Agency Information Collection Activities; Diversions, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use of Colorado River Water in the Lower Colorado River Basin, 59185-59187 [2021-23312]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 26, 2021 / Notices intended to restrict the feedback that commenters may provide: Experiences With Pandemic-Related Document Examination Flexibilities 1. Did you or your organization use the flexibilities for remote document examination for the Form I–9 since March 20, 2020? If not, why? If so, what was your experience using the flexibilities? How did small employers use these flexibilities? 2. If the employer performed any remote document examinations since March 20, 2020: a. What were your experiences with internal technical capabilities to perform remote document examination (for example, video quality, image quality, document retention, etc.)? b. What were your experiences related to employee-provided digital images or copies of documents for retention? c. What were your experiences related to employees’ remote completion and submission of Section 1 of the Form I– 9? d. What processes and/or technology solutions were typically used to remotely examine documents (for example, over video link, fax, or email, etc.)? Was the process always the same, or did it vary based on circumstances? What, if any, internal policies were put into place related to remote document examination practices? e. Were any remotely examined documents rejected because they did not relate to the individual presenting them or did not appear to be genuine? Were there any instances in which a document was accepted during remote examination, but upon subsequent physical inspection, the employer determined that the document did not appear to be genuine or did not relate to the individual presenting it? If so, what actions did the employer take? 3. If the employer performed any remote document examinations since March 20, 2020, and is enrolled in EVerify: a. Were any documents examined remotely for which E-Verify returned an Employment Authorized result, but upon subsequent physical examination, the employer determined that the documents did not appear to be genuine or relate to the individual presenting them? If so, what actions did the employer take? b. What, if any, challenges did employers experience in interpreting and following the requirements of participation in the E-Verify program 6 6 E-Verify Memorandum of Understanding: https://www.e-verify.gov/sites/default/files/everify/ memos/MOUforEVerifyEmployer.pdf. VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:39 Oct 25, 2021 Jkt 256001 during the period of remote document examination? 4. What other changes did employers make to Form I–9 document inspection procedures during the pandemic? Did employers increase use of authorized representatives? Considerations for Future Remote Document Examination Procedures 1. What are the direct and indirect burdens on employees and employers related to the physical document examination requirement for Form I–9? 2. What are the direct and indirect burdens on employees and employers related to the use of authorized representatives to meet the physical document examination requirement? 3. What would be the direct and indirect benefits of offering a permanent option for remote document examination of Form I–9 identity and work eligibility documents (for example, allowing some employers to centralize Form I–9 processing)? 4. What would be the direct and indirect costs of offering a permanent option for remote document examination of Form I–9 identity and work eligibility documents (for example, training or technology acquisition costs)? 5. What would be the direct and indirect burdens on small employers for the items listed above? What are the unique challenges faced by small employers with this process and these flexibilities? What kinds of alternatives should be provided for small employers in adopting these flexibilities? 6. If employers were allowed a permanent option for remote document examination, what types of employers and/or employees do you anticipate would be interested in participating or not interested in participating? 7. How might participation requirements as a condition of these flexibilities, such as required enrollment in E-Verify, document or image quality or retention requirements, or required completion of training offered by DHS, impact an employer’s desire or ability to utilize such a flexibility? 8. What would be the costs or benefits associated with making enrollment in EVerify a condition of flexibilities for you, as an employer? 9. If DHS were to permanently allow an option for remote document examination, what technical considerations would participating employers have to consider? 10. What impact would a permanent option for remote document examination have on employees and employers, if any? If these flexibilities are adopted, are there requirements DHS PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 59185 should adopt to ensure employee rights related to document examination are protected? 11. Are there solutions that would enable employers to verify that documents that are examined remotely appear to be genuine and to relate to the individual presenting them? What actions by DHS would encourage the commercial development of such solutions? 12. Should DHS consider changes to the current lists of acceptable documents on the Form I–9, in the context of remote document examination? What would be the costs and benefits of such changes? 13. Are there any other factors DHS should consider related to remote document examination? IV. Review of Public Input This notice is issued solely for information and program-planning purposes. Public input provided in response to this notice does not bind DHS to any further actions, to include publishing a formal response or agreement to initiate a recommended change. DHS will consider the feedback and make changes or process improvements at its sole discretion. Commenting on this notice is not a substitute for commenting on other ongoing DHS rulemaking efforts. To be considered as part of a specific rulemaking effort, comments on DHS rules must be received during the comment period identified in the relevant rulemaking published in the Federal Register, and in the manner specified therein. Ur M. Jaddou, Director, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security. [FR Doc. 2021–23260 Filed 10–25–21; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111–97–P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Reclamation [RR03042000, 21XR0680A1, RX.18786000.1000000; OMB Control Number 1006–0015] Agency Information Collection Activities; Diversions, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use of Colorado River Water in the Lower Colorado River Basin Bureau of Reclamation, Interior. ACTION: Notice of information collection; request for comment. AGENCY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we, SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\26OCN1.SGM 26OCN1 59186 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 26, 2021 / Notices the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), are proposing to renew an information collection. DATES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before December 27, 2021. ADDRESSES: Send your comments on this information collection request (ICR) by mail to Jeremy Dodds, Manager, Water Accounting and Verification Group, LCB–4200, Boulder Canyon Operations Office, Interior Region 8: Lower Colorado Basin, Bureau of Reclamation, P.O. Box 61470, Boulder City, NV 89006–1470; or by email to jdodds@usbr.gov with a courtesy copy to bor-sha-bcooadmin@usbr.gov. Please reference OMB Control Number 1006– 0015 in the subject line of your comments. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To request additional information about this ICR, contact Jeremy Dodds by email at jdodds@usbr.gov, or by telephone at (702) 293–8164. Individuals who are hearing or speech impaired may call the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877–8339 for TTY assistance. You may also view the ICR at http://www.reginfo.gov/ public/do/PRAMain. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1), all information collections require approval under the PRA. We may not conduct or sponsor and you are not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. As part of our continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burdens, we invite the public and other Federal agencies to comment on new, proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements and minimize the public’s reporting burden. It also helps the public understand our information collection requirements and provide the requested data in the desired format. We are especially interested in public comment addressing the following: (1) Whether or not the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether or not the information will have practical utility; (2) The accuracy of our estimate of the burden for this collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) How might the agency 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 response. Comments that you submit in response to this notice are a matter of public record. We will include or summarize each comment in our request to OMB to approve this ICR. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Abstract: Reclamation delivers Colorado River water to water users for diversion and beneficial consumptive use in the States of Arizona, California, and Nevada. The Consolidated Decree of the United States Supreme Court in the case of Arizona v. California, et al., entered March 27, 2006 (547 U.S. 150 Number responses/ respondent Form No. Annual ................................. Annual ................................. Monthly ................................ Annual ................................. LC–72A .............................. LC–72B .............................. Custom Forms ................... Custom Forms ................... 8 12 37 27 10 10 12 25 1 1 12 1 8 12 444 27 1 2 89 11 Total ............................. ............................................ 84 ........................ ........................ 491 103 22:39 Oct 25, 2021 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4703 Minutes/ response Total responses/ year Frequency of data collection (monthly/annual) VerDate Sep<11>2014 Number of respondents (2006)), requires the Secretary of the Interior to prepare and maintain complete, detailed, and accurate records of diversions of water, return flow, and consumptive use and make these records available at least annually. The information collected ensures that a State or a water user within a State does not exceed its authorized use of Colorado River water. Water users are obligated by provisions in their water delivery contracts to provide Reclamation information on diversions and return flows. Reclamation determines the consumptive use by subtracting return flow from diversions or by other engineering means. Title of Collection: Diversions, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use of Colorado River Water in the Lower Colorado River Basin. OMB Control Number: 1006–0015. Form Numbers: LC–72A, LC–72B, Custom Forms. Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection. Respondents/Affected Public: The respondents will include the Lower Basin States (Arizona, California, and Nevada), local and tribal entities, water districts, and individuals that use Colorado River water. Total Estimated Number of Annual Respondents: 84. Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 491. Estimated Completion Time per Response: See table. Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 103 hours. Respondent’s Obligation: Required to obtain or retain a benefit. Frequency of Collection: Monthly, annually, or otherwise as stipulated by the water user’s Colorado River water delivery contract with the Secretary of the Interior. Total Estimated Annual Non-hour Burden Cost: None. Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\26OCN1.SGM 26OCN1 Total hours/year Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 204 / Tuesday, October 26, 2021 / Notices An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The authority for this action is the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Jacklynn L. Gould, Regional Director, Interior Region 8: Lower Colorado Basin, Bureau of Reclamation. [FR Doc. 2021–23312 Filed 10–25–21; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4332–90–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337–TA–1206] Certain Percussive Massage Devices; Commission Determination To Review in Part an Initial Determination Granting in Part a Motion for Summary Determination and Finding a Violation of Section 337; Schedule for Filing Written Submissions U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined to review in part an initial determination (‘‘ID’’) (Order No. 40) of the presiding administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) granting in part complainant’s motion for summary determination and finding a violation of section 337. The Commission requests written submissions from the parties on an issue under review, and requests briefing from the parties, interested government agencies, and other interested persons on the issues of remedy, the public interest, and bonding, under the schedule set forth below. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cathy Chen, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205–2392. Copies of non-confidential documents filed in connection with this investigation may be viewed on the Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. For help accessing EDIS, please email EDIS3Help@usitc.gov. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server at https://www.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission’s TDD terminal on (202) 205–1810. SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:39 Oct 25, 2021 Jkt 256001 The Commission instituted this investigation on July 22, 2020, based on a complaint filed on behalf of Hyper Ice, Inc. (‘‘Hyperice’’) of Irvine, California. 85 FR 44322 (July 22, 2020). The complaint, as supplemented, alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the United States after importation of certain percussive massage devices by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 10,561,574 (‘‘the ’574 patent’’); U.S. Design Patent No. D855,822; and U.S. Design Patent No. D886,317 (collectively, ‘‘Asserted Design Patents’’). The complaint further alleges that a domestic industry exists. The Commission’s notice of investigation names the following nineteen respondents: Laiwushiyu Xinuan Trading Company of Shandong District, China; Shenzhen Let Us WinWin Technology Co., Ltd. of Guangdong, China; Shenzhen Qifeng Technology Co., Ltd. of Guangdong, China; Shenzhen QingYueTang Ecommerce Co., Ltd. of Guangdong, China; and Shenzhen Shiluo Trading Co., Ltd. of Guangdong, China (collectively, the ‘‘Unserved Respondents’’); Kinghood International Logistics Inc. (‘‘Kinghood’’) of La Mirada, California; Manybo Ecommerce Ltd. (‘‘Manybo’’) of Hong Kong, China; Shenzhen Infein Technology Co., Ltd. (‘‘Shenzhen Infein’’) of Guangdong, China; Hong Kong Yongxu Capital Management Co., Ltd. (‘‘Hong Kong Yongxu’’) of Hong Kong, China; Kula eCommerce Co., Ltd. (‘‘Kula’’) of Guangdong, China; Performance Health Systems, LLC (‘‘Performance Health’’) of Northbrook, Illinois; Rechar, Inc. (‘‘Rechar’’) of Strasburg, Colorado; Ning Chen of Yancheng, Jiangsu China; Opove, Ltd. (‘‘Opove’’) of Azusa, California; Shenzhen Shufang ECommerce Co., Ltd. (‘‘Shufang ECommerce’’) of Shenzhen, China; Fu Si (‘‘Shenzhen Fusi Technology’’) of Guangdong, China; 1 WODFitters (‘‘WODFitters’’) Lorton, Virginia; Massimo Motor Sports, LLC (‘‘Massimo’’) of Garland, Texas; and Addaday LLC (‘‘Addaday’’) of Santa Monica, California. The notice of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 1 Respondent Fu Si’s full name is Shenzhen Fusi Technology Co., Ltd. See Response of Opove Ltd., Shenzhen Shufang E-Commerce Co., Ltd., and Fu Si to the Complaint and Notice of Investigation at ¶ 40, EDIS Doc ID 716966 (Aug. 11, 2020). The principal place of business of Shenzhen Fusi Technology Co., Ltd. was changed to 14E, Building A, Guanghao International Center, No. 441 Meilong Road, Minzhi Street, Longhua District, Shenzhen, China, 518131 effective September 15, 2020. Id. PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 59187 investigation also names the Office of Unfair Import Investigations (‘‘OUII’’) as a party. On October 16, 2020, the Commission determined not to review Order No. 11 granting motions to intervene by third parties Shenzhen Xinde Technology Co., Ltd. (‘‘Xinde’’) and Yongkang Aijiu Industrial & Trade Co., Ltd. (‘‘Aijiu’’) in the investigation. See Order No. 11 (Sept. 25, 2020), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (Oct. 16, 2020). Respondents Addaday, WODFitters, Massimo, Performance Health, Rechar, Ning Chen, Opove, Shufang ECommerce, Xinde, Aijiu, and Shenzhen Fusi Technology were terminated from the investigation based upon settlement agreements. See Order No. 10 (Sep. 16, 2020), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (Oct. 15, 2020); Order No. 12 (Nov. 4, 2020), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (Nov. 20, 2020); Order No. 30 (Apr. 8, 2021), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (Apr. 22, 2021). The Unserved Respondents were terminated from the investigation based upon withdrawal of the Complaint. See Order No. 36 at 2 (Aug. 3, 2021) unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (Aug. 19, 2021). Respondents Kinghood, Manybo, Shenzhen Infein, Hong Kong Yongxu, and Kula (collectively, ‘‘the Defaulting Respondents’’) were found in default. See Order No. 17 (Dec. 17. 2020), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (Jan. 5, 2021). On May 6, 2021, OUII filed a motion to terminate the Asserted Design Patents from this investigation on the ground that Hyperice did not have sufficient rights to the design patents at the time the investigation was instituted. On May 17, 2021, Hyperice filed its response in opposition to OUII’s motion to terminate, which included a crossmotion to amend the Complaint to reflect proper inventorship. On May 7, 2021, Hyperice filed a motion for summary determination that the Defaulting Respondents have violated section 337 for infringing its three asserted patents. On May 14, 2021, Hyperice supplemented its motion with additional declarations. On May 20, 2021, Hyperice again supplemented its motion with claim charts and exhibits. OUII filed a response in support of the motion with respect to the ’574 patent but not with respect to the asserted design patents. On August 17, 2021, the ALJ issued Order No. 38 denying Hyperice’s motion to amend the complaint and the notice of investigation to reflect proper inventorship. That same day, the ALJ issued Order No. 39 granting OUII’s motion to terminate the Asserted Design E:\FR\FM\26OCN1.SGM 26OCN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 204 (Tuesday, October 26, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59185-59187]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-23312]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Reclamation

[RR03042000, 21XR0680A1, RX.18786000.1000000; OMB Control Number 1006-
0015]


Agency Information Collection Activities; Diversions, Return 
Flow, and Consumptive Use of Colorado River Water in the Lower Colorado 
River Basin

AGENCY: Bureau of Reclamation, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of information collection; request for comment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we,

[[Page 59186]]

the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), are proposing to renew an 
information collection.

DATES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before 
December 27, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Send your comments on this information collection request 
(ICR) by mail to Jeremy Dodds, Manager, Water Accounting and 
Verification Group, LCB-4200, Boulder Canyon Operations Office, 
Interior Region 8: Lower Colorado Basin, Bureau of Reclamation, P.O. 
Box 61470, Boulder City, NV 89006-1470; or by email to [email protected] 
with a courtesy copy to [email protected]. Please reference 
OMB Control Number 1006-0015 in the subject line of your comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To request additional information 
about this ICR, contact Jeremy Dodds by email at [email protected], or by 
telephone at (702) 293-8164. Individuals who are hearing or speech 
impaired may call the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339 for TTY 
assistance. You may also view the ICR at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction 
Act of 1995 (PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1), all 
information collections require approval under the PRA. We may not 
conduct or sponsor and you are not required to respond to a collection 
of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
    As part of our continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent 
burdens, we invite the public and other Federal agencies to comment on 
new, proposed, revised, and continuing collections of information. This 
helps us assess the impact of our information collection requirements 
and minimize the public's reporting burden. It also helps the public 
understand our information collection requirements and provide the 
requested data in the desired format.
    We are especially interested in public comment addressing the 
following:
    (1) Whether or not the collection of information is necessary for 
the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including 
whether or not the information will have practical utility;
    (2) The accuracy of our estimate of the burden for this collection 
of information, including the validity of the methodology and 
assumptions used;
    (3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the 
information to be collected; and
    (4) How might the agency 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 response.
    Comments that you submit in response to this notice are a matter of 
public record. We will include or summarize each comment in our request 
to OMB to approve this ICR. Before including your address, phone 
number, email address, or other personal identifying information in 
your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment--including 
your personal identifying information--may be made publicly available 
at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your 
personal identifying information from public review, we cannot 
guarantee that we will be able to do so.
    Abstract: Reclamation delivers Colorado River water to water users 
for diversion and beneficial consumptive use in the States of Arizona, 
California, and Nevada. The Consolidated Decree of the United States 
Supreme Court in the case of Arizona v. California, et al., entered 
March 27, 2006 (547 U.S. 150 (2006)), requires the Secretary of the 
Interior to prepare and maintain complete, detailed, and accurate 
records of diversions of water, return flow, and consumptive use and 
make these records available at least annually. The information 
collected ensures that a State or a water user within a State does not 
exceed its authorized use of Colorado River water. Water users are 
obligated by provisions in their water delivery contracts to provide 
Reclamation information on diversions and return flows. Reclamation 
determines the consumptive use by subtracting return flow from 
diversions or by other engineering means.
    Title of Collection: Diversions, Return Flow, and Consumptive Use 
of Colorado River Water in the Lower Colorado River Basin.
    OMB Control Number: 1006-0015.
    Form Numbers: LC-72A, LC-72B, Custom Forms.
    Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection.
    Respondents/Affected Public: The respondents will include the Lower 
Basin States (Arizona, California, and Nevada), local and tribal 
entities, water districts, and individuals that use Colorado River 
water.
    Total Estimated Number of Annual Respondents: 84.
    Total Estimated Number of Annual Responses: 491.
    Estimated Completion Time per Response: See table.
    Total Estimated Number of Annual Burden Hours: 103 hours.
    Respondent's Obligation: Required to obtain or retain a benefit.
    Frequency of Collection: Monthly, annually, or otherwise as 
stipulated by the water user's Colorado River water delivery contract 
with the Secretary of the Interior.
    Total Estimated Annual Non-hour Burden Cost: None.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                              Number           Total
  Frequency of data collection (monthly/              Form No.               Number of       Minutes/       responses/      responses/     Total hours/
                  annual)                                                   respondents      response       respondent         year            year
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual....................................  LC-72A......................               8              10               1               8               1
Annual....................................  LC-72B......................              12              10               1              12               2
Monthly...................................  Custom Forms................              37              12              12             444              89
Annual....................................  Custom Forms................              27              25               1              27              11
                                                                         -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.................................  ............................              84  ..............  ..............             491             103
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 59187]]

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required 
to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a 
currently valid OMB control number. The authority for this action is 
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

Jacklynn L. Gould,
Regional Director, Interior Region 8: Lower Colorado Basin, Bureau of 
Reclamation.
[FR Doc. 2021-23312 Filed 10-25-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4332-90-P