52988 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 183 / Friday, September 24, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 100 

[Docket No. USCG–2021–0696] 

Regulated Area; San Francisco Bay 

Navy Fleet Week Parade of Ships and 

Blue Angels Demonstration, San 

Francisco, CA 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notification of enforcement of 

regulation. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce 

the limited access area in the navigable 

waters of the San Francisco Bay for the 

San Francisco Bay Navy Fleet Week 

Parade of Ships and Blue Angels 

Demonstration from October 8 through 

October 10, 2021. This action is 

necessary to ensure the safety of event 

participants and spectators. During the 

enforcement period, unauthorized 

persons or vessels are prohibited from 

entering into, transiting through, or 

anchoring in the regulated area, unless 

authorized by the Patrol Commander 

(PATCOM). 

DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 

100.1105 will be enforced from 12:30 

p.m. until 6 p.m. on October 7, 2021; 

from 9:30 a.m. until 5 p.m. on October 

8, 2021; and from 11:30 a.m. until 5 

p.m. daily on October 9, 2021, and 

October 10, 2021, as identified in the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

below. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions about this 

notification of enforcement, call or 

email Sector San Francisco Waterways 

Management, U.S. Coast Guard; 

telephone (415) 399–3585, email 

SFWaterways@uscg.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast 

Guard will enforce the limited access 

area for the annual San Francisco Bay 

Navy Fleet Week Parade of Ships and 

Blue Angels Demonstration in 33 CFR 

100.1105. 

The regulated area ‘‘Alpha’’ in 

§ 100.1105(b)(1) for the Navy Parade of 

Ships will be enforced from 9:30 a.m. 

until 12 p.m. on October 8, 2021.The 

regulated area ‘‘Bravo’’ in 

§ 100.1105(b)(2) for the U.S. Navy Blue 

Angels will be enforced from 12:30 p.m. 

until 6 p.m. on October 7, 2021, and 

11:30 p.m. until 5 p.m. daily from 

October 8, 2021 through October 10, 

2021. 

Regulated area ‘‘Alpha’’ will be 

enforced during the Navy Parade of 

Ships and is bounded by a line 

connecting the following points: 

Latitude Longitude 

37°48′40′′ N 122°28′38′′ W 

37°49′10′′ N 122°28′41′′ W 

37°49′31′′ N 122°25′18′′ W 

37°49′06′′ N 122°24′08′′ W 

37°47′53′′ N 122°22′42′′ W 

37°46′00′′ N 122°22′00′′ W 

37°46′00′′ N 122°23′07′′ W 

and thence along the shore to the point 

of beginning. 

Under the provisions of 33 CFR 

100.1105, except for persons or vessels 

authorized by the PATCOM, in 

regulated area ‘‘Alpha’’ no person or 

vessel may enter the parade route or 

remain within 500 yards of any Navy 

parade vessel. No person or vessel shall 

anchor, block, loiter in, or impede the 

through transit of ship parade 

participants or official patrol vessels in 

regulated area ‘‘Alpha.’’ 

Regulated area ‘‘Bravo’’ will be 

enforced during the Navy Blue Angels 

Demonstration and is bounded by a line 

connecting the following points: 

Latitude Longitude 

37°48′27.5′′ N 122°24′04′′ W 

37°49′31′′ N 122°24′18′′ W 

37°49′00′′ N 122°27′52′′ W 

37°48′19′′ N 122°27′40′′ W 

and thence along the pier heads and 

bulwarks to the point of beginning. 

Except for persons or vessels 

authorized by the PATCOM, no person 

or vessel may enter or remain within 

regulated area ‘‘Bravo.’’ 

When hailed or signaled by U.S. Coast 

Guard patrol personnel by siren, radio, 

flashing light, or other means, a person 

or vessel shall come to an immediate 

stop. Persons or vessels shall comply 

with all directions given; failure to do 

so may result in expulsion from the 

area, citation for failure to comply, or 

both. The Coast Guard may be assisted 

by other Federal, State, or local law 

enforcement agencies in enforcing this 

regulation. 

The PATCOM shall be designated by 

the Commander, Coast Guard Sector San 

Francisco, California. The PATCOM is 

empowered to forbid and control the 

movement of all vessels in the regulated 

areas. 

In addition to this notification of 

enforcement in the Federal Register, the 

Coast Guard plans to provide 

notification of this enforcement period 

via the Local Notice to Mariners. 

Dated: September 20, 2021. 

Taylor Q. Lam, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port, Sector San Francisco. 

[FR Doc. 2021–20750 Filed 9–23–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Patent and Trademark Office 

37 CFR Part 1 

[Docket No. PTO–P–2021–0038] 

RIN 0651–AD56 

2021 Increase of the Annual Limit on 

Accepted Requests for Track One 

Prioritized Examination 

AGENCY: United States Patent and 

Trademark Office, Department of 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Interim rule. 

SUMMARY: The Leahy-Smith America 

Invents Act (America Invents Act) 

includes provisions for prioritized 

examination of patent applications that 

have been implemented by the United 

States Patent and Trademark Office 

(USPTO or Office) in previous 

rulemakings. The America Invents Act 

provides that the Office may not accept 

more than 10,000 requests for 

prioritization in any fiscal year (October 

1 to September 30) until regulations 

setting another limit are prescribed. The 

Office published an interim rule in 2019 

expanding the availability of prioritized 

examination by increasing the limit on 

the number of prioritized examination 

requests that may be accepted in a fiscal 

year to 12,000. The current interim rule 

further expands the availability of 

prioritized examination by increasing 

the limit on the number of prioritized 

examination requests that may be 

accepted in a fiscal year to 15,000. 

DATES: 

Effective Date: September 24, 2021. 

Applicability Date: The limit of 

15,000 requests for prioritized 

examination accepted per year is 

applicable for fiscal year 2021. 

Comment Deadline Date: Written 

comments must be received on or before 

November 23, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: For reasons of Government 

efficiency, comments must be submitted 

through the Federal eRulemaking Portal 

at www.regulations.gov. To submit 

comments via the portal, enter docket 

number PTO–P–2021–0038 on the 

homepage and click ‘‘Search.’’ The site 

will provide a search results page listing 

all documents associated with this 

docket. Find a reference to this notice 

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 183 / Friday, September 24, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 52989 

and click on the ‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon, 

complete the required fields, and enter 

or attach your comments. Attachments 

to electronic comments will be accepted 

in ADOBE® portable document format 

or MICROSOFT WORD® format. 

Because comments will be made 

available for public inspection, 

information that the submitter does not 

desire to make public, such as an 

address or phone number, should not be 

included in the comments. 

Visit the Federal eRulemaking Portal 

website (www.regulations.gov) for 

additional instructions on providing 

comments via the portal. If electronic 

submission of comments is not feasible 

due to a lack of access to a computer 

and/or the internet, please contact the 

USPTO using the contact information 

below for special instructions. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kery 

Fries, Senior Legal Advisor, Office of 

Patent Legal Administration, at 571– 

272–7757; or Parikha Mehta, Legal 

Advisor, Office of Patent Legal 

Administration, at 571–272–3248. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Executive Summary: Purpose: This 

interim rule expands prioritized 

examination (Track One) practice to 

increase the number of applications that 

may be accepted for prioritized 

examination in a fiscal year to 15,000. 

Summary of Major Provisions: The 

prioritized examination provisions (37 

CFR 1.102(e)) currently provide that a 

request for prioritized examination may 

be filed with an original utility or plant 

nonprovisional application under 35 

U.S.C. 111(a). The America Invents Act 

provides that the Office may not accept 

more than 10,000 requests for 

prioritization in any fiscal year until 

regulations setting another limit are 

prescribed. The Office published an 

interim rule in 2019 expanding the 

availability of prioritized examination 

by increasing the limit on the number of 

prioritized examination requests that 

may be accepted in a fiscal year to 

12,000. The current interim rule further 

expands the availability of prioritized 

examination by increasing the limit on 

the number of prioritized examination 

requests that may be accepted in a fiscal 

year to 15,000. 

Background: Section 11(h) of the 

America Invents Act provides for 

prioritized examination of an 

application. See Public Law 112–29, 125 

Stat. 284, 324 (2011). Section 

11(h)(1)(B)(i) of the America Invents Act 

also provides that the Office may, by 

regulation, prescribe conditions for the 

acceptance of a request for prioritized 

examination, and section 11(h)(1)(B)(iii) 

provides that ‘‘[t]he Director may not 

accept in any fiscal year more than 

10,000 requests for prioritization until 

regulations are prescribed under this 

subparagraph setting another limit.’’ Id. 

The Office implemented the 

prioritized examination provision of the 

America Invents Act for applications on 

filing in a final rule published on 

September 23, 2011. See Changes to 

Implement the Prioritized Examination 

Track (Track I) of the Enhanced 

Examination Timing Control Procedures 

Under the Leahy-Smith America Invents 

Act, 76 FR 59050 (Sept. 23, 2011) 

(codified in 37 CFR 1.102(e)). Following 

its implementation, the Office improved 

its processes for carrying out prioritized 

examination and expanded the scope of 

prioritized examination in view of those 

improvements. First, the Office 

implemented prioritized examination 

for pending applications after the filing 

of a proper request for continued 

examination under 35 U.S.C. 132(b) and 

37 CFR 1.114. See Changes to 

Implement the Prioritized Examination 

for Requests for Continued Examination, 

76 FR 78566 (Dec. 19, 2011). Next, the 

prioritized examination procedures 

further expanded to permit the delayed 

submission of certain filing 

requirements while maintaining the 

Office’s ability to timely examine the 

patent application. See Changes to 

Permit Delayed Submission of Certain 

Requirements for Prioritized 

Examination, 79 FR 12386 (Mar. 5, 

2014). 

The number of requests for prioritized 

examination has been increasing 

steadily over the years. The Office 

published an interim rule in 2019 

expanding the availability of prioritized 

examination by increasing the limit on 

the number of prioritized examination 

requests that may be accepted in a fiscal 

year from 10,000 to 12,000. See Increase 

of the Annual Limit on Accepted 

Requests for Track I Prioritized 

Examination, 84 FR 45907 (Sept. 3, 

2019). The current interim rule further 

expands the availability of prioritized 

examination by increasing the limit on 

the number of prioritized examination 

requests that may be accepted in a fiscal 

year to 15,000. Through continued 

monitoring of the implementation of the 

Track One program, the Office has 

determined that the program may be 

further expanded to permit more 

applications to undergo prioritized 

examination while maintaining the 

ability to timely examine all prioritized 

applications. Quality metrics used by 

the Office continue to reveal no loss in 

examination quality for applications 

given prioritized examination. In 

addition, the number of applications 

accepted for prioritized examination 

will remain a small fraction of the 

patent examinations completed in a 

fiscal year (the Office examines 

approximately 640,000 applications and 

requests for continued examination in 

total per fiscal year). Accordingly, the 

Office is further expanding the 

availability of prioritized examination 

by increasing the limit on the number of 

prioritized examination requests that 

may be accepted in a fiscal year to 

15,000, beginning in fiscal year 2021 

(October 1, 2020, through September 30, 

2021) and continuing every fiscal year 

thereafter until further notice. 

Discussion of Specific Rules 

The following is a discussion of the 

amendments to 37 CFR part 1. 

Section 1.102: Section 1.102(e) is 

revised to increase the limit on the total 

number of requests for prioritized 

examination that may be accepted 

(granted) in any fiscal year from 12,000 

to 15,000. 

Rulemaking Considerations 

A. Administrative Procedure Act: This 

interim rule revises the procedures that 

apply to applications for which an 

applicant has requested Track One 

prioritized examination. The changes in 

this interim rule do not change the 

substantive criteria of patentability. 

Therefore, the changes in this 

rulemaking involve rules of agency 

practice and procedure, and/or 

interpretive rules. See JEM Broad. Co. v. 

F.C.C., 22 F.3d 320, 326 (D.C. Cir. 1994) 

(‘‘[T]he ‘critical feature’ of the 

procedural exception [in 5 U.S.C. 

553(b)(A)] ‘is that it covers agency 

actions that do not themselves alter the 

rights or interests of parties, although 

[they] may alter the manner in which 

the parties present themselves or their 

viewpoints to the agency.’’’ (quoting 

Batterton v. Marshall, 648 F.2d 694, 707 

(D.C. Cir. 1980))); see also Bachow 

Commc’ns Inc. v. F.C.C., 237 F.3d 683, 

690 (D.C. Cir. 2001) (rules governing an 

application process are procedural 

under the Administrative Procedure 

Act); Inova Alexandria Hosp. v. Shalala, 

244 F.3d 342, 350 (4th Cir. 2001) (rules 

for handling appeals were procedural 

where they did not change the 

substantive standard for reviewing 

claims). Accordingly, prior notice and 

opportunity for public comment are not 

required pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b) or 

(c) (or any other law). See Cooper Techs. 

Co. v. Dudas, 536 F.3d 1330, 1336–37 

(Fed. Cir. 2008) (stating that 5 U.S.C. 

553, and thus 35 U.S.C. 2(b)(2)(B), do 

not require notice and comment 

rulemaking for ‘‘interpretative rules, 

general statements of policy, or rules of 

agency organization, procedure, or 

52990 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 183 / Friday, September 24, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 

practice’’ (quoting 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A)). 

In addition, the changes in this interim 

rule may be made immediately effective 

because this interim rule is not a 

substantive rule under 35 U.S.C. 553(d). 

Moreover, the Office, pursuant to 

authority at 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), finds 

good cause to adopt the changes in this 

interim rule without prior notice and an 

opportunity for public comment, as 

such procedures would be contrary to 

the public interest. Delay in the 

promulgation of this interim rule to 

provide prior notice and comment 

procedures would cause harm to those 

applicants who desire to file a request 

for Track One prioritized examination 

with a new application or request for 

continued examination. Immediate 

implementation of the changes in this 

interim rule is in the public interest 

because: (1) The public does not need 

time to conform its conduct, as the 

changes in this interim rule do not add 

any additional requirement for 

requesting prioritized examination of an 

application; and (2) those applicants 

who would otherwise be ineligible for 

prioritized examination will benefit 

from the immediate implementation of 

the changes in this interim rule. See 

Nat’l Customs Brokers & Forwarders 

Ass’n of Am., Inc. v. United States, 59 

F.3d 1219, 1223–24 (Fed. Cir. 1995). In 

addition, pursuant to authority at 5 

U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Office finds good 

cause to adopt the changes in this 

interim rule without the 30-day delay in 

effectiveness as such delay would be 

contrary to the public interest. 

Immediate implementation of the 

changes in this interim rule is in the 

public interest because: (1) The public 

does not need time to conform its 

conduct, as the changes in this interim 

rule do not add any additional 

requirement for requesting prioritized 

examination of an application; and (2) 

those applicants who would otherwise 

be ineligible for prioritized examination 

will benefit from the immediate 

implementation of the changes in this 

interim rule. 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act: As prior 

notice and an opportunity for public 

comment are not required pursuant to 5 

U.S.C. 553 or any other law, neither a 

regulatory flexibility analysis nor a 

certification under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) is 

required. See 5 U.S.C. 603. 

C. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory 

Planning and Review): This rulemaking 

has been determined to be not 

significant for purposes of Executive 

Order 12866 (Sept. 30, 1993). 

D. Executive Order 13563 (Improving 

Regulation and Regulatory Review): The 

Office has complied with Executive 

Order 13563 (Jan. 18, 2011). 

Specifically, the Office has, to the extent 

feasible and applicable: (1) Made a 

reasoned determination that the benefits 

justify the costs of the rule; (2) tailored 

the rule to impose the least burden on 

society consistent with obtaining the 

regulatory objectives; (3) selected a 

regulatory approach that maximizes net 

benefits; (4) specified performance 

objectives; (5) identified and assessed 

available alternatives; (6) involved the 

public in an open exchange of 

information and perspectives among 

experts in relevant disciplines, affected 

stakeholders in the private sector, and 

the public as a whole, and provided 

online access to the rulemaking docket; 

(7) attempted to promote coordination, 

simplification, and harmonization 

across Government agencies and 

identified goals designed to promote 

innovation; (8) considered approaches 

that reduce burdens and maintain 

flexibility and freedom of choice for the 

public; and (9) ensured the objectivity of 

scientific and technological information 

and processes. 

E. Executive Order 13132 

(Federalism): This rulemaking does not 

contain policies with federalism 

implications sufficient to warrant 

preparation of a Federalism Assessment 

under Executive Order 13132 (Aug. 4, 

1999). 

F. Executive Order 13175 (Tribal 

Consultation): This rulemaking will not: 

(1) Have substantial direct effects on one 

or more Indian tribes, (2) impose 

substantial direct compliance costs on 

Indian tribal governments, or (3) 

preempt tribal law. Therefore, a tribal 

summary impact statement is not 

required under Executive Order 13175 

(Nov. 6, 2000). 

G. Executive Order 13211 (Energy 

Effects): This rulemaking is not a 

significant energy action under 

Executive Order 13211 because this 

rulemaking is not likely to have a 

significant adverse effect on the supply, 

distribution, or use of energy. Therefore, 

a Statement of Energy Effects is not 

required under Executive Order 13211 

(May 18, 2001). 

H. Executive Order 12988 (Civil 

Justice Reform): This rulemaking meets 

applicable standards to minimize 

litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and 

reduce burden as set forth in sections 

3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 

12988 (Feb. 5, 1996). 

I. Executive Order 13045 (Protection 

of Children): This rulemaking does not 

concern an environmental risk to health 

or safety that may disproportionately 

affect children under Executive Order 

13045 (Apr. 21, 1997). 

J. Executive Order 12630 (Taking of 

Private Property): This rulemaking will 

not effect a taking of private property or 

otherwise have taking implications 

under Executive Order 12630 (Mar. 15, 

1988). 

K. Congressional Review Act: Under 

the Congressional Review Act 

provisions of the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 

1996 (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), prior to 

issuing any final rule, the USPTO will 

submit a report containing the final rule 

and other required information to the 

United States Senate, the United States 

House of Representatives, and the 

Comptroller General of the Government 

Accountability Office. The changes in 

this rulemaking are not expected to 

result in an annual effect on the 

economy of $100 million or more; a 

major increase in costs or prices; or 

significant adverse effects on 

competition, employment, investment, 

productivity, innovation, or the ability 

of United States-based enterprises to 

compete with foreign-based enterprises 

in domestic and export markets. 

Therefore, this rulemaking is not 

expected to result in a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined in 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

L. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995: The changes set forth in this 

rulemaking do not involve a Federal 

intergovernmental mandate that will 

result in the expenditure by State, local, 

and tribal governments, in the aggregate, 

of $100 million (as adjusted) or more in 

any one year, or a Federal private sector 

mandate that will result in the 

expenditure by the private sector of 

$100 million (as adjusted) or more in 

any one year, and will not significantly 

or uniquely affect small governments. 

Therefore, no actions are necessary 

under the provisions of the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995. See 2 

U.S.C. 1501 et seq. 

M. National Environmental Policy Act 

of 1969: This rulemaking will not have 

any effect on the quality of the 

environment and is thus categorically 

excluded from review under the 

National Environmental Policy Act of 

1969. See 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. 

N. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995: The 

requirements of section 12(d) of the 

National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 

272 note) are not applicable because this 

rulemaking does not contain provisions 

that involve the use of technical 

standards. 

O. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995: 

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) requires that the 

Office consider the impact of paperwork 

and other information collection 

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 183 / Friday, September 24, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 52991 

burdens imposed on the public. This 

interim rule does not involve 

information collection requirements that 

are subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) under 

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 3501–3549). An applicant 

who wishes to participate in the 

prioritized examination program must 

submit a certification and request to 

participate in the program, preferably by 

using Form PTO/AIA/424. However, 

OMB has determined that, under 5 CFR 

1320.3(h), Form PTO/AIA/424 does not 

collect ‘‘information’’ within the 

meaning of the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995. Therefore, this rulemaking 

does not impose any additional 

collection requirements under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act that are 

subject to further review by OMB. 

P. E-Government Act Compliance: 

The USPTO is committed to compliance 

with the E-Government Act to promote 

the use of the internet and other 

information technologies, to provide 

increased opportunities for citizen 

access to Government information and 

services, and for other purposes. 

List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 1 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Biologics, Courts, Freedom 

of information, Inventions and patents, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Small businesses. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 37 CFR part 1 is amended as 

follows: 

PART 1—RULES OF PRACTICE IN 

PATENT CASES 

■ 1. The authority citation for 37 CFR 

part 1 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 35 U.S.C. 2(b)(2), unless 

otherwise noted. 

■ 2. Section 1.102 is amended by 

revising paragraph (e) introductory text 

to read as follows: 

§ 1.102 Advancement of examination. 

* * * * * 

(e) A request for prioritized 

examination under this paragraph (e) 

must comply with the requirements of 

this paragraph (e) and be accompanied 

by the prioritized examination fee set 

forth in § 1.17(c), the processing fee set 

forth in § 1.17(i), and if not already paid, 

the publication fee set forth in § 1.18(d). 

An application for which prioritized 

examination has been requested may 

not contain or be amended to contain 

more than four independent claims, 

more than thirty total claims, or any 

multiple dependent claim. Prioritized 

examination under this paragraph (e) 

will not be accorded to international 

applications that have not entered the 

national stage under 35 U.S.C. 371, 

design applications, reissue 

applications, provisional applications, 

or reexamination proceedings. A request 

for prioritized examination must also 

comply with the requirements of 

paragraph (e)(1) or (2) of this section. No 

more than 15,000 requests for such 

prioritized examination will be accepted 

in any fiscal year. 

* * * * * 

Andrew Hirshfeld, 

Commissioner for Patents, Performing the 

Functions and Duties of the Under Secretary 

of Commerce for Intellectual Property and 

Director of the United States Patent and 

Trademark Office. 

[FR Doc. 2021–20530 Filed 9–23–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–16–P 

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS 

AFFAIRS 

38 CFR Parts 38 and 39 

RIN 2900–AR09 

Nomenclature Change for Position 

Title 

AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs. 

ACTION: Correcting amendments. 

SUMMARY: On September 15, 2021, the 

Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) 

published in the Federal Register a final 

rule that amended regulations to revise 

the title of the ‘‘Director, Loan Guaranty 

Service’’ to ‘‘Executive Director, Loan 

Guaranty Service’’ to reflect 

organizational changes. This correction 

addresses minor technical errors in the 

published final rule. 

DATES: These correcting amendments 

are effective September 24, 2021 and 

applicable on or after September 15, 

2021. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stephanie Li, Chief of Regulations, Loan 

Guaranty Service (26), Veterans Benefits 

Administration, Department of Veterans 

Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue NW, 

Washington, DC 20420, (202) 632–8862 

(this is not a toll-free telephone 

number). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: VA is 

amending its final rule 2900–AR09, 

Nomenclature Change for Position Title 

to fix technical errors published on 

September 15, 2021, in the Federal 

Register at 86 FR 51274. Specifically, in 

updating the position title of ‘‘Director, 

Loan Guaranty Service’’ to ‘‘Executive 

Director, Loan Guaranty Service’’, 

references to ‘‘Deputy Director, Loan 

Guaranty Service’’ and ‘‘Assistant 

Director, Loan Guaranty Service’’ were 

inadvertently updated as well. 

Therefore, VA is issuing these 

amendments to correct these errors. 

List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 36 

Condominiums, Housing, Individuals 

with disabilities, Loan programs— 

housing and community development, 

Loan programs—Indians, Loan 

programs—veterans, Manufactured 

homes, Mortgage insurance, Veterans. 

Jeffrey M. Martin, 

Assistant Director, Office of Regulation Policy 

& Management, Office of the Secretary, 

Department of Veterans Affairs. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, the VA amends 38 CFR part 

36 as follows: 

PART 38—PENSIONS, BONUSES, AND 

VETERAN’S RELIEF 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 36 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501 and 3720. 

§ 36.4345 [Amended] 

■ 2. Amend § 36.4345 by: 

■ a. In paragraph (b)(1)(v), removing the 

words ‘‘Deputy Executive Director’’ and 

adding in their place the words ‘‘Deputy 

Director’’; and 

■ b. In paragraph (b)(1)(vi), removing 

the words ‘‘Assistant Executive 

Director’’ and adding in their place the 

words ‘‘Assistant Director’’. 

§ 36.4409 [Amended] 

■ 3. Amend § 36.4409, in paragraph 

(a)(3), by removing the words ‘‘Deputy 

Executive Director’’ and adding in their 

place the words ‘‘Deputy Director’’. 

§ 36.4412 [Amended] 

■ 4. Amend § 36.4412, in paragraph 

(i)(1)(iii), by removing the words 

‘‘Deputy Executive Director’’ and 

adding, in their place, the words 

‘‘Deputy Director’’. 

[FR Doc. 2021–20735 Filed 9–23–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8320–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2021–0215; FRL–8696–02– 

R6] 

Air Plan Approval; Louisiana; Regional 

Haze Five-Year Progress Report State 

Implementation Plan 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule.