing sources. The 

EPA also proposed several related 

actions stemming from the joint 

resolution of Congress, adopted on June 

30, 2021, under the Congressional 

Review Act disapproving the EPA’s 

final rule titled, Oil and Natural Gas 

Sector: ‘‘Emission Standards for New, 

Reconstructed, and Modified Sources 

Review,’’ September 14, 2020 (2020 

Policy Rule). Lastly, in the November 

2021 Proposal the EPA proposed a 

protocol under the general provisions 

for OGI. 

On December 6, 2022, the EPA 

published a supplemental proposed rule 

that was composed of two main actions 

(87 FR 74702). First, the EPA updated, 

strengthened, and expanded on the 

NSPS proposed in November 2021 

under CAA section 111(b) for 

greenhouse gases (in the form of 

methane limitations) and volatile 

organic compounds emissions from 

new, modified, and reconstructed 

facilities. Second, the EPA updated, 

strengthened, and expanded the 

presumptive standards proposed for the 

Emission Guidelines in the November 

2021 Proposal as part of the CAA 

section 111(d) EG for greenhouse gas 

emissions (in the form of methane 

limitations) from designated facilities. 

For purposes of the Emission 

Guidelines, the EPA also proposed the 

implementation requirements for states 

to limit greenhouse gas pollution (in the 

form of methane limitations) from 

designated facilities in the Crude Oil 

and Natural Gas source category under 

CAA section 111(d). The Agency 

expects to issue a final rule later in 

2023. 

Statement of Need: The final actions 

stem from the EPA’s authority and 

obligation under CAA section 111 to 

directly regulate categories of new 

stationary sources that cause or 

contribute to endangerment from air 

pollution and promulgate EG for states 

to follow in regulating existing sources 

(designated facilities) in the source 

category. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Clean Air 

Act section 111(b) provides the legal 

framework for establishing greenhouse 

gas emission standards (in the form of 

limitations on methane) and volatile 

organic compounds for new oil and 

natural gas sources. Clean Air Act 

section 111(d) provides the legal 

framework for establishing greenhouse 

gas emission standards (in the form of 

limitations on methane) for existing oil 

and natural gas sources. 

Alternatives: The EPA has evaluated 

several options for new and existing 

sources and will propose and solicit 

comment on those options. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

EPA’s regulatory impact analyses for the 

December 2022 supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking can be found at 

document number EPA–HQ–OAR– 

2021–0317–1566 of the public docket 

(https://www.regulations.gov/document/ 

EPA-HQ-OAR-2021-0317-1566). 

Risks: The EPA’s regulatory impact 

analyses for the December 2022 

supplemental notice of proposed 

rulemaking can be found at document 

number EPA–HQ–OAR–2021–0317– 

1566 of the public docket (https://

www.regulations.gov/document/EPAHQ-OAR-2021-0317-1566). 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 11/15/21 86 FR 63110 

Supplemental 

NPRM.

12/06/22 87 FR 74702 

Final Rule ............ 12/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State, Tribal. 

Energy Effects: Statement of Energy 

Effects planned as required by Executive 

Order 13211. 

International Impacts: This regulatory 

action will be likely to have 

international trade and investment 

effects, or otherwise be of international 

interest. 

Additional Information: EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2021–0317. https://www.epa.gov/ 

controlling-air-pollution-oil-andnatural-gas-industry. 

Sectors Affected: 213111 Drilling Oil 

and Gas Wells; 2111 Oil and Gas 

Extraction; 211 Oil and Gas Extraction; 

237120 Oil and Gas Pipeline and 

Related Structures Construction; 23712 

Oil and Gas Pipeline and Related 

Structures Construction; 213112 

Support Activities for Oil and Gas 

Operations. 

Agency Contact: Amy Hambrick, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Air and Radiation, 109 T.W. 

Alexander Drive, Mail Code E143–05, 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, 

Phone: 919 541–0964, Fax: 919 541– 

0516, Email: hambrick.amy@epa.gov. 

RIN: 2060–AV16 

EPA—OAR 

205. Revisions to the Air Emission 

Reporting Requirements (AERR) [2060– 

AV41] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Clean Air Act 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 51. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: On August 8, 2023 (88 FR 

54118), the EPA proposed new 

requirements to improve the quality and 

completeness of HAP emissions data 

from stationary sources and all pollutant 

emissions from prescribed fires. 

Specifically, the EPA is proposing to 

require certain sources report 

information regarding emission of 

hazardous air pollutants (HAP); certain 

sources to report criteria air pollutants, 

their precursors and HAP; and to 

require State, local, and certain tribal air 

agencies to report prescribed fire data. 

Further, EPA is considering how best to 

quantify emissions from intermittent 

sources such as backup generators; how 

to obtain data from permitted facilities 

in Indian Country when a Tribe is not 

required to report emissions data; and 

how to address known data gaps, 

streamline processes, and improve data 

quality, documentation, and 

transparency for nonpoint and mobile 

sources. The proposed revisions also 

include changes for reporting data on 

airports, rail yards, commercial marine 

vessels, locomotives, and nonpoint 

sources. This proposed action would 

allow for EPA to annually collect 

(starting in 2027), hazardous air 

pollutant (HAP) emissions data for point 

sources in addition to continuing the 

criteria air pollutant and precursor 

(CAP) collection in place under the 

existing AERR. The proposed 

amendments would ensure that EPA has 

sufficient information to identify and 

solve air quality and exposure problems 

and ensure that communities have the 

data needed to understand significant 

environmental risks that may be 

impacting them. 

Statement of Need: Since 2015, many 

aspects of emissions data collection and 

use have evolved. The EPA has 

continued to review hazardous air 

pollutant (HAP) emissions levels and 

associated public health risk through 

the Residual Risk and Technology (RTR) 

program, which in many cases has 

required Information Collection 

Requests (ICRs) under Section 114 of the 

Act. Such collection efforts have proven 

very time consuming and limited EPA’s 

ability to act quickly. Furthermore, as 

the EPA gains insight into the risks 

posed by certain chemicals, such as 

Ethylene Oxide, we have found 

ourselves limited by the data available 

on emissions sources. New compounds 

continue to be identified as public 

health threats, such as per- and 

polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), 

which may be listed as HAPs in the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
9488 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

future. Currently, States are required to 

report the emissions from sources in 

their state to EPA. In practice, that has 

meant emissions are reported only for 

facilities permitted at the state level. 

Facilities permitted at the federal level 

technically do not fall under the 

reporting requirements, and 

consequently, some never report 

emissions to the EPA, which does not 

allow for proper EPA and state program 

implementation. Requiring HAPs for 

point sources is essential to addressing 

continued public health risks and 

environmental justice issues. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Section 

114(a)(1) of the CAA authorizes the 

Administrator to, among other things, 

require certain persons (explained 

below) on a one-time, periodic, or 

continuous basis to keep records, make 

reports, undertake monitoring, sample 

emissions, or provide such other 

information as the Administrator may 

reasonably require. The EPA may 

require this information of any person 

who (i) owns or operates an emission 

source, (ii) manufactures control or 

process equipment, (iii) the 

Administrator believes may have 

information necessary for the purposes 

set forth in CAA section 114, or (iv) is 

subject to any requirement of the Act 

(except for manufacturers subject to 

certain Title II requirements). The 

information may be required for the 

purposes of developing an 

implementation plan, an emission 

standard under sections 111, 112, or 

129, determining if any person is in 

violation of any standard or requirement 

of an implementation plan or emissions 

standard, or ‘‘carrying out any 

provision’ of the Act (except for a 

provision of Title II with respect to 

manufacturers of new motor vehicles or 

new motor vehicle engines). 

Alternatives: The EPA is also 

proposing options and alternatives for 

consideration that may allow the States 

to report for owners/operators of 

regulated facilities. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: This 

action has an associated Regulatory 

Impact Analysis (RIA), which describes 

the anticipated costs and benefits of this 

proposed action. The RIA is 

summarized in this action and provided 

in the docket for this action. This 

action’s total cost impact is estimated at 

$117.4 million on average annually from 

2024 to 2026, and then is estimated at 

$477.9 million in 2027. All of these 

costs are in 2021 dollars. The increase 

in costs for owners and operators of 

affected sources in 2027 reflects full 

implementation of the proposed rule if 

finalized for the entire population of 

affected sources. 

Risks: No risks are associated with 

this action as these are proposed 

reporting requirements. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 08/09/23 88 FR 54118 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extended.

09/14/23 88 FR 63046 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

10/18/23 

Final Rule ............ 07/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses, 

Governmental Jurisdictions. 

Government Levels Affected: Local, 

State, Tribal. 

Additional Information: EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2004–0489. 

Agency Contact: Marc Houyoux, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Air and Radiation, C339–02, 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, 

Phone: 919 541–3649, Fax: 919 541– 

0684, Email: houyoux.marc@epa.gov. 

RIN: 2060–AV41 

EPA—OAR 

206. Multi-Pollutant Emissions 

Standards for Model Years 2027 and 

Later Light-Duty and Medium-Duty 

Vehicles [2060–AV49] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 to 

7671q 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 86; 40 CFR 600. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: On April 12, 2023, EPA 

announced a proposal for new 

multipollutant emissions standards to 

further reduce harmful air pollutant 

emissions from light-duty passenger 

cars and light trucks and Class 2b and 

3 vehicles (‘‘medium-duty vehicles’’ or 

MDVs) under its authority in section 

202(a) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 

U.S.C. 7521(a), starting with model year 

2027. The proposal builds upon EPA’s 

final standards for federal greenhouse 

gas emissions standards for passenger 

cars and light trucks for model years 

2023 through 2026. The proposed 

standards would result in significant 

reductions in emissions of criteria 

pollutants, GHGs, and air toxics, 

resulting in significant benefits for 

public health and welfare. EPA also 

estimates that the proposal would result 

in reduced vehicle operating costs for 

consumers. The proposed standards 

would be phased in over model years 

2027 through 2032. EPA conducted 

outreach with a wide range of interested 

stakeholders to gather input which was 

considered in developing the proposal, 

and will continue to engage with the 

public and all interested stakeholders as 

part of our regulatory development 

process as we develop the final rule. 

Statement of Need: This action is 

consistent with President Biden’s 

Executive Order, ‘‘Strengthening 

American Leadership in Clean Cars and 

Trucks.’’ 

Summary of Legal Basis: CAA section 

202(a). 

Alternatives: EPA requested comment 

to address alternative options in the 

proposed rule. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: EPA 

analyzed costs and benefits in the 

proposed rule. 

Risks: EPA evaluated the risks of this 

rulemaking in the proposed rule. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 05/05/23 88 FR 29184 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

07/05/23 

Final Rule ............ 03/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal. 

Additional Information: 

Sectors Affected: 811198 All Other 

Automotive Repair and Maintenance; 

336111 Automobile Manufacturing; 

423110 Automobile and Other Motor 

Vehicle Merchant Wholesalers; 811112 

Automotive Exhaust System Repair; 

81111 Automotive Mechanical and 

Electrical Repair and Maintenance; 

336112 Light Truck and Utility Vehicle 

Manufacturing; 335312 Motor and 

Generator Manufacturing. 

Agency Contact: Elizabeth Miller, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Air and Radiation, 2565 

Plymouth Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48105, 

Phone: 734 214–4703, Email: 

miller.elizabeth@epa.gov. 

Jessica Mroz, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Air and 

Radiation, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW, Washington, DC 20460, Phone: 202 

564–1094, Email: mroz.jessica@epa.gov. 

RIN: 2060–AV49 

EPA—OAR 

207. Greenhouse Gas Emissions 

Standards for Heavy-Duty Vehicles— 

Phase 3 [2060–AV50] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 21 U.S.C. 346a; 33 

U.S.C. 1318; 33 U.S.C. secs. 1311, 1314, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9489 

1316, 1317, 1318, 1361; 15 U.S.C. 2003; 

33 U.S.C. 1326; 42 U.S.C. 300f; 42 

U.S.C. 242b; 33 U.S.C. 1342; 33 U.S.C. 

1345; 42 U.S.C. 1857; 42 U.S.C. 7542; 42 

U.S.C. 6901; 42 U.S.C. 9601; 49 U.S.C. 

32901 to 32919q, Pub. L. 109–58; 33 

U.S.C. 1901; 42 U.S.C. 11023; 15 U.S.C. 

2601 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 1037.1. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: On April 12, 2023, EPA 

announced a proposal for more stringent 

standards to reduce greenhouse gas 

emissions from HD vehicles beginning 

in model year (MY) 2027. The new 

standards would be applicable to HD 

vocational vehicles (such as delivery 

trucks, refuse haulers, public utility 

trucks, transit, shuttle, school buses, 

etc.) and tractors (such as day cabs and 

sleeper cabs on tractor-trailer trucks). 

Specifically, EPA proposed stronger CO2

standards for MY 2027 HD vehicles that 

go beyond the current standards that 

apply under the HD Phase 2 Greenhouse 

Gas program. EPA also proposed an 

additional set of CO2 standards for HD 

vehicles that would begin to apply in 

MY 2028, with progressively more 

stringent standards each model year 

through 2032. This proposed Phase 3’’ 

greenhouse gas program maintains the 

flexible structure created in EPA’s Phase 

2 greenhouse gas program, which is 

designed to reflect the diverse nature of 

the heavy-duty industry. EPA has 

conducted outreach with a wide range 

of interested stakeholders to gather 

input which we have considered in 

developing this proposal, and we will 

continue to engage with the public and 

all interested stakeholders as part of our 

regulatory development process. 

Statement of Need: This action is 

consistent with President Biden’s 

Executive Order, ‘‘Strengthening 

American Leadership in Clean Cars and 

Trucks.’’ 

Summary of Legal Basis: CAA section 

202(a). 

Alternatives: EPA requested comment 

to address alternative options in the 

proposed rule. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: EPA 

analyzed costs and benefits in the 

proposed rule. 

Risks: EPA evaluated the risks of this 

rulemaking in the proposed rule. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 04/27/23 88 FR 25926 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

06/16/23 

Final Rule ............ 03/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Additional Information: 

Sectors Affected: 811198 All Other 

Automotive Repair and Maintenance; 

336111 Automobile Manufacturing; 

811112 Automotive Exhaust System 

Repair; 336120 Heavy Duty Truck 

Manufacturing; 336112 Light Truck and 

Utility Vehicle Manufacturing; 333618 

Other Engine Equipment 

Manufacturing; 336212 Truck Trailer 

Manufacturing. 

Agency Contact: Alex Wang, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Air and Radiation, 2000 

Traverwood Dr., Ann Arbor, MI 48105, 

Phone: 248 462–3947, Email: 

wang.alex@epa.gov. 

Tuana Phillips, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Air and 

Radiation, 1200 Pennsylvania NW, 

Washington, DC 20460, Phone: 202 565– 

0074, Email: phillips.tuana@epa.gov. 

RIN: 2060–AV50 

EPA—OAR 

208. Reconsideration of the National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards for 

Particulate Matter [2060–AV52] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Clean Air Act 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 50. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: Under the Clean Air Act 

Amendments of 1977, EPA is required 

to review and if appropriate revise the 

air quality criteria for the primary 

(health-based) and secondary (welfarebased) national ambient air quality 

standards (NAAQS) every 5 years. On 

December 18, 2020, the EPA published 

a final decision retaining the NAAQS 

for particulate matter (PM), which was 

the subject of several petitions for 

reconsideration as well as petitions for 

judicial review. As directed in 

Executive Order 13990, ‘‘Protecting 

Public Health and the Environment and 

Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate 

Crisis,’’ signed by President Biden on 

January 20, 2021, EPA is undertaking a 

reconsideration of the December 2020 

decision to retain the PM NAAQS 

because the available scientific evidence 

and technical information indicate that 

the current standards may not be 

adequate to protect public health and 

welfare, as required by the Clean Air 

Act. As part of this reconsideration, EPA 

developed a Supplement to the 2019 PM 

Integrated Science Assessment (ISA) 

and a Policy Assessment to take into 

account the most up-to-date science on 

public health impacts of PM and 

engaged with the chartered Clean Air 

Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) 

and a newly-constituted expert CASAC 

PM panel. The notice of proposed 

rulemaking was signed on January 5, 

2023, and a final rule will be issued in 

fall 2023. EPA proposed to revise the 

level of the primary annual PM2.5

standard from its current level of 12 mg/ 

m3 to within the range of 9–10 mg/m3. 

EPA proposed to retain all other PM 

NAAQS, including the primary and 

secondary 24-hour PM2.5 standards, the 

primary and secondary 24-hour PM10

standards, and the secondary annual 

PM2.5 standard. EPA also proposed 

revisions to the Air Quality Index (AQI) 

and monitoring network requirements. 

Statement of Need: Under the Clean 

Air Act Amendments of 1977, EPA is 

required to review and if appropriate 

revise the air quality criteria and 

national ambient air quality standards 

(NAAQS) every 5 years. On December 

18, 2020, EPA published a final rule 

retaining the NAAQS for particulate 

matter, without revision. On June 10, 

2021, EPA announced that it is 

reconsidering the December 2020 

decision on the air quality standards for 

PM. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Under the 

Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977, 

EPA is required to review and if 

appropriate revise the air quality criteria 

and the primary (health-based) and 

secondary (welfare-based) national 

ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) 

every 5 years. 

Alternatives: The main alternative for 

the Administrator’s decision on the 

review of the national ambient air 

quality standards for particulate matter 

is whether to retain or revise the 

existing standards. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: When 

the Agency proposes revisions to the 

standards, the Agency prepares a 

Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) to 

provide the public with illustrative 

estimates of the potential costs and 

health and welfare benefits of attaining 

the revised standards. However, the 

Clean Air Act makes clear that the 

economic and technical feasibility of 

attaining standards are not to be 

considered in setting or revising the 

NAAQS, although such factors may be 

considered in the development of state 

plans to implement the standards. 

Risks: The reconsideration builds on 

the review completed in 2020, which 

included the preparation by EPA of an 

Integrated Review Plan, an Integrated 

Science Assessment, and a Policy 

Assessment, which includes a risk/ 

exposure assessment, with 

opportunities for review by the EPA’s 

Clean Air Scientific Advisory 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
9490 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Committee (CASAC) and the public. 

These documents informed the 

Administrator’s final decision to retain 

the PM standards in 2020. As a part of 

the reconsideration, EPA prepared a 

Supplement to the 2019 PM Integrated 

Science Assessment and a Policy 

Assessment, which was reviewed at a 

public meeting by the CASAC. These 

documents informed the 

Administrator’s proposed decisions on 

whether to revise the PM NAAQS, and 

the Administrator’s final decisions on 

whether to revise the PM NAAQS will 

take into consideration these 

documents, CASAC advice, and public 

comment on the proposed decision. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 01/27/23 88 FR 5558 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

03/28/23 

Final Rule ............ 12/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Additional Information: EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2015–0072. 

Agency Contact: Nicole Hagan, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Air and Radiation, 109 T.W. 

Alexander Drive, Mail Code C504–06, 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, 

Phone: 919 541–3153, Email: 

hagan.nicole@epa.gov. 

Karen Wesson, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Air and 

Radiation, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, 

Mail Code C504–06, Research Triangle 

Park, NC 27711, Phone: 919 541–3515, 

Email: wesson.karen@epa.gov. 

RIN: 2060–AV52 

EPA—OAR 

209. NESHAP: Coal- and Oil-Fired

Electric Utility Steam Generating

Units—Review of the Residual Risk and

Technology Review [2060–AV53]

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 to 

7671q 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 63, subpart 

UUUUU. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: On February 16, 2012, EPA 

promulgated National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

for Coal- and Oil-fired Electric Utility 

Steam Generating Units (77 FR 9304). 

The rule (40 CFR part 63, subpart 

UUUUU), commonly referred to as the 

Mercury and Air Toxics Standards 

(MATS), includes standards to control 

hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions 

from new and existing coal- and oilfired electric utility steam generating 

units (EGUs) located at both major and 

area sources of HAP emissions. There 

have been several regulatory actions 

regarding MATS since February 2012, 

including a May 22, 2020, action that 

completed a reconsideration of the 

appropriate and necessary finding for 

MATS and finalized the residual risk 

and technology review (RTR) conducted 

for the Coal- and Oil-Fired EGU source 

category regulated under MATS (85 FR 

31286). The Biden Administration’s 

Executive Order 13990, Protecting 

Public Health and the Environment and 

Restoring Science To Tackle the Climate 

Crisis, ‘‘directs all executive 

departments and agencies (agencies) to 

immediately review and, as appropriate 

and consistent with applicable law, take 

action to address the promulgation of 

Federal regulations and other actions 

during the last 4 years that conflict with 

these important national objectives, and 

to immediately commence work to 

confront the climate crisis.’’ Section 

2(a)(iv) of the Executive Order 

specifically directs that the 

Administrator consider publishing, as 

appropriate and consistent with 

applicable law, a proposed rule 

suspending, revising, or rescinding the 

‘‘National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants: Coal- and OilFired Electric Utility Steam Generating 

Units—Reconsideration of 

Supplemental Finding and Residual 

Risk and Technology Review,’’ 85 FR 

31286 (May 22, 2020). As directed by 

Executive Order 13990, EPA reviewed 

the RTR portion of the May 22, 2020 

final action and, proposed to update and 

strengthen the MATS on April 24, 2023 

(88 FR 24854). EPA finalized the 

Revocation of the 2020 Reconsideration 

and Affirmation of the Appropriate and 

Necessary Supplemental Finding on 

February 15, 2023 (88 FR 13956). 

Statement of Need: Executive Order 

13990, ‘‘Protecting Public Health and 

the Environment and Restoring Science 

To Tackle the Climate Crisis,’’ directs 

EPA to review the May 2020 RTR. EPA 

will issue the results of the review in a 

notice of proposed rulemaking and will 

solicit comment on the review. 

Summary of Legal Basis: CAA section 

112, 42 U.S.C. 7412, provides the legal 

framework and basis for regulatory 

actions addressing emissions of 

hazardous air pollutants from stationary 

sources. 

Alternatives: EPA has evaluated 

several options for reviewing the RTR 

and will take comment on the review. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: EPA 

projects the present value of net benefits 

to be $2.4 billion to $3.0 billion. This 

includes $1.2 billion to $1.9 billion in 

health benefits, $1.4 billion in climate 

benefits, and compliance costs of $230 

million to $330 million. EPA projects 

the estimated annualized value net 

benefits to be $300 million to $350 

million. This includes $170 million to 

$220 million in health benefits, $170 

million in climate benefits, and 

compliance costs of $33 million to $38 

million. EPA projects that the proposed 

changes would result in the following 

emission reductions in the year 2035: 

• 82 pounds of mercury

• 800 tons of fine particulate matter

(PM2.5)

• 8,800 tons of sulfur dioxide

• 8,700 tons of nitrogen oxides

• 5 million tons of carbon dioxide

Risks: The results of the 2020 RTR

showed that emissions of HAP from 

coal- and oil-fired power plants have 

been reduced such that residual risk is 

at in acceptable level. EPA reviewed the 

2020 residual risk assessment and 

determined the risk review was 

conducted using approaches and 

methodologies that are consistent with 

prior risk analyses and reviews for other 

industrial sectors. Although EPA is not 

reopening the 2020 risk review, the 

proposed standards under the 

technology review would achieve 

reductions in HAP emissions from 

power plants and likely to reduce HAP 

exposures to affected populations. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite

NPRM .................. 04/24/23 88 FR 24854 

Final Rule ............ 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State. 

Additional Information: EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2018–0794. 

Sectors Affected: 221122 Electric 

Power Distribution; 221112 Fossil Fuel 

Electric Power Generation. 

URL For More Information: https://

www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-airpollution/mercury-and-air-toxicsstandards. 

Agency Contact: Sarah Benish, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Air and Radiation, 109 T.W. 

Alexander Drive, Triangle Park, NC 

27711, Phone: 909 541–5620, Email: 

benish.sarah@epa.gov. 

Nick Hutson, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Air and 

Radiation, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, 

Mail Code D243–01, Research Triangle 

Park, NC 27711, Phone: 919 541–2968, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9491 

Fax: 919 541–4991, Email: hutson.nick@

epa.gov. 

RIN: 2060–AV53 

EPA—OAR 

210. NSPS for the Synthetic Organic 

Chemical Manufacturing Industry and 

NESHAP for the Synthetic Organic 

Chemical Manufacturing Industry and 

Group I & II Polymers and Resins 

Industry [2060–AV71] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 to 

7671q; 42 U.S.C. 7401 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 63, subpart F; 

40 CFR 63, subpart G; 40 CFR 63, 

subpart H; 40 CFR 63, subpart I; 40 CFR 

63, subpart U; 40 CFR 63, subpart W; 40 

CFR 60, subpart VVa; 40 CFR 60, 

subpart III; 40 CFR 60, subpart NNN; 40 

CFR 60, subpart RRR. 

Legal Deadline: NPRM, Judicial, 

December 16, 2022, Texas 

Environmental Justice Advocacy 

Services et al. v. EPA, 1:20–cv–03733– 

RJL consent Decree. 

Final, Judicial, March 29, 2024, Texas 

Environmental Justice Advocacy 

Services et al. v. EPA, 1:20–cv–03733– 

RJL consent Decree. 

United States District Court for the 

District of Columbia, Texas 

Environmental Justice Advocacy 

Services, California Communities 

Against Toxics Environmental Integrity 

Project, Louisiana Environmental 

Action Network, Ohio Valley 

Environmental Council, Rise St. James, 

and Sierra Club Plaintiffs, v. United 

States Environmental Protection 

Agency, Defendant. Civil Action No. 

1:20–cv–03733–RJL. 

Abstract: This action will address the 

agency’s technology review under Clean 

Air Act (CAA) section 112(d)(6) of the 

National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for 

four subparts in 40 CFR part 63 

(subparts F, G, H, and I) which are 

commonly referred to together as the 

Hazardous Organic NESHAP (HON) and 

that apply to the Synthetic Organic 

Chemical Manufacturing Industry 

(SOCMI) and to equipment leaks from 

certain non-SOCMI processes. This 

action will also address the agency’s 

technology review of the NESHAP for 

two subparts in 40 CFR part 63 

(subparts U and W) that apply to the 

Group I and Group II Polymers and 

Resins industries. The HON standards 

were most recently updated when the 

agency conducted a residual risk and 

technology review (RTR) on December 

21, 2006. Similarly, the Group I and II 

Polymers and Resins NESHAP were 

most recently updated when the agency 

conducted its RTR on December 16, 

2008, and April 21, 2011. The HON and 

Group I and II Polymers and Resins 

NESHAP contain maximum achievable 

control technology (MACT) standards 

for controlling emissions of hazardous 

air pollutants (HAP) from process vents, 

storage vessels, transfer operations, heat 

exchange systems, wastewater streams, 

and equipment leaks. The HAP emitted 

from these emission sources include, 

but are not limited to, ethylene oxide, 

benzene, 1,3-butadiene, vinyl chloride, 

ethylene dichloride, methanol, hexane, 

toluene, xylenes, and chloroprene. The 

agency also plans to consider risks from 

the SOCMI source category and from the 

Neoprene Production source category in 

the Group I Polymers and Resins 

NESHAP during its technology review 

and to ensure the standards continue to 

provide an ample margin of safety to 

protect public health. Lastly, this action 

will also address the agency’s review, 

under CAA section 111(b)(1)(B), of four 

New Source Performance Standards 

(NSPS) in 40 CFR part 60 (subparts III, 

NNN, RRR, and VVa) for emissions of 

Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) from 

SOCMI air oxidation unit processes, 

SOCMI distillation operations, SOCMI 

reactor processes, and equipment leaks 

located at SOCMI sources. These 

subparts were originally promulgated 

pursuant to section 111(b) of the CAA 

on June 29,1990 (subparts III and NNN), 

August 31, 1993 (subpart RRR), and 

November 16, 2007 (subpart VVa). On 

April 25, 2023, the EPA published a 

proposed rulemaking in the Federal 

Register (see 88 FR 25080) for this 

action. In addition, the EPA has 

conducted public outreach activities, 

including hosting an informational 

webinar on April 13, 2023, and holding 

a public hearing on the proposed 

rulemaking on May 16, 2023. 

Statement of Need: The EPA has a 

mandatory duty under CAA section 111 

to at least every 8 years, review and, if 

appropriate, revise its NSPS governed 

by this section of the CAA. Similarly, 

EPA has a mandatory duty under CAA 

section 112 to at least every 8 years, 

review, and revise as necessary (taking 

into account developments in practices, 

processes, and control technologies), its 

NESHAP promulgated under this 

section of the CAA. Thus, this action 

will address EPA’s mandatory 

obligations to conduct such reviews for 

various NSPS (40 CFR part 60, subparts 

III, NNN, RRR, and VVb) and NESHAP 

(40 CFR part 63, subparts F, G, H, I, U 

and W) that apply to the chemical 

industry, for which EPA is under a 

consent decree deadline to finalize such 

actions. The proposed rulemaking for 

this action was previously published in 

the Federal Register on April 25, 2023 

(see 88 FR 25080). 

Summary of Legal Basis: EPA has a 

mandatory duty to conduct reviews of 

its NSPS and NESHAP under CAA 

sections 111 and 112, respectively, at 

least every 8 years. Pursuant to a 

consent deadline of March 29, 2024, the 

Administrator of EPA must sign a final 

rule containing any revisions of EPA’s 

review of various chemical sector rules, 

including various NSPS (40 CFR part 

60, subpart III, NNN, RRR, and VVb) 

and NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subparts 

F, G, H, I, U, and W) that apply to the 

chemical industry. 

Alternatives: None, as EPA has a 

mandatory duty to conduct its review of 

these rules and is under a consent 

decree deadline to do so. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

anticipated costs and benefits of the 

final action are to be determined. For 

the proposed action that published in 

the Federal Register on April 25, 2023 

(see 88 FR 25080), EPA estimated the 

costs of implementing the proposed 

rules at approximately $501 million in 

total capital costs and approximately 

$190 million a year in total annualized 

costs. For benefits in the proposed 

action, EPA also estimated the value of 

the health benefits of reducing ozone as 

result of reducing VOC emissions. EPA 

estimates that the value of those benefits 

would be $6.3 million in 2024 and 

could be as much as $62 million (2021 

dollars, 3 percent discount rate). 

Risks: The EPA is conducting a 

discretionary residual risk assessment in 

this action under CAA section 112(f)(2) 

to address unacceptable risks from 

ethylene oxide and chloroprene 

emissions coming from HON and 

Neoprene Production sources covered 

under the Group I Polymers and Resins 

NESHAP, respectively. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 04/25/23 88 FR 25080 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

06/26/23 

Final Rule ............ 03/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Sectors Affected: 3251 Basic Chemical 

Manufacturing; 325 Chemical 

Manufacturing. 

Agency Contact: Andrew Bouchard, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Air and Radiation, 109 T.W. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9492 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Alexander Drive, Mail Code E143–01, 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, 

Phone: 919 541–4036, Email: 

bouchard.andrew@epa.gov. 

Njeri Moeller, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Air and 

Radiation, E143–01, 109 T.W. 

Alexander Drive, Research Triangle 

Park, NC 27711, Phone: 919 541–1380, 

Email: moeller.njeri@epa.gov. 

RIN: 2060–AV71 

EPA—OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY 

AND POLLUTION PREVENTION 

(OCSPP) 

Final Rule Stage 

211. Methylene Chloride (MC); 

Regulation Under the Toxic Substances 

Control Act (TSCA) [2070–AK70] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Unfunded Mandates: This action may 

affect the private sector under Public 

Law 104–4. 

Legal Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2605 Toxic 

Substances Control Act 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 751. 

Legal Deadline: NPRM, Statutory, 

June 24, 2021, TSCA section 6(c). Final, 

Statutory, June 24, 2022, TSCA section 

6(c). 

Abstract: On May 5, 2023, EPA 

proposed a rule under the Toxic 

Substances Control Act (TSCA) to 

address the unreasonable risk of injury 

to human health from methylene 

chloride. TSCA requires that EPA 

address by rule any unreasonable risk of 

injury to health or the environment 

identified in a TSCA risk evaluation and 

apply requirements to the extent 

necessary so that the chemical no longer 

presents unreasonable risk. Methylene 

chloride, also known as 

dichloromethane, is acutely lethal, a 

neurotoxicant, a likely human 

carcinogen, and presents cancer and 

non-cancer risks following chronic 

exposures as well as acute risks. Central 

nervous system depressant effects can 

result in loss of consciousness and 

respiratory depression, resulting in 

irreversible coma, hypoxia, and 

eventual death, including 85 

documented fatalities from 1980 to 

2018, a majority of which were 

occupational fatalities. Nevertheless, 

methylene chloride is still a widely 

used solvent in a variety of consumer 

and commercial applications including 

adhesives and sealants, automotive 

products, and paint and coating 

removers. To address the identified 

unreasonable risk, EPA proposed to: 

prohibit the manufacture, processing, 

and distribution in commerce of 

methylene chloride for consumer use; 

prohibit most industrial and commercial 

uses of methylene chloride; require a 

workplace chemical protection program 

(WCPP), which would include a 

requirement to meet inhalation 

exposure concentration limits and 

exposure monitoring for certain 

continued conditions of use of 

methylene chloride; require 

recordkeeping and downstream 

notification requirements for several 

conditions of use of methylene chloride; 

and provide certain time-limited 

exemptions from requirements for uses 

of methylene chloride that would 

otherwise significantly disrupt national 

security and critical infrastructure. The 

Agency’s development of this rule 

incorporated significant stakeholder 

outreach and public participation, 

including public webinars and over 40 

external meetings as well as required 

Federalism, Tribal, and Environmental 

Justice consultations and a Small 

Businesses Advocacy Review Panel. 

EPA’s risk evaluation, describing the 

conditions of use is in docket EPA–HQ– 

OPPT–2019–0437, with the 2022 

unreasonable risk determination and 

additional materials in docket EPA– 

HQ–OPPT–2016–0742. 

Statement of Need: This rulemaking is 

needed to address the unreasonable risk 

from methylene chloride that was 

identified in a risk evaluation 

completed under TSCA section 6(b). 

EPA reviewed the exposures and 

hazards of methylene chloride, the 

magnitude of risk, exposed populations, 

severity of the hazard, uncertainties, 

and other factors. EPA sought input 

from the public and peer reviewers as 

required by TSCA and associated 

regulations. 

Summary of Legal Basis: In 

accordance with TSCA section 6(a), if 

EPA determines in a final risk 

evaluation completed under TSCA 6(b) 

that the manufacture, processing, 

distribution in commerce, use, or 

disposal of a chemical substance or 

mixture, or that any combination of 

such activities, presents an 

unreasonable risk of injury to health or 

the environment, the Agency must issue 

regulations requiring one or more of the 

following actions to the extent necessary 

so that the chemical substance no longer 

presents an unreasonable risk: (1) 

Prohibit or otherwise restrict 

manufacture, processing, or distribution 

in commerce of the substance, or limit 

the amount of the substance which may 

be manufactured, processed, or 

distributed in commerce; (2) Prohibit or 

otherwise restrict manufacture, 

processing, or distribution in commerce 

of the substance for a particular use or 

for a particular use above a set 

concentration, or limit the amount of 

the substance which may be 

manufactured, processed, or distributed 

in commerce for a particular use or for 

a particular use above a set 

concentration; (3) Require minimum 

warnings and instructions with respect 

to use, distribution in commerce, or 

disposal; (4) Require recordkeeping or 

testing by manufacturers or processors; 

(5) Prohibit or regulate any manner or 

method of commercial use; (6) Prohibit 

or regulate any manner or method of 

disposal for commercial purposes; and/ 

or (7) Direct manufacturers or 

processors to give notice of the 

unreasonable risk to distributors, other 

persons and the public and replace or 

repurchase the substance. 

Alternatives: TSCA section 6(a) 

requires EPA to address by rule 

chemical substances that the Agency 

determines present unreasonable risk 

upon completion of a final risk 

evaluation. TSCA section 6(c) requires 

EPA to consider one or more primary 

alternative regulatory actions as part of 

the development of a proposed rule 

under TSCA section 6(a). The primary 

alternative regulatory action for this 

rulemaking would, like the proposed 

action, prohibit the manufacture, 

processing, and distribution in 

commerce of methylene chloride for 

consumer use; prohibit most industrial 

and commercial uses of methylene 

chloride; require a workplace chemical 

protection program (WCPP), which 

would include a requirement to meet 

inhalation exposure concentration 

limits and exposure monitoring for 

certain continued conditions of use of 

methylene chloride; require 

recordkeeping and downstream 

notification requirements for several 

conditions of use of methylene chloride; 

and provide certain time-limited 

exemptions from requirements for uses 

of methylene chloride that would 

otherwise significantly disrupt national 

security and critical infrastructure. This 

primary alternative regulatory action 

includes longer compliance timeframes 

and additional uses under workplace 

chemical protection program, in 

comparison to the proposed action. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: EPA’s 

analysis of the incremental, nonclosure-related costs of this proposed 

rule is estimated to be $13.2 million 

annualized over 20 years at a 3% 

discount rate and $14.5 million 

annualized over 20 years at a 7% 

discount rate. The proposed rule 

involves health benefits for the 

American public, some of which can be 

monetized and others that, while 

tangible and significant, cannot be 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9493 

monetized. Although some benefits 

cannot be quantified, they are not 

necessarily less important than the 

quantified benefits. The monetized 

benefits of this rule are approximately 

$17.7 to $18.5 million annualized over 

20 years at a 3% discount rate and $13.4 

to $13.9 million annualized over 20 

years at a 7% discount rate. 

Risks: EPA determined that 

methylene chloride presents an 

unreasonable risk to human health. EPA 

must issue risk management 

requirements so that this chemical 

substance no longer presents an 

unreasonable risk. For more 

information, visit: https://www.epa.gov/ 

assessing-and-managing-chemicalsunder-tsca/risk-management-existingchemicals-under-tsca. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 05/03/23 88 FR 28284 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

07/03/23 

Final Rule ............ 03/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

State, Tribal. 

Federalism: This action may have 

federalism implications as defined in 

E.O. 13132. 

International Impacts: This regulatory 

action will be likely to have 

international trade and investment 

effects, or otherwise be of international 

interest. 

Additional Information: EPA–HQ– 

OPPT–2020–0465. 

Sectors Affected: 325 Chemical 

Manufacturing. 

URL For More Information: https://

www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managingchemicals-under-tsca/risk-managementmethylene-chloride. 

Agency Contact: Ingrid Feustel, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution 

Prevention, Mail Code 7404M, 1200 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20460, Phone: 202 564–3199, Email: 

feustel.ingrid@epa.gov. 

Joel Wolf, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Office of Chemical Safety and 

Pollution Prevention, 1200 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Mail Code 

7404M, Washington, DC 20460, Phone: 

202 564–0432, Email: wolf.joel@epa.gov. 

RIN: 2070–AK70 

EPA—OCSPP 

212. Carbon Tetrachloride (CTC);

Regulation Under the Toxic Substances

Control Act (TSCA) [2070–AK82]

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2605 Toxic 

Substances Control Act 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 751. 

Legal Deadline: NPRM, Statutory, 

November 4, 2021, TSCA section 6(c). 

Final, Statutory, November 4, 2022, 

TSCA section 6(c). 

Abstract: The Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) proposed to 

address the unreasonable risks of injury 

to health presented by carbon 

tetrachloride (CTC) under its conditions 

of use as documented in EPA’s 2020 

Risk Evaluation for Carbon 

Tetrachloride and 2022 Revised 

Unreasonable Risk Determination for 

Carbon Tetrachloride pursuant to the 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). 

CTC is a volatile, organic compound 

that is primarily used as a feedstock 

(i.e., processed as a reactant) in the 

making of products such as refrigerants, 

aerosol propellants, and foam-blowing 

agents. TSCA requires that EPA address 

by rule any unreasonable risk of injury 

to health or the environment identified 

in a TSCA risk evaluation and apply 

requirements to the extent necessary so 

that the chemical no longer presents 

unreasonable risk. EPA determined that 

CTC presents an unreasonable risk of 

injury to health due to cancer from 

chronic inhalation and dermal 

exposures and liver toxicity from 

chronic inhalation, chronic dermal, and 

acute dermal exposures in the 

workplace. To address the identified 

unreasonable risk under TSCA, EPA 

proposed to establish workplace safety 

requirements for most conditions of use, 

including the condition of use related to 

the making of low Global Warming 

Potential (GWP) hydrofluoroolefins 

(HFOs), prohibit the manufacture 

(including import), processing, 

distribution in commerce, and 

industrial/commercial use of CTC for 

conditions of use where information 

indicates use of CTC has already been 

phased out, and establish recordkeeping 

and downstream notification 

requirements. The use of CTC in low 

GWP HFOs is particularly important in 

the Agency’s efforts to support the 

American Innovation and 

Manufacturing Act of 2020 (AIM Act) 

and the Kigali Amendment to the 

Montreal Protocol on Substances that 

Deplete the Ozone Layer, which was 

ratified on October 26, 2022. The 

Agency’s development of this rule 

incorporates significant stakeholder 

outreach and public participation. EPA 

engaged in discussions with industry, 

non-governmental organizations, other 

government agencies, technical experts 

and users of CTC, and the general public 

to hear from users, academics, 

manufacturers, and members of the 

public health community about 

practices related to commercial uses of 

CTC; public health impacts of CTC; the 

importance of CTC in the various uses 

subject to this proposed rule; frequentlyused substitute chemicals or alternative 

methods or lack thereof; engineering 

controls, administrative controls, and 

personal protective equipment currently 

in use or feasibly adoptable; and other 

risk-reduction approaches that may 

have already been adopted or 

considered for industrial and 

commercial uses. EPA conducted 

Federalism, Tribal, and Environmental 

Justice consultations and a Small 

Businesses Advocacy Review Panel. 

EPA’s risk evaluation for CTC, 

describing CTC’s conditions of use, is in 

docket EPA–HQ–OPPT–2019–0499, 

with the December 2022 unreasonable 

risk determination and additional 

information in docket EPA–HQ–OPPT– 

2016–0733. 

Statement of Need: This rulemaking is 

needed to address the unreasonable 

risks of Carbon Tetrachloride (CTC) that 

were identified in a risk evaluation 

completed under TSCA section 6(b). 

EPA reviewed the exposures and 

hazards of Carbon Tetrachloride uses, 

the magnitude of risk, exposed 

populations, severity of the hazard, 

uncertainties, and other factors. EPA 

sought input from the public and peer 

reviewers as required by TSCA and 

associated regulations. 

Summary of Legal Basis: In 

accordance with TSCA section 6(a), if 

EPA determines in a final risk 

evaluation completed under TSCA 6(b) 

that the manufacture, processing, 

distribution in commerce, use, or 

disposal of a chemical substance or 

mixture, or that any combination of 

such activities, presents an 

unreasonable risk of injury to health or 

the environment, the Agency must issue 

regulations requiring one or more of the 

following actions to the extent necessary 

so that the chemical substance no longer 

presents an unreasonable risk: (1) 

Prohibit or otherwise restrict 

manufacture, processing, or distribution 

in commerce of the substance, or limit 

the amount of the substance which may 

be manufactured, processed, or 

distributed in commerce; (2) Prohibit or 

otherwise restrict manufacture, 

processing, or distribution in commerce 

for a particular use or for a particular 

use above a set concentration, or limit 

the amount of the substance which may 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9494 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

be manufactured, processed, or 

distributed in commerce for a particular 

use or for a particular use above a set 

concentration; (3) Require minimum 

warnings and instructions with respect 

to use, distribution in commerce, or 

disposal; (4) Require recordkeeping or 

testing by manufacturers or processors; 

(5) Prohibit or regulate any manner or

method of commercial use; (6) Prohibit

or regulate any manner or method of

disposal for commercial purposes; and/

or (7) Direct manufacturers or

processors to give notice of the

unreasonable risk to distributors, other

persons, and the public and replace or

repurchase the substance.

Alternatives: TSCA section 6(a) 

requires EPA to address by rule 

chemical substances that the Agency 

determines present unreasonable risk 

upon completion of a final risk 

evaluation. TSCA section 6(c) requires 

that EPA consider one or more primary 

alternative regulatory actions as part of 

the development of a proposed rule 

under TSCA section 6(a). The proposed 

primary alternative regulatory action 

would implement workplace chemical 

protection program (WCPP) 

requirements, including requirements to 

meet an existing chemical exposure 

limit (ECEL) and Direct Dermal Contact 

Controls (DDCC) to prevent direct 

dermal contact in the workplace by 

separating, distancing, physically 

removing, or isolating all person(s) from 

direct handling of CTC or from contact 

with surfaces that may be contaminated 

with CTC (i.e., equipment or materials 

on which CTC may be present) under 

routine conditions in the workplace, for 

those conditions of use that would 

otherwise be prohibited under the 

proposed rule. The primary alternative 

regulatory action would also require 

compliance with prescriptive controls— 

specifically requirements for respirators 

and dermal PPE—for those conditions of 

use where an ECEL and DDCC are the 

proposed regulatory action and where 

PPE may address the unreasonable risk. 

This approach differs from the proposed 

regulatory action because it would not 

require the use of elimination, 

substitution, engineering controls, and 

administrative controls, in accordance 

with the hierarchy of controls, to the 

extent feasible as a means of controlling 

inhalation and dermal exposures. The 

primary alternative regulatory action 

would apply the same recordkeeping 

requirements, downstream notification 

requirements, and compliance 

timeframes as those specified in the 

proposed rule. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: EPA’s 

estimate of the incremental costs of the 

proposed rule is $18.8 million per year 

annualized over 20-years at a 3% 

discount rate and $18.5 million per year 

at a 7% discount rate. The costs are 

estimated as incremental to baseline 

conditions, including current use of 

personal protective equipment. The 

costs represent a high-end cost estimate 

because the high estimates for the 

number of entities and workers affected 

by the regulation were used. To the 

extent that EPA’s approach 

overestimates the number of entities 

subject to the regulation, actual realized 

costs of this action will be lower. The 

monetized benefits of the proposed rule 

are from avoided cases of adrenal and 

liver cancers. The estimated monetized 

benefit of the proposed regulatory action 

ranges from approximately $0.09 to $0.1 

million per year annualized over 20- 

years at a 3% discount rate and from 

$0.04 to $0.07 million per year at a 7% 

discount rate. There are also nonmonetized benefits due to other 

potential avoided adverse health effects 

associated with CTC exposure, 

including liver, reproductive, renal, 

developmental, and central nervous 

system (CNS) toxicity endpoints. 

Risks: As EPA determined in the 

TSCA section 6(b) risk evaluation, 

Carbon Tetrachloride presents 

unreasonable risks to human health. 

EPA must issue risk management 

requirements so that this chemical 

substance no longer presents an 

unreasonable risk. For more 

information, visit: https://www.epa.gov/ 

assessing-and-managing-chemicalsunder-tsca/risk-management-existingchemicals-under-tsca. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 07/28/23 88 FR 49180 

Final Rule ............ 08/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal. 

Federalism: This action may have 

federalism implications as defined in 

E.O. 13132. 

International Impacts: This regulatory 

action will be likely to have 

international trade and investment 

effects, or otherwise be of international 

interest. 

Additional Information: EPA–HQ– 

OPPT–2020–0592. 

Sectors Affected: 325199 All Other 

Basic Organic Chemical Manufacturing; 

325998 All Other Miscellaneous 

Chemical Product and Preparation 

Manufacturing; 327310 Cement 

Manufacturing; 325 Chemical 

Manufacturing; 325194 Cyclic Crude, 

Intermediate, and Gum and Wood 

Chemical Manufacturing; 327992 

Ground or Treated Mineral and Earth 

Manufacturing; 562211 Hazardous 

Waste Treatment and Disposal; 325120 

Industrial Gas Manufacturing; 331410 

Nonferrous Metal (except Aluminum) 

Smelting and Refining; 327 Nonmetallic 

Mineral Product Manufacturing; 325180 

Other Basic Inorganic Chemical 

Manufacturing; 325320 Pesticide and 

Other Agricultural Chemical 

Manufacturing; 325110 Petrochemical 

Manufacturing; 325211 Plastics Material 

and Resin Manufacturing; 331 Primary 

Metal Manufacturing; 562213 Solid 

Waste Combustors and Incinerators; 562 

Waste Management and Remediation 

Services. 

URL For More Information: https://

www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managingchemicals-under-tsca/risk-managementcarbon-tetrachloride. 

Agency Contact: Claudia Menasche, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution 

Prevention, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW, Mail Code 7405M, Washington, DC 

20460, Phone: 202 564–3391, Email: 

menasche.claudia@epa.gov. 

Ana Corado, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Chemical 

Safety and Pollution Prevention, 1200 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Mail Code 

7404M, Washington, DC 20460, Phone: 

202 564–0140, Email: corado.ana@

epa.gov. 

RIN: 2070–AK82 

EPA—OCSPP 

213. Perchloroethylene (PCE);

Regulation Under the Toxic Substances

Control Act (TSCA) [2070–AK84]

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2605 Toxic 

Substances Control Act 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 751. 

Legal Deadline: NPRM, Statutory, 

December 28, 2021, TSCA sec. 6(c). 

Final, Statutory, December 28, 2021, 

TSCA sec. 6(c). 

Abstract: On June 16, 2023, EPA 

proposed a rule under the Toxic 

Substances Control Act (TSCA) to 

address the unreasonable risk of injury 

to health from perchloroethylene (PCE). 

TSCA requires that EPA address by rule 

any unreasonable risk identified in a 

TSCA risk evaluation and apply 

requirements to the extent necessary so 

the chemical no longer presents 

unreasonable risk. PCE is a widely used 

solvent in a variety of occupational and 

consumer applications including 

fluorinated compound production, 

petroleum manufacturing, dry cleaning, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9495 

and aerosol degreasing. EPA determined 

that PCE presents an unreasonable risk 

of injury to health due to the significant 

adverse health effects associated with 

exposure to PCE, including 

neurotoxicity effects from acute and 

chronic inhalation exposures and 

dermal exposures, and cancer from 

chronic inhalation exposures to PCE. 

TSCA requires that EPA address by rule 

any unreasonable risk of injury to health 

or the environment identified in a TSCA 

risk evaluation and apply requirements 

to the extent necessary so the chemical 

no longer presents unreasonable risk. 

PCE, also known as perc and 

tetrachloroethylene, is a neurotoxicant 

and a likely human carcinogen. 

Neurotoxicity, in particular impaired 

visual and cognitive function and 

diminished color discrimination, are the 

most sensitive adverse effects driving 

the unreasonable risk of PCE, and other 

adverse effects associated with exposure 

include central nervous system 

depression, kidney and liver effects, 

immune system toxicity, developmental 

toxicity, and cancer. To address the 

identified unreasonable risk, EPA 

proposed to prohibit most industrial 

and commercial uses of PCE; the 

manufacture (including import), 

processing, and distribution in 

commerce of PCE for the prohibited 

industrial and commercial uses; the 

manufacture (including import), 

processing, and distribution in 

commerce of PCE for all consumer use; 

and, the manufacture (including 

import), processing, distribution in 

commerce, and use of PCE in dry 

cleaning and related spot cleaning 

through a 10-year phaseout. For certain 

conditions of use that would not be 

subject to a prohibition, EPA also 

proposed to require a PCE workplace 

chemical protection program that 

includes requirements to meet an 

inhalation exposure concentration limit 

and prevent direct dermal contact. EPA 

also proposed to require prescriptive 

workplace controls for laboratory use, 

and to establish recordkeeping and 

downstream notification requirements. 

Additionally, EPA proposed to provide 

certain time-limited exemptions from 

requirements for certain critical or 

essential emergency uses of PCE for 

which no technically and economically 

feasible safer alternative is available. 

The Agency’s development of this rule 

incorporated significant stakeholder 

outreach and public participation, 

including public webinars and over 40 

external meetings as well as required 

Federalism, Tribal, and Environmental 

Justice consultations and a Small 

Businesses Advocacy Review Panel. 

EPA’s risk evaluation for PCE, 

describing the conditions of use is in 

docket EPA–HQ–OPPT–2019–0502, 

with the 2022 unreasonable risk 

determination and additional materials 

in docket EPA–HQ–OPPT–2016–0732. 

Statement of Need: This rulemaking is 

needed to address the unreasonable risk 

from PCE that was identified in a risk 

evaluation completed under TSCA 

section 6(b). EPA reviewed the 

exposures and hazards of PCE, the 

magnitude of risk, exposed populations, 

severity of the hazard, uncertainties, 

and other factors. EPA sought input 

from the public and peer reviewers as 

required by TSCA and associated 

regulations. 

Summary of Legal Basis: In 

accordance with TSCA section 6(a), if 

EPA determines in a final risk 

evaluation completed under TSCA 6(b) 

that the manufacture, processing, 

distribution in commerce, use, or 

disposal of a chemical substance or 

mixture, or that any combination of 

such activities, presents an 

unreasonable risk of injury to health or 

the environment, the Agency must issue 

regulations requiring one or more of the 

following actions to the extent necessary 

so that the chemical substance no longer 

presents an unreasonable risk: (1) 

Prohibit or otherwise restrict 

manufacture, processing, or distribution 

in commerce of the substance, or limit 

the amount of the substance which may 

be manufactured, processed, or 

distributed in commerce; (2) Prohibit or 

otherwise restrict manufacture, 

processing, or distribution in commerce 

of the substance for a particular use or 

for a particular use above a set 

concentration, or limit the amount of 

the substance which may be 

manufactured, processed, or distributed 

in commerce for a particular use or for 

a particular use above a set 

concentration; (3) Require minimum 

warnings and instructions with respect 

to use, distribution in commerce, or 

disposal; (4) Require recordkeeping or 

testing by manufacturers or processors; 

(5) Prohibit or regulate any manner or 

method of commercial use; (6) Prohibit 

or regulate any manner or method of 

disposal for commercial purposes; and/ 

or (7) Direct manufacturers or 

processors to give notice of the 

unreasonable risk to distributors, other 

persons and the public and replace or 

repurchase the substance. 

Alternatives: TSCA section 6(a) 

requires EPA to address by rule 

chemical substances that the Agency 

determines present unreasonable risk 

upon completion of a final risk 

evaluation. TSCA section 6(c) requires 

EPA to consider one or more primary 

alternative regulatory actions as part of 

the development of a proposed rule 

under TSCA section 6(a). The primary 

alternative regulatory action for this 

rulemaking includes longer compliance 

timeframes and prohibits fewer uses 

than the proposed regulatory action. 

This primary alternative regulatory 

action would prohibit most industrial 

and commercial uses of PCE; prohibit 

the manufacture (including import), 

processing, and distribution in 

commerce of PCE for the prohibited 

industrial and commercial uses; 

prohibit the manufacture (including 

import), processing, and distribution in 

commerce of PCE for all consumer use; 

prohibit the manufacture (including 

import), processing, distribution in 

commerce, and use of PCE in dry 

cleaning and related spot cleaning 

through a 15-year phaseout; require 

prescriptive workplace controls for 

certain conditions of use; and require a 

workplace chemical protection program 

for certain conditions of use. The 

second alternative regulatory action for 

this rulemaking includes shorter 

compliance timeframes and prohibits 

more uses than the proposed regulatory 

action. This second alternative 

regulatory action would prohibit most 

industrial and commercial uses of PCE; 

prohibit the manufacture (including 

import), processing, and distribution in 

commerce of PCE for the prohibited 

industrial and commercial uses; 

prohibit the manufacture (including 

import), processing, and distribution in 

commerce of PCE for all consumer use; 

prohibit the manufacture (including 

import), processing, distribution in 

commerce, and use of PCE in dry 

cleaning and related spot cleaning 

through a 5-year phaseout; require a 

workplace chemical protection program 

that includes requirements to meet an 

inhalation exposure concentration limit 

and prevent direct dermal contact for 

certain conditions of use; require 

prescriptive workplace controls for 

laboratory use; and provide certain 

time-limited exemptions from 

requirements for several conditions of 

use of PCE that would otherwise 

significantly disrupt national security or 

critical infrastructure. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

monetized costs for this proposed rule 

are estimated to range from $14.0 

million annualized over 20 years at a 

3% discount rate and $14.3 million 

annualized over 20 years at a 7% 

discount rate. The monetized benefits 

are estimated to be $10.2 to $46.3 

million annualized over 20 years at a 

3% discount rate and $4.72 million to 

$29.4 million annualized over 20 years 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9496 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

at a 7% discount rate. EPA believes that 

the balance of costs and benefits of this 

proposal cannot be fairly described 

without considering the additional, nonmonetized benefits of mitigating the 

non-cancer adverse effects. These effects 

may include neurotoxicity, kidney 

toxicity, liver toxicity, immunological 

and hematological effects, reproductive 

effects, and developmental effects. 

Risks: EPA determined that PCE 

presents an unreasonable risk to human 

health. EPA must issue risk 

management requirements so that this 

chemical substance no longer presents 

an unreasonable risk. For more 

information, visit: https://www.epa.gov/ 

assessing-and-managing-chemicalsunder-tsca/risk-management-existingchemicals-under-tsca. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 06/16/23 88 FR 39652 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

08/15/23 

Final Rule ............ 07/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

State. 

Federalism: This action may have 

federalism implications as defined in 

E.O. 13132. 

International Impacts: This regulatory 

action will be likely to have 

international trade and investment 

effects, or otherwise be of international 

interest. 

Additional Information: EPA–HQ– 

OPPT–2020–0720. 

Sectors Affected: 325 Chemical 

Manufacturing. 

URL For More Information: https://

www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managingchemicals-under-tsca/risk-managementperchloroethylene. 

Agency Contact: Kelly Summers, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution 

Prevention, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW, Mail Code 7405M, Washington, DC 

20460, Phone: 202 564–2201, Email: 

summers.kelly@epa.gov. 

Joel Wolf, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Office of Chemical Safety and 

Pollution Prevention, 1200 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Mail Code 

7404M, Washington, DC 20460, Phone: 

202 564–0432, Email: wolf.joel@epa.gov. 

RIN: 2070–AK84 

EPA—OCSPP 

214. Asbestos Part 1 (Chrysotile

Asbestos); Regulation of Certain

Conditions of Use Under the Toxic

Substances Control Act (TSCA) [2070–

AK86]

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Unfunded Mandates: This action may 

affect the private sector under Public 

Law 104–4. 

Legal Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2605 Toxic 

Substances Control Act 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 751. 

Legal Deadline: NPRM, Statutory, 

December 28, 2021, TSCA sec. 6(c). 

Final, Statutory, December 28, 2022, 

TSCA sec. 6(c). 

Abstract: This action will address the 

unreasonable risk of injury to health 

presented by conditions of use of 

chrysotile asbestos. Section 6(a) of the 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) 

requires that EPA address by rule any 

unreasonable risk identified in a TSCA 

risk evaluation and apply requirements 

to the extent necessary so that the 

relevant chemical substance no longer 

presents such risk. Therefore, to address 

the unreasonable risk identified in the 

TSCA Risk Evaluation for Asbestos, Part 

1: Chrysotile Asbestos, EPA proposed 

on April 12, 2022, to prohibit 

manufacture (including import), 

processing, distribution in commerce 

and commercial use of chrysotile 

asbestos for chrysotile asbestos 

diaphragms for use in the chlor-alkali 

industry, chrysotile asbestos-containing 

sheet gaskets used in chemical 

production, chrysotile asbestoscontaining brake blocks used in the oil 

industry, aftermarket automotive 

chrysotile asbestos-containing brakes/ 

linings, other chrysotile asbestoscontaining vehicle friction products, 

and other chrysotile asbestos-containing 

gaskets. EPA also proposed to prohibit 

manufacture (including import), 

processing, and distribution in 

commerce of aftermarket automotive 

chrysotile asbestos-containing brakes/ 

linings for consumer use, and other 

chrysotile asbestos-containing gaskets 

for consumer use. Finally, EPA also 

proposed disposal and recordkeeping 

requirements for these conditions of 

use. EPA is reviewing the comments 

received and intends to develop a final 

rule.) EPA consulted with State, local 

and Tribal governments, and conducted 

extensive public outreach during the 

development of this rulemaking. EPA 

held discussions with industry, nongovernmental organizations, other 

national governments, asbestos experts, 

other government agencies, users of 

chrysotile asbestos, and the general 

public on how long industry would 

need to implement a prohibition. These 

meetings helped to inform the timeline 

for implementation of a prohibition, 

EPA’s understanding of how companies 

currently protect workers and the extent 

to which each industry uses asbestosfree technology. EPA also held a public 

webinar to provide an overview of the 

TSCA risk management process 

including the findings in the Part 1 risk 

evaluation. In addition, EPA published 

a notice of data availability on March 

17, 2023 to solicit public comments on 

additional data received by EPA related 

to the proposed rule. The additional 

data pertain to chrysotile asbestos 

diaphragms used in the chlor-alkali 

industry and chrysotile asbestoscontaining sheet gaskets used in 

chemical production and may be used 

by EPA in the development of the final 

rule, including EPA’s determination of 

what constitutes as soon as practicable’’ 

with regard to the proposed chrysotile 

asbestos prohibition compliance dates 

for these uses. EPA is reviewing the 

comments received and intends to 

develop a final rule. 

Statement of Need: This rulemaking is 

needed to address the unreasonable risk 

of chrysotile asbestos identified in the 

Risk Evaluation for Asbestos Part I: 

Chrysotile Asbestos completed under 

TSCA section 6(b). EPA reviewed the 

exposures and hazards of the chrysotile 

asbestos uses evaluated in the risk 

evaluation, the magnitude of risk, 

exposed populations, severity of the 

hazard, uncertainties, and other factors. 

EPA sought input from the public and 

peer reviewers as required by TSCA and 

associated regulations. 

Summary of Legal Basis: In 

accordance with TSCA section 6(a), if 

EPA determines in a final risk 

evaluation completed under TSCA 6(b) 

that the manufacture, processing, 

distribution in commerce, use, or 

disposal of a chemical substance or 

mixture, or that any combination of 

such activities, presents an 

unreasonable risk of injury to health or 

the environment, the Agency must issue 

regulations requiring one or more of the 

following actions to the extent necessary 

so that the chemical substance no longer 

presents an unreasonable risk: (1) 

Prohibit or otherwise restrict 

manufacture, processing, or distribution 

in commerce; (2) Prohibit or otherwise 

restrict for a particular use or above a set 

concentration; (3) Require minimum 

warnings and instructions with respect 

to use, distribution in commerce, or 

disposal; (4) Require recordkeeping or 

testing; (5) Prohibit or regulate any 

manner or method of commercial use; 

(6) Prohibit or regulate any manner or


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9497 

method of disposal; and/or (7) Direct 

manufacturers or processors to give 

notice of the unreasonable risk to 

distributors and replace or repurchase 

products if required. 

Alternatives: TSCA section 6(a) 

requires EPA to address by rule 

chemical substances that the Agency 

determines present unreasonable risk 

upon completion of a final risk 

evaluation. As required under TSCA 

section 6(c), EPA considered one or 

more primary alternative regulatory 

actions as part of the development of the 

proposed rule. The primary alternative 

regulatory action considered by EPA in 

the proposed rule is to: prohibit 

manufacture (including import), 

processing, distribution in commerce 

and commercial use of chrysotile 

asbestos in bulk form or as part of: 

Chrysotile asbestos diaphragms in the 

chlor-alkali industry and for chrysotile 

asbestos-containing sheet gaskets in 

chemical production (with prohibitions 

taking effect five years after the effective 

date of the final rule) and require, prior 

to the prohibition taking effect, 

compliance with an existing chemicals 

exposure limit (ECEL) for the processing 

and commercial use of chrysotile 

asbestos for these uses; and to prohibit 

manufacture (including import), 

processing, distribution in commerce, 

and commercial use of chrysotile 

asbestos-containing brake blocks in the 

oil industry; aftermarket automotive 

chrysotile asbestos-containing brakes/ 

linings; and other vehicle friction 

products (with prohibitions taking effect 

two years after the effective date of the 

final rule and with additional 

requirements for disposal). The primary 

alternative regulatory action considered 

in the proposed rule also included 

prohibitions on manufacture (including 

import), processing, and distribution in 

commerce of aftermarket automotive 

chrysotile asbestos-containing brakes/ 

linings for consumer use and other 

chrysotile asbestos-containing gaskets 

for consumer use (with prohibitions 

taking effect two years after the effective 

date of the final rule). The primary 

alternative regulatory action also would 

require disposal of chrysotile asbestoscontaining materials in a manner 

identical to the proposed option, with 

additional provisions for downstream 

notification and signage and labeling. 

EPA did not consider additional 

alternative regulatory actions in the 

proposed rule. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: As 

estimated in the proposed rule, 

converting the asbestos diaphragm cells 

to membrane cells in response to the 

proposed rule is predicted to require an 

incremental investment of 

approximately $1.8 billion across all 

nine plants predicted to be using 

asbestos diaphragms when the rule goes 

into effect. Compared to this baseline 

trend, the incremental net effect of the 

proposed rule on the chlor-alkali 

industry over a 20-year period using a 

3 percent discount rate is estimated to 

range from an annualized cost of about 

$49 million per year to annualized 

savings of approximately $35 million 

per year, depending on whether the 

higher grade of caustic soda produced 

by membrane cells continues to 

command a premium price. Using a 7 

percent discount rate, the incremental 

annualized net effect ranges from a cost 

of $87 million per year to savings of 

approximately $40,000 per year, again 

depending on whether there are revenue 

gains from the caustic soda production. 

EPA also estimates that approximately 

1,800 sets of automotive brakes or brake 

linings containing asbestos may be 

imported into the U.S. each year, 

representing 0.002% of the total U.S. 

market for aftermarket brakes. The cost 

of a prohibition would be minimal due 

to the ready availability of alternative 

products that are only slightly more 

expensive (an average cost increase of 

$4 per brake). The proposed rule is 

estimated to result in total annualized 

costs for aftermarket automotive brakes 

of approximately $25,000 per year using 

a 3% discount rate and $18,000 per year 

using a 7% discount rate. EPA did not 

have information to estimate the costs of 

prohibiting asbestos for the remaining 

uses subject to the proposed rule (sheet 

gaskets used in chemical production, 

brake blocks in the oil industry, other 

vehicle friction products, or other 

gaskets), so there are additional 

unquantified costs. EPA believes that 

the use of these asbestos-containing 

products has declined over time, and 

that they are now used in at most small 

segments of the industries. EPA’s 

Economic Analysis for the proposed 

rule quantified the benefits from 

avoided cases of lung cancer, 

mesothelioma, ovarian cancer, and 

laryngeal cancer due to reduced 

asbestos exposures to workers, 

occupational non-users (ONUs), and 

DIYers related to the rule’s requirements 

for chlor-alkali diaphragms, sheet 

gaskets for chemical production, and 

aftermarket brakes. The combined 

national quantified benefits of avoided 

cancer cases associated with these 

products are approximately $3,100 per 

year using a 3% discount rate and 

$1,200 per year using a 7% discount 

rate, based on the cancer risk estimates 

from the Part 1 risk evaluation. EPA did 

not estimate the aggregate benefits of the 

requirements for oilfield brake blocks, 

other vehicle friction products or other 

gaskets because the Agency did not have 

sufficient information on the number of 

individuals likely to be affected by the 

proposed rule. Thus, as proposed, the 

rule may yield additional unquantified 

benefits from reducing exposures 

associated with these uses. There would 

also be unquantified benefits due to 

other avoided adverse health effects 

associated with asbestos exposure 

including respiratory effects (e.g., 

asbestosis, non-malignant respiratory 

disease, deficits in pulmonary function, 

diffuse pleural thickening and pleural 

plaques) and immunological and 

lymphoreticular effects. In addition to 

the benefits of avoided adverse health 

effects associated with chrysotile 

asbestos exposure, the proposed rule is 

expected to generate significant benefits 

from reduced air pollution associated 

with electricity generation. Based on a 

sensitivity screening-level analysis that 

EPA conducted, converting asbestos 

diaphragm cells to membrane cells 

could yield tens of millions of dollars 

per year in environmental and health 

benefits from reduced emissions of 

particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, 

nitrogen oxides, and carbon dioxide. 

Risks: In the TSCA Risk Evaluation 

for Asbestos, Part 1: Chrysotile 

Asbestos, EPA determined there is 

unreasonable risk of injury to health 

from conditions of use of chrysotile 

asbestos. The health endpoint driving 

EPA’s determination of unreasonable 

risk for chrysotile asbestos under the 

conditions of use is cancer from 

inhalation exposure. This unreasonable 

risk includes the risk of mesothelioma, 

lung cancer, and other cancers from 

chronic inhalation. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 04/12/22 87 FR 21706 

Notice of Data 

Availability.

03/17/23 88 FR 16389 

Final Rule ............ 01/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal. 

Federalism: This action may have 

federalism implications as defined in 

E.O. 13132. 

International Impacts: This regulatory 

action will be likely to have 

international trade and investment 

effects, or otherwise be of international 

interest. 

Additional Information: EPA–HQ– 

OPPT–2021–0057. 

Sectors Affected: 8111 Automotive 

Repair and Maintenance; 325 Chemical 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I 
9498 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Manufacturing; 332 Fabricated Metal 

Product Manufacturing; 339991 Gasket, 

Packing, and Sealing Device 

Manufacturing; 4231 Motor Vehicle and 

Motor Vehicle Parts and Supplies 

Merchant Wholesalers; 441 Motor 

Vehicle and Parts Dealers; 211 Oil and 

Gas Extraction; 336 Transportation 

Equipment Manufacturing. 

URL For More Information: https://

www.epa.gov/assessing-and-managingchemicals-under-tsca/risk-managementasbestos-part-1-chrysotile-asbestos. 

Agency Contact: Peter Gimlin, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution 

Prevention, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW, Mail Code 7404M, Washington, DC 

20460, Phone: 202 566–0515, Fax: 202 

566–0473, Email: gimlin.peter@epa.gov. 

Ana Corado, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Chemical 

Safety and Pollution Prevention, 1200 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Mail Code 

7404M, Washington, DC 20460, Phone: 

202 564–0140, Email: corado.ana@

epa.gov. 

RIN: 2070–AK86 

EPA—OCSPP 

215. Reconsideration of the Dust-Lead

Hazard Standards and Dust-Lead Post

Abatement Clearance Levels [2070–

AK91]

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Unfunded Mandates: This action may 

affect State, local or tribal governments 

and the private sector. 

Legal Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2681; 15 

U.S.C. 2682; 15 U.S.C. 2683; 15 U.S.C. 

2684; 15 U.S.C. 2686; 42 U.S.C. 4851b; 

42 U.S.C. 4852d 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 745. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: Addressing childhood lead 

exposure is a priority for the 

Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA). This rule addresses health 

concerns for all affected communities, 

including children living in 

communities with environmental justice 

concerns, who have significantly higher 

blood lead levels (BLLs) than other 

children. As part of EPA’s efforts to 

reduce childhood lead exposure, and in 

accordance with a U.S. Court of Appeals 

for the Ninth Circuit 2021 opinion, EPA 

proposed to lower the dust-lead hazard 

standards (DLHS) from 10 micrograms 

per square foot (mg/ft2) and 100 mg/ft2 

for floors and window sills to any 

reportable level as analyzed by a 

laboratory recognized by EPA’s National 

Lead Laboratory Accreditation Program. 

This is a non-numeric value that the 

Agency refers to as greater than zero mg/ 

ft2 and may vary based on laboratory or 

test. While EPA’s DLHS do not compel 

property owners or occupants to 

evaluate their property for lead-based 

paint (LBP) hazards nor take control 

actions (40 CFR 745.61(c)), if an LBP 

activity such as an abatement is 

performed, then EPA’s regulations set 

requirements for doing so (40 CFR 

745.220(d)). EPA also proposed to 

change the dust-lead clearance levels 

(DLCL), which are the values used to 

determine when abatement work can be 

considered complete, from 10 mg/ft2, 

100 mg/ft2 and 400 mg/ft2 for floors, 

window sills, and window troughs to 3 

mg/ft2, 20 mg/ft2, and 25 mg/ft2, 

respectively. Under this proposal, the 

DLHS for floors and window sills would 

not be the same as the DLCL for floors 

and window sills (i.e., the DLHS and 

DLCL would be decoupled). 

Accordingly, dust-lead hazards could 

remain after an abatement due to the 

different statutory direction that 

Congress provided EPA with respect to 

the DLCL. Additionally, EPA proposed 

to change the definition of abatement so 

that the recommendation for action 

applies when dust-lead loadings are at 

or above the DLCL, as well as several 

other amendments, including revising 

the definition of target housing to 

conform with the statute. The Agency 

consulted with State, local and Tribal 

government officials during the 

rulemaking, and held a public webinar 

in summer of 2023. 

Statement of Need: On July 9, 2019, 

EPA promulgated a final rule to lower 

the DLHS from 40 micrograms of lead 

per square foot (mg/ft2) to 10 mg/ft2 for 

floors, and from 250 mg/ft2 to 100 mg/ft2 

for window sills. EPA’s dust-lead 

clearance levels (DLCL) indicate the 

amount of lead in dust on a surface 

following the completion of an 

abatement activity. On January 6, 2021, 

EPA promulgated a final rule to lower 

the DLCL from 40 mg/ft2 to 10 mg/ft2 for 

floors, and from 250 mg/ft2 to 100 mg/ft2 

for window sills. The Agency began a 

reconsideration of the July 2019 and 

January 2021 final rules in keeping with 

Executive Order 13990 (addressing the 

protection of public health and the 

environment and restoring science to 

tackle the climate crisis). In addition, on 

May 14, 2021, the United States Court 

of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued 

an opinion to remand without vacatur 

the 2019 DLHS final rule and directed 

EPA to reconsider the 2019 DLHS rule 

in conjunction with a reconsideration of 

the DLCL. EPA proposed its 

reconsideration rule on August 1, 2023. 

Summary of Legal Basis: EPA 

proposed this rule under the authority 

of sections 401, 402, 403, 404, and 406 

of the Toxic Substances Control Act 

(TSCA), 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq., as 

amended by Title X of the Housing and 

Community Development Act of 1992 

(also known as the Residential LeadBased Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 

1992 or ‘‘Title X’’) (Pub. L. 102–550), 

and section 237(c) of Title II of Division 

K of the Consolidated Appropriations 

Act, 2017 (Pub. L. 115–31), as well as 

sections 1004 and 1018 of Title X (42 

U.S.C. 4851b, 4852d), as amended by 

section 237(b) of Title II of Division K 

of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 

2017. 

Alternatives: EPA considered 2 

alternative approaches for revising the 

DLHS and 1 alternative approach for 

revising the DLCL. One of the 

alternative approaches for revising the 

DLHS is a numeric standard based on 

the probability of exceedance of one or 

more IQ or BLL metrics as determined 

by the Agency. The other alternative 

approach for revising the DLHS would 

use the background dust-lead levels of 

housing built in 1978 and beyond as the 

DLHS (known as ‘‘post-1977 

background’’). For the numeric standard 

approach, EPA evaluated several 

numeric DLHS candidates that the 

Agency believed to be appropriate given 

the health and exposure metrics of 

interest. The numeric DLHS candidates 

were 1/10 mg/ft2 (i.e., 1 mg/ft2 for floors 

and 10 mg/ft2 for sills), 2/20 mg/ft2, 3/ 

30 mg/ft2, and 5/40 mg/ft2 and those 

values were compared to the specified 

BLL and IQ metrics to estimate the 

probability of exceeding the BLL or IQ 

targets. The post-1977 background 

approach would establish the DLHS for 

target housing and COFs using post1977 background dust-lead levels, and 

address disparities in the dust-lead 

levels that children in target housing 

may be exposed to and the 

corresponding disparate health risks. 

This approach would also align with the 

focus of Title X on lead hazards in 

housing constructed before 1978. Using 

this approach, DLHS would be 

established at 0.2 mg/ft2 for floors and 

0.8 mg/ft2 for window sills as the dustlead levels that would result in adverse 

human health effects. The alternative 

approach EPA considered for revising 

the DLCL would be to employ the 

current enforceable levels established by 

the New York City Department of Health 

and Mental Hygiene of 5 mg/ft2 for 

floors, 40 mg/ft2 for window sills and 

100 mg/ft2 for window troughs. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: EPA 

analyzed the potential incremental 

impacts associated with this 

rulemaking. The analysis focused 

specifically on the subset of target 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9499 

housing and child-occupied facilities 

affected by this rulemaking. Although 

the DLHS and DLCL do not compel 

specific actions under the LBP 

Activities Rule to address identified 

LBP hazards, the DLHS and DLCL are 

directly incorporated by reference into 

certain requirements mandated by HUD 

in the housing subject to HUD’s Lead 

Safe Housing Rule (LSHR). As such, the 

analysis estimates incremental costs and 

benefits for two categories of events: (1) 

where dust-wipe testing occurs to 

comply with the LSHR and (2) where 

dust wipe testing occurs in response to 

blood lead testing that detects a blood 

lead level (BLL) above state or Federal 

action levels. This rule would result in 

reduced exposure to lead, yielding 

benefits to residents of pre-1978 housing 

from avoided adverse health effects. For 

the subset of adverse health effects that 

were quantified (i.e., the effect of 

avoided IQ decreases on lifetime 

earnings as an indicator of improved 

cognitive function), the estimated 

monetized and annualized benefits are 

$1.069 billion to $4.684 billion per year 

using a 3% discount rate, and $231 

million to $1.013 billion per year using 

a 7% discount rate. These benefits 

calculations are sensitive to the 

discount rate used and the range in the 

estimated number of lead hazard 

reduction events triggered by children 

with tested BLLs above state or Federal 

action levels. With respect to the latter, 

the wide range is driven largely by 

uncertainty about the BLLs at which 

action might be taken, since in many 

states the action level is currently higher 

than the Federal blood lead reference 

value. Additionally, there are 

unquantified benefits. These additional 

benefits include avoided adverse health 

effects in children, including decreased 

attention-related behavioral problems, 

decreased cognitive performance, 

reduced post-natal growth, delayed 

puberty, and decreased kidney function. 

These additional unquantified benefits 

also include avoided adverse health 

effects in adults, including 

cardiovascular mortality and impacts on 

reproductive function and outcomes. 

This rule is estimated to result in 

quantified costs of $536 million to $784 

million per year using both a 3% and a 

7% discount rate. These costs are 

expected to accrue to landlords, owners 

and operators of child-occupied 

facilities, residential remodelers, and 

abatement firms. Real estate agents and 

brokers may incur negligible costs 

related to the target housing definition 

amendment. The cost calculations are 

highly sensitive to the range in the 

estimated number of lead hazard 

reduction events triggered by children 

with elevated BLLs. In the events 

affected by this rule, incremental costs 

can be incurred for specialized cleaning 

used to reduce dust-lead loadings (i.e., 

quantity of lead per unit of surface area) 

to below the clearance levels. In some 

instances, floors will also be sealed, 

overlaid, or replaced, or window sills 

will be sealed or repainted. Additional 

costs may result from the retesting of 

lead dust levels. Because of the lower 

laboratory reporting limits necessary for 

testing lead dust levels under this rule, 

incremental laboratory test costs are 

likely to increase. 

Risks: This rulemaking addresses the 

risk of adverse health effects associated 

with dust-lead exposures in children 

living in pre-1978 housing and childoccupied facilities, as well as associated 

potential health effects in this 

subpopulation. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 08/01/23 88 FR 50444 

Final Rule ............ 10/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State, Tribal. 

Federalism: This action may have 

federalism implications as defined in 

E.O. 13132. 

Additional Information: Related to 

RIN 2070–AK66. 

Sectors Affected: 92511 

Administration of Housing Programs; 

541350 Building Inspection Services; 

624410 Child Day Care Services; 236 

Construction of Buildings; 611110 

Elementary and Secondary Schools; 

541330 Engineering Services; 531110 

Lessors of Residential Buildings and 

Dwellings; 92811 National Security; 

611519 Other Technical and Trade 

Schools; 531 Real Estate; 562910 

Remediation Services; 531311 

Residential Property Managers; 238 

Specialty Trade Contractors; 541380 

Testing Laboratories. 

URL For More Information: https://

www.epa.gov/lead. 

Agency Contact: Claire Brisse, Office 

of Chemical Safety and Pollution 

Prevention, Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW, Mail Code 7404M, Washington, DC 

20460–0001, Phone: 202 564–9004, 

Email: brisse.claire@epa.gov. 

Marc Edmonds, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Chemical 

Safety and Pollution Prevention, 1200 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Mail Code 

7404M, Washington, DC 20460, Phone: 

202 566–0758, Email: edmonds.marc@

epa.gov. 

RIN: 2070–AK91 

EPA—OFFICE OF LAND AND 

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT (OLEM) 

Final Rule Stage 

216. Designating PFOA and PFOS as 

CERCLA Hazardous Substances [2050– 

AH09] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 9602 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 302. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: Under the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act of 

1980, as amended (‘‘CERCLA’’ or 

‘‘Superfund’’), the Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) 

is moving to finalize the designation of 

perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and 

perfluoro octane sulfonic acid (PFOS), 

including their salts and structural 

isomers, as hazardous substances. 

CERCLA authorizes the Administrator 

to promulgate regulations designating as 

hazardous substances such elements, 

compounds, mixtures, solutions, and 

substances which, when released into 

the environment, may present 

substantial danger to the public health 

or welfare or the environment. Such a 

designation would ultimately facilitate 

cleanup of contaminated sites and 

reduce human exposure to these 

‘‘forever’’ chemicals. 

Statement of Need: Designating PFOA 

and PFOS as CERCLA hazardous 

substances will require reporting of 

releases of PFOA and PFOS that meet or 

exceed the reportable quantity assigned 

to these substances. This will enable 

Federal, State, Tribal and local 

authorities to collect information 

regarding the location and extent of 

releases. 

Summary of Legal Basis: No aspect of 

this action is required by statute or court 

order. 

Alternatives: The Agency identified 

through the 2019 PFAS Action Plan that 

one of the goals was to designate PFOA 

and PFOS as hazardous substances. EPA 

determined that we have enough 

information to propose this designation. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

EPA is analyzing the potential costs and 

benefits associated with this action with 

respect to the reporting of any release of 

the subject hazardous substances to the 

Federal, State, and local authorities. 

Currently EPA expects to estimate lower 

and upper-bound reporting cost 

scenarios. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9500 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Risks: This is a reporting rule and will 

enable Federal, State, Tribal and local 

authorities to collect information 

regarding the location and extent of 

releases. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 09/06/22 87 FR 54415 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

11/07/22 

Final Rule ............ 03/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses, 

Governmental Jurisdictions, 

Organizations. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State, Tribal. 

Additional Information: 

Sectors Affected: 325998 All Other 

Miscellaneous Chemical Product and 

Preparation Manufacturing; 811192 Car 

Washes; 314110 Carpet and Rug Mills; 

332813 Electroplating, Plating, 

Polishing, Anodizing, and Coloring; 

922160 Fire Protection; 488119 Other 

Airport Operations; 325510 Paint and 

Coating Manufacturing; 322121 Paper 

(except Newsprint) Mills; 322130 

Paperboard Mills; 424710 Petroleum 

Bulk Stations and Terminals; 324110 

Petroleum Refineries; 325992 

Photographic Film, Paper, Plate, and 

Chemical Manufacturing; 562212 Solid 

Waste Landfill. 

Agency Contact: Linda Strauss, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Land and Emergency 

Management, 1301 Constitution Ave. 

NW, Washington, DC 20460, Phone: 202 

564–0797, Email: strauss.linda@

epa.gov. 

Sicy Jacob, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Office of Land and Emergency 

Management, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Avenue NW, Mail Code 5104A, 

Washington, DC 20460, Phone: 202 564– 

8019, Fax: 202 564–2625, Email: 

jacob.sicy@epa.gov. 

RIN: 2050–AH09 

EPA—OLEM 

217. Hazardous and Solid Waste

Management System: Disposal of Coal

Combustion Residuals From Electric

Utilities; Legacy Surface Impoundments

[2050–AH14]

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6907(a); 42 

U.S.C. 6912(a); 42 U.S.C. 6944; 42 

U.S.C. 6945(a)(d) 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 257. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: On April 17, 2015, the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA 

or the Agency) promulgated national 

minimum criteria for existing and new 

coal combustion residuals (CCR) 

landfills and existing and new CCR 

surface impoundments. On August 21, 

2018, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals 

issued its opinion in the case of Utility 

Solid Waste Activities Group, et al v. 

EPA, which vacated and remanded the 

provision that exempted inactive 

impoundments at inactive facilities 

from the CCR rule. In May 2023, EPA 

proposed regulations to implement this 

part of the court decision for inactive 

CCR surface impoundments at inactive 

utilities, or ‘‘legacy CCR surface 

impoundments’’. This proposal 

included adding a new definition for 

legacy CCR surface impoundments. EPA 

also proposed to require such legacy 

CCR surface impoundments to follow 

existing regulatory requirements for 

fugitive dust, groundwater monitoring, 

and closure, or other technical 

requirements. Finally, EPA proposed 

requirements for CCR management units 

including a facility evaluation and to 

follow existing regulatory requirements 

for groundwater monitoring, corrective 

action, and closure for all CCR 

contamination (regardless of how or 

when that CCR was placed) at a 

regulated facility. After reviewing the 

public comments on the proposed rule, 

EPA will take final action. 

Statement of Need: On April 17, 2015, 

the EPA finalized national regulations to 

regulate the disposal of Coal 

Combustion Residuals (CCR) as solid 

waste under subtitle D of the Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 

(2015 CCR final rule). In response to the 

Utility Solid Waste Activities Group v. 

EPA decision, this proposed 

rulemaking, if finalized, would bring 

inactive surface impoundments at 

inactive facilities (legacy surface 

impoundments) into the regulated 

universe. 

Summary of Legal Basis: No statutory 

or judicial deadlines apply to this rule. 

The EPA is taking this action in 

response to an August 21, 2018, court 

decision that vacated and remanded the 

provision that exempted inactive 

impoundments at inactive electric 

utilities from the 2015 CCR final rule. 

The proposed rule would be established 

under the authority of the Solid Waste 

Disposal Act of 1970, as amended by the 

Resource Conservation and Recovery 

Act of 1976 (RCRA), as amended by the 

Hazardous and Solid Waste 

Amendments of 1984 (HWSA) and the 

Water Infrastructure Improvements for 

the Nation Act of 2016. 

Alternatives: The Agency issued an 

advance notice of proposed rulemaking 

(ANPRM) on October 14, 2020 (85 FR 

65015), which included public notice 

and opportunity for comment on this 

effort. We have not identified at this 

time any significant alternatives for 

analysis. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

Agency will determine anticipated costs 

and benefits later as it is currently too 

early in the process. 

Risks: The Agency will estimate the 

risk reductions and impacts later as it is 

currently too early in the process. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite

ANPRM ............... 10/14/20 85 FR 65015 

NPRM .................. 05/18/23 88 FR 31982 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

07/17/23 

Final Rule ............ 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State. 

Additional Information: EPA–HQ– 

OLEM–2020–0107. 

Sectors Affected: 221112 Fossil Fuel 

Electric Power Generation. 

URL For More Information: https://

www.epa.gov/coalash. 

URL For Public Comments: https://

www.regulations.gov/docket/EPA-HQOLEM-2020-0107. 

Agency Contact: Michelle Lloyd, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Land and Emergency 

Management, Mail Code 5304T, 1200 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20460, Phone: 202 566–0560, Email: 

lloyd.michelle@epa.gov. 

Frank Behan, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Land and 

Emergency Management, Mail Code 

5304T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, 

Washington, DC 20460, Phone: 202 566– 

1730, Email: behan.frank@epa.gov. 

RIN: 2050–AH14 

EPA—OLEM 

218. Clean Water Act Hazardous

Substance Facility Response Plans

[2050–AH17]

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1321 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 142, subpart B. 

Legal Deadline: NPRM, Judicial, 

March 12, 2022, 19–cv–02516–VM. A 

March 12, 2020, consent decree requires 

EPA to sign a proposed rule within 24 

months (by 3/12/2022) and sign a final 

rule within 30 months of publication of 

the proposed rule. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9501 

Final, Judicial, September 30, 2024, 

19–cv–02516–VM. Requires EPA to sign 

a proposed rule within 24 months (by 3/ 

12/2022) and sign a final rule within 30 

months of publication of the proposed 

rule (estimating by 9/30/2024). 

Abstract: The Clean Water Act (CWA) 

provides that regulations shall be issued 

‘‘which require an owner or operator of 

a tank vessel or facility . . . to prepare 

and submit . . . a plan for responding, 

to the maximum extent practicable, to a 

worst-case discharge, and to a 

substantial threat of such a discharge, of 

. . . a hazardous substance.’’ EPA was 

sued for failure to fulfill this mandatory 

duty imposed by Congress. This 

regulatory action is being conducted 

under the terms of a consent decree 

entered into on March 12, 2020, which 

requires that a proposed action is signed 

within 24 months of the final agreement 

and that a final action follow within 30 

months of the publication of the 

proposed rule. Subsequently, the 

Environmental Protection Agency 

proposed a regulatory action to require 

planning for worst case discharges of 

CWA hazardous substances under 

section 311(j)(5)(A). EPA plans to 

promulgate a final rule by Spring 2024 

meet the terms of the Consent Decree. 

Statement of Need: Worst case 

discharges of CWA hazardous 

substances could result in impacts to 

drinking water; impacts to industrial 

and agricultural water uses; commercial 

and recreational waterway closures; 

impacts to fish and other aquatic life; 

impacts to ecosystems and the 

environment; injuries, hospitalizations, 

and fatalities; emergency response costs; 

transaction costs; direct property 

impacts; property value impacts; costs 

from sheltering in place and 

evacuations; impacts to sensitive or 

vulnerable populations; and fiscal 

revenue impacts. The purpose of this 

regulation would be to plan for and 

mitigate these damages. 

Summary of Legal Basis: CWA 

Section 311(j)(5) directs the president to 

issue regulations to ‘‘require an owner 

or operator of a tank vessel or facility 

. . . to prepare and submit . . . a plan 

for responding, to the maximum extent 

practicable, to a worst case discharge, 

and to a substantial threat of such a 

discharge, of . . . a hazardous 

substance.’’ The EPA was sued for not 

promulgating the hazardous substance 

worst case planning regulations and 

entered into a consent decree with the 

plaintiffs that requires the EPA to 

publish a proposed rule by March 12, 

2022 and take final action by September 

12, 2024. 

Alternatives: The EPA is considering 

a regulatory program modeled on EPA’s 

Facility Response Plan program for 

worst case discharges of oil. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

Agency will determine anticipated costs 

and benefits later as it is currently too 

early in the process. 

Risks: To help determine the risks to 

be addressed by this rulemaking, EPA is 

reviewing historical data on discharges 

of CWA hazardous substances. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 03/28/22 87 FR 17890 

Final Rule ............ 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: Local, 

Tribal. 

Additional Information: 

Agency Contact: Rebecca Broussard, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Land and Emergency 

Management, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Avenue NW, Mail Code 5104A, 

Washington, DC 20460, Phone: 202 564– 

6706, Email: broussard.rebecca@

epa.gov. 

RIN: 2050–AH17 

EPA—OLEM 

219. Accidental Release Prevention 

Requirements: Risk Management 

Program Under the Clean Air Act; Safer 

Communities by Chemical Accident 

Prevention [2050–AH22] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7412 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 68. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: On August 31, 2022, the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

published proposed amendments to its 

Risk Management Program (RMP) 

regulations as a result of Agency review. 

The proposed revisions included several 

changes and amplifications to the 

accident prevention program 

requirements, enhancements to the 

emergency preparedness requirements, 

increased public availability of chemical 

hazard information, and several other 

changes to certain regulatory definitions 

or points of clarification. Such 

amendments seek to improve chemical 

process safety; assist in planning, 

preparedness, and responding to RMPreportable accidents; and improve 

public awareness of chemical hazards at 

regulated sources. EPA plans to publish 

the final rule in December 2023. 

Statement of Need: On January 13, 

2017, the EPA published a final RMP 

rule (2017 Amendments) to prevent and 

mitigate the effect of accidental releases 

of hazardous chemicals from facilities 

that use, manufacture, and store them. 

The 2017 Amendments were a result of 

Executive Order 13650, Improving 

Chemical Facility Safety and Security, 

which directed EPA (and several other 

Federal agencies) to, among other 

things, modernize policies, regulations, 

and standards to enhance safety and 

security in chemical facilities. The 2017 

Amendments rule contained various 

new provisions applicable to RMPregulated facilities addressing 

prevention program elements, 

emergency coordination with local 

responders, and information availability 

to the public. EPA received three 

petitions for reconsideration of the 2017 

Amendments rule under CAA section 

307(d)(7)(B). On December 19, 2019, 

EPA promulgated a final RMP rule 

(2019 Revisions) that acts on the 

reconsideration. The 2019 Revisions 

rule repealed several major provisions 

of the 2017 Amendments and retained 

other provisions with modifications. On 

January 20, 2021, Executive Order 

13990, Protecting Public Health and the 

Environment and Restoring Science To 

Tackle the Climate Crisis (E.O. 13990), 

directed federal agencies to review 

existing regulations and take action to 

address priorities established by the 

new administration including bolstering 

resilience to the impact of climate 

change and prioritizing environmental 

justice. The EPA is considering 

developing a regulatory action to revise 

the current RMP regulations. The 

proposed rule would address the 

administration’s priorities and focus on 

regulatory revisions completed since 

2017. The proposed rule would also 

expect to contain a number of proposed 

modifications to the RMP regulations 

based in part on stakeholder feedback 

received from RMP public listening 

sessions held on June 16 and July 8, 

2021. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The CAA 

section 112(r)(7)(A) authorizes the EPA 

Administrator to promulgate accidental 

release prevention, detection, and 

correction requirements, which may 

include monitoring, record keeping, 

reporting, training, vapor recovery, 

secondary containment, and other 

design, equipment, work practice, and 

operational requirements. The CAA 

section 112(r)(7)(B) authorizes the 

Administrator to promulgate reasonable 

regulations and appropriate guidance to 

provide, to the greatest extent 

practicable, for the prevention and 

detection of accidental releases of 

regulated substances and for response to 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9502 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

such releases by the owners or operators 

of the sources of such releases. 

Alternatives: The EPA currently plans 

to prepare a notice of proposed 

rulemaking that would provide the 

public an opportunity to comment on 

the proposal, and any regulatory 

alternatives that may be identified 

within the preamble to the proposed 

rulemaking. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Costs 

may include the burden on regulated 

entities associated with implementing 

new or revised requirements including 

program implementation, training, 

equipment purchases, and 

recordkeeping, as applicable. Some 

costs could also accrue to implementing 

agencies and local governments, due to 

new or revised provisions associated 

with emergency response. Benefits will 

result from avoiding the harmful 

accident consequences to communities 

and the environment, such as deaths, 

injuries, and property damage, 

environmental damage, and from 

mitigating the effects of releases that 

may occur. Similar benefits will accrue 

to regulated entities and their 

employees. 

Risks: The proposed action would 

address the risks associated with 

accidental releases of listed regulated 

toxic and flammable substances to the 

air from stationary sources. Substances 

regulated under the RMP program 

include highly toxic and flammable 

substances that can cause deaths, 

injuries, property and environmental 

damage, and other on- and off-site 

consequences if accidentally released. 

The proposed action would reduce 

these risks by potentially making 

accidental releases less likely, and by 

mitigating the severity of releases that 

may occur. The proposed action would 

not address the risks of non-accidental 

chemical releases, accidental releases of 

non-regulated substances, chemicals 

released to other media, and air releases 

from mobile sources. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 08/31/22 87 FR 53556 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

10/31/22 

Final Rule ............ 12/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: 

Undetermined. 

Sectors Affected: 325 Chemical 

Manufacturing; 49313 Farm Product 

Warehousing and Storage; 42491 Farm 

Supplies Merchant Wholesalers; 311511 

Fluid Milk Manufacturing; 311 Food 

Manufacturing; 221112 Fossil Fuel 

Electric Power Generation; 311411 

Frozen Fruit, Juice, and Vegetable 

Manufacturing; 49311 General 

Warehousing and Storage; 31152 Ice 

Cream and Frozen Dessert 

Manufacturing; 311612 Meat Processed 

from Carcasses; 211112 Natural Gas 

Liquid Extraction; 32519 Other Basic 

Organic Chemical Manufacturing; 42469 

Other Chemical and Allied Products 

Merchant Wholesalers; 49319 Other 

Warehousing and Storage; 322 Paper 

Manufacturing; 42471 Petroleum Bulk 

Stations and Terminals; 32411 

Petroleum Refineries; 311615 Poultry 

Processing; 49312 Refrigerated 

Warehousing and Storage; 22132 

Sewage Treatment Facilities; 11511 

Support Activities for Crop Production; 

22131 Water Supply and Irrigation 

Systems. 

Agency Contact: Deanne Grant, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Land and Emergency 

Management, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460, 

Phone: 202 564–1096, Email: 

grant.deanne@epa.gov. 

RIN: 2050–AH22 

EPA—OFFICE OF WATER (OW) 

Final Rule Stage 

220. Federal Baseline Water Quality 

Standards for Indian Reservations 

[2040–AF62] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 33 U.S.C. 

1313(c)(4)(B) 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 131. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: On April 27, 2023, the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

Administrator signed a proposed rule to 

establish water quality standards (WQS) 

for waters on Indian reservations that do 

not have WQS under the Clean Water 

Act (CWA). This rule will help advance 

President Biden’s commitment to 

strengthening the nation-to-nation 

relationships with Indian country. Fifty 

years after enactment of the CWA, over 

80% of Indian reservations do not have 

this foundational CWA protection for 

their waters. Addressing this lack of 

CWA-effective WQS for the waters of 

more than 250 Indian reservations is a 

priority for EPA, given that WQS are 

central to implementing the water 

quality framework of the CWA. 

Promulgating baseline WQS would 

provide more scientific rigor and 

regulatory certainty to National 

Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 

(NPDES) permits for discharges to these 

waters. Consistent with EPA’s 

regulations, the baseline WQS include 

designated uses, water quality criteria to 

protect those uses, and antidegradation 

policies to protect high quality waters. 

EPA consulted with tribes in the 

summer of 2021 during the pre-proposal 

phase and in the summer of 2023, 

concurrent with the public comment 

period associated with the proposal. 

Statement of Need: The Federal 

government has recognized 574 tribes. 

More than 300 of these tribes have 

reservation lands and are eligible to 

apply for ‘‘treatment in a similar manner 

as a state’’ (TAS) to administer a WQS 

program. Only 84 tribes, out of over 300 

tribes with reservations, currently have 

such TAS authorization to administer a 

WQS program. Of these 84 tribes, only 

47 tribes to date have adopted WQS and 

submitted them to EPA for review and 

approval under the Clean Water Act 

(CWA). As a result, 50 years after 

enactment of the CWA, over 80% of 

Indian reservations do not have this 

foundational protection expected by 

Congress as laid out in the CWA for 

their waters. Addressing this lack of 

CWA-effective WQS for the waters of 

more than 250 Indian reservations is a 

priority for EPA, given that WQS are 

central to implementing the water 

quality framework of the CWA. 

Although it is EPA’s preference for 

tribes to obtain TAS and develop WQS 

tailored to the tribes’ individual 

environmental goals and reservation 

waters, EPA’s promulgation of baseline 

WQS would serve to safeguard water 

quality until tribes obtain TAS and 

adopt and administer CWA WQS 

themselves. 

Summary of Legal Basis: While CWA 

section 303 clearly contemplates WQS 

for all waters of the United States, it 

does not explicitly address WQS for 

Indian country waters where tribes lack 

CWA-effective WQS. Under CWA 

section 303(a) states were required to 

adopt WQS for all interstate and 

intrastate waters. Where a state does not 

establish such standards, Congress 

directed EPA to do so under the CWA 

section 303(b). These provisions are 

consistent with Congress’ design of the 

CWA as a general statute applying to all 

waters of the United States, including 

those within Indian country. Several 

provisions of the CWA provide EPA 

with the authority to propose this rule. 

Section 501(a) of the CWA provides that 

‘‘[t]he Administrator is authorized to 

prescribe such regulations as are 

necessary to carry out his functions 

under this chapter.’’ Section 303(c)(4)(B) 

of the CWA provides that ‘‘[t]he 

Administrator shall promptly prepare 

and publish proposed regulations 

setting forth a revised or new water 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9503 

quality standard for the navigable 

waters involved . . . in any case where 

the Administrator determines that a 

revised or new standard is necessary to 

meet the requirements of [the Act].’’ In 

2001 the EPA Administrator made an 

Administrator’s Determination that new 

or revised WQS are necessary for certain 

Indian country waters. Today’s action is 

the first step toward fulfilling that 

outstanding Determination. 

Alternatives: No other alternatives 

considered. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: Total 

cost estimates range from $15.51 million 

in annualized costs over 20 years at a 3 

percent discount rate (with $6.1 million 

in one-time costs) to $30.54 in 

annualized costs over 20 years at a 3 

percent discount rate (with $1.23 

million in one-time costs). Using a 

discount rate of 7 percent over 20 years, 

total annualized costs range from $18.94 

million (also with $6.1 million in onetime costs) to $36.45 million (also with 

$1.23 million in one-time costs). Total 

one-time costs are larger in the low 

estimate than in the high estimate 

because one-time WQS variance costs 

are often used in lieu of annualized 

effluent treatment costs for facilityspecific low estimates for certain 

pollutants. 

Promulgating baseline WQS for 

Indian reservation waters would 

promote the implementation of 

pollution control measures and best 

practices to help improve water quality 

and prevent future degradation of 

Indian reservation waters, as well as 

potentially providing positive water 

quality benefits to waters in adjacent 

jurisdictions. Improved water quality for 

Indian reservation waters will benefit 

Tribes as well as anyone who recreates 

on Indian reservation waters or values 

environmental quality regardless of 

their current or anticipated uses of 

Indian reservation waters. Although 

implementation of baseline WQS is 

likely to yield significant benefits, 

estimating the dollar value of these 

improvements to Tribes may not be 

feasible. First, Tribes often express the 

difficulty of placing a monetary value 

on ecosystem services, given the belief 

that these resources are sacred and 

beyond any earthly value. Second, 

estimating the value of water quality 

improvements to visitors of Indian 

reservations is challenging due to the 

lack of data on site-specific visitation, 

use (e.g., recreational fishing) and 

valuation. Therefore, EPA provided a 

qualitative description of benefits 

categories that may stem from baseline 

WQS. These benefits include those 

related to human health, ceremonial and 

subsistence harvests of fish and 

shellfish, recreation, and other social 

welfare improvements. EPA anticipates, 

however, that the abovementioned 

benefits will ultimately outweigh the 

potential estimated incremental costs 

associated with promulgation of this 

rule and that this rule will help address 

the environmental challenges Tribes are 

currently facing. 

Risks: EPA is continuing to evaluate 

potential risks. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

ANPRM ............... 09/29/16 81 FR 66900 

NPRM .................. 05/05/23 88 FR 29496 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

08/03/23 

Final Rule ............ 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: State, 

Tribal, Federal. 

Additional Information: 

URL For More Information: https://

www.epa.gov/wqs-tech/promulgationtribal-baseline-water-quality-standardsunder-clean-water-act. 

Agency Contact: James Ray, 

Environmental Protection Agency Office 

of Water, Mail Code 4305T, 200 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, 

DC 20460, Phone: 202 566–1433, Email: 

ray.james@epa.gov. 

Danielle Anderson, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Water, Mail 

Code 4305T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW, Washington, DC 20460, Phone: 202 

564–1631, Email: anderson.danielle@

epa.gov. 

RIN: 2040–AF62 

EPA—OW 

221. Water Quality Standards

Regulatory Revisions to Protect Tribal

Reserved Rights [2040–AG17]

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1371 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 131. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: Many tribes hold reserved 

rights to resources on lands and waters 

where states establish water quality 

standards, through treaties, statutes, or 

other sources of federal law. The U.S. 

Constitution defines treaties as the 

supreme law of the land. On November 

28, 2022, the EPA Administrator signed 

a proposed rule that would revise the 

federal water quality standards 

regulation to ensure that water quality 

standards do not impair tribal reserved 

rights by giving clear direction on how 

to develop water quality standards 

where tribes hold reserved rights. This 

proposed rule would help EPA ensure 

protection of resources reserved to tribes 

in treaties, statutes, or other sources of 

federal law when establishing, revising, 

and reviewing water quality standards. 

The development of this rule helps 

advance President Biden’s commitment 

to strengthening nation-to-nation 

relationships with tribes. EPA consulted 

with tribes in the summer of 2021 

during the pre-proposal phase and in 

the winter of 2023, concurrent with the 

public comment period for the proposed 

rule. EPA is working to expeditiously 

finalize the proposed rule, taking into 

account public comments. 

Statement of Need: This rule would 

establish a durable and transparent 

national framework outlining how tribal 

reserved rights to aquatic-dependent 

resources must be protected in water 

quality standards (WQS) for waters in 

which such rights apply. In 2016 EPA 

took actions in Maine and Washington 

to protect tribal reserved rights, 

requiring that human health criteria for 

waters in those states where tribes 

reserved the rights to fish for 

subsistence be set at more stringent 

levels to protect tribal fish consumers. 

In 2019 EPA disavowed the approach it 

took to protecting tribal reserved rights 

in the 2016 Maine and Washington 

actions and concluded that states and 

EPA can always protect tribal reserved 

rights by simply applying EPA’s existing 

regulations and guidance, with no 

additional consideration of such rights. 

EPA has now reconsidered its past 

assertions that tribal reserved rights do 

not impose any additional requirements 

in the WQS context. The changes in 

EPA’s position regarding consideration 

of reserved rights in the water quality 

standards context over the years have 

resulted in confusion for tribes, states, 

stakeholders and the public about how 

tribal reserved rights must be 

considered in establishment of WQS. In 

addition, states and industry groups 

criticized EPA for taking its actions in 

2016 without first going through a 

national notice and comment 

rulemaking on its approach. 

Summary of Legal Basis: In exercising 

its CWA section 303(c) authority, EPA 

has an obligation to ensure that its 

actions are consistent with treaties, 

statutes, executive orders, and other 

sources of Federal law reflecting tribal 

reserved rights. EPA’s implementing 

regulation at 40 CFR part 131 specifies 

requirements for states and authorized 

tribes to develop WQS for EPA review 

that are consistent with the Act. EPA is 

exercising its discretion in 

implementing CWA section 303(c) to 

establish new regulatory requirements 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9504 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

to ensure that WQS give effect to rights 

to aquatic and aquatic-dependent 

resources reserved in Federal laws. 

Alternatives: No other options 

considered. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: EPA 

estimated the potential incremental 

administrative burdens and costs that 

may be associated with the proposed 

rule, beyond the burden and costs 

associated with implementation of the 

current WQS regulation. EPA estimated 

the total, one-time costs for the 

proposed rule to range from $989,112 to 

$4,945,562, with no recurring costs. 

This rule would not establish any 

requirements directly applicable to 

regulated entities, such as industrial 

dischargers or municipal wastewater 

treatment facilities, but could ultimately 

lead to additional compliance costs to 

meet permit limits put in place to 

comply with new WQS adopted by 

states. However, because of the 

uncertainty in the specific outcome of 

application of this rule, both in terms of 

location and pollutants involved, EPA is 

unable to provide estimates of costs to 

those regulated entities. EPA was 

likewise unable to quantify the 

estimated benefits of the proposed rule. 

EPA anticipates that the rule would 

enhance the ability of states and tribes 

to protect their water resources by 

clarifying and prescribing how to 

protect waters with applicable tribal 

reserved rights and improving 

coordination between Federal, state, and 

tribal governments. 

Risks: EPA is continuing to evaluate 

potential risks. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 12/05/22 87 FR 74361 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

03/06/23 

Final Rule ............ 03/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

State, Tribal. 

Additional Information: OW–2021– 

0791. 

URL For More Information: https://

www.epa.gov/wqs-tech/revising-federalwater-quality-standards-regulationsprotect-tribal-reserved-rights. 

URL For Public Comments: https://

www.regulations.gov/docket/EPA-HQOW-2021-0791. 

Agency Contact: Jennifer Brundage, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Water, 4305T, 1200 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20460, Phone: 202 566–1265, Email: 

brundage.jennifer@epa.gov. 

Erica Fleisig, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Water, 

4305T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, 

Washington, DC 20460, Phone: 202 566– 

1057, Email: fleisig.erica@epa.gov. 

RIN: 2040–AG17 

EPA—OW 

222. PFAS National Primary Drinking

Water Regulation Rulemaking [2040–

AG18]

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 300f et seq. 

Safe Drinking Water Act 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 141; 40 CFR 

142. 

Legal Deadline: NPRM, Statutory, 

March 3, 2023, Safe Drinking Water Act. 

Final, Statutory, September 3, 2024, 

Safe Drinking Water Act. 

Abstract: On March 3, 2021, the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

published the Fourth Regulatory 

Determinations in the Federal Register, 

including a determination to regulate 

perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and 

perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) in 

drinking water. Per the Safe Drinking 

Water Act, following publication of the 

Regulatory Determination, the 

Administrator shall propose a maximum 

contaminant level goal (MCLG) and a 

national primary drinking water 

regulation (NPDWR) not later than 24 

months after determination and 

promulgate a NPDWR within 18 months 

after proposal (the statute authorizes a 

9-month extension of this promulgation

date). EPA issued a proposed national

primary drinking water regulation for

PFOA and PFOS as well as other PFAS

on March 29, 2023 as part of this action.

This action provides a key commitment

in EPA’s ‘‘PFAS Strategic Roadmap:

EPA’s Commitments to Action 2021–

2024.’’

Statement of Need: EPA has 

determined that PFOA and PFOS may 

have adverse health effects; that PFOA 

and PFOS occur in public water systems 

with a frequency and at levels of public 

health concern; and that, in the sole 

judgment of the Administrator, 

regulation of PFOA and PFOS presents 

a meaningful opportunity for health risk 

reduction for persons served by public 

water systems. 

Summary of Legal Basis: The EPA is 

developing a PFAS NPDWR under the 

authority of the Safe Drinking Water Act 

(SDWA), including sections 1412, 1413, 

1414, 1417, 1445, and 1450 of the 

SDWA. Section 1412 (b)(1)(A) of the 

SDWA requires that EPA shall publish 

a maximum contaminant level goal and 

promulgate a NPDWR if the 

Administrator determines that (1) the 

contaminant may have an adverse effect 

on the health of persons, (2) is known 

to occur or there is a substantial 

likelihood that the contaminant will 

occur in public water systems with a 

frequency and at a level of public health 

concern, and (3) in the sole judgment of 

the Administrator there is a meaningful 

opportunity for health risk reduction for 

persons served by public water systems. 

EPA published a final determination to 

regulate PFOA and PFOS on March 3, 

2021 after considering public comment 

(86 FR 12272). Section 1412 (b)(1)(E) of 

the SDWA requires that EPA publish a 

proposed Maximum Contaminant Level 

Goal and a NPDWR within 24 months 

of a final regulatory determination and 

that the Agency promulgate a NPDWR 

within 18 months of proposal. 

Alternatives: Undetermined. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: 

Undetermined. 

Risks: Studies indicate that exposure 

to PFOA and/or PFOS above certain 

exposure levels may result in adverse 

health effects, including developmental 

effects to fetuses during pregnancy or to 

breast-fed infants (e.g., low birth weight, 

accelerated puberty, skeletal variations), 

cancer (e.g., testicular, kidney), liver 

effects (e.g., tissue damage), immune 

effects (e.g., antibody production and 

immunity), and other effects (e.g., 

cholesterol changes). Both PFOA and 

PFOS are known to be transmitted to the 

fetus via the placenta and to the 

newborn, infant, and child via breast 

milk. Both compounds were also 

associated with tumors in long-term 

animal studies. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite

Notice .................. 02/09/22 87 FR 7412 

NPRM .................. 03/29/23 88 FR 18638 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

05/30/23 

Final Rule ............ 01/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Governmental 

Jurisdictions. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State, Tribal. 

Federalism: This action may have 

federalism implications as defined in 

E.O. 13132. 

Additional Information: 

Agency Contact: Alexis Lan, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Water, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Avenue NW, 4601M, Washington, DC 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9505 

20460, Phone: 202 564–0841, Email: 

lan.alexis@epa.gov. 

RIN: 2040–AG18 

EPA—OW 

223. Supplemental Effluent Limitations

Guidelines and Standards for the Steam

Electric Power Generating Point Source

Category [2040–AG23]

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Unfunded Mandates: Undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1361; 33 

U.S.C. 1318; 33 U.S.C. 1317; 33 U.S.C. 

1316; 33 U.S.C. 1311; 33 U.S.C. 1314 

CFR Citation: 40 CFR 423. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: On March 29, 2023, EPA 

published a proposed rule to potentially 

strengthen the Steam Electric Effluent 

Limitations Guidelines and Standards 

(ELGs) (40 CFR 423). EPA previously 

revised the Steam Electric ELGs in 2015 

and 2020. The proposed rule would 

establish more stringent ELGs for two 

waste streams addressed in the 2020 

‘‘Steam Electric Reconsideration Rule’’ 

(flue gas desulfurization wastewater and 

bottom ash transport water). In addition, 

the proposal would establish more 

stringent effluent limitations and 

standards for an additional waste stream 

(combustion residual leachate) and 

takes comment on potential revisions to 

limitations and standards for a fourth 

waste stream (legacy wastewater). The 

first two waste streams mentioned above 

are the subject of current litigation 

pending in the U.S. Court of Appeals for 

the Fourth Circuit. Appalachian Voices, 

et al. v. EPA, No. 20–2187 (4th Cir.). The 

2015 limitations for combustion 

residual leachate and legacy wastewater 

discharged by existing sources were 

vacated by the U.S. Court of Appeals for 

the Fifth Circuit in Southwestern 

Electric Power Co., et al. v. EPA, 920 

F.3d 999 (5th Cir. 2019).

Statement of Need: Under Executive

Order 13990 on Protecting Public Health 

and the Environment and Restoring 

Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis 

(January 20, 2021), EPA was directed to 

review the 2020 Steam Electric 

Reconsideration Rule. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Sections 101; 

301; 304(b), (c), (e), and (g); 306; 307; 

308 and 501, Clean Water Act (Federal 

Water Pollution Control Act 

Amendments of 1972, as amended; 33 

U.S.C. 1251; 1311; 1314(b), (c), (e), and 

(g); 1316; 1317; 1318 and 1361). 

Alternatives: EPA considered four 

regulatory options at the proposed rule 

stage. Three alternatives varied in the 

stringency of limitations for flue gas 

desulfurization wastewater and bottom 

ash transport water while 

subcategorizing early adopters while the 

fourth option did not include this new 

subcategory. All four regulatory options 

removed the existing high flow and low 

utilization subcategories included in the 

2020 final rule. For further information, 

visit: https://www.federalregister.gov/ 

documents/2023/03/29/2023-04984/ 

supplemental-effluent-limitationsguidelines-and-standards-for-the-steamelectric-power-generating. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: At 

proposal, EPA estimated that the 

proposed rule will cost $200 million per 

year in social costs and result in $1,557 

million per year in monetized benefits 

using a three percent discount rate and 

will cost $216 million per year in social 

costs and result in $1,290 million per 

year in monetized benefits using a seven 

percent discount rate. 

Risks: At proposal, EPA estimated 

that the rule would reduce risks to 

human health and ecological receptors 

via multiple pathways including via air 

pollution, surface water contamination, 

and disinfection byproduct formation in 

drinking water systems. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Notice .................. 08/03/21 86 FR 41801 

NPRM .................. 03/29/23 88 FR 18824 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

05/30/23 

Final Rule ............ 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State. 

Federalism: Undetermined. 

Additional Information: EPA–HQ– 

OW–2009–0819. 

Sectors Affected: 221112 Fossil Fuel 

Electric Power Generation. 

Agency Contact: Jesse Pritts, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Water, Mail Code 4303T, 1200 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20460, Phone: 202 566–1038, Email: 

pritts.jesse@epa.gov. 

Related RIN: Split from 2040–AG28 

RIN: 2040–AG23 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY 

COMMISSION (EEOC) 

Statement of Regulatory and 

Deregulatory Priorities 

The mission of the Equal Employment 

Opportunity Commission (EEOC, 

Commission, or Agency) is to ensure 

equality of opportunity in employment 

by vigorously enforcing and educating 

the public about the following Federal 

statues: title VII of the Civil Rights Act 

of 1964, as amended (prohibits 

employment discrimination on the basis 

of race, color, sex (including pregnancy, 

sexual orientation, and gender identity), 

religion, or national origin); the Equal 

Pay Act of 1963, as amended (makes it 

illegal to pay unequal wages to persons 

of different sexes performing 

substantially equal work under similar 

working conditions at the same 

establishment); the Age Discrimination 

in Employment Act of 1967, as amended 

(prohibits employment discrimination 

based on age of 40 or older); titles I and 

V of the Americans with Disabilities 

Act, as amended, and sections 501 and 

505 of the Rehabilitation Act, as 

amended (prohibits employment 

discrimination based on disability); title 

II of the Genetic Information 

Nondiscrimination Act (prohibits 

employment discrimination based on 

genetic information and limits 

acquisition and disclosure of genetic 

information); section 304 of the 

Government Employee Rights Act of 

1991 (protects certain previously 

exempt state and local government 

employees from employment 

discrimination on the basis of race, 

color, religion, sex, national origin, age, 

or disability); and the Pregnant Workers 

Fairness Act (requires covered entities 

to provide reasonable accommodation to 

qualified applicants’ and employees’ 

known limitations related to, affected 

by, or arising out of pregnancy, 

childbirth or related medical conditions, 

unless doing so would cause an undue 

hardship). 

The EEOC has authority to issue 

legislative regulations under the Age 

Discrimination in Employment Act 

(ADEA), title I of the Americans with 

Disabilities Act (ADA), title II of the 

Genetic Information Nondiscrimination 

Act (GINA), and under the Pregnant 

Workers Fairness Act (PWFA). Under 

title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the 

EEOC’s authority to issue legislative 

regulations is limited to procedural, 

record keeping, and reporting matters. 

Nine pending items are identified in 

the EEOC’s Fall 2023 Regulatory 

Agenda, five at the proposed rule stage 

and four at the final rule stage. One of 

those items is singled out as a key 

priority in this Regulatory Plan: the 

recently published proposed rule 

implementing the PWFA, for which a 

final rule will be drafted after 

consideration of public comments 

received from the full range of EEOC 

stakeholders. 

The PWFA went into effect on June 

27, 2023, and it requires employers with 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9506 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

15 or more employees to provide 

reasonable accommodations to job 

applicants and employees for known 

limitations related to, affected by, or 

arising out of pregnancy, childbirth or 

related medical conditions, unless doing 

so would cause an undue hardship for 

the employer. While other laws 

enforced by the EEOC, including title 

VII and the ADA, provide some 

protections and accommodations for 

pregnant workers, the PWFA fills gaps 

in these federal legal protections. Under 

the ADA, unless the individual’s 

pregnancy, childbirth, or related 

medical condition rose to the level of a 

disability as defined in that statute, an 

employer would not be obligated to 

provide a reasonable accommodation to 

do the job. Under title VII, the pregnant 

employee would need to show that the 

employer provided the accommodation 

to a similarly situated worker who was 

not pregnant in order to get the 

accommodation. The PWFA requires 

covered entities to provide reasonable 

accommodations to a qualified 

employee’s or applicant’s known 

limitation related to, affected by, or 

arising out of pregnancy, childbirth, or 

related medical conditions, unless the 

accommodation will cause an undue 

hardship on the operation of the 

business of the covered entity. The 

PWFA provides some examples of 

potential reasonable accommodations 

for pregnant employees, such as: a 

change in the food or drink policies to 

allow the pregnant worker to have a 

water bottle or food; a reduction in 

lifting requirements; the ability to sit; 

additional breaks to use the bathroom, 

eat, and rest; being excused from 

activities that involve exposure to 

compounds unsafe for pregnancy; and 

providing appropriately sized uniforms 

and safety apparel. 

On August 11, 2023, the EEOC issued 

proposed regulations soliciting public 

input and comment before the PWFA 

regulations become final. See Federal 

Register: Regulations To Implement the 

Pregnant Workers Fairness Act. The 

EEOC announced a 60-day public 

comment period, starting on August 11, 

2023 and ending on October 10, 2023. 

Additionally, through media exposure, 

including press interviews, the 

Commission continues to inform the 

public of these new employee 

protections. The EEOC also conducted 

trainings so that employers and 

employees better understand their rights 

and responsibilities under the PWFA, 

and it will continue to do so in the 

months and years ahead. 

Consistent with Executive Order 

12866, as reaffirmed and amended in 

Executive Order 13563, and 

subsequently reaffirmed and 

supplemented by Executive Order 

14094, this statement was reviewed and 

approved by the Chair of the Agency. 

EEOC 

Final Rule Stage 

224. Regulations To Implement the 

Pregnant Workers Fairness Act [3046– 

AB30] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: Pub. L. 117–328, 136 

Stat. 4459, division II 

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 1636. 

Legal Deadline: Final, Statutory, 

December 29, 2023. 

Abstract: The Equal Employment 

Opportunity Commission (EEOC) will 

issue a rule to implement the Pregnant 

Workers Fairness Act, a new law that 

requires covered entities to provide 

reasonable accommodations to a 

qualified worker’s known limitations 

related to, affected by, or arising out of 

pregnancy, childbirth, or related 

medical conditions, unless the 

accommodation will cause an undue 

hardship. 

Statement of Need: The Pregnant 

Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) is a new 

law. It requires a covered entity to 

provide reasonable accommodations, 

absent undue hardship, to a qualified 

employee or applicant with a known 

limitation related to, affected by, or 

arising out of pregnancy, childbirth, or 

related medical conditions. The PWFA 

requires the EEOC to issue regulations 

by December 29, 2023. 42 U.S.C. 

2000gg–3(a). 

Summary of Legal Basis: The PWFA 

requires the EEOC to issue regulations 

by December 29, 2023. 42 U.S.C. 

2000gg–3(a). 

Alternatives: The EEOC will consider 

possible alternatives for its regulation. 

However, the possible alternatives are 

limited by certain provisions in the 

statute that set out what employers are 

covered, when the statute goes into 

effect, the procedures for enforcement, 

and require the EEOC to issue 

regulations. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

EEOC anticipates that the regulation 

will have significant benefits for 

workers, including benefits that are 

difficult to quantify such as a reduction 

in discrimination and improvements in 

the economic security and health 

outcomes for pregnant workers. The 

costs of the regulation and statute will 

be for employers that have to provide 

reasonable accommodations and onetime administrative costs for covered 

employers to come into compliance 

with the statute and regulation. The 

EEOC anticipates that both of these 

costs will be low for individual 

employers. 

Risks: The rule imposes no new or 

additional risks to employers. The rule 

does not address risks to public safety 

or the environment. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 08/11/23 88 FR 54714 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

10/10/23 

Final Action ......... 12/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Undetermined. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses, 

Governmental Jurisdictions, 

Organizations. 

Government Levels Affected: Federal, 

Local, State. 

Federalism: Undetermined. 

Agency Contact: 

Sharyn A. Tejani, Associate Legal 

Counsel, Equal Employment 

Opportunity Commission, 131 M Street 

NE, Washington, DC 20507, Phone: 202 

921–3240, Email: sharyn.tejani@

eeoc.gov. 

RIN: 3046–AB30 

BILLING CODE 6570–01–P 

GENERAL SERVICES 

ADMINISTRATION (GSA) 

Regulatory Plan—October 2023 

The U.S. General Services 

Administration (GSA) delivers value 

and savings in real estate, acquisition, 

technology, and other mission-support 

services across the Federal Government. 

GSA’s acquisition solutions supply 

Federal purchasers with cost-effective, 

high-quality products and services from 

commercial vendors. GSA provides 

workplaces for Federal employees and 

oversees the preservation of historic 

Federal properties. GSA helps keep the 

Nation safe and efficient by providing 

tools, equipment, and non-tactical 

vehicles to the U.S. military, and by 

providing State and local governments 

with law enforcement equipment, 

firefighting and rescue equipment, and 

disaster recovery products and services. 

As GSA is developing its regulations, 

it seeks to increase participation and 

engagement of members of the public 

affected by its regulations, including in 

the development of its regulatory 

priorities. In its Regulatory Plan, it 

details engagement efforts that have 

helped to inform its priorities to date, as 

well as future engagement it has 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I 
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9507 

planned. In support of Executive Order 

14094, GSA is ensuring that it hears 

from members of the public who have 

not typically participated in the 

regulatory process, including families 

eligible for assistance, communities 

affected by climate change, and rural 

workers, among others. 

GSA serves the public by delivering 

products and services directly to its 

Federal customers through the Federal 

Acquisition Service (FAS), the Public 

Buildings Service (PBS), and the Office 

of Government-wide Policy (OGP). GSA 

has a continuing commitment to its 

Federal customers and the U.S. 

taxpayers by providing those products 

and services in the most cost-effective 

manner possible. 

Federal Acquisition Service 

FAS is the lead organization for 

procurement of products and services 

(other than real property) for the Federal 

Government. The FAS organization 

leverages the buying power of the 

Government by consolidating Federal 

agencies’ requirements for common 

goods and services. FAS provides a 

range of high-quality and flexible 

acquisition services to increase overall 

Government effectiveness and efficiency 

by aligning resources around key 

functions. 

Public Buildings Service 

PBS is the largest public real estate 

organization in the United States. As the 

landlord for the civilian Federal 

Government, PBS acquires space on 

behalf of the Federal Government 

through new construction and leasing 

and acts as a manager for Federal 

properties across the country. PBS is 

responsible for over 370 million 

rentable square feet of workspace for 

Federal employees; has jurisdiction, 

custody, and control over more than 

1,600 federally owned assets totaling 

over 180 million rentable square feet; 

and contracts for more than 7,000 leased 

assets, totaling over 180 million rentable 

square feet. 

In fiscal year (FY) 2023, GSA expects 

to update the existing internal guidance 

and issue a new PBS Order following 

the release of the Implementing 

Instructions for Executive Order 14057 

on Catalyzing Clean Energy Industries 

and Jobs Through Federal Sustainability 

that was issued on December 8, 2021. 

Office of Government-Wide Policy 

OGP sets Government-wide policy in 

the areas of personal and real property, 

mail, travel, motor vehicles, relocation, 

transportation, information technology, 

regulatory information, and the use of 

Federal advisory committees. OGP also 

helps direct how all Federal supplies 

and services are acquired, as well as 

GSA’s own acquisition programs. 

Pursuant to Executive Order 12866, 

‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review’’ 

(September 30, 1993), and Executive 

Order 13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation 

and Regulatory Review’’ (January 18, 

2011), the Regulatory Plan and Unified 

Agenda provides notice regarding OGP’s 

regulatory and deregulatory actions 

within the Executive Branch. 

GSA prepared a list of actions in the 

areas of Climate Risk Management, 

Resilience, and Adaptation; 

Environmental Justice; Greenhouse Gas 

Reduction; Clean Energy; Energy 

Reduction; Water Reduction; 

Performance Contracting; Waste 

Reduction; Sustainable Buildings; and 

Electronics Stewardship and Data 

Centers. Detailed information on actions 

GSA is considering taking through 

December 31, 2025, to implement the 

Administration’s policy set by Executive 

Orders 13990 and 14008 were provided 

in GSA’s Executive Order 13990 90-day 

response, the GSA Climate Change Risk 

Management Plan, and the GSA 2021 

Sustainability Plan. More specifics will 

be known on the Sustainability Plan 

when feedback is obtained from the 

Council on Environmental Quality and 

the Office of Management and Budget. 

Office of Asset and Transportation 

Management 

The Office of Asset and 

Transportation Management and Office 

of Acquisition Policy are prioritizing 

rulemaking focused on initiatives that: 

• Promote the country’s economic 

resilience and improve the buying 

power of U.S. citizens; 

• Support underserved communities, 

promoting equity in the Federal 

Government; and 

• Support national security efforts, 

especially safeguarding Federal 

Government information and 

information technology systems. 

The Fall 2023 Unified Agenda 

consists of 14 active Office of Asset and 

Transportation Management (MA) 

agenda items, of which 6 active actions 

are included in the Federal Travel 

Regulation (FTR) and 8 active actions 

are included in the Federal Management 

Regulation (FMR). 

The FTR enumerates the travel and 

relocation policy for all title 5 Executive 

Agency civilian employees. The Code of 

Federal Regulations (CFR) is available at 

https://ecfr.federalregister.gov/. The 

FTR is contained in chapters 300 

through 304 of title 41 of the CFR, 

which implements statutory 

requirements and Executive branch 

policies for travel by Federal civilian 

employees and others authorized to 

travel at Government expense. The FMR 

is contained in chapter 102 of title 41 of 

the CFR, and establishes policy for 

Federal aircraft management, mail 

management, transportation, personal 

property, real property, motor vehicles, 

and committee management. 

Past or Ongoing Public or Community 

Engagement That Informed the 

Development of GSA Rules 

Although focused primarily on agency 

management and personnel, most rules 

issued by the Office of Asset and 

Transportation Management are 

preceded by proposed rules to 

encourage public participation. In FY 

2022, two Federal Management 

Regulations (Real Estate Acquisition; 

and Replacement of Personal Property 

Pursuant to the Exchange/Sale 

Authority) and two Federal Travel 

Regulation proposed rules (Common 

Carrier Transportation; and Constructive 

Cost) were published. One final rule 

(Federal Management Regulation; 

Soliciting Union Memberships Among 

Contractors in GSA-Controlled 

Buildings), was issued as a final rule 

with a 60-day comment period for 

future rulemaking. 

In FY 2023, two Federal Travel 

Regulation proposed rules (Alternative 

Fuel Vehicle Usage During Relocations; 

and Relocation Allowance—Temporary 

Quarters Subsistence Expenses (TQSE)) 

were published. One GSA proposed rule 

(General Services Administration 

Property Management Regulations 

(GSPMR) Social Security Number Fraud 

Prevention) and one joint agency 

proposed rule (Use of Federal Real 

Property To Assist the Homeless: 

Revisions to Regulations) were 

published. Collectively, the public 

provided 11 comments on the FY 2023 

proposed rules. This input was used in 

the formulation of the final rules. 

In FY 2024, the Office of Asset and 

Transportation Management will 

continue to issue proposed rules with a 

60-day comment period to obtain public 

feedback. Four proposed rules are 

anticipated including: FMR Case 2018– 

102–1, Safety and Environmental 

Management; FMR 2022–01, Federal 

Advisory Committee Management; FTR 

Case 2022–04, Relocation Allowance— 

Allowance for Miscellaneous Expenses; 

FTR Case 2020–301–1 E-Gov Travel 

Services updates; and Federal 

Management Regulation; Interagency 

Fleet Management Systems; FMR Case 

2019–102–2. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9508 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Rulemaking That Tackles Climate 

Change 

FTR Case 2022–03, Alternative Fuel 

Vehicle Usage During Relocations, 

allows greater agency flexibility for 

authorizing shipment of a relocating 

employee’s alternative fuel-based 

privately owned vehicle (POV), as some 

POVs, primarily electric vehicles, 

cannot be driven more than a short 

distance without being recharged. 

Because of the topic area being of great 

public interest in recent years, this rule 

did attract a small number of comments 

from the public. The comments 

reflected both support of the proposal 

and dislike of spending funds on 

Federal employee relocation, and 

caused GSA to think more about 

whether the ideas presented were 

workable and had merit. While 

ultimately GSA decided some of the 

ideas had merit, but were not within 

GSA’s authority, it was helpful to see 

the public’s perspective. 

FMR Case 2023–102–1, Sustainable 

Siting, promotes economy and 

efficiency in the planning, acquisition, 

utilization, and management of Federal 

facilities. The rule will incorporate the 

concepts of several Administration 

priorities, including sustainability, 

equity, and environmental justice. This 

rule will help reduce emissions across 

Federal workplaces by requiring that all 

new construction, modernization 

projects, and leases implement a 

number of energy efficient, sustainable, 

and climate-resilient building practices 

for Federal facilities. 

Rulemaking That Supports Equity and 

Underserved Communities 

FTR Case 2022–05, Updating the FTR 

With Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and 

Accessibility Language, updates the 

entirety of the FTR to ensure that its 

language reflects inclusivity by 

replacing gender-specific pronouns (e.g., 

he, she, his, her) with non-gendered 

pronouns and other language that 

reflects inclusivity and equity. 

FMR Case 2022–01, Federal Advisory 

Committee Management, the Federal 

Advisory Committee Act (FACA) is a 

transparency statute designed to provide 

Congress, interested stakeholders, and 

the public with information on, and 

access to, the activities, membership, 

meetings, and costs, of Federal advisory 

committees established by the Executive 

Branch. Under section 7 of FACA, GSA 

is responsible for preparing regulations 

for implementing FACA. The proposed 

rule revisions will provide updates and 

clarification to policies and processes, 

and further incorporate diversity, 

equity, inclusion, and accessibility 

policies into the Federal advisory 

committee program government-wide, 

which is an Administration priority. 

FMR Case 2021–01, Use of Federal 

Real Property to Assist the Homeless, 

will streamline the process by which 

excess Federal real property is screened 

for potential conveyance to homeless 

interests. 

Rulemaking That Supports National 

Security 

FMR Case 2021–102–1, ‘‘Real Estate 

Acquisition,’’ will clarify the policies 

for entering into leasing agreements for 

high security space (i.e., space with a 

Facility Security Level of III, IV, or V) 

in accordance with the Secure Federal 

LEASEs Act (Pub. L. 116–276). 

Office of Acquisition Policy 

The Fall 2023 Unified Agenda 

consists of 17 active Office of 

Acquisition Policy (MV) agenda items, 

all of which are for the General Services 

Administration Acquisition Regulation 

(GSAR). 

Office of Acquisition Policy—General 

Services Administration Acquisition 

Regulation 

GSA’s rules and practices on how it 

buys goods and services from its 

business partners are covered by the 

GSAR, which implements and 

supplements the Federal Acquisition 

Regulation (FAR). The GSAR establishes 

agency acquisition regulations that 

affect GSA’s business partners (e.g., 

prospective offerors and contractors) 

and acquisition of leasehold interests in 

real property. The latter are established 

under the authority of 40 U.S.C. 121(c) 

and 585. The GSAR implements 

contract clauses, solicitation provisions, 

and standard forms that control the 

relationship between GSA and its 

contractors and prospective contractors. 

Significant Determinations in 

Accordance With Executive Order 

12866 Section (f)(1) 

No GSAR rules in the previous 

Regulatory Plan or this Regulatory Plan 

are anticipated to have a monetary 

annual effect of $200 million or more. 

Past or Ongoing Public or Community 

Engagement That Informed the 

Development of GSAR Cases 

• For rules that GSA expects to have 

significant public interest, GSA’s Office 

of Acquisition Policy (OAP) may issue 

an Advanced Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (ANPR) in order to involve 

the public at the earliest stages. For 

example, an ANPR was issued to assist 

in GSA’s formulation of GSAR Case 

2022–G517, Single-use Plastic 

Packaging Reduction. 

• When issuing proposed rules, OAP 

regularly requests public comment to 

help in the formulation of the final rule. 

• OAP regularly meets with the 

Council of Defense and Space Industry 

Associations (CODSIA). CODSIA 

represents member associations 

representing numerous small, medium, 

and large companies. Examples of these 

member associations include the 

Professional Services Council (PSC), 

Information Technology Industry 

Council (ITI), and the Associated 

General Contractors (AGC) to name a 

few. OAP anticipates continuing these 

meetings into the foreseeable future. 

• Future opportunities OAP intends 

to pursue to increase public engagement 

in the development of regulatory 

acquisition rules includes partnering 

with GSA’s Office of Small and 

Disadvantaged Business Utilization 

(OSDBU) in their industry outreach 

events. GSA’s OSDBU services small 

and disadvantaged businesses and 

works with advocacy groups, chambers 

of commerce, and small business 

coalitions in order to bring small 

businesses to the forefront of federal 

procurement opportunities. 

Rulemaking That Tackles the Climate 

Change Emergency 

GSAR Case 2022–G517, Single-use 

Plastic Packaging Reduction, explores 

regulation that will reduce single-use 

plastic consumption by the agency. 

Single-use plastic poses an 

environmental risk that is documented 

as having the potential to impact 

biodiversity. The case focuses on 

packaging materials with the overall 

intent of addressing not only the items 

that the Government intentionally 

consumes, but those products that the 

Government unintentionally consumes 

(such as packaging) that then have to be 

disposed of once the item is delivered. 

Rulemaking That Advances Equity and 

Supports Underserved, Vulnerable and 

Marginalized Communities 

GSAR Case 2020–G511, Updated 

Guidance for Non-Federal Entities 

Access to Federal Supply Schedules, 

will clarify the requirements for use of 

the FSS by eligible non-Federal entities, 

such as State and local governments. 

The regulatory changes are intended to 

increase understanding of the existing 

guidance and expand access to GSA 

sources of supply by eligible nonFederal entities, as authorized by 

historic statutes, including the Federal 

Supply Schedules Usage Act of 2010. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9509 

Rulemaking That Reflects Actions That 

Create and Sustain Good Jobs With a 

Free and Fair Choice To Join a Union 

and Promote Economic Resilience in 

General 

GSAR Case 2021–G530, Labor 

Requirements for Lease Acquisitions, 

will increase efficiency and cost savings 

in the work performed for leases with 

the Federal Government by increasing 

the hourly minimum wage paid to those 

contractors in accordance with 

Executive Order 14026, ‘‘Increasing the 

Minimum Wage for Federal 

Contractors,’’ dated April 27, 2021, and 

U.S. Department of Labor regulations at 

29 CFR part 23. 

GSAR Case 2020–G510, Federal 

Supply Schedule Economic Price 

Adjustment (EPA), will clarify, update, 

and incorporate Federal Supply 

Schedule (FSS) program policies and 

procedures regarding economic price 

adjustment, including updating related 

prescriptions and clauses. Ultimately, 

the case aims to streamline the EPA 

process for FSS business partners and 

GSA’s acquisition workforce. 

GSAR Case 2021–G530, Extension of 

Federal Minimum Wage to Lease 

Acquisitions, will increase efficiency 

and cost savings in the work performed 

for leases with the Federal Government 

by increasing the hourly minimum wage 

paid to those contractors in accordance 

with Executive Order 14026, 

‘‘Increasing the Minimum Wage for 

Federal Contractors,’’ dated April 27, 

2021, and U.S. Department of Labor 

regulations at 29 CFR part 23. 

Rulemaking Reflecting Actions That 

Improve Service Delivery, Customer 

Experience, and Reduce Administrative 

Burdens 

GSAR Case 2022–G506, Standardizing 

the Identification of Deviations in the 

GSAR, standardizes the identification, 

including number, title, date, and 

deviation label, of any provision or 

clause listed in the General Services 

Administration Regulation (GSAR) that 

has an authorized deviation. 

Standardizing this information will add 

clarity and uniformity, therefore 

reducing burden, for both the GSA 

acquisition workforce and GSA’s 

industry partners. 

Dated: August 15, 2023. 

Krystal J. Brumfield, 

Associate Administrator, Office of 

Government-wide Policy. 

BILLING CODE 6820–14 

BILLING CODE 6820–34–P 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND 

SPACE ADMINISTRATION (NASA) 

Statement of Regulatory Priorities 

The National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration’s (NASA) aim is to 

increase human understanding of the 

solar system and the universe that 

contains it and to improve American 

aeronautics ability. NASA’s basic 

organization consists of the 

Headquarters, nine field Centers, the Jet 

Propulsion Laboratory (a federally 

funded research and development 

center), and several component 

installations which report to Center 

Directors. Responsibility for overall 

planning, coordination, and control of 

NASA programs is vested in NASA 

Headquarters, located in Washington, 

DC. 

NASA continues to implement 

programs according to its 2022 Strategic 

Plan. The Agency’s mission is to 

‘‘explore the unknown in air and space, 

innovate for the benefit of humanity, 

and inspire the world through 

discovery.’’ The 2022 Strategic Plan 

(available at 2022 NASA Strategic Plan) 

guides NASA’s program activities 

through a framework of the following 

four strategic goals: 

• Strategic Goal 1: Expand human 

knowledge through new scientific 

discoveries. 

• Strategic Goal 2: Extend human 

presence deeper into space and to the 

Moon for sustainable long-term 

exploration and utilization. 

• Strategic Goal 3: Catalyze economic 

growth and drive innovations to address 

national challenges. 

• Strategic Goal 4: Enhance 

capabilities and operations to catalyze 

current and future mission success. 

NASA’s Regulatory Philosophy and 

Principles 

The Agency’s rulemaking program 

strives to be responsive, efficient, and 

transparent. NASA adheres to the 

general principles set forth in Executive 

Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and 

Review. NASA is a signatory to the 

Federal Acquisition Regulatory (FAR) 

Council. The FAR at 48 Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR), chapter 1, contains 

procurement regulations that apply to 

NASA and other Federal agencies. 

Pursuant to 41 United States Code 

(U.S.C.), section 1302, and FAR 

1.103(b), the FAR is jointly prepared, 

issued, and maintained by the Secretary 

of Defense, the Administrator of General 

Services, and the Administrator of 

NASA, under several of their statutory 

authorities. 

NASA is also mindful of the 

importance of international regulatory 

cooperation, consistent with domestic 

law and the United States (U.S.) trade 

policy, as noted in Executive Order 

13609, Promoting International 

Regulatory Cooperation. NASA, along 

with the Departments of State, 

Commerce, and Defense, engage with 

other countries in the Wassenaar 

Arrangement, Nuclear Suppliers Group, 

Australia Group, and Missile 

Technology Control Regime through 

which the international community 

develops a common list of items that 

should be subject to export controls. 

NASA also has been a key participant in 

interagency efforts to overhaul and 

streamline the U.S. Munitions List and 

the Commerce Control List. These 

efforts help facilitate transfers of goods 

and technologies to allies and partners 

while helping prevent transfers to 

countries of national security and 

proliferation concerns. 

NASA Priority Regulatory Actions 

NASA is highlighting the priorities 

summarized below in this agenda. 

Procedures for Implementing the 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) 

NASA is finalizing its regulations for 

implementing the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and 

the Council on Environmental Quality 

regulations. These amendments will 

update 14 CFR subpart 1216.3, 

Procedures for Implementing the NEPA, 

to incorporate the Agency’s review of its 

Categorical Exclusions and streamline 

the NEPA process to better support 

NASA’s evolving mission. 

NASA Federal Acquisition Regulation 

(FAR) Supplement (NFS) 

NASA is finalizing its regulations in 

the NFS at 48 CFR, chapter 18. These 

amendments will remove the 

Solicitation Provision and the 

Determination of Compensation 

Reasonableness to align with FAR 

requirements and changes made in 10 

U.S.C. pursuant to a section of the 

William M. (Mac) Thornberry National 

Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for 

Fiscal Year (FY) 2021 (Pub. L. 116–283). 

The Agency will also issue a proposed 

rule to amend chapter 18 to align with 

changes made in the FAR that reflects 

an updated ‘‘commercial item’’ 

definition pursuant to a section of the 

John S. McCain NDAA for FY 2019 

(Pub. L. 115–232). 

Public Outreach and Engagement 

As NASA develops regulations, we 

seek to increase public participation and 

community outreach to be better 

informed of and address issues from 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9510 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

members of the public affected by our 

regulations. For example, our Office of 

Communications is currently beta 

testing a revised website to enhance 

NASA’s interactions with the public. 

The revised site will include a ‘‘Doing 

Business With NASA’’ page; 

opportunities and advice on providing 

public comment on NASA regulations, 

and information on forming 

partnerships with the Agency using 

NASA’s Other Transactional 

Authorities, such as Space Act 

Agreements. 

NASA uses Federal Register notices, 

website postings, press releases, and 

social media releases to notify the 

public of the dates and times for input 

on NASA programs. NASA offices also 

work to support roundtables and similar 

engagements so stakeholder 

organizations can meet with NASA 

leaders to discuss and share information 

about NASA policies and programs. 

Currently, the Agency sponsors 12 

Federal advisory committee providing 

NASA the opportunity to engage with 

external subject matter experts on key 

topics of Agency interest. All advisory 

meetings are announced in the Federal 

Register, allowing an opportunity for 

the public to obtain information on 

committee work before it leads to 

recommendations for Agency 

consideration. 

NASA engages with the public on 

procurement-related regulations in 

several ways. In addition to publishing 

abstracts and anticipated publication 

dates for upcoming rules in the biannual 

Unified Agenda, members of the public 

can track the progress of any open and 

pending NASA regulation upon 

publication of NASA Federal 

Acquisition Regulations (FAR) 

Supplement (NFS) rules in the Federal 

Register (FR). 

NASA also meets with industry 

associations on a quarterly basis both for 

its own regulations and as a signatory to 

the FAR. Industry associations that 

regularly participate in these 

discussions include members of Council 

of Defense and Space Industry 

Associations (CODSIA). CODSIA 

current member associations include: 

• Aerospace Industries Association

• American Council of Engineering

Companies

• Associated General Contractors

• Computing Technology Industry

Association Federal Procurement

Council

• Information Technology Industry

Council

• National Defense Industrial

Association

• Professional Services Council

During these meetings, NASA often 

provides information on open FAR rules 

which is publicly accessible in the FAR 

Case Status Report at https://

www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/dars/far_case_

status.html, and may provide an update 

on companion NFS acquisition rules. 

Occasionally, while NFS or FAR rules 

are out for public comment, NASA will 

hold a public meeting to allow the 

public to provide feedback in an open 

forum. Information regarding a public 

meeting is typically provided the rule 

document upon publication for 

comment. 

NASA’s Acquisition also conveys 

policy changes through publications the 

following websites: 

• Procurement Class Deviations at

https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/ 

procurement/regs/pcd.pdf. 

• Procurement Notices (https://

www.hq.nasa.gov/office/procurement/ 

regs/pn.pdf). 

• Procurement Information Circulars

at https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/ 

procurement/regs/pic.pdf. 

NASA actively engages the public 

through Federal Register publications. 

For example, two Requests for 

Information [86 FR 31735 and 88 FR 

21725] were published to gather input 

on the obstacles and difficulties 

hindering involvement of individuals 

from underserved communities (as 

defined in Executive Order 13985, 

Advancing Racial Equity and Support 

for Underserved Communities Through 

the Federal Government, and Executive 

Order 14091 Further Advancing Racial 

Equity and Support for Underserved 

Communities Through the Federal 

Government) in NASA’s procurement, 

grants, and cooperative agreements. 

Currently, public responses are being 

reviewed by the Agency. In the interim, 

NASA has taken action to increase its 

outreach efforts aimed at reaching 

underserved communities; specifically 

providing additional virtual training 

seminars and webinars to engage 

members of underserved communities 

on understanding NASA programs and 

on how to do business with NASA. 

In addition to these program-specific 

efforts, NASA regularly seeks feedback 

from customers in the form of 

information collections under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). The 

Agency maintains several generic PRA 

clearances allowing the Agency to 

rapidly engage the public. 

2700–0153, Generic Clearance for the 

Collection of Qualitative Feedback on 

Agency Service Delivery 

This collection of information allows 

the Agency to engage members of the 

public and stakeholders through quick 

surveys, small discussion or focus 

groups, and can highlight areas where 

communication, training, or changes in 

operations which could improve 

delivery of products or services. For 

example, the Artemis Student 

Challenges (ASC) provides foundational 

learning opportunities to prepare 

students to learn and engage in Artemisfocused challenges that align with the 

technological needs of the Artemis 

missions and/or that will provide the 

Artemis generation with new, authentic, 

high- quality student challenge 

experiences. ASC provides students 

with the opportunity to design, build, 

and test technologies. 

2700–0159, Generic Clearance for the 

NASA Office of Education Performance 

Measurement and Evaluation (Testing) 

This collection supports NASA’s 

Office of STEM Engagement which 

administers the Agency’s national 

education activities in support of the 

Space Act. This collection allows the 

Agency to validate the forms and 

instruments used by educators, students 

and NASA interns for program 

application forms, customer satisfaction 

questionnaires, focus group protocols, 

and project activity survey instruments. 

2700–0181, Generic Clearance for 

Improving Customer Experience (OMB 

Circular A–11, Section 280 

Implementation) 

This information collection is used to 

garner customer and stakeholder 

feedback in accordance with the 

Administration’s commitment to 

improving customer service delivery as 

discussed in Section 280 of OMB 

Circular A–11. The Circular established 

government-wide standards for mature 

customer experience organizations in 

government to identify their highestimpact customer journeys and select 

touchpoints or transactions within those 

journeys to collect feedback. These 

results will be used to improve the 

delivery of Federal services and 

programs and will provide governmentwide data on customer experience that 

can be displayed on performance.gov to 

help build transparency and 

accountability of Federal programs. 

NASA’s SBIR/STTR team is currently 

considering how to leverage this 

collection to: 

• Develop a user-friendly interface for

online applications to make it easier for 

small businesses to navigate the 

submission process. 

• Simplify the application process to

reduces administrative burden. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9511 

• Seek feedback from applicants and 

stakeholders to identify areas for 

improvement. 

BILLING CODE 7510–13–P 

NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS 

ADMINISTRATION (NARA) 

Statement of Regulatory Priorities 

The National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA) primarily issues 

regulations directed to other federal 

agencies. These regulations include 

records management, information 

services, and information security. For 

example, records management 

regulations directed to federal agencies 

concern the proper management and 

disposition of federal records. Through 

the Information Security Oversight 

Office (ISOO), NARA also issues 

Government-wide regulations 

concerning information security 

classification, controlled unclassified 

information (CUI), and declassification 

programs; through the Office of 

Government Information Services, 

NARA issues Government-wide 

regulations concerning the Freedom of 

Information Act (FOIA) dispute 

resolution services and FOIA 

ombudsman functions; and through the 

Office of the Federal Register, NARA 

issues regulations concerning 

publishing federal documents in the 

Federal Register, Code of Federal 

Regulations, and other publications. 

NARA regulations directed to the 

public primarily address access to and 

use of our historically valuable 

holdings, including archives, donated 

historical materials, Nixon Presidential 

materials, and other Presidential 

records. NARA also issues regulations 

relating to the National Historical 

Publications and Records Commission 

(NHPRC) grant programs. 

Proposed Changes to Rescheduling 

Requirements 

In the second quarter of FY 2024, 

NARA will issue a draft rule with 

changes to 36 CFR 1225.22 regarding 

requirements for agencies to reschedule 

their records. All rescheduling 

requirements will be in section 1225.22. 

NARA will remove and reserve sections 

1225.24 and 1225.26 to eliminate the 

media neutral notification requirement, 

which is no longer relevant. 

Enhancing Oversight Requirements for 

Records Management 

We also propose to amend 36 CFR 

part 1239. We are removing subpart B— 

Program Assistance, as it is out-of-date 

and informational, and provides no 

agency requirements. We are proposing 

to update the remaining subparts to 

provide clarity and specificity to our 

agency oversight requirements. We 

propose to move unauthorized 

disposition requirements from 36 CFR 

part 1230 to 36 CFR part 1239 and 

strengthen them. 

Streamlining Requirements for 

Agencies Dealing With General Records 

Schedules and GAO 

We propose updating 36 CFR 1225.20 

and removing 1225.12(h) to make it 

easier for agencies applying the General 

Records Schedules (GRS) by minimizing 

the instances where the General 

Accounting Office (GAO) must be 

consulted. Now, agencies will only need 

GAO approval for deviations from GRS 

1.1, item 010, which relates to 

accountable officer records. They won’t 

need GAO approval for deviations from 

other parts of the GRS. Also, they won’t 

need GAO approval for program records 

schedules that are less than three years 

old. 

New Digitization Standards for 

Permanent Still Image Film Records 

The next step for digitization 

standards in NARA’s Regulations will 

include technical standards for 

digitizing various permanent still image 

film records, such as transparencies, 

negatives, radiographic, microfiche, and 

microfilm. These standards will be 

added to subpart E of 36 CFR part 1236. 

Revising Provisions for Digital 

Photographs 

We propose revising the provisions 

stated in 36 CFR 1237.28(d), which 

addresses special concerns for digital 

photographs. This revision is essential 

because the recent publication of 

subpart E of 36 CFR part 1236 

introduces new and more detailed 

requirements for digitizing photographic 

prints. 

Authorization for Disposing of Digitized 

Temporary Records 

In June 2023, NARA released GRS 

Transmittal 34, introducing GRS 4.5 

Digitizing Records. As a result, we 

propose updating the regulations in 36 

CFR 1236.36 to ensure appropriate 

authorization for disposing of temporary 

records after they have been digitized. 

Furthermore, we propose aligning the 

language used throughout 36 CFR 

subpart D with the newly published 

subpart E of 36 CFR part 1236. 

Improving Regulations for Electronic 

Message Preservation 

On January 1, 2021, the Federal 

Records Act was amended. The updated 

law now requires the Archivist of the 

United States to create regulations for 

federal agencies on preserving 

electronic messages that are considered 

records. In response to this, we are 

proposing changes to our regulations by 

revising section 1236.22, which covers 

the additional requirements for 

managing electronic mail records. The 

aim is to clearly outline the records 

management requirements for electronic 

messages and systems. 

These records management regulatory 

priorities align with the goals and 

initiatives of our Strategic Plan 2022– 

2026. 

BILLING CODE 7515–01–P 

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION 

Overview 

The National Science Foundation 

(NSF) is an independent federal agency 

created by Congress in 1950 ‘‘to promote 

the progress of science; to advance the 

national health, prosperity, and welfare; 

to secure the national defense . . .’’ 

NSF is vital because we support basic 

research and people to create knowledge 

that transforms the future. This type of 

support: 

• Is a primary driver of the U.S. 

economy 

• Enhances the nation’s security 

• Advances knowledge to sustain global 

leadership 

With an annual budget of $9.5 billion 

(FY 2023), we are the funding source for 

approximately 23% of the total federal 

budget for basic research conducted at 

U.S. colleges and universities. In many 

fields such as mathematics, computer 

science and the social sciences, NSF is 

the major source of federal backing. 

We fulfill our mission chiefly by 

issuing limited-term grants—currently 

about 11,200 new awards per year, with 

an average duration of three years—to 

fund specific research proposals that 

have been judged the most promising by 

a rigorous and objective merit-review 

system. Most of these awards go to 

individuals or small groups of 

investigators. Others provide funding 

for research centers, instruments and 

facilities that allow scientists, engineers, 

and students to work at the outermost 

frontiers of knowledge. 

NSF’s goals—discovery, learning, 

research infrastructure and 

stewardship—provide an integrated 

strategy to advance the frontiers of 

knowledge, cultivate a world-class, 

broadly inclusive science and 

engineering workforce and expand the 

scientific literacy of all citizens, build 

the nation’s research capability through 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9512 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

investments in advanced 

instrumentation and facilities, and 

support excellence in science and 

engineering research and education 

through a capable and responsive 

organization. We like to say that NSF is 

‘‘where discoveries begin.’’ 

NSF is committed to expanding the 

opportunities in STEM to people of all 

racial, ethnic, geographic, and 

socioeconomic backgrounds, sexual 

orientations, gender identities and to 

persons with disabilities. 

We value diversity and inclusion, 

demonstrate integrity and excellence in 

our devotion to public service and 

prioritize innovation and collaboration 

in our support of the work of the 

scientific community and of each other. 

While broadening participation in 

STEM is included in NSF’s merit review 

criteria, some programs go beyond the 

standard review criteria. These 

investments—which make up NSF’s 

Broadening Participation in STEM 

Portfolio—use different approaches to 

build STEM education and research 

capacity, catalyze new areas of STEM 

research, and develop strategic 

partnerships and alliances. 

Many of the discoveries and 

technological advances have been truly 

revolutionary. In the past few decades, 

NSF-funded researchers have won some 

236 Nobel Prizes as well as other honors 

too numerous to list. These pioneers 

have included the scientists or teams 

that discovered many of the 

fundamental particles of matter, 

analyzed the cosmic microwaves left 

over from the earliest epoch of the 

universe, developed carbon-14 dating of 

ancient artifacts, decoded the genetics of 

viruses, and created an entirely new 

state of matter called a Bose-Einstein 

condensate. 

NSF also funds equipment that is 

needed by scientists and engineers but 

is often too expensive for any one group 

or researcher to afford. Examples of 

such major research equipment include 

giant optical and radio telescopes, 

Antarctic research sites, high-end 

computer facilities and ultra-high-speed 

connections, ships for ocean research, 

sensitive detectors of very subtle 

physical phenomena and gravitational 

wave observatories. 

Another essential element in NSF’s 

mission is support for science and 

engineering education, from pre-K 

through graduate school and beyond. 

The research we fund is thoroughly 

integrated with education to help ensure 

that there will always be plenty of 

skilled people available to work in new 

and emerging scientific, engineering, 

and technological fields, and plenty of 

capable teachers to educate the next 

generation. 

No single factor is more important to 

the intellectual and economic progress 

of society, and to the enhanced wellbeing of its citizens, than the continuous 

acquisition of new knowledge. NSF is 

proud to be a major part of that process. 

Specifically, the Foundation’s organic 

legislation authorizes us to engage in 

the following activities: 

A. Initiate and support, through grants 

and contracts, scientific and engineering 

research, and programs to strengthen 

scientific and engineering research 

potential, and education programs at all 

levels, and appraise the impact of 

research upon industrial development 

and the general welfare. 

B. Award graduate fellowships in the 

sciences and in engineering. 

C. Foster the interchange of scientific 

information among scientists and 

engineers in the United States and 

foreign countries. 

D. Foster and support the 

development and use of computers and 

other scientific methods and 

technologies, primarily for research and 

education in the sciences. 

E. Evaluate the status and needs of the 

various sciences and engineering and 

take into consideration the results of 

this evaluation in correlating our 

research and educational programs with 

other federal and non-federal programs. 

F. Provide a central clearinghouse for 

the collection, interpretation, and 

analysis of data on scientific and 

technical resources in the United States, 

and provide a source of information for 

policy formulation by other federal 

agencies. 

G. Determine the total amount of 

federal money received by universities 

and appropriate organizations for the 

conduct of scientific and engineering 

research, including both basic and 

applied, and construction of facilities 

where such research is conducted, but 

excluding development, and report 

annually thereon to the President and 

the Congress. 

H. Initiate and support specific 

scientific and engineering activities in 

connection with matters relating to 

international cooperation, national 

security, and the effects of scientific and 

technological applications upon society. 

I. Initiate and support scientific and 

engineering research, including applied 

research, at academic and other 

nonprofit institutions and, at the 

direction of the President, support 

applied research at other organizations. 

J. Recommend and encourage the 

pursuit of national policies for the 

promotion of basic research and 

education in the sciences and 

engineering. Strengthen research and 

education innovation in the sciences 

and engineering, including independent 

research by individuals, throughout the 

United States. 

K. Support activities designed to 

increase the participation of women and 

minorities and others underrepresented 

in science and technology. The Louis 

Stokes Alliances for Minority 

Participation (LSAMP) program is an 

alliance-based program. The program’s 

theory is based on the Tinto model for 

student retention referenced in the 2005 

LSAMP program evaluation (cleared 

under 3145–0190 and now covered by 

3145–0226). The overall goal of the 

program is to assist universities and 

colleges in diversifying the nation’s 

science, technology, engineering, and 

mathematics (STEM) workforce by 

increasing the number of STEM 

baccalaureate and graduate degrees 

awarded to populations historically 

underrepresented in these disciplines: 

African Americans, Hispanic 

Americans, American Indians, Alaska 

Natives, Native Hawaiians, and Native 

Pacific Islanders. LSAMP’s efforts to 

increase diversity in STEM are aligned 

with the goals of the Federal 

Government’s five-year strategic plan for 

STEM education, Charting a Course for 

Success: America’s Strategy for STEM 

Education. 

With this fall regulatory agenda, NSF 

highlights the Robert Noyce Teacher 

Scholarship (Noyce) Program (RIN 

3145–AA65). This program provides 

funding to institutions of higher 

education for scholarships to STEM 

major undergraduates and professionals 

to become effective certified K–12 

STEM teachers and experienced, 

exemplary K–12 teachers to become 

master teacher leaders in high-need 

school districts. Undergraduate and 

post-baccalaureate STEM professionals 

receiving funding must teach two years 

in a high-need school district for each 

year in which they have received 

financial support. Post-baccalaureate 

STEM professionals must teach for four 

years in a high-need school district 

during which time they receive annual 

salary supplements from the grant 

funds. Experienced, exemplary K–12 

teachers of mathematics or science in 

high-need school districts receiving 

financial support may be supported for 

one year in obtaining a master’s degree 

and then receive a salary supplement 

from grant funds for four years as they 

continue to teach in a high-need school 

district. Individuals who already 

possess a master’s degree can be 

supported for five years with salary 

supplements from grant funds as they 

continue to teach in a high-need school 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9513 

district. NSF, in consultation with the 

Secretary of Education, plans to l 

propose regulations on the process of 

treating scholarships as Federal 

unsubsidized student loans for 

repayment purposes when the 

scholarship recipients fail to meet their 

required service obligations under the 

Noyce Program. 

Consistent with the President’s 

Executive Order on Modernizing 

Regulatory Review (Apr. 6, 2023), NSF 

intends to consider a variety of 

methods, beyond publication of the 

proposed regulation for public comment 

in the Federal Register, to encourage the 

participation and input of potentially 

affected individuals and entities. These 

additional efforts may include notices, 

bulletins, emails, phone calls, meetings, 

surveys, ‘‘office hours,’’ or other means 

of communication, information 

gathering, and dialogue with academic 

institutions that receive or have 

received Noyce scholarship funding, as 

well as similar outreach, by NSF or 

these institutions, to past and present 

individual Noyce scholarship 

recipients, to obtain their views. 

In addition, NSF regularly seeks 

feedback from customers in the form of 

information collections under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). NSF 

maintains three generic PRA clearances 

allowing the Agency to rapidly engage 

the public: two clearances allow NSF to 

collect customer feedback on service 

delivery for NSF programs such as 

principal investigator workshops and 

website redesigns (OMB Control 

Number 3145–0215, Generic Clearance 

for the Collection of Qualitative 

Feedback on Agency Service Delivery 

and OMB Control Number 3145–0254, 

Generic Clearance for Improving 

Customer Experience (OMB Circular A– 

11, Section 280 Implementation)), and a 

third to allow NSF to collect 

information for evaluation, research, 

and evidence building in order to 

improve surveys conducted by the 

National Center for Science, Engineering 

and Statistics programs (OMB Control 

Number 3145–0174, SRS-Generic 

Clearance of Survey Improvement 

Projects for the Division of Science 

Resources Statistics). Additional 

information regarding these 

collections—including all background 

materials—can be found at https://

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

BILLING CODE 7555–01–P 

U.S. OFFICE OF PERSONNEL 

MANAGEMENT 

Statement of Regulatory and 

Deregulatory Priorities 

Fall 2023 Unified Agenda 

The Office of Personnel Management 

(OPM) serves as the chief human 

resources agency and personnel policy 

manager for the Federal Government. 

We are champions of talent for the 

Federal Government, leading Federal 

agencies in workforce policies, 

programs, and benefits in service to the 

American people. We seek to position 

the Federal Government as a model 

employer through innovation, 

inclusivity, and leadership, as we build 

a rewarding culture that empowers the 

Federal workforce to tackle some of our 

nation’s toughest challenges. 

OPM’s regulatory agenda is aligned 

with these core mission areas and 

advances multiple Biden-Harris 

Administration priorities. Indeed, each 

of OPM’s regulations is focused on 

improving the efficiency and 

effectiveness of government—a key 

Administration priority. In addition, 

several of OPM’s regulations are: 

• Actions that empower workers and 

increase their wages; 

• Actions that promote racial and 

gender equity and LGBTQI+ equality 

and address issues of disability, 

religious discrimination, persistent 

poverty, and immigration; 

• Actions that address pandemic 

preparedness and access to healthcare; 

and 

• Actions that improve access to and 

delivery of public programs and services 

by reducing administrative burden. 

While OPM is committed to 

promoting inclusiveness in the 

regulatory process, most of our 

regulations are focused on 

organizational and personnel matters 

and, therefore, agency engagement with 

the general public is limited. In cases 

where OPM regulations do have public 

impact, OPM actively engages with 

stakeholders who may be affected by 

our regulations directly or indirectly 

through the social groups they 

represent. Public participation through 

petitions, job fairs, webinars, meetings, 

and the public comment process have 

informed the development of a few of 

our rulemakings at the initiation phase 

of the process and are summarized in 

this Statement, where applicable. 

Generally, however, OPM’s engagement 

in developing its regulatory program 

focuses on engagement with agencies 

(such as through the Chief Human 

Capital Officers Council) and employee 

representative groups (such as labor 

unions). 

We will continue to encourage and 

provide opportunities for meaningful 

participation to inform regulatory 

planning in the future. 

I. Actions That Empower Workers and 

Increase Their Wages 

OPM is committed to recruiting, 

retaining, and supporting a world-class 

Federal workforce. This means 

providing pathways to Federal service, 

working to make every Federal job a 

good job, and strengthening Federal 

labor unions. OPM’s regulatory agenda 

advances each of these goals and reflects 

the inputs received from members of the 

public during different phases of the 

rulemaking process. 

• Pathways Programs (3206–AO25) 

OPM is finalizing modifications to the 

Pathways Programs to align the three 

constituent programs to better meet the 

Federal government’s needs for 

recruiting and hiring interns and recent 

graduates. OPM proposes to update the 

regulations for the Pathways Programs 

to facilitate a better applicant 

experience, to improve developmental 

opportunities for Pathways Program 

participants, and to streamline agencies’ 

ability to hire participants in the 

Pathways Programs, especially those 

who have successfully completed their 

Pathways requirements and are eligible 

for conversion to a term or permanent 

position in the competitive service. 

Robust Pathways Programs with 

appropriate safeguards to promote its 

use as a supplement to, and not a 

substitute for, the competitive hiring 

process is essential to boosting the 

Federal government’s ability to recruit 

and retain early career talent. 

This rule was informed by feedback 

from various stakeholders over the past 

decade, including applicants, 

educational institutions, Federal 

employees, and agencies. Major sources 

of this feedback include outreach events 

like job fairs and presentations/webinars 

on the Pathways Programs. Email 

inquiries from applicants and 

participants about how the Programs 

work provided additional opportunities 

to receive feedback. Based on these 

inputs, OPM is modifying current 

regulations to allow Recent Graduate 

and Presidential Management Fellows 

participants to be converted to term or 

permanent positions in any agency, 

when appropriate. After publishing the 

proposed rule, OPM further engaged 

stakeholders to ensure awareness and 

encourage the submission of comments 

that may inform the development of the 

final rule. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9514 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

• Time-Limited Promotions [3206– 

A052] 

The Office of Personnel Management 

(OPM) is issuing a proposed rule to 

clarify that bargaining- unit employees 

who are detailed or temporarily 

promoted to higher grade duties of a 

higher- graded position should be paid 

appropriately for performing these 

duties, when ordered by an arbitrator, 

administrative body, or court, under a 

collective bargaining agreement and the 

employees were assigned these duties 

outside of competitive hiring 

procedures. Similarly, the proposed rule 

clarifies that non-bargaining unit 

employees should also be paid 

appropriately for performing these 

duties if ordered by an administrative 

body or court. At present, noncompetitive temporary promotions and 

non-competitive details to duties of 

higher-graded positions are limited to 

no more than 120 days under OPM 

regulations regardless of the bargainingunit status of the employee. Current 

regulations prohibit employees from 

being appropriately paid for highergraded duties performed in excess of 

120 days and assigned without 

competition. As a result, the principle of 

equal pay for equal work is absent and 

bargaining unit employees are unable to 

have meaningful recourse through their 

negotiated collective bargaining 

agreement. 

OPM’s decision to issue this proposed 

rule was informed by engagement with 

the National Treasury Employees Union 

(NTEU) and the National Federation of 

Federal Employees (NFFE). In 2022, 

NTEU submitted a written petition to 

OPM seeking the issuance of a rule 

under 5 U.S.C. 553(e). This petition 

outlined the problem to be addressed 

with recommended changes. In 

addition, NFFE raised similar 

suggestions in meetings with OPM in 

late 2022. When the proposed rule is 

issued, OPM anticipates further 

engagement with national unions and 

other Federal employee groups. 

• Upholding Civil Service Protections 

and Merit System Principles [3206– 

A056] 

OPM plans to finalize a rule to uphold 

civil service protections and merit 

system principles after consideration of 

comments on OPM’s proposal. OPM 

proposed to clarify that employees who 

are moved involuntarily from the 

competitive to the excepted service, or 

from one excepted service schedule to 

another, retain the status and adverse 

action rights they had at the time of 

movement. OPM’s proposal also 

required Federal agencies to follow 

specific procedures upon moving any 

employees without their consent from 

the competitive service to the excepted 

service or, if already in the excepted 

service, to a different excepted service 

schedule. Finally, OPM proposed to 

define positions of a ‘‘confidential, 

policy-determining, policy-making, or 

policy- advocating character,’’ in 

accordance with legislative history and 

Congressional intent, to mean political 

appointments. 

In late 2022, the National Treasury 

Employees Union (NTEU) submitted a 

written petition to OPM outlining their 

views on regulatory changes that would 

reinform civil service protections and 

merit system principles. Subsequently 

in early 2023, the Federal Workers 

Alliance (FWA) sent a letter to OPM 

expressing support for the NTEU 

petition. OPM anticipates engagement 

with national unions and other Federal 

employee groups during the notice and 

comment period as part of the standard 

regulatory process. 

II. Actions That Promote Racial and 

Gender Equity and LGBTQI+ Equality 

and Address Issues of Disability, 

Religious Discrimination, Persistent 

Poverty, and Immigration 

In fact, many of the regulations noted 

above—in particular, those focused on 

providing pathways into the Federal 

Government—emphasize equity. 

Additional work in this area focuses on 

promoting pay equity and OPM has 

made efforts to encourage feedback on 

the proposals from stakeholders. 

• Advancing Pay Equity in 

Governmentwide Pay Systems (3206– 

AO39) 

OPM is issuing a final rule to advance 

pay equity in the General Schedule (GS) 

pay system, Prevailing Rate Systems, 

Administrative Appeals Judge (AAJ) pay 

system, and Administrative Law Judge 

(ALJ) pay system by revising the criteria 

for making salary determinations based 

on salary history. After the proposed 

rule was published, OPM shared it with 

more than 990 stakeholders to ensure 

awareness and encourage the 

submission of comments that may 

inform the development of the final 

rule. 

III. Actions That Address Pandemic 

Preparedness and Access to Healthcare 

OPM has helped to lead the Federal 

Government throughout the COVID–19 

pandemic—serving as a co-chair of the 

Safer Federal Workforce Task Force, 

supporting agencies with 

implementation of a maximum telework 

posture, and providing meaningful 

benefits to Federal employees. OPM will 

continue this important work through 

its regulatory agenda. 

• Scheduling of Annual Leave for 

Employees Responding to COVID–19 

(3206–AO04) 

OPM is finalizing regulations to assist 

agencies and employees responding to 

the National Emergency Concerning the 

Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID–19) 

Outbreak and for future national 

emergencies. The regulations provide 

that employees who would forfeit 

annual leave in excess of the maximum 

annual leave allowable carryover 

because of their work to support the 

nation during a national emergency will 

have their excess annual leave deemed 

to have been scheduled in advance and 

subject to leave restoration. 

• Evacuation During a Public Health 

Emergency (3206–AO34) 

OPM is proposing a new subpart Q 

within 5 CFR part 550, which would 

amend, expand, and reorganize 

regulations that currently provide 

agencies with the authority to evacuate 

employees during a pandemic health 

crisis. The revised regulations will 

provide agencies with the authority to 

evacuate an employee or groups of 

employees during either a public health 

emergency declaration or a pandemic 

health crisis. The current authority to 

evacuate employees during a pandemic 

health crisis is found at 5 CFR 550.409. 

This revision and reorganization of the 

regulations will enable OPM to 

capitalize on lessons learned from the 

COVID–19 pandemic. 

• Postal Service Health Benefits 

Program (3206–AO43) 

OPM is finalizing an interim final rule 

that implemented the Postal Service 

Health Benefits (PSHB) Program within 

the Federal Employees Health Benefits 

(FEHB) Program pursuant to the Postal 

Service Reform Act of 2022. This 

regulation will ensure continuity of 

health insurance coverage for Postal 

Service employees, annuitants, and 

their family members who will no 

longer be eligible for FEHB in January 

2025; enable enrollees access to more 

prescription drug coverage options and 

potential reduction in prescription drug 

costs for Medicare Part D eligible 

enrollees; reduce the Postal Service’s 

premiums by approximately $5.7 billion 

over 10 years (CBO Analysis) and 

reduce its future liability for retiree 

health benefits; and enable use of a 

central enrollment portal that will 

reduce administrative burden for 

enrollment, which will ensure more 

accurate payment of plans, allow more 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9515 

frequent sharing of enrollment data with 

plans, and limit human error. 

IV. Actions That Improve Access to and 

Delivery of Public Programs and 

Services by Reducing Administrative 

Burden 

OPM’s work in this area focuses on 

improving efficiency and providing 

agencies additional flexibilities in the 

hiring process. 

• Hiring Authority for Post-Secondary 

Students (3206–AN86) 

OPM is finalizing regulations 

establishing hiring authorities for postsecondary students to positions in the 

competitive service to provide 

additional flexibility in hiring eligible 

and qualified individuals. These 

revisions will implement section 1108 

of Public Law 115–232, John S. McCain 

National Defense Authorization Act 

(NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2019. 

• Hiring Authority for College 

Graduates (3206–AN79) 

OPM is finalizing regulations 

establishing hiring authorities for 

certain college graduates to positions in 

the competitive service. This rule will 

provide additional flexibility in hiring 

eligible and qualified individuals by 

implementing section 1108 of Public 

Law 115–232, the NDAA for FY 2019. 

• Rule of Many (3206–AN80) 

OPM is finalizing regulations to 

implement changes—known as the 

‘‘rule of many’’—authorized by the 

NDAA for FY 2019 governing the 

selection of candidates from competitive 

lists of eligibles. The statute eliminates 

the requirement that an agency select 

only from the top three candidates at 

any given juncture (the rule of three) in 

numerical rating and ranking and 

instead authorizes agencies to certify 

and consider a sufficient number of 

candidates, no fewer than three, using a 

cut-off score or other mechanism 

established through this rulemaking. 

This change also affects how agencies 

may make selections under 5 CFR part 

302, titled ‘‘Employment in the 

Excepted Service.’’ These changes will 

provide expanded flexibility to agencies 

in the selection of candidates. 

• Noncompetitive Appointment of 

Certain Military Spouses (3206–AO57) 

OPM is issuing interim final 

regulations to implement section 1111 

of Public Law 117–263, the NDAA for 

FY 2023. These revisions extend the 

eligibility criteria for any spouse 

married to an active-duty military 

member through December 31, 2028, 

and remove the agency reporting 

requirements established under section 

573(d) of Public Law 115–232. The 

intended effect of the Authority is to 

increase the hiring of military spouses 

in the Federal Government. 

• Recruitment and Relocation Incentive 

Waivers (3206–AO36) 

OPM is issuing a proposed rule to 

expand the authority to approve waivers 

of the normal payment limitations on 

recruitment and relocation incentives, 

so that agencies have access to higher 

payment limitations based on a critical 

need without requesting approval from 

OPM. Currently, agencies have the 

authority to approve a recruitment or 

relocation incentive without OPM 

approval for payments of up to 25 

percent of an employee’s annual rate of 

basic pay times the number of years in 

a service agreement (not to exceed 4 

years or 100 percent of annual basic 

pay). Under a waiver, agencies could 

approve a recruitment or relocation 

incentive without OPM approval for 

payments of up to 50 percent of an 

employee’s annual rate of basic pay 

times the number of years in a service 

agreement (not to exceed 100 percent of 

annual basic pay). 

• Recruitment and Selection Through 

Competitive Examination (3206–AO24) 

OPM is finalizing revisions 

implementing the Competitive Service 

Act of 2015, Public Law 114–137, to 

allow an appointing authority (i.e., the 

head of a federal agency or department) 

to share a competitive certificate of 

eligibles with one or more appointing 

authorities for the purpose of making 

selections of qualified candidates. 

• Selective Service Registration (3206– 

AO37) 

OPM is proposing regulations to 

enable executive agencies to make 

initial determinations as to whether 

failure to register with the Selective 

Service System was knowing and 

willful. 

BILLING CODE 3280–F5–P 

PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY 

CORPORATION (PBGC) 

Statement of Regulatory and 

Deregulatory Priorities 

The Pension Benefit Guaranty 

Corporation (PBGC or Corporation) is a 

federal corporation created under title 

IV of the Employee Retirement Income 

Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) to protect 

the retirement security of over 33 

million American workers, retirees, and 

beneficiaries in both single-employer 

and multiemployer private-sector 

pension plans. PBGC administers two 

insurance programs—one for singleemployer defined benefit pension plans 

and a second for multiemployer defined 

benefit pension plans. In addition, 

PBGC administers a special financial 

assistance (SFA) program for eligible 

financially troubled multiemployer 

plans. 

• Single-Employer Program. Under 

the single-employer program, when a 

plan terminates with insufficient assets 

to cover all plan benefits (distress and 

involuntary terminations), PBGC pays 

plan benefits that are guaranteed under 

title IV. PBGC also pays nonguaranteed 

plan benefits to the extent funded by 

plan assets or recoveries from 

employers. In fiscal year (FY) 2022, 

PBGC paid over $7.0 billion in benefits 

to more than 960,000 participants. 

Operations under the single-employer 

program are financed by insurance 

premiums, investment income, assets 

from pension plans trusteed by PBGC, 

and recoveries from the companies 

formerly responsible for the trusteed 

plans. 

• Multiemployer Program. The 

multiemployer program covers 

collectively bargained plans involving 

more than one unrelated employer. 

PBGC provides traditional financial 

assistance (technically in the form of a 

loan, though almost never repaid) to the 

plan if the plan is insolvent and thus 

unable to pay benefits at the guaranteed 

level. The guarantee is structured 

differently from, and is generally 

significantly lower than, the singleemployer guarantee. In FY2022, PBGC 

provided $217 million in traditional 

financial assistance to 115 insolvent 

multiemployer plans covering 93,525 

participants receiving guaranteed 

benefits. Those plans also cover an 

additional 46,480 participants entitled 

to receive benefits in the future. PBGC 

also provided a final payment of $9 

million in financial assistance to 

facilitate the merger of two 

multiemployer plans. Operations under 

the multiemployer program generally 

are financed by insurance premiums 

and investment income. 

• Special Financial Assistance 

Program. The American Rescue Plan 

(ARP) Act of 2021 added section 4262 

of ERISA, which requires PBGC to 

provide SFA to certain financially 

troubled multiemployer plans upon 

application for assistance. PBGC’s SFA 

Program requires plans to demonstrate 

eligibility for SFA and to calculate the 

amount of assistance pursuant to ARP 

and PBGC’s regulations. This program is 

funded by general tax revenues. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9516 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

For the second year in a row, both 

PBGC’s Multiemployer Program and 

Single-Employer Program have a 

positive net position at fiscal year-end. 

The financial status of the singleemployer program improved from a 

positive net financial position of $30.9 

billion at the end of FY 2021 to $36.6 

billion at the end of FY 2022. The net 

financial position of the multiemployer 

program improved from a positive net 

position of $481 million at the end of 

FY 2021 to $1.1 billion at the end of FY 

2022. 

ARP substantially improves the 

financial condition and the outlook for 

PBGC’s multiemployer program. By 

forestalling the near-term insolvency of 

the most troubled multiemployer plans, 

the multiemployer program is no longer 

expected to go insolvent in FY 2026 and 

can accumulate a greater level of reserve 

assets in its insurance fund in the nearterm. 

To carry out its statutory functions, 

PBGC issues regulations on such matters 

as how to pay premiums, when reports 

are due, what benefits are covered by 

the insurance programs, how to 

terminate a plan, the liability for 

underfunding, and how withdrawal 

liability works for multiemployer plans. 

PBGC follows a regulatory approach that 

seeks to encourage the continuation and 

maintenance of securely-funded defined 

benefit plans. In developing new 

regulations and reviewing existing 

regulations, PBGC seeks to reduce 

burdens on plans, employers, and 

participants, and to ease and simplify 

employer compliance wherever 

possible. PBGC particularly strives to 

meet the needs of small businesses that 

sponsor defined benefit plans. In all 

such efforts, PBGC’s mission is to 

protect the retirement incomes of plan 

participants. 

Regulatory/Deregulatory Objectives and 

Priorities 

PBGC’s regulatory/deregulatory 

objectives and priorities are developed 

in the context of the Corporation’s 

statutory purposes, priorities, and 

strategic goals. 

Pension plans and the statutory 

framework in which they are 

maintained and terminated are complex. 

Despite this complexity, PBGC is 

committed to issuing simple, 

understandable, flexible, and timely 

regulations to help affected parties. 

PBGC’s regulatory/deregulatory 

objectives and priorities are: 

• To enhance the retirement security 

of workers and retirees; 

• To implement regulatory actions 

that ease compliance burdens and 

achieve maximum net benefits while 

protecting retirement security; and 

• To simplify existing regulations and 

reduce burden. 

PBGC endeavors in all its regulatory 

and deregulatory actions to promote 

clarity and reduce burden on the public. 

Small Businesses 

PBGC considers very seriously the 

impact of its regulations and policies on 

small entities. PBGC attempts to 

minimize administrative burdens on 

plans and participants, improve 

transparency, simplify filing, and assist 

plans to comply with applicable 

requirements. PBGC particularly strives 

to meet the needs of small businesses 

that sponsor defined benefit plans. In all 

such efforts, PBGC’s mission is to 

protect the retirement incomes of plan 

participants. 

Open Government and Public 

Engagement 

PBGC encourages public participation 

in the regulatory process. For example, 

PBGC’s ‘‘Federal Register Notices Open 

for Comment’’ web page highlights 

when there are opportunities to 

comment on proposed rules, 

information collections, and other 

Federal Register notices. PBGC 

encourages comments on an ongoing 

basis as it continues to look for ways to 

further improve the agency’s 

regulations. PBGC staff also actively 

participate in conferences focused on 

employee retirement benefits and 

engage with plan participant advocacy 

groups to understand where there may 

be concerns with PBGC regulations. 

Efforts to reduce regulatory burden in 

the projects discussed below are in 

substantial part a response to public 

comments and engagement. 

American Rescue Plan 

The American Rescue Plan (ARP) Act 

of 2021 added a new section 4262 of 

ERISA to create a program to provide 

funding to severely underfunded 

multiemployer pension plans to ensure 

that millions of America’s workers, 

retirees, and their families receive the 

pension benefits they earned through 

many years of hard work. 

Under new section 4262 of ERISA, 

PBGC was required within 120 days to 

prescribe in regulations or other 

guidance the requirements for SFA 

applications. To implement the 

program, on July 9, 2021, PBGC released 

an interim final rule (RIN 1212–AB53) 

adding a new part 4262 to its 

regulations, ‘‘Special Financial 

Assistance by PBGC,’’ which was 

published in the Federal Register on 

July 12, 2021. Part 4262 provides 

guidance to multiemployer pension 

plan sponsors on eligibility, 

determining the amount of SFA, content 

of an application for SFA, the process of 

applying, PBGC’s review of 

applications, and restrictions and 

conditions on plans that receive SFA. 

PBGC received over 100 public 

comments on many provisions of the 

interim rule including the methodology 

plans must use to calculate the amount 

of SFA, permissible investments of SFA 

funds, and the conditions imposed on 

plans that receive SFA. PBGC published 

a final rule on July 8, 2022, that makes 

various changes to part 4262 in response 

to public comments. The provisions of 

the final rule became effective on 

August 8. PBGC included a 30-day 

public comment period solely on the 

change to the condition to require a 

phased recognition of SFA assets for 

purposes of computing employer 

withdrawal liability. In response to 

comments received, PBGC added an 

exception process for the withdrawal 

liability conditions that apply to a plan 

that receives SFA, which was published 

in a final rule that was effective on 

January 26, 2023. 

Multiemployer Plans 

PBGC published a proposed rule on 

October 14, 2022, that would prescribe 

actuarial assumptions which may be 

used by a multiemployer plan actuary in 

determining an employer’s withdrawal 

liability (RIN 1212–AB54). Section 

4213(a) of ERISA permits PBGC to 

prescribe by regulation such 

assumptions. 

Benefit levels in a multiemployer plan 

are typically set by trustees representing 

contributing employers and unions. 

Withdrawal liability generally 

represents an employer’s share of the 

plan’s unfunded vested benefits (UVBs) 

that the plan may have at the end of the 

plan year immediately preceding the 

plan year in which the employer 

withdraws. Withdrawal liability is the 

portion of the UVBs allocable to the 

withdrawing employer and represents a 

plan’s only opportunity to require a 

withdrawing employer to pay its 

allocated share of the unfunded 

liabilities. When a plan does not collect 

an adequate amount of withdrawal 

liability from a withdrawing employer 

or collects an amount that is less than 

a withdrawing employer’s allocated 

share of the plan’s UVBs, that burden is 

shifted to the remaining contributing 

employers in the plan. There is a higher 

likelihood that the plan will not be able 

to pay full accrued benefits, and 

ultimately, there is an increased 

likelihood that it would not have 

resources to pay basic (PBGCVerDate Sep<11>2014 18:15 Feb 08, 2024 Jkt 262001 PO 00000 Frm 00226 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09FEP2.SGM 09FEP2

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9517 

guaranteed) benefits. In that case, a plan 

may have to cut benefits to the PBGC 

guarantee level and apply to PBGC for 

financial assistance, which shifts costs 

to plan participants and to others in the 

multiemployer insurance system who 

fund PBGC via annual premiums. 

The rulemaking is needed to clarify 

that a plan actuary’s use of 4044 rates 

represents a valid approach to selecting 

an interest rate assumption to determine 

withdrawal liability. The rulemaking 

would thereby reduce or eliminate the 

cost-shifting effects of impediments to 

actuaries’ use of 4044 rates. PBGC plans 

to publish a final rule that responds to 

the public comments received on the 

proposed rule. 

PBGC also plans to propose a 

rulemaking that would add a new part 

4022A to PBGC’s regulations to provide 

guidance on determining the monthly 

amount of multiemployer plan benefits 

guaranteed by PBGC (‘‘Multiemployer 

Plan Guaranteed Benefits,’’ RIN 1212– 

AB37). For example, the proposed rule 

would explain what multiemployer plan 

benefits are eligible for PBGC’s 

guarantee, how to determine credited 

service, how to determine a benefit’s 

accrual rate, and how to calculate the 

guaranteed monthly benefit amount. 

Rethinking Existing Regulations 

Most of PBGC’s regulatory/ 

deregulatory actions are the result of its 

ongoing retrospective review to identify 

and correct unintended effects, 

inconsistencies, inaccuracies, and 

requirements made irrelevant over time. 

For example, PBGC is proposing 

miscellaneous updates, clarifications, 

and improvements (RIN 1212–AB51) to 

its regulations that are in part a response 

to frequently asked questions and 

comments received from stakeholders, 

such as to annual financial and actuarial 

information filings (part 4010) and 

filings for termination of singleemployer plans (part 4041). This action 

also addresses SECURE Act changes 

affecting premium rates (part 4006), 

benefits payable in terminated singleemployer plans (part 4022), and part 

4044 (allocation of assets in singleemployer plans). PBGC’s regulatory 

review also identified a need to improve 

PBGC’s recoupment of benefit 

overpayment rules (‘‘Improvements to 

Rules on Recoupment of Benefit 

Overpayments,’’ RIN 1212–AB47). Other 

rulemakings would modernize PBGC’s 

regulations and policies by adopting upto-date assumptions and methods that 

are more consistent with best practices 

within the pension community. For 

example, PBGC is considering 

modernizing the interest, mortality, and 

expense load assumptions used to 

determine the present value of benefits 

under the asset allocation regulation (for 

single-employer plans) and for 

determining mass withdrawal liability 

payments (for multiemployer plans) 

(RIN 1212–AA55) among other 

purposes. 

PBGC 

Final Rule Stage 

225. Actuarial Assumptions for 

Determining an Employer’s Withdrawal 

Liability [1212–AB54] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 29 U.S.C. 1393; 29 

U.S.C. 1302(b)(3) 

CFR Citation: 29 CFR 4213. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This final rule responds to 

public comments received on the 

proposed rule. It would prescribe 

actuarial assumptions which may be 

used by a multiemployer plan actuary in 

determining an employer’s withdrawal 

liability. 

Statement of Need: Benefit levels in a 

multiemployer plan are typically set by 

trustees representing contributing 

employers and unions. Withdrawal 

liability generally represents an 

employer’s share of the plan’s unfunded 

vested benefits (UVBs) that the plan 

may have at the end of the plan year 

immediately preceding the plan year in 

which the employer withdraws. 

Withdrawal liability is the portion of the 

UVBs allocable to the withdrawing 

employer and represents a plan’s only 

opportunity to require a withdrawing 

employer to pay its allocated share of 

the unfunded liabilities. When a plan 

does not collect an adequate amount of 

withdrawal liability from a withdrawing 

employer or collects an amount that is 

less than a withdrawing employer’s 

allocated share of the plan’s UVBs, that 

burden is shifted to the remaining 

contributing employers in the plan. 

There is a higher likelihood that the 

plan will not be able to pay full accrued 

benefits, and ultimately, there is an 

increased likelihood that it would not 

have resources to pay basic (PBGCguaranteed) benefits. In that case, a plan 

may have to cut benefits to the PBGC 

guarantee level and apply to PBGC for 

financial assistance, which shifts costs 

to plan participants and to others in the 

multiemployer insurance system who 

fund PBGC via annual premiums. 

This rulemaking is needed to clarify 

that a plan actuary’s use of 4044 rates 

represents a valid approach to selecting 

an interest rate assumption to determine 

withdrawal liability in all 

circumstances. The rulemaking would 

thereby reduce or eliminate the costshifting effects of impediments to 

actuaries’ use of 4044 rates. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: PBGC 

estimates that, in the 20 years following 

the final rule’s effective date, there will 

be a nominal increase in cumulative 

withdrawal liability payments ranging 

between $804 million and $2.98 billion. 

While PBGC expects that the 

rulemaking will deter employer 

withdrawals, it will do so only at the 

margin, and this impact is difficult to 

estimate. Accordingly, this analysis 

does not model any change to the rate 

of employer withdrawals or decrease in 

contributions due to improved plan 

funding attributable to these changes 

because doing so would be too 

speculative. 

The major expenses associated with a 

withdrawal liability dispute are attorney 

fees, arbitration fees (including fees to 

initiate arbitration and fees charged by 

an arbitrator), and fees charged by 

expert witnesses. Though costs will vary 

greatly from plan to plan based on the 

plan’s benefit formula, size of the plan, 

attorney and expert witness rates, and 

other factors, PBGC estimates that a 

withdrawal liability arbitration, 

measuring from a request for plan 

sponsor review of a withdrawal liability 

determination through the end of 

arbitration would range from $82,500 to 

$222,000. For lengthy litigation, costs 

can be over $1 million. Assuming some 

arbitrations and litigation would be 

avoided entirely, and others would be 

less complex because they would not 

include disputes over interest 

assumptions, PBGC estimates that this 

rulemaking would result in an annual 

savings of $500,000 to $1 million, split 

evenly between plans and employers. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 10/14/22 87 FR 62316 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

11/14/22 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extended.

11/10/22 87 FR 67853 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

12/13/22 

Final Rule ............ 11/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Hilary Duke, 

Assistant General Counsel for 

Regulatory Affairs, Pension Benefit 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9518 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Guaranty Corporation, 445 12th Street 

SW, Washington, DC 20024, Phone: 202 

229–3839, Email: duke.hilary@pbgc.gov. 

RIN: 1212–AB54 

BILLING CODE 7709–02–P 

U.S. SMALL BUSINESS 

ADMINISTRATION 

Statement of Regulatory Priorities 

Overview 

The mission of the U.S. Small 

Business Administration (SBA or 

Agency) is to maintain and strengthen 

the nation’s economy by helping 

Americans start, grow, and build 

resilient businesses and recover after 

disasters. In accomplishing this mission, 

SBA strives to improve the economic 

environment for small businesses, 

including those in rural areas, those in 

areas that have significantly higher 

unemployment and lower income levels 

than the nation’s averages, and those in 

traditionally underserved markets. 

SBA has several financial, 

procurement, and technical assistance 

programs that provide a crucial 

foundation for Americans starting or 

growing a small business. For example, 

the Agency serves as a guarantor of SBA 

program loans to small businesses and 

licenses Small Business Investment 

Companies that make equity and debt 

investments in qualifying small 

businesses using a combination of 

privately raised capital and SBA 

guaranteed leverage. SBA also helps 

small businesses, including those 

owned by women, service-disabled 

veterans, minorities, and other 

historically underrepresented groups, 

gain access to federal government 

contracting opportunities. In addition, 

the Agency funds various small 

business training and mentoring 

programs and provides management and 

technical assistance to existing or 

potential small business owners through 

grants, cooperative agreements, and 

contracts. Finally, as an essential part of 

its purpose, SBA provides direct 

financial assistance to homeowners, 

renters, and businesses to repair or 

replace their property in the aftermath 

of a disaster. Beyond providing a crucial 

foundation for business-owners, SBA’s 

assistance to small businesses, 

including access to capital, generates 

new jobs to help create a strong, 

innovative, and sustainable American 

economy. 

Reducing Burden on Small Businesses 

SBA’s regulatory policy reflects a 

commitment to developing regulations 

that reduce or eliminate the burden on 

the public, particularly the Agency’s 

core constituents—small businesses. 

SBA’s regulatory process generally 

includes an assessment of the costs and 

benefits of the regulations as required by 

Executive Order No. 12866, 1993, 

‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review’’; 

Executive Order No. 13563, 2011, 

‘‘Improving Regulation and Regulatory 

Review’’; and the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act. SBA’s program offices are 

particularly invested in finding ways to 

reduce the burden imposed on the 

public by the Agency’s core activities in 

its loan, grant, innovation, and 

procurement programs. 

Openness and Transparency 

SBA promotes transparency, 

collaboration, and public participation 

in its rulemaking process. To that end, 

SBA makes a conscious effort to engage 

those members of the public eligible for 

SBA programs or affected by SBA 

regulations beyond the standard noticeand-comment process. SBA engages in 

tribal consultations when proposing 

changes to its government contracting 

regulations and often receives input on 

access and burdens associated with SBA 

program regulations and policies. For 

example, SBA conducted five tribal 

consultations or listening sessions about 

a proposal contained within the 8(a) 

Ownership and Control Rule (RIN 3245– 

AH70) mentioned below, leading to the 

elimination of the proposal in the final 

rule. For SBA’s Small Business 

Innovation Research (SBIR) program, 

the Agency coordinates a road tour 

around the country, on which SBA and 

other agencies engage small businesses 

and provide them with information 

about the application process and 

upcoming SBIR topics for grant or 

contract awards. The Historically 

Underutilized Business Zones 

(HUBZones) program office regularly 

provides webinars about the program to 

prospective and current program 

participants, who are encouraged to 

provide feedback, and holds ‘‘office 

hours’’ twice a week, during which 

firms are encouraged to inquire about 

the certification process or provide 

feedback. SBA’s Office of Government 

Contracting & Business Development 

(GCBD) and its attorneys routinely 

attend trade association conferences 

concerning its programs, including the 

annual conferences hosted by the 

National 8(a) Association and HUBZone 

Council. SBA’s 8(a) Business 

Development (BD) program office 

periodically uses its monthly Straight 

Talk call to obtain input from external 

stakeholders. For example, in fall 2022, 

the office invited stakeholders to 

provide feedback on ways to improve 

the 8(a) application. SBA has also in the 

past entered interagency agreements 

with the Department of the Interior to 

conduct customer satisfaction surveys to 

gain a broad understanding of customer 

experience and customer satisfaction 

with the availability of information 

about SBA programs. 

In addition to these program-specific 

efforts, SBA regularly seeks feedback 

from customers in the form of 

information collections under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). SBA 

maintains two generic PRA clearances 

that allow the Agency to rapidly engage 

the public: one clearance allows SBA to 

collect customer feedback on service 

delivery for SBA programs such as 

GCBD and Boots to Business, and the 

other allows SBA to collect information 

for evaluation, research, and evidence 

building in order to improve programs 

like GCBD, Community Navigators, and 

SBA’s capital programs. 

Regulatory Framework 

SBA’s Strategic Plan for fiscal years 

2022 through 2026 provides a 

framework for strengthening, 

streamlining, and simplifying SBA 

programs and leverages collaborative 

relationships with other agencies and 

the private sector to provide small 

businesses with the tools they need to 

drive innovation and strengthen the 

economy through business revenue and 

job growth. The Strategic Plan serves as 

the foundation for the regulations that 

the Agency will develop during the next 

twelve to twenty-four months. 

SBA developed the Strategic Plan in 

consultation with multiple stakeholder 

groups through its Strategic Plan 

Working Group, which comprised 

members at all levels of SBA and across 

numerous Agency programs, allowing 

the themes revealed during the 

stakeholder engagement process to be 

incorporated throughout the Agency. 

SBA also partnered with the General 

Services Administration (GSA) to solicit 

input and feedback from federal 

employees whose roles support the 

implementation of SBA programs across 

the government or who work with other 

small business development programs. 

In addition, the Agency conducted 

community outreach across the country, 

including by conducting listening 

sessions with community development 

organizations in eight cities, from 

Portland, Maine, to Portland, Oregon, 

which provided SBA with input from 

entrepreneurs of all kinds and 

highlighted place-based and sectorspecific issues. Finally, SBA solicited 

feedback through the Federal Register, 

SBA.gov posting, an SBA daily 

newsletter, a social media campaign, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9519 

and outreach to key stakeholder 

organizations. 

Based on the input received during 

this stakeholder engagement process, 

SBA identified the following 

imperatives and integrated them into its 

Strategic Plan: increase collaboration 

with resource partners and stakeholders 

to amplify SBA’s reach and better 

communicate the Agency’s products 

and services, and improve SBA’s data 

transparency so that researchers, 

resource partners, community 

organizations, and the public can better 

understand how the SBA supports the 

small business and entrepreneurial 

ecosystem. The Strategic Plan, in turn, 

sets out three strategic goals: (1) ensure 

equitable and customer-centric design 

and delivery of programs to support 

small businesses and innovative 

startups; (2) build resilient businesses 

and a sustainable economy; and (3) 

implement strong stewardship of 

resources for greater impact. 

The regulations reported in SBA’s 

semi-annual Regulatory Agenda and 

Plan are intended to facilitate 

achievement of these goals while 

meeting the needs of the members of the 

public eligible for our programs or 

affected by our regulations. Over the 

past twelve months, SBA developed 

rulemakings designed to support the 

Administration’s Invest in America 

initiative and advance the country’s 

economic growth and resiliency. 

SBA continues to take regulatory 

action as necessary to adjust and adapt 

requirements for its programs to better 

support the country’s economy. In the 

upcoming twelve to twenty-four 

months, SBA will focus on 

implementing recently finalized rules 

that increase competition in the market 

for small business credit, incentivize 

patient investments in innovative 

startups, and reduce barriers in access to 

capital for underserved communities. 

The Agency will also focus on 

advancing proposed rules that further 

remove barriers to credit across its loan 

programs for justice-involved 

entrepreneurs and make SBA’s 

contracting and counseling programs 

accessible and impactful for a wider 

range of small businesses. 

Administration’s Priorities 

To the extent possible and consistent 

with the Agency’s statutory purpose, 

SBA will take action to support the 

Administration’s priorities highlighted 

in the Fall 2023 Data Call for the Unified 

Agenda of Federal Regulatory and 

Deregulatory Actions (07/19/2023), 

namely: (1) tackling the climate change 

emergency; (2) advancing equity and 

supporting underserved, vulnerable, 

and marginalized communities; (3) 

creating and sustaining good jobs with 

a free and fair choice to join a union, 

and promoting economic resilience in 

general; and (4) improving service 

delivery and customer experience and 

reducing administrative burdens. In 

fact, many of the Agency’s rulemakings 

cut across multiple priorities. For 

example, SBA’s amendments to Small 

Business Investment Company (SBIC) 

program regulations (RIN 3245–AH90, 

described below) not only support the 

Administration’s priority to advance 

equity and support underserved 

communities, but also aim to improve 

SBA response times and enable SBA to 

focus on customer relationships and 

monitoring funds, efforts that broadly 

advance the Administration’s fourth 

priority. Highlighted below are some of 

SBA’s most important regulatory actions 

arranged by Administration priority, 

including actions SBA has completed 

since the spring 2023 Unified Agenda 

and actions that SBA plans to take in 

the upcoming 12–24 months. 

Priority (1)—Actions That Tackle the 

Climate Change Emergency 

Over the past year, SBA has 

continued to make efforts toward its a 

multi-year priority goal to help prepare 

and rebuild resilient communities by 

enhancing communication efforts for 

disaster mitigation. Under the Small 

Business Act, SBA is authorized to 

make disaster loans for efforts to repair, 

rehabilitate, or replace property 

damaged or destroyed as a result of a 

disaster. SBA’s regulations in 13 CFR 

part 123 contain the legal framework for 

the SBA Disaster Loan program, which 

delivers SBA financing specifically 

targeted for pre-disaster and postdisaster mitigation projects. SBA can 

also tap into its other financing 

programs for funding to put toward 

disaster mitigation measures. No 

regulations are necessary to implement 

either of these options. In addition to its 

regulatory actions, SBA will continue to 

focus its efforts on educating the public 

on the benefits of investing in mitigation 

and resilience projects and on 

increasing awareness of SBA loan 

programs that small businesses can take 

advantage of to purchase, renovate, or 

retrofit buildings and equipment in 

order to reduce greenhouse gas 

emissions, improve energy efficiency, 

and enable the development of 

innovative solutions that support the 

green economy. 

i. Disaster Assistance Loan Program 

Changes to Maximum Loan Amounts 

and Miscellaneous Updates (RIN 3245– 

AH91) 

SBA continues to develop regulatory 

actions that enhance and modernize its 

procurement and capital assistance 

programs in order to combat the climate 

crisis. A direct final rule for the Disaster 

Loan program, effective July 31, 2023, 

aimed to increase disaster survivors’ 

access to much needed funds to repair 

or replace damaged property by, among 

other things, increasing home loan 

lending limits, extending the deferment 

period, and expanding mitigation 

options. 

Specifically, the final rule increased 

the lending limits on amounts for repair 

and replacement of disaster damaged 

real and personal property, for 

refinancing, for mitigation, and for 

contractor malfeasance. These were 

necessary changes as current home loan 

lending limits had not been adjusted 

since 1994, but inflation, housing 

prices, and construction and labor costs 

have increased over time. From 2018 

through 2022, approximately 8.5% of 

borrowers were unable to fully restore 

their real estate and replace their 

personal property due to the current 

home loan lending limits. In some cases, 

the numbers were even higher; for 

example, 64.2% of recipients of home 

loans for damage caused by the 2021 

Colorado Wildfires and 17.6% of such 

borrowers from Hurricanes Fiona and 

Ian were unable to fully restore their 

real estate and replace personal 

property. Before this rule, this shortfall 

was expected only to continue to 

increase and impact greater numbers of 

disaster survivors in other regions as 

disasters and disaster recovery becomes 

more frequent, widespread, and 

expensive. With respect to deferment 

periods, the final rule increased the 

initial deferment period from 5 months 

to 12 months, reducing the immediate 

financial burden for disaster survivors, 

a crucial change as repair and 

replacement timelines often extend 

beyond the prior 5-month deferment 

period. Additionally, the final rule 

expanded the allowable use of disaster 

loan funds used to protect damaged or 

destroyed real property from possible 

future ‘‘similar’’ disasters to simply all 

possible future disasters. By eliminating 

the word ‘‘similar,’’ SBA has provided 

a disaster loan recipient the flexibility to 

use loan funds allocated for mitigation 

to protect against any type of disaster 

and thus better protect their property 

from future disasters. The amended 

regulations also allow the Administrator 

to increase the maximum loan amounts 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9520 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

to homeowners and renters under a 

specific disaster declaration based on 

appropriate economic indicators, such 

as current building costs, regional 

median home prices, and the Consumer 

Price Index (CPI) and the Producer Price 

Index (PPI) for the region(s). 

As a direct final rule, the public was 

invited to comment until July 17, 2023. 

SBA did not receive significant adverse 

comment, and the rule became effective 

on July 31, 2023. 

Priority (2)—Actions That Advance 

Equity and Support Underserved, 

Vulnerable and Marginalized 

Communities 

SBA continues to make efforts to 

improve access of underserved 

communities to capital, federal 

government procurement and 

contracting opportunities, disaster 

assistance, and small business services 

like counseling and training. In addition 

to SBA’s actions to promote access to its 

programs—namely addressing language, 

cultural differences, and socio-economic 

factors, expanding the lending network 

to groups that work with underserved 

communities, leveraging technology, 

and addressing the digital/technological 

divide—SBA continues to make efforts 

to identify gaps and develop a more 

targeted outreach by revising 

information collection instruments and 

commissioning federal statistical 

agencies to gather demographic data on 

programs participants and service 

recipients. 

SBA also continues to explore 

regulatory actions that can supplement 

its Equity Action Plan objectives and 

support underserved, vulnerable, and 

marginalized communities. For 

example, SBA is prioritizing 

development of a rulemaking to 

standardize the regulatory requirements 

that govern its certification programs: 

the 8(a) BD program, HUBZone, the 

Women-Owned Small Business (WOSB) 

program, and the Veteran Small 

Business Certification program 

(VetCert). This is consistent with SBA’s 

ongoing efforts to support businesses in 

underserved markets and remove 

barriers to entry in SBA’s small business 

contracting programs. In addition, the 

final rule for the SBIC program (RIN 

3245–AH90, discussed below) intends 

to implement Executive Order 13985, 

Advancing Racial Equity and Support 

for Underserved Communities Through 

the Federal Government, by reducing 

financial and administrative barriers to 

participation in the SBIC program and 

modernizing the program’s license 

offerings to align with a more 

diversified set of new funds investing in 

underserved small businesses. 

i. Ownership and Control and 

Contractual Assistance Requirements for 

the 8(a) Business Development Program 

(RIN 3245–AH70) 

The 8(a) BD program helps firms 

owned and controlled by socially and 

economically disadvantaged individuals 

strengthen their ability to compete 

effectively in the economy by providing 

training and various forms of technical, 

financial, and procurement assistance. 

This final rule, effective April 27, 2023, 

made several changes to the program, 

including, among other things, 

recognizing a process for allowing a 

change of ownership in a former 

participant that is still performing one 

or more 8(a) contracts. Program 

regulations previously stated that a 

program participant awarded one or 

more 8(a) contracts could substitute one 

disadvantaged individual for another 

disadvantaged individual without 

requiring the termination of those 

contracts or a request for waiver. The 

rule clarified the regulation’s language 

to make clear that, just like current 

program participants, former 

participants performing 8(a) contract(s) 

may change ownership, provided the 

new ownership claims a socially and 

economically disadvantaged status, 

without the requirement for contract 

termination or a waiver. As a result, 

individual entrepreneurs and entities 

(i.e., tribes, Alaska Native Corporations 

(ANCs), Native Hawaiian Organizations 

(NHOs), and Community Development 

Corporations (CDCs)) can acquire an 

existing platform of capabilities and 

past performance, as well as an 

established contract revenue stream 

with fewer administrative burdens. 

In addition, the rule clarified that an 

applicant or participant firm that settles 

its debts with the federal government is 

not barred from participating in the 

program. Specifically, where a firm or 

its principals can demonstrate that any 

financial obligations owed have been 

settled and discharged by the federal 

government, that firm will be eligible for 

the 8(a) BD program. The rule also 

clarified that a business concern can use 

its successful performance of state, 

local, or federal government contracts to 

demonstrate its ‘‘potential for success,’’ 

a requirement for program eligibility, 

and expanded the means by which 

tribally-owned businesses can 

demonstrate potential for success, by 

allowing such applicants to submit 

financial statements as evidence of their 

potential in lieu of federal income tax 

returns, which not all tribally-owned 

small businesses file. The rule also 

made several changes relating to 8(a) 

contracts, including clarifying that a 

contracting officer cannot limit an 8(a) 

competition to participants having more 

than one certification (e.g., 8(a) and 

HUBZone), ensuring that 8(a) 

competition remains available to all 

eligible program participants. The rule 

clarified not only the prohibition against 

an agency requiring one or more other 

certifications in addition to its 8(a) 

certification, but also makes similar 

clarifications to the regulations for the 

SDVO, HUBZone, and WOSB programs. 

The final rule reflects feedback SBA 

received during five tribal consultations 

and listening sessions about a proposal 

to add certain reporting and Community 

Benefits Plan requirements for entities 

having one or more participants in the 

8(a) BD program. Based on that 

feedback, SBA eliminated the proposal 

in the final rule. In addition, the rule 

reflects extensive feedback in the form 

of over 650 comments received from 125 

commenters, with most comments 

supporting the rule’s substantive 

changes. SBA adopted suggested 

changes, made clarifications to the 

rule’s language as appropriate, or 

explained its rationale for rejecting 

suggestions. In addition to accepting 

feedback on the rule in general, SBA 

sought comments on specific issues, 

including issues relating to 8(a) and 

Timber Set-Aside program waivers, 

sole-source 8(a) follow-on procurement, 

and Community Benefits Plans. SBA 

developed the sections of the final rule 

that were focused on these issues based 

on the feedback received. 

ii. Criminal Justice Reviews for the SBA 

Business Loan Programs and Surety 

Bond Guaranty Program (RIN 3245– 

AI03) 

SBA is proposing to amend 

regulations governing SBA’s business 

loan programs (the 7(a) Loan program, 

504 Loan program, Microloan program, 

Intermediary Lending Pilot (ILP) 

program, and Surety Bond Guarantee 

(SBG) program) and the Disaster Loan 

program (except for the COVID 

Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) 

program) to modify how SBA considers 

applicants with criminal history. The 

amendments are designed to improve 

equitable access based on criminal 

background review of applicants 

seeking to participate in one or more of 

these programs. After conducting a 

comprehensive study of SBA capital 

programs’ current policies on 

individuals with criminal histories, SBA 

believes the proposed changes honor 

and incorporate the statutory mandates 

of 15 U.S.C. 631 that emphasize both the 

importance of small business 

development in general and SBA’s 

responsibility to increase opportunities 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9521 

for certain groups that historically may 

not have had equitable opportunities for 

small business ownership. Aside from 

these statutory mandates, the rule is 

based on how state and local 

governments and the private sector have 

broadened access to business capital 

and employment opportunities and is 

supported by data and empirical 

research demonstrating the public safety 

and economic benefits of such 

broadened access. Federal laws have 

also evolved regarding recidivism and 

second chances for formerly 

incarcerated individuals. SBA has 

determined that there is a need to 

update regulations to reduce barriers to 

participation in these programs for 

equitable support for small business 

entrepreneurs with criminal history 

records. 

Priority (3): Actions That Create and 

Sustain Good Jobs With a Free and Fair 

Choice To Join a Union and Promote 

Economic Resilience in General 

Small businesses form the foundation 

of the U.S. economy. They create twothirds of net new jobs and drive 

American innovation and 

competitiveness. SBA continues to 

focus on helping small businesses 

develop economic resilience. SBA’s 

Office of Capital Access has two goals: 

to increase the capital available to start 

and grow the small businesses that 

would not otherwise be able to access 

capital through conventional sources 

and to provide disaster assistance in the 

form of home and business loans for 

disaster survivors. SBA’s loan guaranty 

and microloan programs provide creditworthy small businesses with access to 

capital they would otherwise not 

receive because they cannot qualify for 

a loan under conventional credit 

standards. The Agency’s disaster 

assistance programs help small 

businesses prepare for disasters and 

restore small businesses and their 

communities struck by disaster. 

SBA aims to develop economic 

resilience not only in small businesses, 

but broadly within the U.S. economy, by 

helping ensure small businesses receive 

their fair share of federal contracting 

dollars. This is a crucial aspect of the 

government-wide effort to strengthen 

the federal supply chain. To that end, 

SBA continues to look for regulatory 

avenues to enhance its contracting 

assistance programs, which help small 

businesses win federal contracts. As 

noted, SBA is prioritizing development 

of a rulemaking that will standardize the 

certification requirements and process 

for SBA’s contracting assistance 

programs—the 8(a) BD program, 

HUBZone, WOSB, and VetCert. The 

streamlined certification regulations and 

process will eliminate unnecessary 

bureaucratic obstacles for eligible small 

businesses seeking multiple 

certifications, which will allow federal 

contracting dollars to flow more easily 

to eligible small businesses. The 

proposed updates will also ensure 

regulatory consistency among the 

programs to the extent possible. In 

streamlining the certification 

regulations and process, SBA aims to 

facilitate federal contracting of eligible 

small businesses, and thereby assist the 

federal government as a whole more 

effectively diversify its supply chains 

and strengthen its economic resilience. 

In addition, SBA continues to identify 

gaps in small business investment and 

develop rules that aim to plug those 

gaps. 

i. Small Business Investment Company 

Investment Diversification and Growth 

(RIN 3245–AH90) 

A final rule for the SBIC program, 

effective August 17, 2023, aims to 

significantly reduce barriers to program 

participation of new SBIC fund 

managers and funds investing in (i) 

underserved communities and 

geographies, (ii) capital intensive 

investments, and (iii) technologies 

critical to national security and 

economic development. SBA believes it 

must reduce barriers to participation 

and diversify its patient capital and 

long-term loan program to ensure longterm program stability and mission 

effectiveness. 

The rule introduces new types of 

SBICs, termed Accrual SBICs and 

Reinvestor SBICs, through which SBA 

will increase program investment 

diversification and patient capital 

financing for small businesses. It also 

introduces a new Accrual Debenture for 

issuance by these Accrual SBICs. This 

new structure is intended to attract new 

investors by reducing perceived 

disadvantages of being an SBIC. The 

Accrual Debenture aligns with cash 

flows of equity-focused strategies by 

offering an alternative to a semi-annual 

interest payment Debenture structure for 

all SBIC licensees either (1) not taking 

a control-position in small businesses 

and or (2) with over 75% of capital 

earmarked for long-term equity 

investment in small businesses to help 

them grow and scale. This alternative 

structure accommodates a longer 

horizon for investments in small 

businesses that might require more 

patient capital. In introducing this new 

structure, SBA aims to increase the 

equity funding available to underserved 

small business owners and unlock 

equity as a source of funding for many 

small business owners. Importantly, 

SBA believes it can offer this new 

structure while maintaining a zerosubsidy cost in the program. 

During the rulemaking process, SBA 

received comments on both the rule and 

the SBIC program generally. SBA 

incorporated the recommendations of 

many of the comments, even those that 

were not directly within scope of the 

rulemaking. For example, in response to 

comments urging an expedited SBIC 

licensing process, SBA elected to 

introduce an expedited subsequent fund 

licensing process for eligible applicants 

and modify its standard operating 

procedures to increase transparency in 

the licensing process and decrease 

potential tail-end delays. SBA is also 

making efforts to implement 

recommendations that the Agency 

publish the names and dates of licensed 

SBICs in the Federal Register, collect 

certain data and financial metrics, and 

modernize certain aspects of the 

program, including the ‘‘reinvestment’’ 

restrictions which prohibit Section 

301(c) Licensees from investing in a 

fund-of-funds capacity in emerging 

managers and licensing fees. 

Among changes to the rule itself, after 

consideration of all public comments, 

SBA modified the final rule to make the 

Accrual Debenture available only to 

Accrual SBICs and Reinvestor SBICs, to 

align with the types of long-duration 

growth investing they primarily 

perform, and to exclude Standard 

SBICs, which may issue only Standard 

Debentures and Discount Debentures. 

This change limits the Accrual 

Debenture to SBICs that focus on 

stimulating small businesses. In 

addition, based on public comment, the 

final rule does not apply the new 

modified distribution waterfall to 

Standard Debenture Licensees, but 

instead applies it exclusively to the 

Accrual Debenture instrument. The final 

rule thus separated distribution 

requirements based on three categories 

of SBICs: (1) Non-leveraged Licensees; 

(2) Standard Debenture SBICs; and (3) 

Accrual SBICs and Reinvestor SBICs. 

SBA also decided against moving 

forward with modifications to 

Examination fees based on public 

comment. In addition, SBA modified 

the final rule to modify an exception to 

the restriction prohibiting licensees 

from making investments into relenders 

or reinvestors to permit reinvestors 

which are Accrual SBICs to make equity 

investments in certain underserved 

reinvestors. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9522 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

Priority (4): Actions That Improve 

Service Delivery, Customer Experience, 

and Reduce Administrative Burdens 

SBA continues to make efforts to 

improve service delivery and customer 

experience and reduce administrative 

burdens wherever possible. In fact, 

many of the rules already mentioned 

under other priorities aim to support 

this priority. For example, SBA’s 

amendments to the Disaster Loan 

program (RIN 3245–AH91) removed a 

business loan limit on amounts for 

landscaping or recreational facilities. 

Prior to the removal, SBA would make 

exceptions to the limit based on 

documented functional need on a caseby-case basis. The change provides 

consistency with home loans, removes 

the need for administrative exceptions, 

and reduces administrative burden on 

the disaster survivor and SBA in 

securing resources to repair or replace 

damaged property. SBA’s amendments 

to the 8(a) BD program (RIN 3245– 

AH70) advance this priority in several 

ways, including by making SBA’s 

approval of a participant’s business plan 

part of that participant’s eligibility 

determination in certain situations, by 

streamlining the reapplication process 

for small businesses whose application 

was denied solely due to size that was 

later found to be small in connection 

with a formal size determination, 

providing that such applicants shall be 

immediately certified as eligible for the 

program, and by making it easier to 

meet the bona fide place of business 

requirement for 8(a) construction 

contracts (when imposed), which 

commenters noted would reduce 

overhead costs and provide needed 

flexibility to meet client needs more 

efficiently at a lower cost. And, as 

previously mentioned, SBA’s 

amendments to the SBIC program (RIN 

3245–AH90) include streamlined 

regulatory filing and reductions in 

duplicative data collections and 

bureaucratic processes to improve its 

response times and enable a greater 

focus on customer relationships and 

fund monitoring. For example, the rule 

allows approval to be granted at 

licensing of an SBIC’s Total Intended 

Leverage Commitment, creates safe 

harbors for certain conflicts of interest 

that eliminate the need for explicit SBA 

approval, and allows automatic 

approval of GAAP-compliant valuations 

for non-leveraged licensees, changes 

which SBA believes will decrease the 

time and cost associated with applying 

for an SBIC license. In addition, SBA is 

prioritizing a rulemaking designed to 

standardize the regulatory requirements 

that govern its certification programs: 

the 8(a) BD program, HUBZone, the 

WOSB program, and VetCert. 

Following revisions to the 

requirements in SBA’s 8(a) BD program 

and Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned 

Small Business (SDVOSB) programs, 

SBA is issuing conforming revisions to 

its affiliation rules that govern all small 

business procurement programs and to 

the WOSB 

program. These revisions will ensure 

consistent requirements for ownership 

and control across SBA’s procurement 

programs. 

i. Affiliation in Small Business 

Procurement Program (RIN 3245–AH97) 

SBA is proposing to amend its 

regulations on affiliation to expand 

access to credit and capital for small 

businesses, particularly those involved 

in government contracting. The 

proposed rule will address an 

inconsistency between SBA’s affiliation 

rule and the rule on ownership and 

control in the SDVOSB program. On 

November 29, 2022, SBA published a 

final rule on procedures for certifying 

Veteran-Owned Small Business (VOSB) 

concerns and SDVOSB concerns. 87 FR 

73400 (Nov. 29, 2022). That rule 

included changes to SBA’s ownership 

and control rules for service-disabled 

veteran-owned small business concerns. 

In particular, SBA’s rules allow a nonveteran to participate in certain 

extraordinary corporate decisions 

without causing the business to lose its 

veteran-owned status. SBA listed such 

extraordinary circumstances as: (1) the 

company’s addition of a new equity 

stakeholder; (2) the dissolution of the 

company; (3) the sale of the company or 

all assets of the company; (4) the merger 

of the company; and (5) the company’s 

declaration of bankruptcy. See also 83 

FR 48908 (Sept. 28, 2018). Under that 

provision in the SDVOSB program, a 

non-veteran could have authority to do 

any of those five extraordinary actions, 

but SBA’s affiliation rule still could 

cause the non- veteran’s authority to be 

deemed ineligible as a small business 

concern under the negative control 

provision in 13 CFR 121.103(a)(3). 

Accordingly, this proposed rule makes 

the negative- control rule in SBA’s 

affiliation rule consistent with 

ownership-and-control rules in the 

SDVOSB program. The proposal also 

would better define what stock holdings 

and merger agreements lead to 

affiliation. 

ii. WOSB Program Updates and 

Clarifications (RIN 3245–AI04) 

The WOSB regulations were updated 

in 2020 to implement a certification 

program as mandated by Congress. 

Certified WOSB program participants 

are required to re-certify as to their 

eligibility every three years, which 

means the first group of firms will begin 

the re- certification process in October 

of 2023. In conjunction with this 

anniversary, SBA is updating the 

regulations for clarity and ease of use. 

After three years of feedback from 

applicants, program participants, 

contracting officers, advocacy groups, 

Congressional staffers, and the Small 

Business Procurement Advisory 

Council, among others, SBA looks 

forward to refining the regulations to 

provide clear, accessible guidance for all 

stakeholders. 

SBA also plans to align WOSB 

regulations with SBA’s other 

government contracting programs, such 

as VetCert and 8(a), where appropriate. 

Such changes are especially important 

because the WOSB program has 

certification reciprocity with both 

programs. The 8(a) regulations were 

significantly revised earlier this year, 

and the VetCert regulations are also new 

as of January, so the WOSB proposed 

updates will ensure regulatory 

consistency to the extent possible. 

iii. Small Business Development Center 

Program Revisions (RIN 3245–AE05) 

SBA plans to issue a final rule to 

update its regulations for the Small 

Business Development Centers (SBDC) 

program. The program links the 

resources of federal, state and local 

governments with the resources of the 

educational community and the private 

sector to provide assistance to the small 

business community. In partnership 

with SBA’s Office of Small Business 

Development Centers (OSBDC) and 

District Offices, SBDCs develop 

business counseling and training 

programs, informational tools, and other 

services that enhance the economic 

development goals and objectives of 

SBA in their respective service areas 

and local funding partners. Although 

Congress has amended the statute 

authorizing the SBDC program at least 

17 times, SBDC regulations have not 

been comprehensively updated since 

1995. This final rule will incorporate 

updates to the Uniform Guidance, i.e., 

the administrative requirements, cost 

principles, and audit requirements for 

federal awards. It will also align SBDC 

regulations with current SBA policy and 

guidance as well as modernize and 

clarify the regulations to be more 

efficient, effective, and transparent. 

Among other changes, the rule clarifies 

the role of the District Office regarding 

oversight activities, defines and clarifies 

the various roles, procedures, 

documents, and categories of funding, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9523 

and codifies the current Lead Center 

Director selection process used by 

SBDCs. 

The intent of the changes is to make 

program operations less onerous for 

recipient organizations. Current 

program policies and requirements are 

set forth in the annual notice of funding 

opportunity and the SBDC cooperative 

agreements, in addition to the agencyand government-wide guidance, 

including the Uniform Guidance. The 

above changes will simplify these 

governing documents by moving select 

policy language to the regulations. In 

addition, by consolidating 

programmatic guidance, the rule will 

ensure consistency in program 

administration and enhance program 

oversight. The rule will also include 

policy and procedural changes 

identified by the Agency as necessary to 

preserve the integrity and legislative 

intent of the program. 

Pursuant to the Small Business Act’s 

requirement that SBA consult with the 

recognized association of SBDCs in any 

SBDC rulemaking action, SBA shared 

the draft proposed rule and 

subsequently met with America’s SBDC 

in March 2022 to incorporate the 

association’s feedback as appropriate 

and briefed the nationwide network 

during its Annual Conference and 

Spring Leadership meeting. SBA also 

participated in three tribal consultations 

that addressed the SBDC program, 

including the regulations. In addition, 

SBA considered the more than 400 

comments on the proposed rule it 

received during the notice-andcomment process and is incorporating 

many of the suggestions in its revisions 

to the proposed rule. Nearly ten percent 

of the comments related to the ability of 

the networks to partner with local 

organizations to deliver services to 

small businesses. SBA intends to adopt 

the comments and expand and allow the 

SBDC Lead Center to partner not only 

with the institutions of higher 

education, but also with other 

community organizations, such as 

Chambers of Commerce. 

Conclusion 

Through these and other regulatory 

actions, SBA aims to better help 

Americans start, grow, and build 

resilient businesses and recover after 

disasters and thereby strengthen the 

American economy. In developing its 

rules, the Agency will continue to 

advance the Administration’s priorities 

to tackle the climate change emergency; 

advance equity and support 

underserved, vulnerable, and 

marginalized communities; create and 

sustain good jobs with a free and fair 

choice to join a union and promote 

economic resilience in general; and 

improve service delivery and customer 

experience while reducing 

administrative burdens. 

BILLING CODE 8026–03–P 

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION 

(SSA) 

I. Statement of Regulatory Priorities 

We administer the Retirement, 

Survivors, and Disability Insurance 

programs under title II of the Social 

Security Act (Act), the Supplemental 

Security Income (SSI) program under 

title XVI of the Act, and the Special 

Veterans Benefits program under title 

VIII of the Act. As directed by Congress, 

we also assist in administering portions 

of the Medicare program under title 

XVIII of the Act. Our regulations codify 

the requirements for eligibility and 

entitlement to benefits and our 

procedures for administering these 

programs. Generally, our regulations do 

not impose burdens on the private 

sector or on State or local governments, 

except for the States’ Disability 

Determination Services. However, our 

regulations can impose burdens on the 

private sector in the course of evaluating 

a claimant’s initial or continued 

eligibility. We fully fund the Disability 

Determination Services in advance or 

via reimbursement for necessary costs in 

making disability determinations. 

As we are developing our regulations, 

we seek to increase participation and 

engagement with members of the public 

affected by our regulations, including in 

the development of our regulatory 

priorities. In this Regulatory Plan, we 

note engagement efforts that have 

helped to inform our priorities to date. 

We seek to hear from members of the 

public who have not typically 

participated in the regulatory process. 

The entries in our regulatory plan 

represent issues of major importance to 

the Agency. Through our regulatory 

plan, we intend to: 

A. Simplify a specific policy within 

the SSI program by no longer 

considering food in In-Kind Support 

and Maintenance (ISM) calculations 

(RIN 0960–AI60); 

B. Expand the definition of a Public 

Assistance (PA) Household to include 

an additional means- tested assistance 

program (RIN 0960–AI81); 

C. Expand the rental subsidy 

exception beyond the seven states to 

which it already applies so that it 

applies nationwide (RIN 0960–AI82); 

and 

D. Revise the disability adjudication 

process regarding how we consider past 

work to reduce the application time 

burden on claimants and expedite the 

disability application and determination 

process (RIN 0960–AI83). 

II. Regulations in the Proposed Rule 

Stage 

We are not including any of our 

regulations in the proposed rule stage in 

this statement of regulatory priorities. 

III. Regulations in the Final Rule Stage 

Our final regulations would expand 

the definition of a PA household for 

purposes of our programs to include the 

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance 

Program (SNAP) as an additional 

means-tested public income 

maintenance (PIM) program, decreasing 

the amount of income we would be 

required to deem to SSI applicants. This 

proposal reflects feedback we received 

from advocacy groups representing 

claimants and beneficiaries during 

listening sessions conducted under the 

authority of Executive Order (E.O.) 

12866. These listening sessions took 

place in Fall 2022, during the 

development of the omitting food from 

the ISM calculations proposed rule. 

During the public comment period for 

the omitting food ISM proposed rule, 

several of these advocacy groups also 

submitted comments relating to the 

definition of PA household. Across both 

the listening session and the public 

comment submission, these groups 

expressed that the expansion of the 

definition of a PA household should 

include additional means-tested 

programs to help underserved families 

more easily access benefits. Advocates 

conveyed this was a top priority for 

them. (RIN 0960–AI81). 

Our final regulations would also 

apply nationwide the ISM rental 

subsidy exception that is currently in 

place for SSI applicants and recipients 

residing in seven States, by recognizing 

that a ‘‘business arrangement’’ exists 

when the amount of required monthly 

rent equals or exceeds the presumed 

maximum value. This proposal would 

bring nationwide uniformity to our rules 

and improve equality in the application 

of the rental subsidy policy. This 

proposed rule was also informed by the 

Executive Order 12866 listening 

sessions conducted during the 

development of the omitting food from 

the ISM calculations regulation. (RIN 

0960–AI82). 

Our final regulations revise the period 

that we consider when determining 

whether an individual’s past work is 

relevant for purposes of making 

disability determinations and decisions, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9524 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

which would reduce the reporting 

burden for individuals seeking 

disability benefits and decrease the time 

associated with the overall disability 

application and decision process. The 

development of this proposed rule was 

informed by a listening session 

conducted by our Office of 

Communications with advocacy groups 

representing claimants and 

beneficiaries. (RIN 0960–AI83). 

Lastly, our final regulations target 

changes to the ISM policy in our SSI 

program, including this regulation on 

food provided by others. The changes 

would simplify a specific policy within 

the SSI program by no longer 

considering food in the calculation of 

ISM. In Fall 2022, we heard from 

advocacy groups representing claimants 

and beneficiaries during two Executive 

Order 12866 listening sessions. We 

incorporated our listening session notes 

in the rulemaking record via 

www.regulations.gov, under docket 

SSA–2021–0014. (RIN 0960–AI60). 

Retrospective Review of Existing 

Regulations 

Pursuant to section 6 of Executive 

Order 13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation 

and Regulatory Review’’ (January 18, 

2011), SSA regularly engages in 

retrospective review and analysis for 

multiple existing regulatory initiatives. 

These initiatives may be proposed or 

completed actions, and they do not 

necessarily appear in The Regulatory 

Plan. You can find more information on 

these completed rulemakings in past 

publications of the Unified Agenda at 

www.reginfo.gov in the ‘‘Completed 

Actions’’ section for the Social Security 

Administration. 

SSA 

Final Rule Stage 

226. Omitting Food From In-Kind 

Support and Maintenance Calculations 

[0960–AI60] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 902(a)(5); 

42 U.S.C. 1381a; 42 U.S.C.1382; 42 

U.S.C. 1382a; 42 U.S.C. 1382b; 42 U.S.C. 

1382c(f); 42 U.S.C. 1382j; 42 U.S.C. 

1383; 42 U.S.C. 1382 note; . . . 

CFR Citation: 20 CFR 416.1102; 20 

CFR 416.1130; 20 CFR 416.1131; 20 CFR 

416.1103; 20 CFR 416.1104; 20 CFR 

416.1121; 20 CFR 416.1124; 20 CFR 

416.1132; 20 CFR 416.1133; 20 CFR 

416.1140; 20 CFR 416.1147; 20 CFR 

416.1148; 20 CFR 416.1149; 20 CFR 

416.1157; . . . 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: This final rule removes food 

from the calculation of In-Kind Support 

and Maintenance (ISM). Accordingly, 

we would calculate ISM based only on 

shelter expenses (i.e., costs associated 

with room, rent, mortgage payments, 

real property taxes, heating fuel, gas, 

electricity, water, sewerage, and garbage 

collection services). The changes 

simplify our policy and promote equity 

by not disadvantaging an already 

vulnerable population when they 

receive food assistance. 

In the Fall of 2022, we heard from 

advocacy groups representing claimants 

and beneficiaries during two E.O. 12866 

listening sessions. We incorporated our 

notes in the rulemaking record via 

www.regulations.gov, under docket 

SSA–2021–0014. 

Statement of Need: This change 

would remove food costs when we 

calculate ISM. By doing so, it 

streamlines the ISM policy and resulting 

SSI program complexity. 

Summary of Legal Basis: We are 

removing food from our ISM 

calculations. This will streamline the 

policy and reduce the program 

complexity of ISM. 

Alternatives: The current proposal 

streamlines the SSI process. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: We 

estimate that implementation of this 

proposed rule for all eligibility and 

payment determinations effective April 

1, 2023 and later will result in an 

increase in Federal SSI payments of a 

total of about $1.5 billion over the 

period of fiscal years 2023 through 

2032. 

Risks: We do not anticipate risk to the 

integrity of our program. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 02/15/23 88 FR 9779 

Final Action ......... 03/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Scott Logan, Social 

Insurance Specialist, Social Security 

Administration, Office of Income 

Security Programs, 6401 Security 

Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21235–6401, 

Phone: 410 966–5927, Email: 

scott.logan@ssa.gov. 

RIN: 0960–AI60 

SSA 

227. Expand the Definition of a Public 

Assistance (PA) Household [0960–AI81] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 405(a) 

CFR Citation: 20 CFR 416.1142; 

416.1161; 416.1163; 416.1165. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: We propose expanding the 

definition of a Public Assistance (PA) 

Household to include additional meanstested assistance programs. This will 

decrease the number of applicants and 

recipients charged in-kind support and 

maintenance, which will simplify living 

arrangement development within the 

Supplemental Security Income (SSI) 

program. 

This proposal reflects feedback we 

received from advocacy groups 

representing claimants and beneficiaries 

during listening sessions conducted 

under the authority of Executive Order 

(E.O.) 12866. These listening sessions 

took place during the development of 

the omitting food from the ISM 

calculations regulation in Fall 2022. We 

also received public comments 

submitted by these advocacy groups 

during the public comment period 

associated with the omitting food from 

ISM calculations NPRM. The Agency 

heard from these advocacy groups that 

the expansion of the definition of a PA 

household to include additional meanstested programs could help underserved 

families more easily access benefits and 

that this was a top priority. 

Statement of Need: This change, 

adding SNAP to our regulatory 

definition of a public assistance 

household, would decrease the number 

of SSI applicants and recipients charged 

with in-kind support and maintenance 

(ISM). By doing so, it streamlines the 

ISM policy and resulting SSI program 

complexity, which supports the 

economic security of households who 

receive nutrition assistance. 

Summary of Legal Basis: We are 

adding SNAP as a means-tested public 

income maintenance program to our 

regulatory definition of a public 

assistance household. This will 

streamline the policy and reduce the 

program complexity of ISM. 

Alternatives: The current proposal 

streamlines the SSI process. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: We 

estimate that implementation of this 

proposed rule would result in a total 

increase in Federal SSI payments of 

$14.8 billion over fiscal years 2024 

through 2033, assuming implementation 

of this rule on May 15, 2024. 

Risks: We do not anticipate risk to the 

integrity of our program. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9525 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 09/29/23 88 FR 67148 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

11/28/23 

Final Action ......... 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Tamara Levingston, 

Analyst, Social Security Administration, 

6401 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 

21235, Phone: 410 966–7384, Email: 

tamara.levingston@ssa.gov. 

RIN: 0960–AI81 

SSA 

228. Nationwide Expansion of the 

Rental Subsidy Policy for SSI 

Recipients [0960–AI82] 

Priority: Other Significant. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 405(a) 

CFR Citation: 20 CFR 416.1130(b). 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: We propose expanding the 

rental subsidy exception beyond the 7 

states to which it already applies so that 

it applies nationwide. Accordingly, our 

nationwide policy would be that a 

business arrangement exists when the 

amount of monthly rent required to be 

paid equals or exceeds the presumed 

maximum value or the current market 

value, whichever is less. We expect that 

the proposed change would improve 

service delivery by making our policy 

uniform throughout the country and 

reducing administrative burdens for 

individuals seeking access to the 

Supplemental Security Income (SSI) 

program. 

This was informed in part by the 

Executive Order 12866 listening 

sessions conducted during the 

development of the omitting food from 

the ISM calculations regulation. 

Statement of Need: This proposal 

streamlines the agency’s policy on InKind Support and Maintenance (ISM) 

and reduces SSI program complexity. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Social 

Security Administration general 

rulemaking authority 42 U.S.C. 405(a); 

42 U.S.C. 1383(d)(1). 

Alternatives: The current proposal 

streamlines the SSI process. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: We 

estimate that implementation of this 

proposed rule would result in a total 

increase in Federal SSI payments of 

$971 million over fiscal years 2024 

through 2033, assuming implementation 

of this rule on April 29, 2024. 

Risks: We do not anticipate risk to the 

integrity of our program. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 08/24/23 88 FR 57910 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

10/23/23 

Final Action ......... 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Tamara Levingston, 

Analyst, Social Security Administration, 

6401 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 

21235, Phone: 410 966–7384, Email: 

tamara.levingston@ssa.gov. 

RIN: 0960–AI82 

SSA 

229. Intermediate Improvement to the 

Disability Adjudication Process, 

Including How We Consider Past Work 

[0960–AI83] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 42 U.S.C. 405(a); 42 

U.S.C. 1383(d)(1) 

CFR Citation: 20 CFR 404 Subpart P; 

20 CFR 416 Subpart I; 20 CFR 

404.1560(b); 20 CFR 416.960(b). 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: We propose to develop 

intermediate improvements to reduce 

the burden in our current disability 

adjudication process as a step towards 

longer-term reforms to ensure our 

disability program remains current and 

supports equitable outcomes. Actions 

could include decreasing the years of 

past work we consider when making a 

disability determination, as well as 

other potential regulatory changes. 

The development of this regulation 

was informed by a listening session 

conducted by our Office of 

Communications with advocacy groups 

representing claimants and 

beneficiaries. 

Statement of Need: Reducing the 

reporting requirements for prior work to 

a 5-year period instead of 15 years will 

reduce the burden on individuals 

seeking disability benefits while still 

providing us with enough relevant 

information to make accurate disability 

determinations and decisions. 

Summary of Legal Basis: Social 

Security Administration general 

rulemaking authority 42 U.S.C. 405(a); 

42 U.S.C. 1383(d)(1). 

Alternatives: We make disability 

determinations consistent with statutes 

and our current regulations. Taking 

actions such as exploring revising the 

definition of past relevant work would 

reduce the burden on individuals and 

improve customer service. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: We 

estimate that implementation of the 

proposed rule would result in an 

increase in scheduled SSDI benefits of 

$22.9 billion, a net reduction in 

scheduled old-age and survivors 

insurance (OASI) benefits of $6.5 

billion, and an increase in Federal SSI 

payments of $3.9 billion in total over 

fiscal years 2024 through 2033, 

assuming implementation for all 

decisions made on or after May 6, 2024. 

Risks: Risks not yet identified. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 09/29/23 88 FR 67135 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

11/28/23 

Final Action ......... 04/00/24 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Mary Quatroche, 

Director, Social Security 

Administration, 6401 Security 

Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21235–6401, 

Phone: 410 966–4794, Email: 

mary.quatroche@ssa.gov. 

RIN: 0960–AI83 

BILLING CODE 4191–02–P 

FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATION 

(FAR) 

The Secretary of Defense, the 

Administrator of General Services, and 

the Administrator of National 

Aeronautics and Space are members of 

the Federal Acquisition Regulatory 

Council (FAR Council), and jointly issue 

and maintain a single Government-wide 

procurement regulation known as the 

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR). 

The FAR provides uniform policies and 

procedures for the acquisition of 

supplies and services by executive 

agencies. The FAR Council, which is 

chaired by the Administrator of Federal 

Procurement Policy, assists in the 

direction and coordination of 

Government-wide procurement policies 

to be implemented in the FAR. 

Public Engagement 

The FAR Council engages with the 

public on rules that will affect the FAR 

in several ways. First, in addition to 

publishing abstracts of and anticipated 

publication dates for upcoming 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2

I 
9526 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

rulemakings in the Office of Information 

and Regulatory Affairs biannual Unified 

Agenda, members of the public can 

track the progress of any open and 

pending FAR rule via the ‘‘Open FAR 

Cases’’ report, which is publicly 

available at https://www.acq.osd.mil/ 

dpap/dars/far_case_status.html. The 

report is updated on a weekly basis and 

includes the following information: a 

case number, title, FAR parts 

anticipated to be impacted by the rule, 

a summary of the basis for the rule, and 

the rule status. Members of the public 

who are interested in a particular FAR 

case are encouraged to monitor the 

Open FAR Cases Report to track where 

a particular rule is in the rulemaking 

process. 

In addition to the Open FAR Cases 

report, the Department of Defense 

(DoD), General Services Administration 

(GSA), and National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration (NASA) 

independently engage with several 

industry associations on a quarterly 

basis including, but not limited to, the 

Aerospace Industries Association, the 

National Defense Industrial Association, 

and the Professional Services Council. 

During these meetings, DoD, GSA, and 

NASA often provide updates on open 

FAR cases and association 

representatives are able to provide 

feedback from their various members or 

member groups on upcoming 

rulemakings. 

While developing certain FAR rules, 

DoD, GSA, and NASA may seek input 

from the public by publishing in the 

Federal Register an advance notice of 

proposed rulemaking (ANPR) or a 

general request for information (RFI). 

Such notices normally include a 

summary of the overarching policy 

objectives of the rule and a list of 

questions seeking input that will help 

the Government develop a proposed 

rule. Information on whether DoD, GSA, 

and NASA plan on publishing an ANPR 

or RFI is included in both the Open FAR 

Cases Report and OIRA’s biannual 

Unified Agenda. 

Occasionally, while a proposed or 

interim FAR rule is out for public 

comment, DoD, GSA, and NASA may 

hold a public meeting to provide an 

overview of the rule and allow the 

public to provide feedback to the 

Government in an open forum. 

Information about whether DoD, GSA, 

and NASA plan on holding a public 

meeting on a rule is normally included 

in the proposed or interim rule when it 

is published for public comment. 

Presentations made during the public 

meeting are included in the rule docket 

and made publicly available. 

Information provided during the public 

meeting is also considered during 

development of the final rule. 

DoD, GSA, and NASA are also 

rethinking the types of supporting 

documentation that should be published 

with proposed or interim rules to 

facilitate public understanding of the 

rule. For example, for FAR Case 2022– 

006, Sustainable Procurement (RIN: 

9000–AO43), DoD, GSA, and NASA 

included, as a supporting document in 

the rule docket at www.regulations.gov, 

a slide show that illustrates the 

overarching restructuring of existing 

content in FAR part 23, a visual aid 

intended to make clear the extensive 

edits presented in the amendatory 

language of the rule. 

Finally, DoD, GSA, and NASA 

independently conduct outreach to 

industry regarding upcoming 

rulemakings. For example, the GSA 

Federal Acquisition Service (FAS) holds 

webinars with its industry partners to 

provide an update on the current policy 

landscape, including summaries of 

upcoming FAR rules expected to have a 

significant impact on industry. As part 

of these webinars, which are available to 

the public at https://buy.gsa.gov/ 

interact/community/11/activity-feed, 

GSA FAS includes information on the 

rulemaking process, how to monitor 

FAR and GSA FAR supplement rules, 

and best practices for submitting public 

comments. 

Rulemaking Priorities 

Pursuant to Executive Order 12866, 

‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review’’ 

(September 30, 1993), as reaffirmed and 

amended in Executive Order 13563, 

‘‘Improving Regulation and Regulatory 

Review’’ (January 18, 2011), and 

Executive Order 14094, ‘‘Modernizing 

Regulatory Review’’ (April 6, 2023), the 

Regulatory Plan and Unified Agenda 

provide public notice about the FAR 

Council’s proposed regulatory and 

deregulatory actions within the 

Executive Branch. The Fall 2023 

Unified Agenda consists of 56 active 

agenda items. 

The FAR Council is required to 

amend the Federal Acquisition 

Regulation to implement statutory and 

policy initiatives. The FAR Council 

prioritization is focused on initiatives 

that: 

• Tackle the climate change 

emergency, 

• Advance equity and support 

underserved, vulnerable and 

marginalized communities, 

• Promote economic resilience, 

• Improve service delivery, customer 

experience, and reduce administrative 

burdens, and 

• Support national security efforts, 

especially safeguarding Federal 

Government information and 

information technology systems. 

Rulemaking That Tackles Climate 

Change 

FAR Case 2022–006, ‘‘Sustainable 

Procurement,’’ will implement 

requirements for the procurement of 

sustainable products and services per 

Executive Order 14057, Catalyzing 

Clean Energy Industries and Jobs 

Through Federal Sustainability, and 

Office of Management and Budget 

Memorandum M–22–06. The rule will 

also reorganize FAR part 23 for 

consistency and clarity. 

FAR Case 2021–015, ‘‘Disclosure of 

Greenhouse Gas Emissions and ClimateRelated Financial Risk,’’ will require 

major Federal suppliers to publicly 

disclose greenhouse gas emissions and 

climate-related financial risk, and to set 

science-based reductions targets per 

section 5(b)(i) of Executive Order 14030, 

‘‘Climate-Related Financial Risk.’’ 

FAR Case 2021–016, ‘‘Minimizing the 

Risk of Climate Change in Federal 

Acquisitions,’’ will ensure agencies 

minimize the risk of climate change and 

consider the social cost of greenhouse 

gas emissions in major procurements 

per section 5(b)(ii) of Executive Order 

14030, ‘‘Climate-Related Financial 

Risk.’’ An advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking was published in October of 

2021 seeking input from the public on 

ways in which the Government could 

consider greenhouse gas emissions and 

climate risks in Federal procurement. 

The feedback is being considered in the 

development of the proposed rule. 

Rulemaking That Advances Equity and 

Supports Underserved Communities 

FAR Case 2022–009, ‘‘Certification of 

Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small 

Businesses,’’ will clarify the 

certification requirements for servicedisabled veteran-owned small 

businesses (SDVOSB) concerns to be 

eligible for the award of a sole source or 

set-aside SDVOSB contract. 

FAR Case 2021–011, ‘‘Past 

Performance Ratings for Small Business 

Joint Venture Members and Small 

Business First-Tier Subcontractors,’’ 

will permit small business first-tier 

subcontractors and joint venture 

members, in certain situations, to 

submit the past performance and 

experience they gained under these 

arrangements with their offers on 

Federal contracts. Contracting officers 

will be required to consider the 

capabilities and past performance 

provided by first-tier subcontractors and 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9527 

joint venture members in certain 

situations. 

FAR Case 2023–011, ‘‘Small Business 

Participation on Certain Multiple Award 

Contract,’’ will update and clarify 

market research, acquisition planning, 

small business coordination, and the 

use of set-asides during the placement 

of orders against certain multiple award 

contracts to increase small business 

participation in certain multiple award 

contracts. 

Rulemaking That Promotes Economic 

Resilience 

FAR Case 2022–004, ‘‘Enhanced Price 

Preference for Critical Items,’’ will add 

a list of critical items, along with their 

associated enhanced price preference, 

that will apply to acquisitions subject to 

the Buy American statute. This rule 

completes the framework added to the 

FAR as part of implementation of 

section 8 of Executive Order 14005, 

Ensuring the Future Is Made in All of 

America by All of America’s Workers. 

FAR Case 2020–009, ‘‘List of 

Domestically Nonavailable Articles,’’ 

will amend the list of domestically 

nonavailable articles under the Buy 

American Act and the protocols to 

update the list. An advance notice of 

proposed rulemaking was published in 

May of 2020 seeking input from the 

public to assist in identifying domestic 

capabilities and for evaluating whether 

some articles on the list at FAR 

25.104(a) should be removed because 

they are now mined, produced, or 

manufactured in the United States in 

sufficient and reasonably available 

commercial quantities and of a 

satisfactory quality. The feedback is 

being considered in the development of 

the proposed rule. 

FAR Case 2022–011, 

‘‘Nondisplacement of Qualified Workers 

Under Service Contracts,’’ will require 

contractors and subcontractors to offer 

qualified employees employed under 

predecessor contracts a right of first 

refusal of employment under successor 

contracts in accordance with Executive 

Order 14055, Nondisplacement of 

Qualified Workers Under Service 

Contracts and the associated 

Department of Labor regulations at 29 

CFR part 9. 

FAR Case 2022–003, ‘‘Use of Project 

Labor Agreement for Federal 

Construction Projects,’’ will require the 

use of project labor agreements for largescale construction projects with a total 

estimated value of $35 million or more 

in accordance with Executive Order 

14063, Use of Project Labor Agreements 

for Federal Construction Projects. 

Project labor agreements are often 

effective in preventing labor-related 

disruptions on projects by using 

dispute-resolution processes to resolve 

worksite disputes and by prohibiting 

work stoppages, including strikes and 

lockouts. 

Rulemakings That Improve Service 

Delivery and Customer Experience 

FAR Case 2019–015, ‘‘Improving 

Consistency Between Procurement & 

Non-Procurement Procedures on 

Suspension and Debarment,’’ will bring 

the procedures on suspension and 

debarment in the FAR into closer 

alignment with the Nonprocurement 

Common Rule (NCR) procedures, 

creating a more consistent experience 

for industry. 

FAR Case 2021–001, ‘‘Increased 

Efficiencies with Regard to Certified 

Mail, In-person Business, Mail, 

Notarization, Original Documents, 

Seals, and Signatures,’’ will streamline 

certain essential contracting procedures 

by increasing flexibilities and 

efficiencies with regards to certified 

mail, in-person business, mail, 

notarization, original documents, seals, 

and signatures using digital and virtual 

technology. This rule makes permanent 

policy flexibilities introduced during 

the pandemic. 

Rulemakings That Support National 

Security 

FAR Case 2021–017, ‘‘Cyber Threat 

and Incident Reporting and Information 

Sharing,’’ will increase the sharing of 

information about cyber threats and 

incident information and require certain 

contractors to report cyber incidents to 

the Federal Government to facilitate 

effective cyber incident response and 

remediation pursuant to sections 2(b), 

(c), (g)(i) and 8(b) of Executive Order 

14028, ‘‘Improving the Nation’s 

Cybersecurity.’’ 

FAR Case 2021–019, ‘‘Standardizing 

Cybersecurity Requirements for 

Unclassified Information Systems,’’ will 

standardize cybersecurity contractual 

requirements across Federal agencies for 

unclassified information systems 

pursuant to sections 2(i) and 8(b) of 

Executive Order 14028, Improving the 

Nation’s Cybersecurity. 

FAR Case 2023–002, ‘‘Supply Chain 

Software Security,’’ will require 

suppliers of software available for 

purchase by Federal agencies to comply 

with, and attest to complying with, 

applicable secure software development 

practices pursuant to section 4(n) and 

4(k) of Executive Order 14028, 

Improving the Nation’s Cybersecurity, 

and Office of Management and Budget 

Memorandum 22–18 and 23–16. 

William F. Clark, 

Director, Office of Government-wide 

Acquisition Policy, Office of Acquisition 

Policy, Office of Government-wide Policy. 

BILLING CODE 6820–EP–P 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY 

COMMISSION (CPSC) 

Statement of Regulatory Priorities 

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety 

Commission is charged with protecting 

the public from unreasonable risks of 

death and injury associated with 

consumer products. To achieve this 

goal, CPSC, among other things: 

• develops mandatory product safety 

standards or bans to address safety 

hazards, including where required by 

statute; 

• obtains repairs, replacements, or 

refunds for defective products that 

present a substantial product hazard; 

• develops information and education 

campaigns about the safety of consumer 

products; 

• participates in the development or 

revision of voluntary product safety 

standards; and 

• follows other statutory mandates. 

Unless otherwise directed by 

congressional mandate, when deciding 

which of these approaches to take in 

any specific case, CPSC gathers and 

analyzes data about the nature and 

extent of the risk presented by the 

product. The Commission’s rules at 16 

CFR 1009.8 require the Commission to 

consider the following criteria, among 

other factors, when deciding the level of 

priority for any particular project: 

• the frequency and severity of 

injuries; 

• the causality of injuries; 

• chronic illness and future injuries; 

• costs and benefits of Commission 

action; 

• the unforeseen nature of the risk; 

• the vulnerability of the population 

at risk; 

• the probability of exposure to the 

hazard; and 

• additional criteria that warrant 

Commission attention. 

Significant Regulatory Actions 

Currently, the Commission is 

considering acting in the next 12 

months on three rules—Regulatory 

Options for Table Saws (RIN 3041– 

AC31); Portable Generators (RIN 3041– 

AC36); and Gas Appliance Carbon 

Monoxide Sensors (RIN 3041–AD70)— 

which would constitute ‘‘significant 

regulatory actions’’ under the definition 

of that term in Executive Order 12866, 

although the Commission’s rulemaking 

is not subject to E.O. 12866 review. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9528 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

These priority levels are included to 

provide an analogous criterion through 

which the Commission can provide this 

information to the public. 

CPSC 

Proposed Rule Stage 

230. Regulatory Options for Table Saws 

[3041–AC31] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 5 U.S.C. 553(e); 15 

U.S.C. 2056; 15 U.S.C. 2058 

CFR Citation: 16 CFR 1245. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: In 2006, the Commission 

granted a petition asking that the 

Commission issue a rule to prescribe 

performance standards for an active 

injury mitigation (AIM) system to 

reduce or prevent injuries from 

contacting the blade of a table saw. The 

Commission subsequently issued a 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) 

that would establish a performance 

standard requiring table saws to limit 

the depth of cut to 3.5 millimeters when 

a test probe, acting as a surrogate for a 

human body/finger, contacts the table 

saw’s spinning blade. Staff has 

conducted several studies to provide 

information for the rulemaking. Staff is 

assigned to submit a final rule briefing 

package to the Commission in fiscal 

year 2023. 

Statement of Need: In the NPRM, the 

Commission preliminarily determined 

that there is an unreasonable risk 

associated with blade-contact injuries 

on table saws. Based on injury data 

reviewed in 2015, there were an 

estimated 33,400 table saw, emergency 

department treated injuries. Of these, 

staff estimated that 30,800 (92 percent) 

are likely related to the victim making 

contact with the saw blade. Of the 

30,800 ED treated blade-contact injuries, 

an estimated 28,900 injuries (93.8 

percent) involved the finger, with 4,700 

amputations (15.2 percent). 

Summary of Legal Basis: Table saws 

are consumer products that can be 

regulated by the Commission under the 

authority of the CPSA. See 15 U.S.C. 

2052(a). Section 7 of the CPSA 

authorizes the Commission to 

promulgate a mandatory consumer 

product safety standard that sets forth 

performance requirements for a 

consumer product or that sets forth 

requirements that a product be marked 

or accompanied by clear and adequate 

warnings or instructions. 15 U.S.C. 

20512084. Section 7(a) of the CPSA 

authorizes the Commission to 

promulgate a mandatory consumer 

product safety standard that sets forth 

performance or labeling requirements 

for a consumer product if such 

requirements are reasonably necessary 

to prevent or reduce an unreasonable 

risk of injury. 15 U.S.C. 2056(a). Section 

9 of the CPSA specifies the procedure 

that the Commission must follow to 

issue a consumer product safety 

standard under section 7 of the CPSA. 

Alternatives: The Commission could 

(1) pursue table saw voluntary standard 

activities; (2) extend the effective dates 

of a possible rule; (3) exempt certain 

categories of table saws from the draft 

proposed rule; (4) limit the applicability 

of the performance requirements to 

some, but not all, tables saws; or (5) 

pursue an information and education 

campaign to inform the public of the 

hazards of blade contact and the 

benefits of the AIM technology. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

expected gross benefits range from about 

$970 million to $2.45 billion over the 

product life of 1 year of sales. The 

expected costs of the draft proposed rule 

will range from about $168 million to 

about $345 million annually. Based on 

staff’s benefit and cost estimates, net 

benefits (i.e., benefits minus costs) for 

the market were estimated to amount to 

about $625 million to $2.3 billion over 

the product life of 1 year of table saw 

sales. 

Risks: The CPSC has determined 

preliminarily that there may be an 

unreasonable risk of blade-contact 

injuries associated with table saws. Each 

year, approximately 30,000 table saw 

blade contact injuries are treated in 

emergency room departments. The most 

common diagnoses in blade-contact 

injuries were lacerations (60 percent), 

fractures (20 percent), and amputations 

(10 percent). 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Commission Decision to Grant 

Petition.

07/11/06 

ANPRM ............... 10/11/11 76 FR 62678 

Notice of Extension of Time for 

Comments.

12/02/11 76 FR 75504 

Comment Period 

End.

02/10/12 

Notice to Reopen 

Comment Period.

02/15/12 77 FR 8751 

Reopened Comment Period 

End.

03/16/12 

Staff Sent NPRM 

Briefing Package to Commission.

01/17/17 

Commission Decision.04/27/17 

Action Date FR Cite 

NPRM .................. 05/12/17 82 FR 22190 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

07/26/17 

Public Hearing ..... 08/09/17 82 FR 31035 

Staff Sent 2016 

NEISS Table 

Saw Type 

Study Status 

Report to Commission.

08/15/17 

Staff Sent 2017 

NEISS Table 

Saw Special 

Study to Commission.

11/13/18 

Notice of Availability of 2017 

NEISS Table 

Saw Special 

Study.

12/04/18 83 FR 62561 

Staff Sends a Status Briefing 

Package on 

Table Saws to 

Commission.

08/28/19 

Commission Decision.09/10/19 

Staff Sends 

SNPRM Briefing Package to 

Commission.

09/21/23 

Commission Decision.11/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: 

Undetermined. 

Federalism: Undetermined. 

International Impacts: This regulatory 

action will be likely to have 

international trade and investment 

effects, or otherwise be of international 

interest. 

Agency Contact: Caroleene Paul, 

Project Manager, Directorate for 

Engineering Sciences, Consumer 

Product Safety Commission, National 

Product Testing and Evaluation Center, 

5 Research Place, Rockville, MD 20850, 

Phone: 301 987–2225, Email: cpaul@

cpsc.gov. 

RIN: 3041–AC31 

CPSC 

231. Safety Standard for Residential 

Gas Furnaces and Boilers [3041–AD70] 

Priority: Other Significant. Major 

status under 5 U.S.C. 801 is 

undetermined. 

Legal Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2056; 15 

U.S.C 2058 

CFR Citation: None. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: Over several years, staff has 

conducted research and worked with 

voluntary standards organizations 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9529 

concerning the risk of injury and death 

associated with carbon monoxide (CO) 

production and leakage from residential 

gas furnaces and boilers. This proposed 

rule would establish a performance 

requirement, under which gas furnaces 

or boilers would be required to shut off 

or modulate when CO levels reach a 

specified level for a specified duration 

of time. In 2019, the Commission issued 

an advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking (ANPRM) to initiate 

rulemaking under the Consumer 

Product Safety Act and requested 

comments on the risk of injury and 

alternative approaches to address the 

risk. On September 24, 2021, the 

Commission voted to change the fiscal 

year 2022 deliverable from a notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to Data 

Analysis and/or Technical Review (DA/ 

TR). On February 9, 2022, staff provided 

a summary and status update in a public 

briefing to the Commission. Staff 

continues to investigate sensing 

technology to automatically adjust or 

shut off major gas appliances, such as 

furnaces and boilers, in response to 

dangerous operating levels of carbon 

monoxide in their combustion products 

and will share its findings with the 

relevant voluntary standards 

organizations. Staff is finalizing an 

NPRM briefing package and will submit 

it to the Commission in fiscal year 2023. 

Statement of Need: From 2014 

through 2018, there were 108 deaths 

from CO poisoning from gas furnaces 

and boilers, with 30,587 nonfatal 

injuries in the same time period. 

Summary of Legal Basis: This notice 

of proposed rulemaking is authorized by 

the CPSA. 15 U.S.C. 2051–2084. Section 

7(a) of the CPSA authorizes the 

Commission to promulgate a mandatory 

consumer product safety standard that 

sets forth performance or labeling 

requirements for a consumer product if 

such requirements are reasonably 

necessary to prevent or reduce an 

unreasonable risk of injury. 15 U.S.C. 

2056(a). Section 9 of the CPSA specifies 

the procedure that the Commission 

must follow to issue a consumer 

product safety standard under section 7 

of the CPSA. 

Alternatives: The Commission could: 

(1) continue to work and advocate for 

change through the voluntary standards 

process; (2) rely on the use of residential 

CO alarms; (3) continue to conduct 

education and information campaigns; 

and (4) take no action. 

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

proposed rule is estimated to avert 576 

deaths (19.20 deaths per year) and 

126,387 injuries (roughly 5,357 injuries 

per year) over 30 years. Overall, the 

draft proposed rule has total annualized 

benefits of $356.52 million, discounted 

at 3 percent, and for every $1 in direct 

cost to consumers and manufacturers, 

the draft proposed rule generates $0.59 

in benefits from mitigated deaths and 

injuries. 

Risks: For the 20-year period, 2000 

through 2019, these products were 

associated with a total of 539 CO deaths. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Staff Sent 

ANPRM Briefing Package to 

Commission.

07/31/19 

Commission 

Voted to Publish ANPRM.

08/07/19 

ANPR Published 

in FR.

08/19/19 84 FR 42847 

ANPRM Comment 

Period End.

10/18/19 

Staff Sent FR Notice to Commission to Reopen 

Comment Period.

10/23/19 

Commission 

Voted to Reopen Comment 

Period.

11/01/19 

Notice to Reopen 

Comment Period Published 

in FR.

11/07/19 84 FR 60010 

ANPRM Comment 

Period End.

01/06/20 

Commission Vote 

to Change Deliverable from 

NPRM to DA/ 

TR.

09/24/21 

Public Briefing to 

Commission.

02/09/22 

Staff Sends 

NPRM Briefing 

Package to 

Commission.

09/25/23 

Commission Decision.11/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: No. 

Small Entities Affected: No. 

Government Levels Affected: None. 

Agency Contact: Ronald Jordan, 

Project Manager, Directorate for 

Engineering Sciences, Consumer 

Product Safety Commission, National 

Product Testing and Evaluation Center, 

5 Research Place, Rockville, MD 20850, 

Phone: 301 987–2219, Email: rjordan@

cpsc.gov. 

RIN: 3041–AD70 

CPSC 

Final Rule Stage 

232. Portable Generators [3041–AC36] 

Priority: Section 3(f)(1) Significant. 

Major under 5 U.S.C. 801. 

Legal Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2056; 15 

U.S.C 2058 

CFR Citation: Not Yet Determined. 

Legal Deadline: None. 

Abstract: In 2006, the Commission 

issued an advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking (ANPRM) under the 

Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSA) 

concerning portable generators. The 

ANPRM discussed regulatory options 

that could reduce deaths and injuries 

related to portable generators, 

particularly those involving carbon 

monoxide (CO) poisoning. In fiscal year 

2006, staff awarded a contract to 

develop a prototype generator engine 

with reduced CO in the exhaust. Also, 

in fiscal year 2006, staff entered into an 

interagency agreement (IAG) with the 

National Institute of Standards and 

Technology (NIST) to conduct tests with 

a generator, in both off-the-shelf and 

prototype configurations, operating in 

the garage attached to NIST’s test house. 

In fiscal year 2009, staff entered into a 

second IAG with NIST with the goal of 

developing CO emission performance 

requirements for a possible proposed 

regulation that would be based on 

health effects criteria. After additional 

staff and contractor work, the 

Commission issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) in 2016, proposing 

a performance standard that would limit 

the CO emission rates from operating 

portable generators. In 2018, two 

voluntary standards, UL 2201 and 

PGMA G300, adopted different COmitigation requirements intended to 

address the CO poisoning hazard 

associated with portable generators. 

Staff developed a simulation and 

analysis plan to evaluate the 

effectiveness of those voluntary 

standards’ requirements. In 2019, the 

Commission sought public comments 

on staff’s plan. In August 2020, staff 

submitted to the Commission a draft 

notice of availability of the modified 

plan, based on staff’s review and 

consideration of the comments, for 

evaluating the voluntary standards; the 

Commission published the notice of 

availability in August 2020. In February 

2022, staff delivered a briefing package 

to the Commission with the results of 

the effectiveness analysis and 

information on the availability of 

compliant generators in the 

marketplace. Staff concluded that the 

CO hazard-mitigation requirements of 

one standard are more effective than the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9530 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

1Fed. Trade Comm’n, Strategic Plan for Fiscal 

Years 2022–2026, at 13 (Aug. 26, 2022), https://

www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/fy-2022-2026- 

ftc-strategic-plan.pdf. 

2See 5 U.S.C. 46(b); see also Fed. Trade Comm’n, 

A Brief Overview of the Federal Trade 

Commission’s Investigative, Law Enforcement, and 

Rulemaking Authority (May 2021), https://

www.ftc.gov/about-ftc/mission/enforcementauthority. 

3See 5 U.S.C. 46(g). 

other, but conformance to either 

standard is low. Staff provided a 

supplemental NPRM (SNPRM) on 

portable generators to the Commission 

on March 8, 2023. The Commission 

published the SNPRM on April 20, 

2023. The comment period closed on 

June 20, 2023. A final rule briefing 

package is scheduled to be sent to the 

Commission in fiscal year 2023. 

Statement of Need: From 2004 

through 2021, there were an annual 

average of 74 consumer CO poisoning 

deaths and an estimated 4,314 

medically-attended consumer CO 

poisoning injuries caused by generators 

over this 18-year period. The 

Commission expects that the proposed 

rule would be highly effective in 

avoiding generator-related CO incidents, 

producing benefits that far exceed the 

estimated costs. For every $1 in 

estimated direct cost to consumers and 

manufacturers, the proposed rule 

generates more than $7 in benefits from 

mitigated deaths and injuries. 

Summary of Legal Basis: This 

supplemental notice of proposed 

rulemaking is authorized by the CPSA. 

15 U.S.C. 2051–2084. Section 7(a) of the 

CPSA authorizes the Commission to 

promulgate a mandatory consumer 

product safety standard that sets forth 

performance or labeling requirements 

for a consumer product if such 

requirements are reasonably necessary 

to prevent or reduce an unreasonable 

risk of injury. 15 U.S.C. 2056(a). Section 

9 of the CPSA specifies the procedure 

that the Commission must follow to 

issue a consumer product safety 

standard under section 7 of the CPSA. 

Alternatives: The Commission could 

(1) implement the draft proposed rule

with the exception of the CO emission

requirements and CO concentrations for

shutoff included in voluntary standard

UL 2201; (2) rely on voluntary standard

stakeholders to adopt the requirements

included in the draft proposed rule into

either existing voluntary standard, UL

2201 or PGMA G300; (3) require

portable generators to comply with

either UL 2201 (2nd Edition; 2019) or

PGMA G300–2018; or (4) rely on

continued education and information

campaigns.

Anticipated Cost and Benefits: The 

proposed rule is estimated to avert 2,148 

deaths (nearly 72 deaths per year) and 

126,387 injuries (roughly 4,213 injuries 

per year) over 30 years. Overall, the 

draft proposed rule has net benefits 

(benefits over and above costs) of 

$897.06 million on an annualized basis 

at a 3 percent discount rate, and for 

every $1 in direct cost to consumers and 

manufacturers, the draft proposed rule 

generates $7.02 in benefits from 

mitigated deaths and injuries. 

Risks: As of May 10, 2022, CPSC 

databases contained reports of at least 

770 generator-related consumer COpoisoning deaths resulting from 588 

incidents that occurred from 2011 

through 2021. 

Timetable: 

Action Date FR Cite 

Staff Sent 

ANPRM to 

Commission.

07/06/06 

Staff Sent Supplemental Material 

to Commission.

10/12/06 

Commission Decision.10/26/06 

Staff Sent Draft 

ANPRM to 

Commission.

11/21/06 

ANPRM ............... 12/12/06 71 FR 74472 

ANPRM Comment 

Period End.

02/12/07 

Staff Releases 

Research Report for Comment.

10/10/12 

NPRM .................. 11/21/16 81 FR 83556 

NPRM Comment 

Period Extended.

12/13/16 81 FR 89888 

Public Hearing for 

Oral Comments.

03/08/17 82 FR 8907 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

04/24/17 

Staff Sends Notice of Availability to the 

Commission.

06/26/19 

Commission Decision.07/02/19 

Notice of Availability.07/09/19 84 FR 32729 

Staff Sends Notice of Availability to Commission.08/12/20 

Commission Decision.08/19/20 

Notice of Availability.08/24/20 85 FR 52096 

Staff Report on 

Effectiveness 

Evaluation of 

Voluntary 

Standards.

02/16/22 

Staff Sends 

(S)NPRM Briefing Package to

Commission.

03/08/23 

Commission Decision.04/05/23 

NPRM .................. 04/20/23 88 FR 24346 

NPRM Comment 

Period End.

06/20/23 

Staffs Sends 

Briefing Package to Commission.

11/00/23 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

Required: Yes. 

Small Entities Affected: Businesses. 

Government Levels Affected: 

Undetermined. 

Federalism: Undetermined. 

International Impacts: This regulatory 

action will be likely to have 

international trade and investment 

effects, or otherwise be of international 

interest. 

Agency Contact: Janet L. Buyer, 

Project Manager, Directorate for 

Engineering Sciences, Consumer 

Product Safety Commission, National 

Product Testing and Evaluation Center, 

5 Research Place, Rockville, MD 20850, 

Phone: 301 987–2293, Email: jbuyer@

cpsc.gov. 

RIN: 3041–AC36 

BILLING CODE 6355–01–P 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION (FTC) 

Statement of Regulatory Priorities 

(2023) 

The Federal Trade Commission is an 

independent agency charged with 

rooting out unfair methods of 

competition and unfair or deceptive acts 

or practices. Its mission is vital to the 

national interest because, when markets 

are fair and competitive, honest 

businesses and the public all benefit. 

The Commission also protects people 

who cannot protect themselves—from 

powerful corporate interests looking to 

squeeze out, trick, erode the wealth of, 

or otherwise undermine the economic 

autonomy of consumers. The 

Commission works to ensure wellfunctioning markets that protect 

people’s economic freedom, choice, and 

liberty. The agency’s vision is of ‘‘a 

vibrant economy fueled by fair 

competition and an empowered, 

informed public.’’ 1

The Commission has a unique set of 

tools to carry out its mission, such as its 

market study tool, as well as traditions 

like public workshops and open 

comment dockets, to receive a wide 

breadth of information about a topic on 

which it is considering making policy.2

Another tool is its ability to issue rules.3

The Commission is committed to 

deploying all its tools, including issuing 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9531 

4Fed. Trade Comm’n, Public Participation in the 

Rulemaking Process, https://www.ftc.gov/ 

enforcement/rulemaking/public-participationrulemaking-process. 

5See id. 

6 87 FR 72901 (Dec. 23, 2021). 

7 87 FR 62741 (Oct. 17, 2022). 

8 87 FR at 62746, 62747. 

9 Id. 

10 Id. at 62741. 

11 88 FR 19024–25 (Mar. 30, 2023). 

12 87 FR 63738 (Oct. 20, 2022). 

13 87 FR 51273 (Aug. 22, 2022). 

14 88 FR 37819 (June 9, 2023). 

15 88 FR 18266 (Mar. 28, 2023). 

16 88 FR 248 (Jan. 3, 2023). 

17 88 FR 24716, 24726 (Apr. 24, 2023). 

18Fed. Trade Comm’n, FTC Strategic Plan for 

Fiscal Years 2022 to 2026, at 16 (Aug. 26, 2022), 

https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/fy2022-2026-ftc-strategic-plan.pdf. Other competition 

problems could also be addressed by new rules. Cf. 

Exec. Order No. 14036, section 5(h)(i)–(vii) (July 9, 

2021), https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/ 

presidential-actions/2021/07/09/executive-orderon-promoting-competition-in-the-americaneconomy/. 

19 88 FR 3482 (Jan. 19, 2023). 

20 88 FR 20441 (Apr. 6, 2023). 

new rules and updating old ones, to 

achieve its mission. 

I. The Commission Is Using All

Available Tools To Advance Its

Missions

a. Rulemakings

The Administrative Procedure Act

rulemaking process creates significant 

opportunity for public participation to 

ensure that the agency is making wellconsidered policy decisions.4 The 

rulemaking process for rules issued 

under section 18 of the FTC Act creates 

additional procedures to ensure 

participation.5 Pursuant to these 

statutes, the Commission has been 

actively engaging members of the public 

to solicit their input in the 

Commission’s means of pursuing its 

mission to ensure fair and competitive 

markets. Accordingly, the Commission 

and its staff continue to study the 

problems that rules can address, publish 

rulemaking documents, and engage with 

stakeholders and the public. 

As to newly proposed consumerprotection rulemakings or rulemaking 

proceedings, in December 2021, the 

Commission published an ANPR 

(advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking) focused on the 

impersonation of government and 

businesses.6 None of the public 

comments submitted in response to the 

ANPR opposed proceeding with the 

rulemaking. The Commission 

subsequently issued a proposed rule in 

October 2022.7 This NPRM (notice of 

proposed rulemaking) would make it 

unlawful for persons to misrepresent 

that they are or are affiliated with a 

government or government officer or a 

business or business officer.8 It also 

would make it unlawful to provide the 

means and instrumentalities for 

violations set out in this proposed rule.9

This NPRM offered interested parties 

the opportunity to request an informal 

hearing, if they wished to present their 

position orally.10 The opportunity to 

make an oral statement at an informal 

hearing is afforded by section 18 of the 

Federal Trade Commission Act and 

implemented in the Commission’s Rules 

of Practice. The Commission received a 

timely request for an informal hearing. 

The hearing was held on May 4, 2023.11

The Commission is reviewing comments 

submitted as part of the informal 

hearing along with those submitted in 

response to the Commission’s NPRM. 

On October 20, 2022, the Commission 

extended the comment period on 

another ANPR focused on issues 

concerning commercial surveillance and 

data security.12 This ANPR described 

how Americans must routinely 

surrender their personal information to 

participate in basic aspects of modern 

life.13 It canvassed the Commission’s 

decades-long effort to protect 

Americans’ privacy through case-bycase enforcement, policy work, and 

implementation of sectoral privacy 

laws, concluding that rulemaking could 

be a useful addition to the effort to 

protect individuals’ personal privacy. 

The ANPR requested comment on 95 

questions to ascertain whether unfair or 

deceptive practices relating to 

commercial surveillance and data 

security are prevalent and whether 

proceeding with one or more proposed 

rules is worthwhile. 

Updating existing rules to meet new 

challenges is another important part of 

the Commission’s rulemaking work. For 

example, as part of its regular review 

cycle, the Commission issued a NPRM 

proposing to revise its Health Breach 

Notification Rule to, among other 

things, clarify its scope, including its 

coverage of developers of many health 

applications; revise certain definitions; 

clarify what it means for a vendor of 

personal health records to draw PHR 

(personal health records) identifiable 

health information from multiple 

sources; modernize notice and expand 

the content of the notice.14

As part of the Eyeglass Rule 

regulatory review, the Commission 

hosted a public workshop 15 to explore 

information relating to the Rule changes 

proposed in its NPRM.16 This workshop 

covered several topics, such as the costs 

and benefits related to the proposals set 

out in the NPRM. Staff is reviewing the 

47 comments it received in response to 

this workshop. 

The Commission also continues its 

general consumer protection work. For 

example, problematic negative option 

practices continue to be a source of 

consumer harm. These practices, among 

other things, saddle shoppers with 

recurring payments for products and 

services they never intended to 

purchase or did not want to continue 

buying. To address these ongoing 

problems, the Commission proposed 

amending the current Negative Option 

Rule with the objective of setting clear, 

enforceable performance-based 

requirements for all negative option 

features in all media.17 These proposed 

changes are designed to ensure 

consumers understand what they are 

purchasing, to allow them to cancel 

their participation without undue 

burden or complication, and to address 

the most important issues related to 

negative option marketing, including 

misrepresentations, disclosures, 

consent, and cancellation. 

As for its competition mission, the 

Commission continues to explore 

whether new rules that specify ‘‘unfair 

methods of competition’’ prohibited by 

section 5 of the FTC Act would help 

achieve the agency’s mission. In its most 

recent strategic plan, the Commission 

observed that ‘‘[r]ules . . . inform 

businesses and their legal advisers about 

antitrust risks and can deter 

anticompetitive mergers and business 

practices’’ and that promoting 

competition can benefit all market 

participants, including workers.18 In 

January 2023, the Commission proposed 

a rule addressing non-compete clauses 

in the labor market.19 The Commission’s 

proposal discusses the startling 

prevalence of non-compete clauses in 

states where they are unenforceable, 

which can have a chilling effect on 

competitive conditions—just as 

enforceable clauses do. Clear rules that 

are easily understood help to clear up 

these misconceptions and achieve the 

desired results—in this case, more 

optimal job switching and matching. 

During the comment period for this 

NPRM, some commenters requested that 

this comment period be extended to 

give them additional time to respond; 

other commenters opposed such an 

extension and any potential delay. The 

Commission reviewed the extension 

requests and agreed to allow the public 

additional time to prepare and file 

comments. Thus, the comment period 

was extended until April 19, 2023, to 

provide commenters a total of 104 days 

from the public release of the NPRM.20

To additionally ensure that all 

viewpoints were heard during the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9532 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

21 88 FR 42178 (June 29, 2023). 

22Exec. Order No. 12866, 58 FR 51735 (Sept. 30, 

1993). 23 5 U.S.C. 610(a). 24 80 FR 1329 (Jan. 9, 2015). 

public comment period before 

determining how to proceed, the 

Commission also hosted a public forum 

on February 16, 2023, which examined 

this proposed rule and provided an 

opportunity for interested parties to 

directly share their experiences with 

non-compete clauses. In the months 

since proposing this rule, the 

Commission received more than 21,000 

public comments, including from 

nurses, doctors, fast food workers, and 

hairdressers. Staff is reviewing the 

comments. 

Also in furtherance of its competition 

mission, the Commission has been 

working for the past year with the 

Department of Justice (DOJ) to examine 

how the agencies can more readily 

detect potentially problematic mergers 

and acquisitions. Pursuant to the HartScott-Rodino (HSR) Antitrust 

Improvements Act of 1976, the 

Commission, with the concurrence of 

the DOJ Assistant Attorney General, 

issues rules to ensure that the agencies 

receive the information needed to 

identify anticompetitive mergers and 

investigate them fully to determine 

whether to seek to block any the effect 

of which may be substantially to lessen 

competition or to tend to create a 

monopoly. After conducting a 

comprehensive review of the 

information that market participants 

currently submit in premerger 

notification filings, the Commission 

initiated a rulemaking to propose the 

collection of additional information that 

the agencies need to more effectively 

and efficiently identify transactions that 

warrant deeper investigation.21 This 

proposed rule would also implement 

provisions of the Merger Filing Fee 

Modernization Act of 2022, which 

requires companies to disclose 

information in their HSR filings about 

subsidies received from certain foreign 

governments and entities. 

b. Service Delivery 

The Commission also takes actions 

that improve service delivery and 

customer experience and that reduce 

administrative burdens for the public. 

For example, the Commission plans to 

issue a final rule by early 2024 to update 

the filing system for Hart-Scott-Rodino 

Form and Instructions to the new cloudbased e-filing system, which will 

eliminate paper filings. As part of this 

process, FTC staff engaged with internal 

and external customers, including 

usability testing of beta software 

processes for submitting electronic HSR 

filings. 

In sum, the Commission continues 

seeking public input and learning from 

its law-enforcement, consumereducation, market-monitoring, and other 

work to identify additional 

opportunities for new or improved rules 

to complement its other tools and the 

vital work of partner agencies and the 

states. Meaningful public engagement in 

rulemakings or for improvements to 

service delivery can deliver important 

benefits to the public and honest 

businesses, so the Commission will 

continue to seek the views of all affected 

communities. 

II. Updates on Other Ongoing 

Rulemakings 

a. Periodic Regulatory Review Program 

In 1992, the Commission 

implemented a program to review its 

rules and guides on a regular basis. The 

Commission’s review program is 

patterned after provisions in the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601– 

612, and complies with the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996. The Commission’s 

review program is also consistent with 

section 5(a) of Executive Order 12866, 

which directs executive branch agencies 

to reevaluate periodically all their 

significant regulations.22 Under the 

Commission’s program, rules and guides 

are typically reviewed on a ten-year 

schedule that results in more frequent 

reviews than are generally required by 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The 

public can obtain information on rules 

and guides under review and the 

Commission’s regulatory review 

program generally at https://

www.ftc.gov/enforcement/rules/ 

retrospective-review-ftc-rules-guides. 

The program provides an ongoing, 

systematic approach for obtaining 

information about the costs and benefits 

of rules and guides and whether there 

are changes that could minimize any 

adverse economic effects, not just a 

‘‘significant economic impact upon a 

substantial number of small entities.’’ 23

As part of each review, the Commission 

requests public comment on, among 

other things, the economic impact and 

benefits of the rule; possible conflict 

between the rule and state, local, or 

other federal laws or regulations; and 

the effect on the rule of any 

technological, economic, or other 

industry changes. Reviews may lead to 

the revision or rescission of rules and 

guides to ensure that the Commission’s 

consumer protection and competition 

goals are achieved efficiently. Pursuant 

to this program, the Commission has 

rescinded 40 rules and guides 

promulgated under the FTC’s general 

authority and updated dozens of other 

rules and guides since the program’s 

inception. 

(1) Newly Initiated and Upcoming 

Periodic Reviews of Rules and Guides 

During Fall 2023, the Commission 

plans to issue an updated ten-year 

review schedule. The Commission has 

initiated or announced plans to initiate 

periodic reviews of the following rules 

and guides: 

Alternative Fuels Rule, 16 CFR part 

309. On October 26, 2023, as part of the 

systematic review of all Commission 

rules, the Commission initiated a 

periodic review of the Alternative Fuels 

Rule (formally ‘‘Labeling Requirements 

for Alternative Fuels and AlternativeFueled Vehicles’’) by publishing a 

notice seeking public comments on the 

effectiveness and impact of the Rule. 88 

FR 73549 (Oct. 26, 2023). The public 

comment period will close on December 

26, 2023. 

Cooling-Off Rule, 16 CFR part 429. By 

the end of 2023, as part of the 

systematic review of all Commission 

rules, the Commission plans to initiate 

a periodic review of the Cooling-Off 

Rule (formally ‘‘Trade Regulation Rule 

Concerning Cooling-Off Period for Sales 

Made at Homes or at Certain Other 

Locations’’) by publishing a notice 

seeking public comments on the 

effectiveness and impact of the Rule. 

Most recently, on January 9, 2015, the 

Commission amended the Cooling-Off 

Rule by increasing the exclusionary 

limit for all door-to-door sales at 

locations other than a buyer’s residence 

from $25 up to $130.24 Under that final 

rule, the revised definition of door-todoor sale now distinguishes between 

sales at a buyer’s residence and those at 

other locations. The revised definition 

retained coverage for sales made at a 

buyer’s residence that have a purchase 

price of $25 or more. The final rule 

amendment was effective on March 13, 

2015. 

Rules. During 2024, the Commission 

plans to initiate periodic review of 

Rules and Regulations under the Wool 

Products Labeling Act of 1939, 16 CFR 

part 300, Rules and Regulations under 

Fur Products Labeling Act, 16 CFR part 

301, Rules and Regulations under the 

Textile Fiber Products Identification 

Act, 16 CFR part 303, the Mail, internet, 

or Telephone Order Merchandise Rule, 

16 CFR part 435, and Retail Food Store 

Advertising and Marketing Practices 

(Unavailability Rule), 16 CFR part 424. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9533 

25 85 FR 77042 (Dec. 1, 2020). 

26 88 FR 42178 (June 29, 2023). 

27 88 FR 54256 (Aug. 10, 2023). 

28 87 FR 72428 (Nov. 25, 2022). 

29 84 FR 35842 (July 25, 2019). 

30 84 FR 56391 (Oct. 22, 2019). 

31 80 FR 53274 (Sept. 3, 2015). 

32 88 FR 248 (Jan. 3, 2023). 

33 88 FR 18266 (Mar. 28, 2023). 

34 84 FR 9051 (Mar. 13, 2019). 

35 85 FR 55850 (Sept. 10, 2020). 

36 85 FR 31085 (May 22, 2020). 

37 88 FR 37819 (June 9, 2023). 

Guides. During 2024, the Commission 

plans to initiate periodic review of the 

Guides for the Rebuilt, Reconditioned, 

and Other Used Automobile Parts 

Industry, 16 CFR part 20, and the 

Guides for Advertising Allowances and 

Other Merchandising Payments and 

Services (Fred Meyer Guides), 16 CFR 

part 240. 

(2) Ongoing Periodic Reviews of Rules 

and Guides 

The following proceedings for the 

retrospective review of Commission 

rules and guides described in the 2022 

Regulatory Plan are ongoing: 

Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust 

Improvements Act Coverage, 

Exemption, and Transmittal Rules, 16 

CFR parts 801–803. On December 1, 

2020, the Commission initiated the 

periodic review of the Hart- ScottRodino Antitrust Improvements Act’s 

Coverage, Exemption, and Transmittal 

Rules (HSR Rules) as part of the 

Commission’s systematic review of all 

current Commission rules and guides.25

The comment period closed on February 

1, 2021. The HSR Rules and the 

Antitrust Improvements Act 

Notification and Report Form (HSR 

Form) was adopted pursuant to section 

7A of the Clayton Act, which requires 

firms of a certain size contemplating 

mergers, acquisitions, or other 

transactions of a specified size to file 

notification with the FTC and the DOJ 

and to wait a designated period of time 

before consummating the transaction. 

On June 29, 2023, the Commission 

issued a notice of proposed rulemaking 

on substantive HSR Form changes, 

including implementing congressionally 

mandated reporting requirements on 

foreign subsidies.26 The extended 

public comment period closed on 

September 27, 2023.27 Staff is reviewing 

the public comments. By February 2024, 

staff anticipates that the Commission 

will issue a final rule to transition the 

HSR Form and Instructions to the new 

cloud-based e-filing system. 

Business Opportunity Rule, 16 CFR 

part 437. On November 25, 2022, the 

Commission initiated a periodic review 

of the Business Opportunity Rule.28 The 

Commission sought comments on, 

among other things, the economic 

impact, and benefits of this rule; 

possible conflict between the rule and 

State, local, or other Federal laws or 

regulations; and the effect on the rule of 

any technological, economic, or other 

industry changes. The comment period 

as extended closed on January 31, 2023. 

Staff is currently reviewing the public 

comments. Effective in 2012, the Rule 

requires business-opportunity sellers to 

furnish prospective purchasers with a 

disclosure document that provides 

information regarding the seller, the 

seller’s business, and the nature of the 

proposed business opportunity, as well 

as additional information to substantiate 

any claims about actual or potential 

sales, income, or profits for a 

prospective business-opportunity 

purchaser. The seller must also preserve 

information that forms a reasonable 

basis for such claims. 

Children’s Online Privacy Protection 

Rule, 16 CFR part 312. On July 25, 2019, 

the Commission issued a request for 

public comment on its Children’s 

Online Privacy Protection Rule 

(‘‘COPPA Rule’’).29 Although the 

Commission’s last COPPA Rule review 

ended in 2013, the Commission 

initiated this review early in light of 

changes in the marketplace. Following 

an extension, the public comment 

period closed on December 9, 2019.30

The FTC sought comment on all major 

provisions of the COPPA Rule, 

including its definitions, notice and 

parental-consent requirements, 

exceptions to verifiable parental 

consent, and safe-harbor provision. The 

FTC hosted a public workshop to 

address issues raised during the review 

of the COPPA Rule on October 7, 2019. 

Staff is analyzing and reviewing public 

comments. 

Eyeglass Rule, 16 CFR part 456. As 

part of the systematic review process, 

the Commission sought public 

comments about the Trade Regulation 

Rule on Ophthalmic Practice Rules 

(Eyeglass Rule) on September 3, 2015,31

and the comment period closed on 

October 26, 2015. Commission staff 

completed review of the 868 comments 

received from consumers, eye care 

professionals, industry members, trade 

associations, and consumer advocates. 

The Eyeglass Rule requires that an 

optometrist or ophthalmologist give the 

patient, at no extra cost, a copy of the 

eyeglass prescription immediately after 

the examination is completed. The Rule 

also prohibits optometrists and 

ophthalmologists from conditioning the 

availability of an eye examination, as 

defined by the Rule, on a requirement 

that the patient agree to purchase 

ophthalmic goods from the optometrist 

or ophthalmologist. On January 3, 2023, 

the Commission issued a notice of 

proposed rulemaking that would require 

ophthalmologists and optometrists to 

provide patients with a copy of their 

prescription immediately after the 

completion of a refractive eye exam, get 

a signed statement from the patient 

confirming that they have received their 

prescription, and keep a record of that 

confirmation for at least three years.32

The comment period closed on March 6, 

2023, and staff is reviewing the 

comments. The Commission held a 

public workshop on May 18, 2023, and 

staff is reviewing the comments.33

Franchise Rule, 16 CFR part 436. On 

March 15, 2019, the Commission 

initiated a periodic review of the 

Franchise Rule (formally ‘‘Disclosure 

Requirements and Prohibitions 

Concerning Franchising’’).34 The 

comment period closed on April 21, 

2019. The Commission then held a 

public workshop on November 10, 2020. 

The closing date for written comments 

related to the issues discussed at the 

workshop was December 17, 2020.35

Staff continues to evaluate the record 

and review the public comments. The 

Rule is intended to give prospective 

purchasers of franchises the material 

information they need to weigh the risks 

and benefits of such an investment. The 

Rule requires franchisors to provide all 

potential franchisees with a disclosure 

document containing 23 specific items 

of information about the offered 

franchise, its officers, and other 

franchisees. Required disclosure topics 

include, for example, the franchise’s 

litigation history; past and current 

franchisees and their contact 

information; any exclusive territory that 

comes with the franchise; assistance the 

franchisor provides franchisees; and the 

cost of purchasing and starting up a 

franchise. 

Health Breach Notification Rule, 16 

CFR part 318. On May 22, 2020, the 

Commission initiated a periodic review 

of the Health Breach Notification Rule.36

The comment period closed on August 

20, 2020. On June 9, 2023, the 

Commission proposed to amend the 

Rule in seven ways and requested 

comment on the proposed changes.37

The comment period closed on August 

8, 2023, and staff is reviewing the 

comments. The Rule requires vendors of 

personal health records (PHR) and PHRrelated entities to provide: (1) notice to 

consumers whose unsecured personally 

identifiable health information has been 

breached; and (2) notice to the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9534 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

38 83 FR 63604 (Dec. 11, 2018). 

39 84 FR 8045 (Mar. 6, 2019). 

40 84 FR 52393 (Oct. 2, 2019). 

41 88 FR 24716 (Apr. 24, 2023). 

42 87 FR 64399 (Oct. 25, 2022). 

43 88 FR 4796 (Jan. 25, 2023). 

44 85 FR 82391 (Dec. 18, 2020). 

45 87 FR 45047 (July 27, 2022). 

46 88 FR 56780 (Aug. 21, 2023). 

47 79 FR 46732 (Aug. 11, 2014). 

48 79 FR 61267 (Oct. 10, 2014). 

49 87 FR 33677 (June 3, 2022). 

50 87 FR 33662 (June 3, 2022). 

51 88 FR 3482 (Jan. 19, 2023). 

Commission. Under the Rule, vendors 

must notify both the FTC and affected 

consumers whose information has been 

affected by a breach ‘‘without 

unreasonable delay and in no case later 

than 60 calendar days’’ after discovery 

of a data breach. Among other 

information, the notices must provide 

consumers with steps they can take to 

protect themselves from harm. 

Identity Theft Rules, 16 CFR part 681. 

In December 2018, the Commission 

initiated a periodic review of the 

Identity Theft Rules, which include the 

Red Flags Rule and the Card Issuer 

Rule.38 FTC staff is reviewing the 

comments received. The Red Flags Rule 

requires financial institutions and 

creditors to develop and implement a 

written identity theft prevention 

program (a ‘‘Red Flags Program’’). By 

identifying red flags for identity theft in 

advance, businesses can be better 

equipped to spot suspicious patterns 

that may arise and take steps to prevent 

potential problems from escalating into 

a costly episode of identity theft. The 

Card Issuer Rule requires credit and 

debit card issuers to implement 

reasonable policies and procedures to 

assess the validity of a change of 

address if they receive notification of a 

change of address for a consumer’s debit 

or credit card account and, within a 

short period of time afterwards, also 

receive a request for an additional or 

replacement card for the same account. 

Leather Guides, 16 CFR part 24. On 

March 6, 2019, the Commission 

initiated a periodic review of the 

Leather Guides, formally known as the 

Guides for Select Leather and Imitation 

Leather Products.39 The comment 

period closed on April 22, 2019. The 

Leather Guides apply to the 

manufacture, sale, distribution, 

marketing, or advertising of leather or 

simulated leather purses, luggage, 

wallets, footwear, and other similar 

products. The Guides address 

misrepresentations regarding the 

composition and characteristics of 

specific leather and imitation leather 

products. 

Negative Option Rule, 16 CFR part 

310. On October 2, 2019, the 

Commission issued an advance notice of 

proposed rulemaking seeking public 

comment on the effectiveness and 

impact of the Trade Regulation Rule on 

Use of Prenotification Negative Option 

Plans (Negative Option Rule).40 On 

April 24, 2023, the Commission 

published a notice of proposed 

rulemaking to amend the existing Rule 

to implement new requirements to 

provide important information to 

consumers, obtain consumers’ express 

informed consent, and ensure 

consumers can easily cancel these 

programs when they choose.41 The 

comment period closed on June 23, 

2023. Staff is currently reviewing the 

public comments. 

b. Proposed Rules 

Since the publication of the 2022 

Regulatory Plan, the Commission has 

initiated or plans to take further steps as 

described below in the following 

rulemaking proceedings: 

Energy Labeling Rule, 16 CFR part 

305. The Energy Labeling Rule requires 

energy labeling for major home 

appliances and other consumer 

products to help consumers compare 

the energy usage and costs of competing 

models. On October 25, 2022, the 

Commission issued an advance notice of 

proposed rulemaking that sought public 

comment on potential amendments to 

the Rule, including energy labels for 

several new consumer product 

categories, other possible amendments 

to improve the Rule’s effectiveness, and 

reducing unnecessary burdens.42 The 

comment period as extended closed on 

January 31, 2023.43 Staff is currently 

reviewing the public comments. 

Power Output Claims for Amplifiers 

Utilized in Home Entertainment 

Products, 16 CFR part 432. On 

December 18, 2020, the Commission 

initiated a periodic review of the 

Amplifier Rule (formally ‘‘Power Output 

Claims for Amplifiers Utilized in Home 

Entertainment Products Rule’’).44 The 

Commission sought comments on, 

among other things, the economic 

impact, and benefits of this Rule; 

possible conflict between the Rule and 

State, local, or other Federal laws or 

regulations; and the effect on the Rule 

of any technological, economic, or other 

industry changes. The Amplifier Rule 

establishes uniform test standards and 

disclosures so that consumers can make 

more meaningful comparisons of 

amplifier-equipment performance 

attributes. On July 27, 2022, the 

Commission sought public comment on 

a proposal to amend the Rule to require 

sellers making power-related claims to 

calculate power output using uniform 

testing methods to allow consumers to 

easily compare amplifier sound 

quality.45 Additionally, for 

multichannel home theater amplifiers 

the Commission sought comment about 

how to set test conditions to reflect 

typical consumer use. The comment 

period closed on September 26, 2022. 

On August 21, 2023, the Commission 

issued a supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking.46 The comment 

period closed on October 23, 2023. 

Telemarketing Sales Rule, 16 CFR 

part 310. On August 11, 2014, the 

Commission initiated a periodic review 

of the Telemarketing Sales Rule (TSR).47

The comment period as extended closed 

on November 13, 2014.48 On June 3, 

2022, the Commission issued a notice of 

proposed rulemaking seeking public 

comment on proposed amendments to 

the TSR.49 The proposed amendments 

would require telemarketers and sellers 

to maintain additional records of their 

telemarketing transactions, prohibit 

material misrepresentations and false or 

misleading statements in business-tobusiness telemarketing transactions, and 

add a new definition for the term 

‘‘previous donor.’’ The comment period 

closed on August 2, 2022, and the 

Commission has received 25 comments 

to date. Also on June 3, 2022, the 

Commission issued an advance notice of 

proposed rulemaking seeking public 

comment on whether the TSR should 

continue to exempt telemarketing calls 

to businesses, whether the TSR should 

require a notice and cancellation 

mechanism with negative option sales, 

and whether to extend the TSR to apply 

to telemarketing calls that consumers 

initiate to a telemarketer (i.e., inbound 

telemarketing calls) regarding computer 

technical support services.50 The 

comment period closed on August 2, 

2022. Staff is reviewing the comments. 

Non-Compete Clause Rule, proposed 

to be codified at 16 CFR part 901. On 

January 19, 2023, the Commission 

proposed the Non-Compete Clause 

Rule.51 The proposed rule would, 

among other things, provide that it is an 

unfair method of competition for an 

employer to enter into or attempt to 

enter into a non-compete clause with a 

worker; to maintain with a worker a 

non-compete clause; or, under certain 

circumstances, to represent to a worker 

that the worker is subject to a noncompete clause. On February 16, 2023, 

the Commission hosted a public forum 

that examined the FTC’s proposed rule 

and provided an opportunity for 

interested parties to directly share their 

experiences with non-compete clauses. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9535 

52 87 FR 42012 (July 13, 2022). 

53 87 FR 62741 (Oct. 17, 2022). 

54See Fed. Trade Comm’n, Transcript of Informal 

Hearing Before the Administrative Law Judge on 

Government and Business Impersonation Rule (May 

4, 2023), https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/ 

pdf/ 

impersonationruleinformalhearingtranscript.pdf. 

55 87 FR 13951 (Mar. 11, 2022). 

56 87 FR 51273 (Aug. 22, 2022). 

57FR 63738 (Oct. 20, 2022). 

58 85 FR 8490 (Feb. 14, 2020). 

59 85 FR 20453(Apr. 13, 2020). 

60 87 FR 66096 (Nov. 2, 2022). 

61See Fed. Trade Comm’n, FTC Seeks to Improve 

the American Public’s Access to Funeral Service 

Prices Online (Oct. 20, 2022), https://www.ftc.gov/ 

news-events/news/press-releases/2022/10/ftc-seeksimprove-american-publics-access-funeral-serviceprices-online. 

62 88 FR 33011 (May 23, 2023). 

63 87 FR 67413 (Nov. 8, 2022); see also Fed. Trade 

Comm’n, Federal Trade Commission Explores Rule 

Cracking Down on Junk Fees (Oct. 20, 2022), 

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/pressreleases/2022/10/federal-trade-commissionexplores-rule-cracking-down-junk-fees. 

64 87 FR 67424 (Nov. 8, 2022); see also Fed. Trade 

Comm’n, Federal Trade Commission to Explore 

Rulemaking to Combat Fake Reviews and Other 

Deceptive Endorsements (Oct. 20, 2022), https://

www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2022/ 

10/ftc-explore-rulemaking-combat-fake-reviewsother-deceptive-endorsements. 

65 88 FR 49364 (July 31, 2023). 

The comment period as extended closed 

on April 19, 2023. Staff is reviewing the 

comments. 

Motor Vehicle Dealers Trade 

Regulation Rule, proposed to be codified 

at 16 CFR part 463. On July 13, 2022, 

the Commission issued a notice of 

proposed rulemaking soliciting public 

comment on a proposed Rule regarding 

unfair or deceptive acts or practices 

under its authority with respect to 

motor vehicle dealers described in 

section 1029(d) of the Dodd-Frank Wall 

Street Reform and Consumer Protection 

Act.52 The proposed rule would prohibit 

motor vehicle dealers from making 

certain misrepresentations in the course 

of selling, leasing, or arranging 

financing for motor vehicles; require 

accurate pricing disclosures in dealers’ 

advertising and sales discussions; 

require dealers to obtain consumers’ 

express, informed consent for charges; 

prohibit the sale of any add-on product 

or service that confers no benefit to the 

consumer; and require dealers to keep 

records of advertisements and customer 

transactions. The public comment 

period closed on September 12, 2022. 

Staff is reviewing the public comments. 

Trade Regulation Rule on 

Impersonation of Government and 

Businesses, proposed to be codified at 

16 CFR part 461. On October 17, 2022, 

the Commission issued a notice of 

proposed rulemaking to address certain 

deceptive or unfair acts or practices of 

impersonation of government and 

business officials.53 The public 

comment period closed on December 

16, 2022. An informal hearing was held 

on May 4, 2023, at which oral 

testimony 54 was provided and 

additional written testimony was 

accepted. Staff is reviewing the 

comments. 

Earnings Claims Trade Regulation 

Rule, proposed to be codified at 16 CFR 

part 462. On March 11, 2022, the 

Commission issued an advance notice of 

proposed rulemaking seeking public 

comment about a potential rule to 

address deceptive or unfair marketing 

using earnings claims.55 The comment 

period closed on May 10, 2022. Staff is 

reviewing the comments. 

Trade Regulation Rule on Commercial 

Surveillance, 16 CFR part 

undetermined. On August 22, 2022, the 

Commission issued an advance notice of 

proposed rulemaking under section 18 

of the FTC Act to limit privacy abuses, 

curb lax security practices, and ensure 

that algorithmic decision-making does 

not result in unlawful discrimination.56

The Commission sought public 

comment on whether new rules are 

needed to protect people’s privacy and 

information in the commercial 

surveillance economy. On September 8, 

2022, the Commission hosted a public 

forum regarding its ANPR on 

commercial surveillance and data 

security practices that harm consumers 

and competition. The public forum 

included panel discussions and 

members of the public provided 

remarks. The ANPR’s extended public 

comment period closed on November 

21, 2022.57 Staff is reviewing the public 

comments. 

Funeral Rule, 16 CFR part 453. On 

February 14, 2020, the Commission 

initiated a periodic review of the 

Funeral Industry Practices Rule (Funeral 

Rule).58 The comment period as 

extended closed on June 15, 2020.59 The 

Funeral Rule, which became effective in 

1984, requires sellers of funeral goods 

and services to give price lists to 

consumers who visit or call a funeral 

home. On November 2, 2022, the 

Commission issued an advance notice of 

proposed rulemaking seeking comment 

on potential updates to modernize the 

Funeral Rule, including improvements 

to the public accessibility of funeral 

home price information.60 The comment 

period closed on January 3, 2023. The 

Commission also issued a staff report 

that summarizes the results of staff’s 

review of almost 200 funeral provider 

websites.61 The Commission held a 

public workshop on September 7, 

2023.62 The workshop explored issues 

relating to the Funeral Rule’s General 

Price List requirements, including 

whether and how funeral providers 

should be required to provide price lists 

electronically or online, and other 

issues raised in the comments received 

in response to the 2022 ANPR. The 

comment period for any written 

comments related to the issues 

discussed at the workshop closed on 

October 10, 2023. Staff is reviewing the 

public comments. 

Unfair or Deceptive Fees Trade 

Regulation Rule, proposed to be codified 

at 16 CFR part 464. On November 8, 

2022, the Commission issued an 

advance notice of proposed rulemaking 

to address certain deceptive or unfair 

acts or practices related to fees.63 The 

public comment period closed on 

January 9, 2023. On October 11, 2023, 

the Commission announced that it was 

publishing a notice of proposed 

rulemaking to promulgate a trade 

regulation rule entitled ‘‘Rule on Unfair 

or Deceptive Fees,’’ which would 

prohibit unfair or deceptive practices 

relating to fees for goods or services, 

specifically, misrepresenting the total 

costs of goods and services by omitting 

mandatory fees from advertised prices 

and misrepresenting the nature and 

purpose of fees. The public comment 

period will close 60 days after 

publication in the Federal Register. 

Trade Regulation Rule on the Use of 

Reviews and Endorsements, proposed to 

be codified at 16 CFR part 465. On 

November 8, 2022, the Commission 

issued an advance notice of proposed 

rulemaking to address certain deceptive 

or unfair acts or practices concerning 

reviews and endorsements.64 The public 

comment period closed on January 9, 

2023. On July 31, 2023, the Commission 

issued a notice of proposed rulemaking 

seeking public comments concerning 

the utility and scope of the proposed 

trade regulation rule to prohibit the 

specified unfair or deceptive acts or 

practices.65 The comment period closed 

on September 29, 2023, and staff is 

reviewing the comments. 

c. Final Actions

Since the publication of the 2022

Regulatory Plan, the Commission has 

issued the following final agency 

actions in rulemaking and guide 

proceedings: 

Endorsement Guides, 16 CFR part 

255. On July 26, 2023, the Commission

adopted revised Endorsement Guides to

reflect the ways advertisers now reach

consumers to promote products and

services, including through social media


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
9536 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 

66 88 FR 48092 (July 26, 2023). 

67 86 FR 70062 (Dec. 9, 2021). 

and reviews.66 The Guides provide 

agency guidance to businesses and 

others to ensure that advertising using 

reviews or endorsements is truthful. The 

final revised Guides took the public 

comments received into consideration 

and make a number of revisions 

including: (1) articulating a new 

principle regarding procuring, 

suppressing, boosting, organizing, 

publishing, upvoting, downvoting, or 

editing consumer reviews so as to 

distort what consumers think of a 

product; (2) addressing incentivized 

reviews, reviews by employees, and fake 

negative reviews of a competitor; (3) 

adding a definition of ‘‘clear and 

conspicuous’’ and saying that a 

platform’s built-in disclosure tool might 

not be an adequate disclosure; (4) 

changing the definition of 

‘‘endorsements’’ to clarify the extent to 

which it includes fake reviews, virtual 

influencers, and tags in social media; (5) 

better explaining the potential liability 

of advertisers, endorsers, and 

intermediaries; and (6) highlighting that 

child-directed advertising is of special 

concern. In many instances the 

revisions responded to comments by 

adding to or modifying the hypothetical 

examples that illustrate the principles of 

the Guides. For example, within section 

255.2 concerning consumer 

endorsements, staff modified Example 8 

to clarify that a particular seller must 

display reviews about its own customer 

service but need not display reviews 

about the customer service of a different 

seller. 

Safeguards Rule (Standards for 

Safeguarding Customer Information), 16 

CFR part 314. On December 9, 2021, the 

Commission issued a supplemental 

notice of proposed rulemaking that 

proposes to amend the Safeguards Rule 

to require financial institutions to report 

to the Commission any security event 

where the financial institutions have 

determined misuse of customer 

information has occurred or is 

reasonably likely and that at least 1,000 

consumers have been affected or 

reasonably may be affected.67 The 

comment period closed on February 7, 

2022. On October 27, 2023, the 

Commission announced a final rule 

amendment that requires covered 

financial institutions to notify the FTC 

as soon as possible, and no later than 30 

days after discovery, of a security breach 

involving the information of at least 500 

consumers. Such an event requires 

notification if unencrypted customer 

information has been acquired without 

the authorization of the individual to 

which the information pertains. The 

notice to the FTC must include certain 

information about the event, such as the 

number of consumers affected or 

potentially affected. The breach 

notification requirement becomes 

effective 180 days after publication of 

the rule in the Federal Register. 

d. Significant Regulatory Actions 

The Commission has three proposed 

rules that would be a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under the definition 

in section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866: 

the proposed Motor Vehicle Dealers 

Trade Regulation Rule, to be codified at 

16 CFR part 463, the proposed NonCompete Clause Rule to be codified at 

16 CFR 910,and the proposed 

substantive HSR form changes under the 

Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust 

Improvements Act Coverage, 

Exemption, and Transmittal Rules, 16 

CFR parts 801–803. 

The Commission has no proposed 

rule that would have significant 

international impacts or any 

international regulatory cooperation 

activities that are reasonably anticipated 

to lead to significant regulations, as 

defined in Executive Order 13609. 

Summary 

The actions under consideration 

advance the Commission’s mission by 

informing and protecting consumers 

while minimizing burdens on honest 

businesses. The Commission continues 

to identify and weigh the costs and 

benefits of proposed regulatory actions 

and possible alternative actions. 

BILLING CODE 6750–01–P 

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

Statement of Regulatory Priorities for 

Fiscal Year 2024 

I. Introduction 

Under the authority of the Atomic 

Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and 

the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, 

as amended, the U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulates 

the possession and use of source, 

byproduct, and special nuclear material. 

Our regulatory mission is to license and 

regulate the Nation’s civilian use of 

byproduct, source, and special nuclear 

materials to ensure the adequate 

protection of public health and safety 

and promote the common defense and 

security. As part of our mission, we 

regulate the operation of nuclear power 

plants and fuel cycle facilities; the 

safeguarding of nuclear materials from 

theft and sabotage; the safe transport, 

storage, and disposal of radioactive 

materials and wastes; the 

decommissioning and safe release for 

other uses of licensed facilities that are 

no longer in operation; and the medical, 

industrial, and research applications of 

nuclear material. In addition, we license 

the import and export of radioactive 

materials. 

As part of our regulatory process, we 

routinely conduct comprehensive 

regulatory analyses that examine the 

costs and benefits of contemplated 

regulations. We have developed internal 

procedures and programs to ensure that 

we impose only necessary requirements 

on our licensees and we review existing 

regulations to determine whether the 

requirements imposed are still 

necessary. 

Our regulatory priorities for fiscal 

year (FY) 2024 reflect our safety and 

security mission and will enable us to 

achieve our three strategic goals 

described in NUREG–1614, Volume 8, 

‘‘Strategic Plan: Fiscal Years 2022– 

2026,’’ issued April 2022 (https://

www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doccollections/nuregs/staff/sr1614/v8/ 

index.html): (1) ensure the safe and 

secure use of radioactive materials, (2) 

continue to foster a healthy 

organization, and (3) inspire stakeholder 

confidence in the NRC. 

II. Regulatory Priorities 

This section contains information on 

some of our most important and 

significant regulatory actions that we are 

considering issuing in proposed or final 

form during FY 2024. This report does 

not include the NRC’s high-priority 

rulemakings titled ‘‘American Society of 

Mechanical Engineers 2021–2022 Code 

Editions’’ (RIN 3150–AK21; NRC–2018– 

0289), ‘‘American Society of Mechanical 

Engineers Code Cases and Update 

Frequency’’ (RIN 3150–AK23; NRC– 

2018–0291), ‘‘Risk-Informed, 

Technology-Inclusive Regulatory 

Framework for Advanced Reactors’’ 

(RIN 3150–AK31; NRC–2019–0062), 

‘‘Advanced Nuclear Reactor Generic 

Environmental Impact Statement’’ (RIN 

3150–AK55; NRC 2020–0101), and 

‘‘Reporting Nuclear Medicine Injection 

Extravasations as Medical Events’’ (RIN 

3150–AK91; NRC–2022–0218) as the 

timeframe for reporting is only through 

FY 2024; the agency expects to publish 

the final rules during FY 2025. The 

agency’s portion of the Unified Agenda 

of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions 

contains additional information on NRC 

rulemaking activities and a broader 

spectrum of our upcoming regulatory 

actions. We also provide additional 

information on planned rulemakings 

and petition for rulemaking activities, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 28 / Friday, February 9, 2024 / UA: Reg Flex Agenda 9537 

including priority and schedule, on our 

website at https://www.nrc.gov/aboutnrc/regulatory/rulemaking/rulespetitions.html. 

A. NRC Priority Rulemakings

Proposed Rules

Integrated Low-Level Radioactive 

Waste Disposal (RIN 3150–AI92; NRC– 

2011–0012): This rulemaking would 

amend the NRC’s regulations in Title 10 

of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 

61, ‘‘Licensing Requirements for Land 

Disposal of Radioactive Waste,’’ to 

revise the licensing requirements for 

low-level radioactive waste disposal and 

address requirements for disposal of 

greater-than-Class C and transuranic 

waste. 

Final Rules 

Alignment of Licensing Processes and 

Lessons Learned from New Reactor 

Licensing (RIN 3150–AI66; NRC–2009– 

0196): This rulemaking would amend 

the NRC’s regulations for the licensing 

of new reactors. The rule would align 

requirements between the two licensing 

processes provided in the NRC’s 

regulations to ensure that all new 

reactor applications conform to the 

NRC’s policies and requirements, 

regardless of the selected licensing 

approach. The rule would address 

lessons learned from NRC reviews 

conducted for combined licenses, 

design certifications, early site permits, 

and operating licenses. 

Regulatory Improvements for 

Production and Utilization Facilities 

Transitioning to Decommissioning (RIN 

3150–AJ59; NRC–2015–0070): This 

rulemaking would amend the NRC’s 

regulations to provide an appropriate 

regulatory framework for nuclear power 

reactors transitioning from operations to 

decommissioning. 

Cyber Security for Fuel Facilities (RIN 

3150–AJ64; NRC–2015–0179): This 

rulemaking would amend the NRC’s 

regulations to require certain fuel cycle 

facilities to establish, implement, and 

maintain a cyber security program that 

is designed to protect public health and 

safety and the common defense and 

security. 

Renewing Nuclear Power Plant 

Operating Licenses—Environmental 

Review (RIN 3150–AK32; NRC–2018– 

0296): This rulemaking would amend 

the NRC’s environmental protection 

regulations by updating the 

environmental effect findings of 

renewing the operating license of a 

nuclear power plant. These findings 

would be based on a programmatic 

analysis under the National 

Environmental Policy Act. The rule will 

affect operating power reactor licensees 

that seek an initial or subsequent 

renewed operating license. 

Radioactive Source Security and 

Accountability (RIN 3150–AK83; NRC– 

2022–0103): The NRC is amending its 

regulations to require safety and 

security equipment to be in place before 

the agency grants a license for 

possession and use of radioactive 

materials. This rule also would require 

a licensee transferring category 3 

quantities of radioactive material to 

verify that the recipient’s license 

authorizes the receipt of the type, form, 

and quantity of radioactive material to 

be transferred, and that such verification 

be conducted through the License 

Verification System or by contacting the 

license-issuing authority. Lastly, the 

NRC would implement a more stringent 

license verification method for licensees 

relying upon an oral certification to 

process an emergency shipment of 

radioactive material and remove an 

obsolete verification method for 

obtaining sources of information. This 

rulemaking would affect applicants for 

a radioactive material license and 

licensees that transfer category 3 

quantities of radioactive material. 

B. Significant Final Rules

The rulemaking activity below meets

the requirements of a significant 

regulatory action in Executive Order 

12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and 

Review,’’ signed September 30, 1993, 

because it is likely to have an annual 

effect on the economy of $100 million 

or more. 

Revision of Fee Schedules: Fee 

Recovery for FY 2024 (RIN 3150–AK74; 

NRC–2022–0046): This rule amends the 

NRC’s fee schedules for licensing, 

inspection, and annual fees charged to 

agency applicants and licensees. 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

[FR Doc. 2024–00476 Filed 2–8–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6820–27–P 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS2