Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 64 / Monday, April 4, 2022 / Notices 19539 

ESTIMATE OF ANNUAL RESPONDENT BURDEN—Continued 

Form No. Annual 

responses 

Time 

(minutes) 

Burden 

(hours) 

(With assistance) .................................................................................................................. 250 45 188 

(Without assistance) ............................................................................................................. 20 55 18 

AA–19a: 

(With assistance) .................................................................................................................. 200 45 150 

(Without assistance) ............................................................................................................. 15 65 16 

Total ...................................................................................................................................... 3,485 ........................ 1,337 

3. Title and purpose of information 

collection: Nonresident Questionnaire; 

OMB 3220–0145. 

Under Public Laws 98–21 (42 U.S.C. 

410) and 98–76 (45 U.S.C. 231t), 

benefits under the Railroad Retirement 

Act payable to annuitants living outside 

the United States may be subject to 

taxation under United States income tax 

laws. Whether the social security 

equivalent and non-social security 

equivalent portions of Tier I, Tier II, 

vested dual benefit, or supplemental 

annuity payments are subject to tax 

withholding, and whether the same or 

different rates are applied to each 

payment, depends on a beneficiary’s 

citizenship and legal residence status, 

and whether exemption under a tax 

treaty between the United States and the 

country in which the beneficiary is a 

legal resident has been claimed. To 

affect the required tax withholding, the 

Railroad Retirement Board (RRB) needs 

to know a nonresident’s citizenship and 

legal residence status. 

To secure the required information, 

the RRB utilizes Form RRB–1001, 

Nonresident Questionnaire, as a 

supplement to an application as part of 

the initial application process, and as an 

independent vehicle for obtaining the 

needed information when an 

annuitant’s residence or tax treaty status 

changes. Completion is voluntary. One 

response is requested of each 

respondent. 

The RRB proposes no changes to 

Form RRB–1001: 

ESTIMATE OF ANNUAL RESPONDENT BURDEN

Form No. Annual 

responses 

Time 

(minutes) 

Burden 

(hours) 

RRB–1001 (Initial filing) ............................................................................................................... 300 30 250 

RRB–1001 (Tax renewal) ............................................................................................................ 1,000 30 400 

Total ...................................................................................................................................... 1,300 ........................ 650 

Additional Information or Comments: 

To request more information or to 

obtain a copy of the information 

collection justification, forms, and/or 

supporting material, contact Kennisha 

Tucker at (312) 469–2591 or 

Kennisha.Tucker@rrb.gov. Comments 

regarding the information collection 

should be addressed to Brian Foster, 

Railroad Retirement Board, 844 North 

Rush Street, Chicago, Illinois 60611– 

1275 or emailed to Brian.Foster@rrb.gov. 

Written comments should be received 

within 60 days of this notice. 

Brian D. Foster, 

Clearance Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2022–06946 Filed 4–1–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7905–01–P 

SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY 

OFFICE 

Request for Information: Sustainable 

Chemistry 

AGENCY: Office of Science and 

Technology Policy (OSTP). 

ACTION: Notice of Request for 

Information (RFI) from the public on 

Federal programs and activities in 

support of sustainable chemistry. 

SUMMARY: The Office of Science and 

Technology Policy (OSTP) requests 

input from interested parties on 

sustainable chemistry to guide future 

Federal efforts. The term ‘‘sustainable 

chemistry’’ does not have a consensus 

definition and most uses of the term 

indicate that it is synonymous with 

‘‘green chemistry.’’ Therefore, 

information is requested on the 

preferred definition for sustainable 

chemistry. OSTP requests comments on 

how the definition of sustainable 

chemistry could impact the following: 

The role of technology, Federal policies 

that may aid or hinder sustainable 

chemistry initiatives, future research to 

advance sustainable chemistry, financial 

and economic considerations, and 

Federal agency efforts. Comments 

provided in response to this RFI will be 

used to address Subtitle E—Sustainable 

Chemistry of the 2021 National Defense 

Authorization Act (NDAA) to identify 

research questions and priorities to 

promote transformational progress in 

improving the sustainability of the 

chemical sciences. 

DATES: Interested persons and 

organizations are invited to submit 

comments on or before 5:00 p.m. ET on 

June 3, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: Interested individuals and 

organizations should submit comments 

electronically to JEEP@ostp.eop.gov and 

include ‘‘Sustainable Chemistry RFI’’ in 

the subject line of the email. Due to time 

constraints, mailed paper submissions 

will not be accepted, and electronic 

submissions received after the deadline 

may not be taken into consideration. 

Instructions 

Response to this RFI is voluntary. 

Each responding entity (individual or 

organization) is requested to submit 

only one response. OSTP welcomes any 

responses to inform and guide policies 

and actions related to Sustainable 

Chemistry. Please feel free to respond to 

one or as many topics as you choose, 

while noting the number of the topic(s) 

to which you are responding. 

Submission must not exceed 10 pages in 

12-point or larger font, with a page 

number provided on each page. 

Responses should include the name of 

the person(s) or organization(s) filing 

the comment, as well as the respondent 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
19540 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 64 / Monday, April 4, 2022 / Notices 

1See, for example: H. Rept 108–462, ‘‘Green 

Chemistry Research and Development Act of 2004’’ 

H. Rept. 108–462—GREEN CHEMISTRY 

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 2004 | 

Congress.gov | Library of Congress. 2Public Law No: 111–358 (01/04/2011) which 

uses both terms independently and combined 

https://www.congress.gov/bill/111th-congress/ 

house-bill/5116/text?overview=closed&r=12. 3https://www.epa.gov/greenchemistry/basicsgreen-chemistry. 

4Public Law 114–329, SEC 114(a)(2) approved on 

January 6, 2017, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/ 

pkg/PLAW-114publ329/pdf/PLAW-114publ329.pdf. 

5https://www.oecd.org/chemicalsafety/riskmanagement/sustainablechemistry.htm. 

6https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-18-307.pdf. 

7https://www.congress.gov/116/plaws/pub|283/ 

PLAW-116publ283.pdf. 

type (e.g., academic institution, 

advocacy group, professional society, 

community-based organization, 

industry, member of the public, 

government, other). Respondent’s role 

in the organization may also be 

provided (e.g., researcher, administrator, 

student, program manager, journalist) 

on a voluntary basis. Comments 

containing references, studies, research, 

and other empirical data that are not 

widely published should include copies 

or electronic links of the referenced 

materials. No business proprietary 

information, copyrighted information, 

or personally identifiable information 

should be submitted in response to this 

RFI. Please be aware that comments 

submitted in response to this RFI, 

including the submitter’s identification 

(as noted above), may be posted on 

OSTP’s website or otherwise released 

publicly. 

In accordance with Federal 

Acquisitions Regulations Systems 

15.202(3), responses to this notice are 

not offers and cannot be accepted by the 

Federal Government to form a binding 

contract. Additionally, those submitting 

responses are solely responsible for all 

expenses associated with response 

preparation. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

additional information, please direct 

questions to Melanie Buser at JEEP@

ostp.eop.gov or 202–456–4444. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background: The term ‘‘sustainable 

chemistry’’ does not have a consensus 

definition and most uses of the term 

indicate that it is synonymous with 

‘‘green chemistry.’’ Publications and 

legislation have typically treated 

sustainable chemistry and green 

chemistry synonymously.1 2 However, 

green chemistry has traditionally 

focused on hazardous substances, while 

sustainable chemistry has been used in 

the context of both hazardous and nonhazardous substances. An example is 

the EPA definition: 

‘‘Green chemistry is the design of chemical 

products and processes that reduce or 

eliminate the use or generation of hazardous 

substances. Green chemistry applies across 

the life cycle of a chemical product, 

including its design, manufacture, use, and 

ultimate disposal. Green chemistry is also 

known as sustainable chemistry.’’ 3

In 2017, Congress used the term 

‘‘sustainable chemistry’’ and included 

expanded concepts such as pollution 

prevention, reducing risk, efficient 

manufacturing, and to ‘‘promote 

efficient use of resources in developing 

new materials, processes, and 

technologies that support viable longterm solutions to a significant number of 

challenges.’’ 4

The Organization for Economic 

Cooperation and Development (OECD) 

considers a much broader definition 

that incorporates efficiency in use of 

natural resources: ‘‘Sustainable 

chemistry is a scientific concept that 

seeks to improve the efficiency with 

which natural resources are used to 

meet human needs for chemical 

products and services. Sustainable 

chemistry encompasses the design, 

manufacture and use of efficient, 

effective, safe and more 

environmentally benign chemical 

products and processes.’’ 5

In early 2018, the Government 

Accountability Office (GAO) published 

GAO–18–307, titled Chemical 

Innovation: Technologies to Make 

Processes and Products More 

Sustainable, that equated ‘‘green 

chemistry’’ with ‘‘sustainable 

chemistry’’ and found that participating 

stakeholders lacked agreement on how 

to define, measure, or assess the 

sustainability of chemical processes and 

products. The GAO did find, however, 

that there were several common themes 

underlying what sustainable chemistry 

strives to achieve: 

—Improve the efficiency with which natural 

resources—including energy, water, and 

materials—are used to meet human needs 

for chemical products while avoiding 

environmental harm; 

—reduce or eliminate the use or generation 

of hazardous substances in the design, 

manufacture, and use of chemical 

products; 

—protect and benefit the economy, people, 

and the environment using innovative 

chemical transformations; 

—consider all life-cycle stages including 

manufacture, use, and disposal when 

evaluating the environmental impact of a 

product; and 

—minimize the use of non-renewable 

resources.6

OSTP has been tasked under Subtitle 

E—Sustainable Chemistry of the 

William M. (Mac) Thornberry National 

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2021 (Pub. L. 116–283) 7 with 

creating a consensus definition for the 

term ‘‘sustainable chemistry’’ to 

coordinate Federal programs and 

activities in support of sustainable 

chemistry. The definition, for which we 

are seeking comment, will inform 

OSTP’s development of a framework of 

attributes characterizing sustainable 

chemistry as well as quantitative 

assessment metrics. Additionally, it will 

allow OSTP to assess the state of 

sustainable chemistry in the United 

States; coordinate and support Federal 

research, development, demonstration, 

technology transfer, commercialization, 

education, and support for publicprivate partnerships; identify Federal 

barriers and opportunities; identify 

scientific challenges; avoid duplication; 

and position Federal funding for 

maximal impact including through 

synergistic partnerships. 

Scope: OSTP invites input from any 

interested stakeholders, including 

industry and industry association 

groups; civil society and advocacy 

groups; local organizers and community 

groups; state, local, and tribal 

governments; academic researchers; 

technical practitioners specializing in 

chemistry and chemical processes; and 

members of the public, representing all 

backgrounds and perspectives. OSTP 

has great interest in receiving input 

from parties developing sustainable 

chemistry technologies, parties 

acquiring and using such technologies, 

and people from communities impacted 

by their use, including but not limited 

to environmental justice communities. 

Information Requested: OSTP has 

considered definitions for sustainable 

chemistry to potentially include 

incorporating technology, policy, 

finance/economics, energetics, national 

security, critical industries, and critical 

natural resources. OSTP encourages 

input on these and other considerations 

for a definition of sustainable chemistry. 

Respondents may provide information 

for one or as many topics below as they 

choose. Through this RFI, OSTP seeks 

information to develop a consensus 

definition for the term ‘‘sustainable 

chemistry’’ and to consider the 

implications of such a definition, 

including the following topics: 

1. Definition of sustainable chemistry: 

OSTP is mandated by the 2021 NDAA 

to develop a consensus definition of 

sustainable chemistry. Comments are 

requested on what that definition 

should include. The definition will 

inform OSTP and Federal agencies for 

prioritizing and implementing research 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 64 / Monday, April 4, 2022 / Notices 19541 

and development programs to advance 

sustainable chemistry practice in the 

United States. Comments are also 

requested on how the definition of 

‘‘sustainable chemistry’’ relates to the 

common usage of ‘‘green chemistry’’ 

and whether these terms should be 

synonymous, exclusive, 

complementary, or if one should be 

incorporated into the other. 

2. Technologies that would benefit 

from Federal attention to move society 

toward more sustainable chemistry: 

What technologies/sectors stand to 

benefit most from progress in 

sustainable chemistry or require 

prioritized investment? Why? What 

mature technology areas, if any, should 

be lower priority? 

3. Fundamental research areas: What 

fundamental and emerging research 

areas require increased attention, 

investment, and/or priority focus to 

support innovation toward sustainable 

chemistry (e.g., catalysis, separations, 

toxicity, biodegradation, 

thermodynamics, kinetics, life-cycle 

analysis, market forces, public 

awareness, tax credits, etc.). What 

Federal research area might you regard 

as mature/robustly covered, or which 

Federal programs would benefit from 

increased prioritization? 

Ancillary topics regarding the 

definition: 

4. Potential outcome and output 

metrics based on the definition of 

sustainable chemistry: What outcomes 

and output metrics will provide OSTP 

the ability to prioritize initiatives and 

measure their success? How does one 

determine the effectiveness of the 

definition of sustainable chemistry? 

What are the quantitative features 

characteristic of sustainable chemistry? 

5. Financial and economic 

considerations for advancing 

sustainable chemistry: How are 

financial and economic factors 

considered (e.g., competitiveness, 

externalized costs), assessed (e.g., 

economic models, full life cycle 

management tools) and implemented 

(e.g., economic infrastructure). 

6. Policy considerations for advancing 

sustainable chemistry: What changes in 

policy could the Federal government 

make to improve and/or promote 

sustainable chemistry? 

7. Investment considerations when 

prioritizing Federal initiatives for study: 

What issues, consequences, and 

priorities are not necessarily covered 

under the definition of sustainable 

chemistry, but should be considered 

when investing in initiatives? Public 

Law 114–329, discussed in the 

background section above, includes the 

phrase: ‘‘support viable long-term 

solutions to a significant number of 

challenges’’. OSTP expects the final 

definition of sustainable chemistry to 

strongly consider resource conservation 

and other environmentally focused 

issues. For example, national security, 

jobs, funding models, partnership 

models, critical industries, and 

environmental justice considerations 

may all incur consequences from 

implementation of sustainable 

chemistry initiatives such as 

dematerialization, or the reduction of 

quantities of materials needed to serve 

and economic function. 

Dated: March 30, 2022. 

Stacy Murphy, 

Operations Manager. 

[FR Doc. 2022–07043 Filed 4–1–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3270–F2–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[SEC File No. 270–015, OMB Control No. 

3235–0021] 

Submission for OMB Review; 

Comment Request; Extension: Rule 

6a–3 

Upon Written Request, Copies Available 

From: Securities and Exchange 

Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 

100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 

20549–2736 

Notice is hereby given that pursuant 

to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(‘‘PRA’’) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the 

Securities and Exchange Commission 

(‘‘Commission’’) has submitted to the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(‘‘OMB’’) a request for extension of the 

previously approved collection of 

information provided for in Rule 6a–3 

(17 CFR 240.6a–3) under the Securities 

Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a et 

seq.) (‘‘Act’’). 

Section 6 of the Act sets out a 

framework for the registration and 

regulation of national securities 

exchanges. Under Rule 6a–3, one of the 

rules that implements Section 6, a 

national securities exchange (or an 

exchange exempted from registration 

based on limited trading volume) must 

provide certain supplemental 

information to the Commission, 

including any material (including 

notices, circulars, bulletins, lists, and 

periodicals) issued or made generally 

available to members of, or participants 

or subscribers to, the exchange. Rule 6a– 

3 also requires the exchanges to file 

monthly reports that set forth the 

volume and aggregate dollar amount of 

certain securities sold on the exchange 

each month. The information required 

to be filed with the Commission 

pursuant to Rule 6a–3 is designed to 

enable the Commission to carry out its 

statutorily mandated oversight functions 

and to ensure that registered and 

exempt exchanges continue to be in 

compliance with the Act. 

The Commission estimates that each 

respondent makes approximately 12 

such filings on an annual basis. Each 

response takes approximately 0.5 hours. 

In addition, respondents incur shipping 

costs of approximately $20 per 

submission. Currently, 24 respondents 

(24 national securities exchanges) are 

subject to the collection of information 

requirements of Rule 6a–3. The 

Commission estimates that the total 

burden for all respondents is 144 hours 

and $5,760 per year. 

Compliance with Rule 6a–3 is 

mandatory for registered and exempt 

exchanges. Information received in 

response to Rule 6a–3 shall not be kept 

confidential; the information collected 

is public information. As set forth in 

Rule 17a–1 (17 CFR 240.17a–1) under 

the Act, a national securities exchange 

is required to retain records of the 

collection of information for at least five 

years. 

An agency may not conduct or 

sponsor, and a person is not required to 

respond to, a collection of information 

under the PRA unless it displays a 

currently valid OMB control number. 

The public may view background 

documentation for this information 

collection at the following website: 

www.reginfo.gov. 

Find this particular information 

collection by selecting ‘‘Currently under 

30-day Review—Open for Public 

Comments’’ or by using the search 

function. Written comments and 

recommendations for the proposed 

information collection should be sent 

within 30 days of publication of this 

notice to (i) www.reginfo.gov/public/do/ 

PRAMain and (ii) David Bottom, 

Director/Chief Information Officer, 

Securities and Exchange Commission, 

c/o John Pezzullo, 100 F Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20549, or by sending an 

email to: PRA_Mailbox@sec.gov. 

Dated: March 30, 2022. 

J. Matthew DeLesDernier, 

Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2022–07060 Filed 4–1–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES