30496 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 108 / Tuesday, June 8, 2021 / Notices 

821, 831 (1985) (‘‘This Court has 

recognized on several occasions over 

many years that an agency’s decision 

not to prosecute or enforce, whether 

through civil or criminal process, is a 

decision generally committed to an 

agency’s absolute discretion.’’). Instead, 

agencies exercise their investigative and 

prosecutorial discretion based on 

matters such as enforcement priorities 

and the availability of resources. See, 

e.g., id. at 831–32. 

Further, Petitioner has had, and 

continues to have, the option of 

submitting an application for a new 

DEA registration. The Agency’s 

decisions make clear that an applicant’s 

past actions that violate the law need 

not result in her being denied a DEA 

registration indefinitely. See, e.g., 

Michele L. Martinho, M.D., 86 FR 24012 

(2021). 

Regarding her allegation that the 

sanction I assessed in my April 12, 2021 

Decision/Order is ‘‘excessive, unjust, 

and disproportionate to her actions,’’ 

Petitioner neither submitted evidence 

for the record during the hearing on the 

OSC nor now submits evidence that 

substantiates it. My April 21, 2021 

Decision/Order, however, explains how 

violations that I found Petitioner had 

committed go to the heart of the CSA 

and its implementing regulations, and 

rejects her arguments that minimize 

applicable legal requirements. See, e.g., 

86 FR at 19024. Accordingly, I do not 

find persuasive Petitioner’s arguments 

that there is a substantial likelihood that 

she will prevail on the merits upon 

appellate review, and I reject them. 

Petitioner’s irreparable injury 

arguments are predictions that she does 

not tether to existing or new record 

evidence. For example, as already 

discussed, Petitioner provides an 

address for herself in Las Vegas, Nevada 

in the pro se review petition she 

recently filed in the District of Columbia 

Circuit. Supra n.1. There is no record 

evidence, and she submitted no new 

evidence along with this or her Review 

Petition filing, that Petitioner is 

registered in Nevada or even that she is 

licensed to practice medicine in 

Nevada. Petitioner’s irreparable injury 

arguments related to any future loss by 

her of earned income, therefore, are 

without a sufficient basis in record 

evidence. Accordingly, I reject them. 

Further, Petitioner’s loss of earned 

income claims are of a generic nature 

that any practitioner whose registration 

had been revoked or suspended could 

make. Even if Petitioner had submitted 

record evidence substantiating these 

predictions, the CSA does not direct me 

to consider her loss of earned income or 

potential loss of earned income. 

Accordingly, I do not accept Petitioner’s 

irreparable injury arguments. 

Nken makes clear that the ‘‘first two 

factors of the traditional standard are 

the most critical.’’ 556 U.S. at 434. It 

also explains that, if the applicant 

satisfies the first two factors, ‘‘the 

traditional stay inquiry calls for 

assessing the harm to the opposing party 

and weighing the public interest.’’ Id. at 

435. Here, Petitioner has not satisfied 

either of the first two factors. Supreme 

Court case law makes clear that I need 

not address Petitioner’s arguments 

regarding the third and fourth stay 

factors. Id. For the sake of having a 

complete record, however, I shall do so. 

Assuming, arguendo, the accuracy of 

Petitioner’s arguments that she has 

never been accused of harming a person, 

and of her suggestion that the third 

factor addresses such harm, I find that 

the legal violations I sustained in my 

April 12, 2021 Decision/Order do not 

include harm to a person among their 

elements. Accordingly, I find 

Petitioner’s third factor arguments to be 

irrelevant, and I reject them. 

Fourth, even if the record evidence 

substantiates Petitioner’s public interest 

claims, which it does not, the Agency 

has rejected community impact 

arguments. See, e.g., Perry County Food 

& Drug, 80 FR 70084 (2015). 

Accordingly, I reject Petitioner’s public 

interest arguments. 

Having determined that Petitioner has 

not met her burden of showing that the 

circumstances justify an exercise of my 

discretion to stay enforcement of the 

sanction I ordered on April 12, 2021, 

pending appellate review, I deny her 

Motion to Stay. 

