Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 9 / Wednesday, January 15, 2025 / Notices 3963 

• To join the Zoom meeting by 

telephone, please dial one of the 

following phone numbers: 

• +1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose) 

• +1 408 638 0968 US (San Jose) 

• +1 669 444 9171 US 

• +1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma) 

• +1 346 248 7799 US (Houston) 

• +1 719 359 4580 US 

• +1 253 205 0468 US 

• +1 386 347 5053 US 

• +1 507 473 4847 US 

• +1 564 217 2000 US 

• +1 646 876 9923 US (New York) 

• +1 646 931 3860 US 

• +1 689 278 1000 US 

• +1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC) 

• +1 305 224 1968 US 

• +1 309 205 3325 US 

• +1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago) 

• +1 360 209 5623 US 

Meeting ID: 813 1038 7219. 

Thursday, January 23, 2025 

• To join the Zoom meeting by 

computer, please use this link: https:// 

lsc-gov.zoom.us/j/85376875347?

pwd=9RWUAXgEMGIh5wbhV91nISN6

MLRsbY.1&from=addon. 

Meeting ID: 853 7687 5347. 

Passcode: 12325. 

• To join the Zoom meeting with one 

tap from your mobile phone, please 

dial: 

+14086380968,,85376875347# US (San 

Jose) 

+16694449171,,85376875347# US 

• To join the Zoom meeting by 

telephone, please dial one of the 

following phone numbers: 

• +1 408 638 0968 US (San Jose) 

• +1 669 444 9171 US 

• +1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose) 

• +1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma) 

• +1 346 248 7799 US (Houston) 

• +1 719 359 4580 US 

• +1 253 205 0468 US 

• +1 507 473 4847 US 

• +1 564 217 2000 US 

• +1 646 876 9923 US (New York) 

• +1 646 931 3860 US 

• +1 689 278 1000 US 

• +1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC) 

• +1 305 224 1968 US 

• +1 309 205 3325 US 

• +1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago) 

• +1 360 209 5623 US 

• +1 386 347 5053 US 

Meeting ID: 853 7687 5347. 

Once connected to Zoom, please 

immediately mute your computer or 

telephone. Members of the public are 

asked to keep their computers or 

telephones muted to eliminate 

background noise. To avoid disrupting 

the meetings, please refrain from 

placing the call on hold if doing so will 

trigger recorded music or other sound. 

From time to time, the Committee 

Chairs may solicit comments from the 

public. To participate in the meeting 

during public comment, use the ‘raise 

your hand’ or ‘chat’ functions in Zoom 

and wait to be recognized by the Chair 

before stating your questions and/or 

comments. 

STATUS: Parts of this meeting will be 

open to the public. The rest of the 

meeting will be closed to the public. 

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 

Meeting Schedule 

Tuesday, January 21, 2025 

Start Time: 2:00 p.m. ET. 

Operations and Regulations 

Committee. 

PORTIONS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC: Matters to 

be discussed in open session include 

approval of the Committee’s agenda; 

approval of the minutes of the 

Committee’s October 7, 2024, meeting; 

the Committee’s self-evaluation for 2024 

and goals for 2025; Management’s report 

on implementation of LSC’s 2021–2025 

strategic plan; and LSC’s engagement 

with the Client Leaders Council around 

LSC’s rules governing client grievance 

procedures and prohibition of 

discrimination on the basis of disability. 

Tuesday, January 21, 2025 

Start Time: 3:00 p.m. ET. 

Governance and Performance Review 

Committee. 

PORTIONS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC: Matters to 

be discussed in open session include 

approval of the Committee’s agenda; 

approval of the minutes of the 

Committee’s October 8, 2024, meeting; 

Management’s report on the 2024 

annual Board and committee selfevaluation process; the Committee’s 

self-evaluation for 2024 and goals for 

2025; proposed Board handbook; 

activities of the Office of Access to 

Justice, Department of Justice, and the 

White House Legal Aid Interagency 

Roundtable; Presidential transition and 

legislative outreach plans; LSC 

President’s self-evaluation; and the 2024 

activities of the Office of Inspector 

General. 

Thursday, January 23, 2025 

Start Time: 3:00 p.m. ET. 

Institutional Advancement Committee 

and Communications Subcommittee. 

PORTIONS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC: Matters to 

be discussed in open session include 

approval of the Committee’s agenda; 

approval of the minutes of the 

Subcommittee’s and Committee’s 

October 7, 2024, and October 15, 2024 

meetings, respectively; the 

Subcommittee’s and Committee’s selfevaluations for 2024 and goals for 2025; 

activities of the Leaders and Emerging 

Leaders Councils; development 

activities; the Civil Court Data Initiative; 

Veterans Task Force implementation 

activities; communications and social 

media update; and a preview of the 

dynamic strategic communication plan 

for 2025. 

PORTIONS CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC: Matters 

to be discussed in closed session 

include approval of the minutes of the 

Committee’s October 15, 2024, meeting; 

a confidential development report; and 

consideration of and action on 

nominations to the Leaders and 

Emerging Leaders Councils. 

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

Cheryl DuHart, Administrative 

Coordinator, at (202) 295–1621. 

Questions may also be sent by electronic 

mail to duhartc@lsc.gov. 

Non-Confidential Meeting Materials: 

Non-confidential meeting materials will 

be made available in electronic format at 

least 24 hours in advance of the meeting 

on the LSC website, at https://

www.lsc.gov/about-lsc/board-meetingmaterials. 

(Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552b). 

Dated: January 10, 2025. 

Stefanie Davis, 

Deputy General Counsel, Legal Services 

Corporation. 

[FR Doc. 2025–00944 Filed 1–13–25; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 7050–01–P 

OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND 

BUDGET 

Advancing the Domestic 

Manufacturing of Semiconductors in 

Commercial Information Technology 

AGENCY: Office of Management and 

Budget. 

ACTION: Request for information: 

Advancing the Domestic Manufacturing 

of Semiconductors in Commercial 

Information Technology. 

SUMMARY: This request for information 

(RFI) seeks input on ways the Federal 

Government can build the resilience of 

domestic semiconductor manufacturing 

and maintain this essential capability 

through the procurement of commercial 

IT end products that include 

semiconductors fabricated in the United 

States. Specific feedback is sought on 

potential procurement approaches to 

minimize supply chain disruption and 

increase fabrication of semiconductors 

in the United States. 

DATES: Responses to this request for 

information will be accepted for 

consideration until March 17, 2025. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
3964 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 9 / Wednesday, January 15, 2025 / Notices 

1https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/ 

uploads/2024/03/Strengthening-Domestic-Sourcingfor-Critical-Items.pdf. 

ADDRESSES: Responses must be 

submitted electronically through 

regulations.gov. Mailed paper 

submissions will not be accepted, and 

electronic submissions received after 

the deadline may not be considered. 

Instructions: Federal eRulemaking 

Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov 

search ‘‘Commercial IT Procurement 

RFI’’ to submit your comments 

electronically. Information on how to 

use Regulations.gov, including 

instructions for accessing agency 

documents, submitting comments, and 

viewing the docket, is available on the 

site under ‘‘FAQ’’ (https://

www.regulations.gov/faq). 

Privacy Act Statement: OMB is 

issuing this request for information 

(RFI) pursuant to its authorities under 

the Office of Federal Procurement 

Policy Act, 41 U.S.C. 1101 et seq., and 

consistent with Executive Order (E.O.) 

14005 and sec. 70933(1) of the 

Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act 

(IIJA), Public Law 117–58, which aim 

for every executive agency to maximize 

the use of goods, products, and 

materials produced in, and services 

offered in, the United States. Your 

response to this RFI and submission of 

comments is voluntary. OMB will use 

your feedback to inform sound decisionmaking on topics related to this RFI 

regarding potential government-wide 

actions to revitalize the domestic 

manufacturing base, create new 

opportunities for U.S. firms and 

workers, and position U.S. businesses to 

compete and lead globally in strategic 

industries. Please note that submissions 

received in response to this notice may 

be posted in the Federal eRulemaking 

Portal at www.regulations.gov or 

otherwise released in their entirety, 

including any personal and business 

confidential information provided. Do 

not include in your submissions any 

information of a confidential nature, 

such as personal or proprietary 

information, or any information you 

would not like to be made publicly 

available. The OMB Public Input 

System of Records, OMB/INPUT/01 at 

88 FR 20913 (https://

www.federalregister.gov/documents/ 

2023/04/07/2023-07452/privacy-act-of1974-system-of-records) includes a list 

of routine uses associated with the 

collection of this information. 

Comments containing references, 

studies, research, and other empirical 

data that are not widely published 

should include electronic links to the 

referenced materials, if they are 

available online. 

Please note that the U.S. Government 

will not pay for response preparation, or 

for the use of any information contained 

in the response. A response to this RFI 

will not be viewed as a binding 

commitment to develop or pursue the 

project or ideas discussed. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Please direct questions regarding this 

Notice to Eddie Garcia, Procurement 

Analyst (telephone: 202–881–7508) or 

email the Made in America Office at 

MadeInAmerica@omb.eop.gov with 

‘‘Commercial IT Procurement RFI’’ in 

the subject line. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

bipartisan CHIPS and Science Act of 

2022, Public Law 117–167, made 

historic investments in American 

semiconductor manufacturing to 

strengthen U.S. supply chains and help 

address vulnerabilities identified in the 

Information and Communications 

Technology (ICT) review of critical 

sectors conducted pursuant to E.O. 

14017, America’s Supply Chains. 

This RFI is part of a series of 

government-wide actions the 

Administration is taking to build an 

essential domestic manufacturing 

capability for semiconductors. This RFI 

complements related efforts to minimize 

risk to U.S. economic and national 

security, which includes potential 

rulemaking by the Federal Acquisition 

Regulatory Council to prohibit Federal 

agencies from procuring or obtaining 

semiconductors manufactured in certain 

countries. 

OMB’s Made in America Office 

(MIAO) and Office of Federal 

Procurement Policy (OFPP) seek to 

understand how the Federal acquisition 

system can best leverage domestic 

sources for semiconductors to ensure a 

safe and secure supply chain for U.S. 

government procured commercial IT 

products and services (hereafter referred 

to as ‘‘commercial IT’’). Market 

segments of interest include: 

—Telecommunication infrastructure 

and services 

—Cloud/data center infrastructure and 

services 

—ICT devices (e.g., mobile phones, 

laptops) 

—Transportation/vehicles 

MIAO and OFPP are especially 

interested in obtaining your views 

regarding the impact of using contract 

requirements for dual sourcing, 

potential agency reliance on the 

industrial mobilization exception to full 

and open competition, or other 

contracting methods to create and 

preserve this essential capability, 

mitigate the risk posed by undue 

dependence on foreign manufacturing 

and help reduce costs currently 

associated with domestic fabrication, 

assembly, test, and packaging (hereafter 

referred to as ‘‘manufacturing’’). 

Dual sourcing. Dual sourcing refers to 

the supply chain management practice 

of requiring contractors to utilize at least 

two suppliers to provide a specific 

component, material, or product for the 

purpose of helping to build alternative 

sources of supply and reducing supply 

chain disruption risks associated with 

relying on a single source. 

Industrial mobilization. Procurement 

law and regulations have long 

recognized exceptions to full and open 

competition for a period of time, 

including when an agency can 

demonstrate that an exception is 

necessary to award the contract to 

particular sources in order to (a) 

maintain a facility, producer, 

manufacturer, or other supplier 

available for furnishing supplies or 

services in case of a national emergency 

or to achieve industrial mobilization; or 

(b) establish or maintain an essential 

engineering, research, or development 

capability to be provided by an 

educational or other nonprofit 

institution or a Federally funded 

research and development center. 10 

U.S.C. 2304(c)(3), 41 U.S.C. 3304(a)(3); 

FAR 6.302–3. Limiting competition to 

domestic sources for a period of time to 

create or maintain the required domestic 

capability for production of critical 

supplies has long been identified in the 

FAR as a recognized application of the 

industrial mobilization exception to full 

and competition and can help to 

address the cost differences between 

domestic and foreign production by 

building the competitiveness of the 

domestic market over time. For 

additional information on industrial 

mobilization, see OFPP & MIAO, 

Strengthening Domestic Sourcing for 

Critical Items (Mar. 13, 2024).1

To understand the potential impact of 

these or other strategies, OMB seeks 

feedback on the following questions. 

OMB is especially interested in 

feedback as it pertains to data centers, 

telecom, and other IT infrastructure and 

services, mobile devices, laptops, 

servers, and workstations, as well as 

automobiles and other vehicles, but 

welcomes feedback on any commercial 

IT that uses semiconductors. 

For purposes of this RFI, the terms 

semiconductor and semiconductor 

manufacturing have the same meanings 

as set forth in National Institute of 

Standards and Technology regulations 

at 15 CFR 231.115 and 231.116. 

Examples of semiconductors include 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 9 / Wednesday, January 15, 2025 / Notices 3965 

memory chips, logic chips such as 

microprocessors and microcontrollers, 

complex systems-on-a-chip, and 

discrete, analog, and optoelectronic 

chips. The RFI encompasses in its scope 

leading-edge, current-generation, and 

mature-node semiconductors as defined 

in CHIPS Program Office Notice of 

Funding Opportunities for commercial 

fabrication facilities, Feb 28 2023]. For 

instance, leading-edge logic 

semiconductors are those requiring 

extreme ultraviolet (EUV) lithography 

tools for production (and equivalent 

performance spec for memory chips); 

current-generation semiconductors are 

those that are not leading-edge, up to 28 

nanometer process technologies, and 

include logic, analog, radio frequency, 

and mixed-signal devices; mature-node 

semiconductors include sensors, 

optoelectronics, discrete devices, and 

logic and analog chips not based on 

FinFET, post-FinFET, or any other sub28 nanometer transistor architectures. 

Questions 

1. If sufficient economic incentives 

existed, how quickly could you begin to 

use domestically manufactured 

semiconductors? In responding, please 

identify your market segment or 

segments (e.g., cloud services, cloud 

infrastructure, telecom services, telecom 

infrastructure, user devices, 

automobiles) and the type of chips you 

use most frequently. 

2. Once you have determined that 

there is sufficient domestic 

manufacturing of semiconductors, what 

factors, including economic incentives, 

would affect your willingness to take 

advantage of this supply? In responding, 

please identify your market segment. 

3. How much production is needed to 

constitute a sufficient domestic supply 

of semiconductors? In responding, 

please identify both your market 

segment and the any information 

regarding semiconductors that would be 

helpful to better understand your 

market segment needs. 

4. Last year, the Federal Government 

purchased approximately $10 billion on 

IT hardware, including approximately 

1.5 million mobile devices and 1.3 

million laptops, around $14 billion of 

cloud computing, including data 

centers, and $5.43 billion of telecom 

services. 

a. What steps might agencies take that 

could effectively incentivize you to use 

domestically manufactured 

semiconductors in meeting this demand 

(e.g., agency competitions limited to 

offerors who use only domestically 

manufactured semiconductors; 

requirements that awardees must use 

two different sources for 

semiconductors and at least one source 

must provide domestically 

manufactured semiconductors; agency 

forecasts published well in advance of 

solicitation that inform interested 

sources of these competitions)? Please 

identify your market segment. 

b. Would you be willing to compete 

for an IT data center contract or a 

telecom contract that requires the 

service provider to use equipment with 

domestically manufactured 

semiconductors in the performance of 

the required service? If not, why not? 

Would your answer change if the 

statement of work required offerors to 

agree to use at least two different 

sources for semiconductors? 

c. What opportunities or challenges 

do you see for your market segment if 

you were to use only domestically 

manufactured semiconductors? Are 

there steps that could make the 

requirement more manageable, such as 

with a phase-in (e.g., requiring a certain 

percentage of semi-conductors to be 

domestically manufactured)? 

d. Many state and local governments 

adopt Federal standards with respect to 

their own procurement regulations. 

Would your responses change to any of 

the above questions, if State and local 

governments adopted, through their 

own authorities, complementary 

actions? 

e. What percentage of your current 

offerings rely on domestically 

manufactured semiconductors? Please 

identify your market segment. 

f. Are there particular categories of 

semiconductors that would be easier to 

source domestically or ones that would 

be more difficult? 

g. Are there particular categories of 

semiconductors that would constitute a 

larger portion of your purchased 

components and would be better 

sourced domestically? 

5. How far in advance of 

manufacturing must a purchase order be 

secured from a semiconductor fabricator 

to support production, or infrastructure 

build-out? 

6. What, if any, significant domestic 

supply chain vulnerabilities 

surrounding semiconductors are you 

aware of and what could be done to 

reduce or eliminate those 

vulnerabilities? Are there other 

vulnerabilities of which we should be 

aware? 

7. To meet Federal sustainability 

purchasing requirements, should 

domestically-produced commercial IT 

products with domestic semiconductors 

include specifications, standards, or 

ecolabels recommended by the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

for Federal purchasing or be capable of 

meeting EPA’s Framework for the 

Assessment of Environmental 

Performance Standards and Ecolabels 

for Federal Purchasing for future 

inclusion? 

Questions for Domestic Manufacturers 

of Semiconductors 

8. What is the anticipated timeline for 

domestic production and anticipated 

capacity of various types of 

semiconductors, including but not 

limited to memory chips, logic chips 

such as microprocessors and 

microcontrollers, complex systems-on-achip, and discrete, analog, and 

optoelectronic chips? 

9. How much time do you need from 

the placement of an order from an IT 

hardware manufacturer to deliver the 

semiconductors? 

10. What is the anticipated timeline 

for domestic production and capacity of 

associated components, including, but 

not limited to, packaging of chips, 

mother boards, etc.? 

11. What raw materials used in 

semiconductor manufacturing are in 

limited or constrained supply and could 

prevent scale up of your domestic 

manufacturing operations? 

12. What manufacturing equipment 

do you use that are in limited or 

constrained supply and could prevent 

scale up of your domestic 

semiconductor manufacturing and 

operations? 

13. What, if any, factors (for example, 

workforce, permitting, access to high 

quality power/water, etc.) are causing 

significant delays in bringing domestic 

manufacturing facilities online? 

14. What types of innovations can 

help make the manufacturing market 

more efficient? 

Additional Questions for Interested 

Stakeholders 

15. What actions should the Federal 

Government take to enable strong small 

business participation by resellers 

offering commercial IT with 

domestically fabricated 

semiconductors? 

OMB intends to hold industry 

listening sessions in the coming months 

to discuss industry feedback. Listening 

sessions will be noticed through the 

Federal Register. 

Christine J. Harada, 

Senior Advisor, Office of Federal Procurement 

Policy, Performing, by delegation, the duties 

of the Administrator for Federal Procurement 

Policy. 

[FR Doc. 2025–00727 Filed 1–14–25; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1