Submission for OMB Review; Data Collection for a National Evaluation of the American Rescue Plan, 22726-22727 [2024-06913]
Download as PDF
22726
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 64 / Tuesday, April 2, 2024 / Notices
clarity of the information to be
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the
burden of the collections of information
on respondents, including through the
use of automated collection techniques
or other forms of information
technology. All comments will become
a matter of public record.
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Dated at Washington, DC, March 27, 2024.
James P. Sheesley,
Assistant Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2024–06881 Filed 4–1–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6714–01–P
FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION
[Docket No. 24–17]
Samsung Electronics America, Inc.,
Complainant v. Orient Overseas
Container Line Limited and OOCL
(Europe) Limited, Respondents; Notice
of Filing of Complaint and Assignment
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Served: March 28, 2024.
Notice is given that a complaint has
been filed with the Federal Maritime
Commission (the ‘‘Commission’’) by
Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (the
‘‘Complainant’’) against Orient Overseas
Container Line Limited and OOCL
(Europe) Limited (the ‘‘Respondents’’).
Complainant states that the Commission
has subject matter jurisdiction over this
complaint pursuant to the Shipping Act
of 1984, as amended, 46 U.S.C. 40101 et
seq. and personal jurisdiction over the
Respondents as common carriers and as
vessel-operating ocean common carriers
as these terms are defined in 46 U.S.C.
40102.
Complainant is a corporation
organized and existing under the laws of
the State of New York with a principal
place of business in Ridgefield Park,
New Jersey.
Complainant identifies Respondent
Orient Overseas Container Line Limited
as a company existing under the laws of
Hong Kong with its principal place of
business in Wanchai, Hong Kong whose
agent in the United States is OOCL
(USA) Inc. with its principal place of
business in South Jordan, Utah.
Complainant identifies Respondent
OOCL (Europe) Limited as a company
existing under the laws of United
Kingdom with its principal place of
business in Levington, Suffolk, United
Kingdom whose agent in the United
States is OOCL (USA) Inc. with its
principal place of business in South
Jordan, Utah.
Complainant alleges that Respondents
violated 46 U.S.C. 41102(c) and (d), and
41104(a)(3), (10), (14), and (15); and 46
CFR 545.4 and 545.5. Complainant
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:06 Apr 01, 2024
Jkt 262001
alleges these violations arose from a
failure to perform and a delay in
performance of inland transportation
obligations on ‘‘store door’’ shipments,
and other acts and omissions of the
Respondents, that resulted in damages,
such as unreasonable costs, demurrage
and detention charges, and delay.
An answer to the complaint must be
filed with the Commission within 25
days after the date of service.
The full text of the complaint can be
found in the Commission’s electronic
Reading Room at https://www2.fmc.gov/
readingroom/proceeding/24-17/. This
proceeding has been assigned to the
Office of Administrative Law Judges.
The initial decision of the presiding
judge shall be issued by March 28, 2025,
and the final decision of the
Commission shall be issued by October
14, 2025.
David Eng,
Secretary.
CFR 545.4 and 545.5. Complainant
alleges these violations arose from a
failure to perform and a delay in
performance of inland transportation
obligations on ‘‘store door’’ shipments,
and other acts and omissions of the
Respondent, that resulted in damages,
such as unreasonable costs, demurrage
and detention charges, and delay.
An answer to the complaint must be
filed with the Commission within 25
days after the date of service.
The full text of the complaint can be
found in the Commission’s electronic
Reading Room at https://www2.fmc.gov/
readingroom/proceeding/24-16/. This
proceeding has been assigned to the
Office of Administrative Law Judges.
The initial decision of the presiding
judge shall be issued by March 28, 2025,
and the final decision of the
Commission shall be issued by October
14, 2025.
[FR Doc. 2024–06925 Filed 4–1–24; 8:45 am]
David Eng,
Secretary.
BILLING CODE 6730–02–P
[FR Doc. 2024–06936 Filed 4–1–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730–02–P
FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION
[Docket No. 24–16]
Samsung Electronics America, Inc.,
Complainant, v. COSCO Shipping
Lines Co., Ltd., Respondent; Notice of
Filing of Complaint and Assignment
Served: March 28, 2024.
Notice is given that a complaint has
been filed with the Federal Maritime
Commission (the ‘‘Commission’’) by
Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (the
‘‘Complainant’’) against COSCO
Shipping Lines Co., Ltd. (the
‘‘Respondent’’). Complainant states that
the Commission has subject matter
jurisdiction over this complaint
pursuant to the Shipping Act of 1984,
46 U.S.C. 40101, et seq. and personal
jurisdiction over the Respondent as a
common carrier and as a vesseloperating ocean common carrier as
these terms are defined in 46 U.S.C.
40102.
Complainant is a corporation
organized and existing under the laws of
the State of New York with a principal
place of business in Ridgefield Park,
New Jersey.
Complainant identifies Respondent as
a global ocean carrier with its corporate
office in Shanghai, China who conducts
business in the United States under
COSCO Shipping (North America) Inc.
with its principal corporate office in
Secaucus, New Jersey.
Complainant alleges that Respondent
violated 46 U.S.C. 41102(c) and (d), and
41104(a)(3), (10), (14), and (15); and 46
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
[OMB Control No. 3090–XXXX; Docket No.
2023–0001; Sequence No. 8]
Submission for OMB Review; Data
Collection for a National Evaluation of
the American Rescue Plan
Office of Evaluation Sciences;
General Services Administration (GSA).
ACTION: Notice of request for comments
regarding a request for a new OMB
clearance.
AGENCY:
Under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act, OES is
proposing new data collection activities
conducted for the National Evaluation
of the American Rescue Plan (ARP). The
objective of this project is to provide a
systematic look at the contributions of
selected ARP-funded programs toward
achieving equitable outcomes to inform
program design and delivery across the
Federal Government. The project will
include in-depth, cross-cutting
evaluations and data analysis of selected
ARP programs, especially those with
shared outcomes, common approaches,
or overlapping recipient communities;
and targeted, program-specific analyses
to fill critical gaps in evidence needs.
DATES: Submit comments on or before
May 2, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Written comments and
recommendations for this information
collection should be sent within 30 days
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\02APN1.SGM
02APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 64 / Tuesday, April 2, 2024 / Notices
of publication of this notice to
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.
Find this particular information
collection by selecting ‘‘Currently under
Review—Open for Public Comments’’ or
by using the search function.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Elizabeth Martin, Program Manager,
267–455–8556 at
arp.national.evaluation@gsa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
A. Purpose
The goal of this study is to look
systematically across the selected subset
of ARP programs, to provide an
integrated account of whether, how, and
to what extent their implementation
served to achieve their intended
outcomes, particularly with respect to
advancing equity. More specifically, the
study aims to learn how lessons from
examination of ARP programs and
interventions with shared outcomes,
common approaches, or overlapping
recipient communities may inform
equitable program design and delivery
across the Federal Government. The
study aims to address these overarching
evaluation questions:
• To what extent did ARP
investments and policy interventions
advance equitable outcomes for those
they were designed to serve?
• What strategies contributed to the
successes, and where are different
strategies needed?
• Where multiple ARP programs aim
to reach similar outcomes, especially
among a shared population:
Æ To what extent is there
coordination across programs in their
administration, customer experience
strategies, or performance or outcome
measurement practices?
Æ To what extent are there collective
impacts that could be attributed to more
than one program? What kinds of
impacts, if any, are observed?
Æ What kinds of secondary effects are
observed that may not be captured in
targeted outcome measures?
The list of 32 programs covered in the
May 2022 White House report
‘‘Advancing Equity through the
American Rescue Plan’’ provided the
scope of programs included in the
National Evaluation. A partnership
between the Office of Management and
Budget Evidence Team and GSA’s
Office of Evaluation Sciences, this study
is also guided by leadership from the
White House ARP Implementation
Team, who participate on the Steering
Committee, as well as a team of agency
experts across the Federal Government.
To build evidence in support of the
study goals, this project includes a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:06 Apr 01, 2024
Jkt 262001
series of up to five in-depth, crosscutting evaluations of selected ARP
programs or recipient communities of
multiple ARP program investments with
shared outcomes, common approaches,
or overlapping recipient groups. These
evaluations will be selected based on
program, population, place, community,
or a combination of these factors. A
mixed-methods approach is anticipated
in order to ensure that appropriate
attention is paid to context and that data
collection and analysis methods reflect
the complexity of program
implementation and address the specific
evaluation questions identified through
the ongoing planning and consultation
process.
The ARP National Evaluation will use
a multiple-phased approach for this
proposed information collection
activity. In Phase 1 (current request) the
research team seeks approval to carry
out consultations with the relevant state
and local agencies, community-based
organizations, and program participants,
including the formal recruitment
process to establish community
advisory boards for each of the planned
in-depth evaluations.
Under subsequent phases of the
request, the project will update the
information collection request for the
instruments tailored to each in-depth
evaluation, to reflect the specific
evaluation design, information
collection methods and instruments,
and associated burden. The proposed
information collection activities cover
mixed-method approaches to implement
primarily outcome and process
evaluations. Data collection activities
for these studies may include: (1)
interviews with program administrators
and staff; (2) focus groups, (3) short
surveys of program participants and/or
eligible non-participants, and (4) data
requests.
Respondents: State and local program
administrators, program staff,
community-based program partners, and
individuals who participate or are
eligible to participate in the relevant
ARP programs.
B. Annual Burden Estimates
Currently, three cross-cutting in-depth
evaluations are anticipated. The burden
estimates below reflect the expectations
for information collection and related
activities associated with the conduct of
those three studies, in addition to the
anticipated burden for this initial,
formative phase of the overall study.
During Phase 1, we estimate the
following: consultations with
approximately 95 state and/or local
program administrators or
representatives from community-based
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
22727
organizations, recruitment of up to 9
participants for each of up to seven
Community Advisory Groups
established across the three studies, and
the initiation of the group meetings.
The anticipated information
collections to be undertaken in Phase 2
are expected to vary in their approaches
to data collection and sample size. The
subsequent information collection
requests will describe the specific study
design and associated burden for each
evaluation. The estimates below include
our current expectations for the burden
associated with these evaluations.
Total Respondents: 1,241.
Total Annual Responses: 15.
Average Burden Hours per Response:
1.9.
Total Burden Hours: 3,034.5.
C. Public Comments
A 60-day notice published in the
Federal Register at 88 FR 85621 on
December 8, 2023. Two comments were
received, but neither provided
substantive comments relevant to this
specific information collection request.
Obtaining Copies: Requesters may
obtain a copy of the information
collection documents from the GSA
Regulatory Secretariat Division, by
calling 202–501–4755 or emailing
GSARegSec@gsa.gov. Please cite OMB
Control No. 3090–XXXX, Data
Collection for a National Evaluation of
the American Rescue Plan.
Lois Mandell,
Director, Regulatory Secretariat Division,
General Services Administration.
[FR Doc. 2024–06913 Filed 4–1–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820–TZ–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention
Solicitation of Nominations for
Appointment to the Communications
and Public Engagement Workgroup of
the Advisory Committee to the
Director, CDC; Notice of Extension
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Federal Advisory Committee Act, the
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC), within the
Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS), is seeking nominations
for membership on the Communications
and Public Engagement Workgroup
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\02APN1.SGM
02APN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 2, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22726-22727]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-06913]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
[OMB Control No. 3090-XXXX; Docket No. 2023-0001; Sequence No. 8]
Submission for OMB Review; Data Collection for a National
Evaluation of the American Rescue Plan
AGENCY: Office of Evaluation Sciences; General Services Administration
(GSA).
ACTION: Notice of request for comments regarding a request for a new
OMB clearance.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, OES is
proposing new data collection activities conducted for the National
Evaluation of the American Rescue Plan (ARP). The objective of this
project is to provide a systematic look at the contributions of
selected ARP-funded programs toward achieving equitable outcomes to
inform program design and delivery across the Federal Government. The
project will include in-depth, cross-cutting evaluations and data
analysis of selected ARP programs, especially those with shared
outcomes, common approaches, or overlapping recipient communities; and
targeted, program-specific analyses to fill critical gaps in evidence
needs.
DATES: Submit comments on or before May 2, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Written comments and recommendations for this information
collection should be sent within 30 days
[[Page 22727]]
of publication of this notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.
Find this particular information collection by selecting ``Currently
under Review--Open for Public Comments'' or by using the search
function.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth Martin, Program Manager,
267-455-8556 at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Purpose
The goal of this study is to look systematically across the
selected subset of ARP programs, to provide an integrated account of
whether, how, and to what extent their implementation served to achieve
their intended outcomes, particularly with respect to advancing equity.
More specifically, the study aims to learn how lessons from examination
of ARP programs and interventions with shared outcomes, common
approaches, or overlapping recipient communities may inform equitable
program design and delivery across the Federal Government. The study
aims to address these overarching evaluation questions:
To what extent did ARP investments and policy
interventions advance equitable outcomes for those they were designed
to serve?
What strategies contributed to the successes, and where
are different strategies needed?
Where multiple ARP programs aim to reach similar outcomes,
especially among a shared population:
[cir] To what extent is there coordination across programs in their
administration, customer experience strategies, or performance or
outcome measurement practices?
[cir] To what extent are there collective impacts that could be
attributed to more than one program? What kinds of impacts, if any, are
observed?
[cir] What kinds of secondary effects are observed that may not be
captured in targeted outcome measures?
The list of 32 programs covered in the May 2022 White House report
``Advancing Equity through the American Rescue Plan'' provided the
scope of programs included in the National Evaluation. A partnership
between the Office of Management and Budget Evidence Team and GSA's
Office of Evaluation Sciences, this study is also guided by leadership
from the White House ARP Implementation Team, who participate on the
Steering Committee, as well as a team of agency experts across the
Federal Government.
To build evidence in support of the study goals, this project
includes a series of up to five in-depth, cross-cutting evaluations of
selected ARP programs or recipient communities of multiple ARP program
investments with shared outcomes, common approaches, or overlapping
recipient groups. These evaluations will be selected based on program,
population, place, community, or a combination of these factors. A
mixed-methods approach is anticipated in order to ensure that
appropriate attention is paid to context and that data collection and
analysis methods reflect the complexity of program implementation and
address the specific evaluation questions identified through the
ongoing planning and consultation process.
The ARP National Evaluation will use a multiple-phased approach for
this proposed information collection activity. In Phase 1 (current
request) the research team seeks approval to carry out consultations
with the relevant state and local agencies, community-based
organizations, and program participants, including the formal
recruitment process to establish community advisory boards for each of
the planned in-depth evaluations.
Under subsequent phases of the request, the project will update the
information collection request for the instruments tailored to each in-
depth evaluation, to reflect the specific evaluation design,
information collection methods and instruments, and associated burden.
The proposed information collection activities cover mixed-method
approaches to implement primarily outcome and process evaluations. Data
collection activities for these studies may include: (1) interviews
with program administrators and staff; (2) focus groups, (3) short
surveys of program participants and/or eligible non-participants, and
(4) data requests.
Respondents: State and local program administrators, program staff,
community-based program partners, and individuals who participate or
are eligible to participate in the relevant ARP programs.
B. Annual Burden Estimates
Currently, three cross-cutting in-depth evaluations are
anticipated. The burden estimates below reflect the expectations for
information collection and related activities associated with the
conduct of those three studies, in addition to the anticipated burden
for this initial, formative phase of the overall study. During Phase 1,
we estimate the following: consultations with approximately 95 state
and/or local program administrators or representatives from community-
based organizations, recruitment of up to 9 participants for each of up
to seven Community Advisory Groups established across the three
studies, and the initiation of the group meetings.
The anticipated information collections to be undertaken in Phase 2
are expected to vary in their approaches to data collection and sample
size. The subsequent information collection requests will describe the
specific study design and associated burden for each evaluation. The
estimates below include our current expectations for the burden
associated with these evaluations.
Total Respondents: 1,241.
Total Annual Responses: 15.
Average Burden Hours per Response: 1.9.
Total Burden Hours: 3,034.5.
C. Public Comments
A 60-day notice published in the Federal Register at 88 FR 85621 on
December 8, 2023. Two comments were received, but neither provided
substantive comments relevant to this specific information collection
request.
Obtaining Copies: Requesters may obtain a copy of the information
collection documents from the GSA Regulatory Secretariat Division, by
calling 202-501-4755 or emailing [email protected]. Please cite OMB
Control No. 3090-XXXX, Data Collection for a National Evaluation of the
American Rescue Plan.
Lois Mandell,
Director, Regulatory Secretariat Division, General Services
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2024-06913 Filed 4-1-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820-TZ-P