It is so ordered. 

Dated: May 11, 2021. 

D. Christopher Evans, 

Acting Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2021–11982 Filed 6–7–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–09–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

[OMB Number 1103–0102] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Proposed eCollection 

eComments Requested; Community 

Oriented Policing Services (COPS) 

Progress Report 

AGENCY: Community Oriented Policing 

Services, Department of Justice. 

ACTION: 60-Day notice. 

SUMMARY: The Office of Community 

Oriented Policing Services (COPS), 

Department of Justice (DOJ), will be 

submitting the following information 

collection request to the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) for 

review and approval in accordance with 

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. 

DATES: The purpose of this notice is to 

allow for an additional 60 days for 

public comment August 9, 2021. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have comments especially on the 

estimated public burden or associated 

response time, suggestions, or need a 

copy of the proposed information 

collection instrument with instructions 

or additional information, please 

contact Lashon M. Hilliard, Department 

of Justice Office of Community Oriented 

Policing Services, 145 N Street NE, 

Washington, DC 20530, 202–305–5245. 

Written comments and/or suggestions 

can also be directed to the Office of 

Management and Budget, Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

Attention Department of Justice Desk 

Officer, Washington, DC 20530 or sent 

to OIRA_submissions@omb.eop.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Written 

comments and suggestions from the 

public and affected agencies concerning 

the proposed collection of information 

are encouraged. Your comments should 

address one or more of the following 

four points: 

—Evaluate whether the proposed 

collection of information is necessary 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of the agency, including 

whether the information will have 

practical utility; 

—Evaluate the accuracy of the agency’s 

estimate of the burden of the 

proposed collection of information, 

including the validity of the 

methodology and assumptions used; 

—Enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and 

—Minimize the burden of the collection 

of information on those who are to 

respond, including through the use of 

appropriate automated, electronic, 

mechanical, or other technological 

collection techniques or other forms 

of information technology, e.g., 

permitting electronic submission of 

responses. 

Overview of This Information 

Collection 

(1) Type of Information Collection: 

Revision of a currently approved 

collection. 

(2) Title of the Form/Collection: COPS 

Progress Report. 

(3) Agency form number: 1103–0102 

U.S. Department of Justice Office of 

Community Oriented Policing Services. 

(4) Affected public who will be asked 

or required to respond, as well as a brief 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 108 / Tuesday, June 8, 2021 / Notices 30497 

abstract: Primary: Law Enforcement 

Agencies. 

(5) An estimate of the total number of 

respondents and the amount of time 

estimated for an average respondent to 

respond/reply: 

There will be approximately 1,424 

awardees submitting a COPS Progress 

Report on a semi-annually basis, or 

4,042 responses annually. The average 

estimated time to complete a progress 

report is 35 minutes per awardee 

submission. 

(6) An estimate of the total public 

burden (in hours) associated with the 

collection: 

0.4167 hours per respondent × 1424 

respondents × 2 (semi-annually 

response) = 2,848 annual hours 

Total Annual Respondent Burden: 

2,848 hours. 

If additional information is required 

contact: Melody D. Braswell, 

Department Clearance Officer, United 

States Department of Justice, Justice 

Management Division, Policy and 

Planning Staff, Two Constitution 

Square, 145 N Street NE, Room 

3E.405A, Washington, DC 20530. 

Dated: June 3, 2021. 

Melody D. Braswell, 

Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. 

Department of Justice. 

[FR Doc. 2021–11963 Filed 6–7–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–AT–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

[OMB Control No. 1103–NEW] 

Information Collection; Improving 

Customer Experience (OMB Circular 

A–11, Section 280 Implementation) 

AGENCY: Office of the Chief Information 

Officer, Department of Justice. 

ACTION: 60-Day notice. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Justice as 

part of its continuing effort to reduce 

paperwork and respondent burden, is 

announcing an opportunity for public 

comment on a new proposed collection 

of information by the Agency. Under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(PRA), Federal Agencies are required to 

publish notice in the Federal Register 

concerning each proposed collection of 

information, and to allow 60 days for 

public comment in response to the 

notice. This notice solicits comments on 

new collection proposed by the Agency. 

DATES: Submit comments on or before: 

August 9, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments 

identified by Information Collection 

1103–NEW, Improving Customer 

Experience (OMB Circular A–11, 

Section 280 Implementation), by any of 

the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking portal: 

https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Comments submitted electronically, 

including attachments to https://

www.regulations.gov, will be posted to 

the docket unchanged. 

• Mail: General Services 

Administration, Regulatory Secretariat 

Division (MVCB), 1800 F Street NW, 

Washington, DC 20405. ATTN: Ms. 

Mandell/IC 1103–NEW, A–11 Section 

280 Improving Customer Experience. 

Instructions: Please submit comments 

only and cite Information Collection 

1103–NEW, Improving Customer 

Experience (OMB Circular A–11, 

Section 280 Implementation), in all 

correspondence related to this 

collection. To confirm receipt of your 

comment(s), please check 

regulations.gov, approximately two-tothree business days after submission to 

verify posting (except allow 30 days for 

posting of comments submitted by 

mail). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

A. Purpose 

Under the PRA, (44 U.S.C. 3501– 

3520) Federal Agencies must obtain 

approval from the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) for each collection of 

information they conduct or sponsor. 

‘‘Collection of information’’ is defined 

in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 

1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests 

or requirements that members of the 

public submit reports, keep records, or 

provide information to a third party. 

Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA 

requires Federal Agencies to provide a 

60-day notice in the Federal Register 

concerning each proposed collection of 

information, including each proposed 

extension of an existing collection of 

information, before submitting the 

collection to OMB for approval. To 

comply with this requirement, GSA is 

publishing notice of the proposed 

collection of information set forth in 

this document. 

Whether seeking a loan, Social 

Security benefits, veteran’s benefits, or 

other services provided by the Federal 

Government, individuals and businesses 

expect Government customer services to 

be efficient and intuitive, just like 

services from leading private-sector 

organizations. Yet the 2016 American 

Consumer Satisfaction Index and the 

2017 Forrester Federal Customer 

Experience Index show that, on average, 

Government services lag nine 

percentage points behind the private 

sector. 

A modern, streamlined and 

responsive customer experience means: 

Raising government-wide customer 

experience to the average of the private 

sector service industry; developing 

indicators for high-impact Federal 

programs to monitor progress towards 

excellent customer experience and 

mature digital services; and providing 

the structure (including increasing 

transparency) and resources to ensure 

customer experience is a focal point for 

agency leadership. To support this, 

OMB Circular A–11 Section 280 

established government-wide standards 

for mature customer experience 

organizations in government and 

measurement. To enable Federal 

programs to deliver the experience 

taxpayers deserve, they must undertake 

three general categories of activities: 

Conduct ongoing customer research, 

gather and share customer feedback, and 

test services and digital products. 

These data collection efforts may be 

either qualitative or quantitative in 

nature or may consist of mixed 

methods. Additionally, data may be 

collected via a variety of means, 

including but not limited to electronic 

or social media, direct or indirect 

observation (i.e., in person, video and 

audio collections), interviews, 

questionnaires, surveys, and focus 

groups. The De will limit its inquiries to 

data collections that solicit strictly 

voluntary opinions or responses. Steps 

will be taken to ensure anonymity of 

respondents in each activity covered by 

this request. 

The results of the data collected will 

be used to improve the delivery of 

Federal services and programs. It will 

include the creation of personas, 

customer journey maps, and reports and 

summaries of customer feedback data 

and user insights. It will also provide 

government-wide data on customer 

experience that can be displayed on 

performance.gov to help build 

transparency and accountability of 

Federal programs to the customers they 

serve. 

Method of Collection 

The Department will collect this 

information by electronic means when 

possible, as well as by mail, fax, 

telephone, technical discussions, and 

in-person interviews. The Department 

may also utilize observational 

techniques to collect this information. 

Data 

Form Number(s): None. 

Type of Review: New. 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES