38158 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 122 / Monday, June 27, 2022 / Notices 

6Statement of the Commission on Use of Prior 

Approval Provisions in Merger Orders (Oct. 25, 

2021), https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/ 

public_statements/1597894/ 

p859900priorapprovalstatement.pdf (hereinafter 

‘‘Prior Approval Policy’’). But see Dissenting 

Statement of Commissioners Christine S. Wilson 

and Noah Joshua Phillips Regarding the Statement 

of the Commission on Use of Prior Approval 

Provisions in Merger Orders (Oct. 29, 2021), https:// 

www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/public_

statements/1598095/wilson_phillips_prior_

approval_dissentingstatement102921.pdf. 

7Prior Approval Policy, p. 2. 

8See Press Release, FTC Requires Veterinary 

Service Providers Compassion First and National 

Veterinary Associates to Divest Assets in Three 

Local Markets (Feb. 14, 2020), https://www.ftc.gov/ 

news-events/news/press-releases/2020/02/ftcrequires-veterinary-service-providers-compassionfirst-national-veterinary-associates-divest (The FTC 

required divestiture of 3 out of over 70 clinics 

operated by the parties). 

9See e.g., The FTC’s Merger Remedies 2006–2012: 

A Report of the Bureaus of Competition and 

Economics (Jan. 2017), https://www.ftc.gov/system/ 

files/documents/reports/ftcs-merger-remedies-2006- 

2012-report-bureaus-competition-economics/ 

p143100_ftc_merger_remedies_2006-2012.pdf. 

10 Decision, In re DaVita Inc./Total Rental Care, 

Inc., File No. 2110013 (Oct. 25, 2021) https://

www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/cases/davita_

order_9_24_final.pdf (DaVita was subject to a 

statewide prior provision, requiring prior approval 

from the Commission before acquiring any new 

ownership interest in a dialysis clinic in Utah.). 

ones affected by the merger.6 Most of the 

bases for imposing out-of-market 

remedies are not met here—for example, 

if ‘‘the relevant market alleged is 

already concentrated or has seen 

significant consolidation in the previous 

ten years’’ (emphasis added).7 The 

Complaint does not allege that the three 

relevant geographic markets here have 

seen significant consolidation. 

The Chair also justifies the broad 

prior approval provision because JAB 

previously acquired clinics and entered 

into a related consent order. In that 

prior matter, JAB approached the 

Commission with a proposed 

acquisition and worked with it to 

resolve competitive overlaps, small 

parts of a much larger transaction.8 That 

process enabled the FTC to ensure that 

overlapping assets were divested to an 

acceptable buyer, which is critical to 

maintaining competition.9 The effect of 

imposing broader prior approval 

requirements because of such 

settlements will be to deter not mergers, 

but settlements. It will deter parties 

from submitting for agency review the 

complete set of assets subject to the 

deal, instead ‘‘fixing it first’’: selling 

what they want to whom they want. The 

Commission has traditionally eschewed 

this approach because it reduces our 

ability to ensure the robustness of the 

divestiture and the quality of the buyer 

and because, without a consent order, 

there is no accountability should parties 

fail to meet their obligations. Fix-it-first 

transactions remove Commission 

oversight and increase the likelihood 

that competition will not be preserved 

and that consumers will be harmed. 

As we warned when the Commission 

(actually, two sitting Commissioners 

and a zombie vote) issued the illadvised Prior Approval Policy, the 

broad and subjective factors enunciated 

in that policy lack limiting principles 

and are almost certain to lead to the 

routine imposition of prior approval 

provisions on geographic and product 

markets beyond those at issue in any 

given merger. We acknowledge that 

there are cases where the evidence 

supports the imposition of these more 

onerous remedies.10 This does not 

appear to be one of those cases. 

We encourage comments during the 

public comment period regarding the 

statewide prior approval and 

nationwide prior notice provisions that 

appear in today’s consent order. In 

addition, we encourage comments on 

the implications of the agency’s 

apparent shift to an approach that 

incentivizes fix-it-firsts. 

[FR Doc. 2022–13584 Filed 6–24–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6750–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Administration for Children and 

Families 

Submission for OMB Review; Family 

Reunification Packet for Sponsors of 

Unaccompanied Children (OMB #0970– 

0278) 

AGENCY: Office of Refugee Resettlement, 

Administration for Children and 

Families, HHS. 

ACTION: Request for public comment. 

SUMMARY: The Office of Refugee 

Resettlement (ORR), Administration for 

Children and Families (ACF), U.S. 

Department of Health and Human 

Services (HHS), is inviting public 

comments on revisions to an approved 

information collection. The request 

consists of several forms that allow the 

Unaccompanied Children (UC) Program 

to assess the suitability of potential 

sponsors for UC. 

DATES: Comments due within 30 days of 

publication. OMB must make a decision 

about the collection of information 

between 30 and 60 days after 

publication of this document in the 

Federal Register. Therefore, a comment 

is best assured of having its full effect 

if OMB receives it within 30 days of 

publication. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments and 

recommendations for the proposed 

information collection should be sent 

within 30 days of publication of this 

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

PRAMain. Find this particular 

information collection by selecting 

‘‘Currently under 30-day Review—Open 

for Public Comments’’ or by using the 

search function. You can also obtain 

copies of the proposed collection of 

information by emailing infocollection@

acf.hhs.gov. Identify all emailed 

requests by the title of the information 

collection. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Description: ORR proposes the 

following revisions to this information 

collection: 

For all forms, ORR replaced the term 

‘‘minor’’ with ‘‘child.’’ 

• Authorization for Release of 

Information— 

Æ ORR replaced the term ‘‘minor’’ 

with ‘‘child.’’ 

Æ ORR removed the Alien 

Registration Number field, since it is not 

required for background checks. 

Æ ORR removed reference to ‘‘past 

and present immigration status,’’ since 

that information will no longer be 

collected in the Family Reunification 

application. 

• Family Reunification Application— 

Æ ORR replaced the term ‘‘minor’’ 

with ‘‘child.’’ 

Æ Proof of Identity—ORR added 

clarification that individuals under the 

age of 21 may use the ORR Verification 

of Release form with a photograph to 

meet this requirement. 

Æ Proof of Immigration Status or U.S. 

Citizenship—ORR removed the 

requirement that potential sponsors 

provide documentation verifying their 

immigration status or U.S. citizenship. 

ORR no longer uses this information as 

a criterion to determine when a sponsor 

care plan is required; therefore, it is no 

longer necessary to collect this 

information. 

Æ Proof of Address—ORR also 

removed the phrase ‘‘dated within the 

last two months’’ that appears after the 

current lease line item, because it is not 

applicable to that acceptable form of 

documentation. 

Æ Burden Estimate—ORR increased 

the average burden hours per response 

from 0.75 hours to a more accurate 

estimate of 1.0 hour. 

• Letter of Designation for Care of a 

Minor— 

Æ ORR replaced the term ‘‘minor’’ 

with ‘‘child.’’ 

Æ ORR also increased the average 

burden hours per response from 0.5 

hours to a more accurate estimate of 

0.75 hours. 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 122 / Monday, June 27, 2022 / Notices 38159 

Respondents: Potential sponsors of 

UC. 

Annual Burden Estimates: 

RESPONDENTS

Instrument title 

Annual total 

number of 

respondents 

Annual total 

number of 

responses per 

respondent 

Average 

burden hours 

per response 

Annual total 

burden hours 

Authorization for Release of Information (Forms FRP–2 & FRP–2s) ............. 81,532 1 0.50 40,766 

Family Reunification Application (Forms FRP–3 & FRP–3s) .......................... 122,950 1 1.00 122,950 

Fingerprinting Instructions (Forms FRP–7 & FRP–7s) .................................... 81,532 1 1.25 101,915 

Letter of Designation for Care of Minor (Forms FRP–9 & FRP–9s) ............... 41,181 1 0.75 30,886 

Estimated Annual Burden Total ............................................................... ........................ ........................ ........................ 296,517 

RECORD KEEPERS

Instrument title 

Annual total 

number of 

record keepers 

Annual total 

number of 

responses per 

record keeper 

Average 

burden hours 

per response 

Annual total 

burden hours 

Authorization for Release of Information (Forms FRP–2 & FRP–2s) ............. 235 347 0.25 20,386 

Family Reunification Application (Forms FRP–3 & FRP–3s) .......................... 235 523 0.25 30,726 

Fingerprinting Instructions (Forms FRP–7 & FRP–7s) .................................... 235 347 1.00 81,545 

Letter of Designation for Care of Minor (Forms FRP–9 & FRP–9s) ............... 235 175 0.25 10,281 

Estimated Annual Burden Hours Total ..................................................... ........................ ........................ ........................ 142,938 

Authority: 6 U.S.C. 279; 8 U.S.C. 

1232; Flores v. Reno Settlement 

Agreement, No. CV85–4544–RJK (C.D. 

Cal. 1996). 

Mary B. Jones, 

ACF/OPRE Certifying Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2022–13631 Filed 6–24–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4184–45–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Administration for Children and 

Families 

Submission for OMB Review; 

Recordkeeping for New Vaccine and 

Mask Requirements To Mitigate the 

Spread of COVID–19 in Head Start 

(OMB #0970–0583) 

AGENCY: Office of Head Start, 

Administration for Children and 

Families, HHS. 

ACTION: Request for public comment. 

SUMMARY: The Office of Head Start 

(OHS), Administration for Children and 

Families (ACF), U.S. Department of 

Health and Human Services (HHS) 

requests public comment on an 

extension with no changes to 

recordkeeping requirements for ACF 

Head Start grantees. An Interim Final 

Rule with Comment Period (IFC) was 

published on November 30, 2021 that 

established the COVID–19 vaccination 

requirements whereby all Head Start 

staff, certain contractors, and volunteers 

must be vaccinated for COVID–19 by 

January 31, 2022. OHS requested and 

received emergency approval from the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) to implement the associated 

recordkeeping requirements for 6 

months. This request will extend 

approval beyond the current expiration 

date (6/30/2022). ACF is currently in the 

final rulemaking process. If the 

requirements in the final rule differ 

from the IFC in a way that alters 

recordkeeping requirements, ACF will 

make those changes in coordination 

with OMB. 

DATES: Comments due within 30 days of 

publication. OMB is required to make a 

decision concerning the collection of 

information between 30 and 60 days 

after publication of this document in the 

Federal Register. Therefore, a comment 

is best assured of having its full effect 

if OMB receives it within 30 days of 

publication. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments and 

recommendations for the proposed 

information collection should be sent 

within 30 days of publication of this 

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

PRAMain. Find this particular 

information collection by selecting 

‘‘Currently under 30-day Review—Open 

for Public Comments’’ or by using the 

search function. You can also obtain 

copies of the proposed collection of 

information by emailing infocollection@

acf.hhs.gov. Identify all emailed 

requests by the title of the information 

collection. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Description: This request is for 

recipients of Head Start funding to 

continue to (1) collect and maintain 

records on the vaccination status of staff 

(including certain contractors) and 

volunteers in Head Start and Early Head 

Start programs and (2) develop and 

maintain a written COVID–19 testing 

protocol for individuals granted vaccine 

exemptions that was established 

through the IFC (86 FR 68052). There is 

no standard instrument required to be 

used to meet these recordkeeping 

requirements. Burden estimates have 

been updated to reflect more recent data 

available. 

Respondents: Recipients of Head Start 

funding. 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1