Notice of Request for Information (RFI) on Critical Materials Market Dynamics, 28759-28761 [2024-08391]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 77 / Friday, April 19, 2024 / Notices
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Requests to serve as a peer reviewer
should be submitted at least four weeks
prior to the program’s application
deadline, noted on the forecast page, to
provide program offices with sufficient
time to review resumes and determine
an individual’s suitability to serve as a
peer reviewer for a specific competition.
If you are selected to serve as a peer
reviewer, the program office will contact
you.
Accessible Format: On request to the
person(s) listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT, individuals with
disabilities can obtain this document
and a copy of the application package in
an accessible format. The Department
will provide the requestor with an
accessible format that may include Rich
Text Format (RTF) or text format (txt),
a thumb drive, an MP3 file, braille, large
print, audiotape, or compact disc, or
other accessible format.
Electronic Access to This Document:
The official version of this document is
the document published in the Federal
Register. You may access the official
edition of the Federal Register and the
Code of Federal Regulations at
www.govinfo.gov. At this site you can
view this document, as well as all other
documents of this Department
published in the Federal Register, in
text or Portable Document Format
(PDF). To use PDF you must have
Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is
available free at the site.
You may also access documents of the
Department published in the Federal
Register by using the article search
feature at www.federalregister.gov.
Specifically, through the advanced
search feature at this site, you can limit
your search to documents published by
the Department.
Program Authority: Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965, as
amended (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.);
Higher Education Act of 1965, as
amended (20 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.);
Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act (20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq.); and the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended
by the Workforce Innovation and
Opportunity Act (29 U.S.C. 701 et seq.).
Roberto J. Rodriguez,
Assistant Secretary for Planning, Evaluation
and Policy Development.
[FR Doc. 2024–08341 Filed 4–18–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
02:06 Apr 19, 2024
Jkt 262001
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
[Docket No.: ED–2024–SCC–0025]
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Submission to the Office of
Management and Budget for Review
and Approval; Comment Request;
Student Assistance General Provision
Subpart I Immigration Status
Confirmation
Federal Student Aid (FSA),
Department of Education (ED).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of
1995, the Department is proposing an
extension without change of a currently
approved information collection request
(ICR).
DATES: Interested persons are invited to
submit comments on or before May 20,
2024.
ADDRESSES: Written comments and
recommendations for proposed
information collection requests should
be submitted within 30 days of
publication of this notice. Click on this
link www.reginfo.gov/public/do/
PRAMain to access the site. Find this
information collection request (ICR) by
selecting ‘‘Department of Education’’
under ‘‘Currently Under Review,’’ then
check the ‘‘Only Show ICR for Public
Comment’’ checkbox. Reginfo.gov
provides two links to view documents
related to this information collection
request. Information collection forms
and instructions may be found by
clicking on the ‘‘View Information
Collection (IC) List’’ link. Supporting
statements and other supporting
documentation may be found by
clicking on the ‘‘View Supporting
Statement and Other Documents’’ link.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
specific questions related to collection
activities, please contact Beth
Grebeldinger, 202–377–4018.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Department is especially interested in
public comment addressing the
following issues: (1) Is this collection
necessary to the proper functions of the
Department; (2) will this information be
processed and used in a timely manner;
(3) is the estimate of burden accurate;
(4) how might the Department enhance
the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (5) how
might the Department minimize the
burden of this collection on the
respondents, including through the use
of information technology. Please note
that written comments received in
response to this notice will be
considered public records.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
28759
Title of Collection: Student Assistance
General Provision Subpart I Immigration
Status Confirmation.
OMB Control Number: 1845–0052.
Type of Review: An extension without
change of a currently approved ICR.
Respondents/Affected Public: Private
sector; State, local, and Tribal
governments; individuals and
households.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Responses: 118,360.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Burden Hours: 14,794.
Abstract: This request is for approval
of an extension of the reporting
requirements currently in the Student
Assistance General Provisions, 34 CFR
668, subpart I. This subpart governs the
Immigration-Status Confirmation, as
authorized by section 484(g) of the
Higher Education Act of 1965, as
amended (HEA) (20 U.S.C. 1091). The
regulations may be reviewed at 34 CFR
668, subpart I. The regulations are
necessary to determine eligibility to
receive program benefits and to prevent
fraud and abuse of program funds. This
collection updates the usage by
individuals and schools. While the
regulations refer to a secondary
confirmation process and completion of
the paper G–845 form these processes
are no longer in use. The Department of
Homeland Security/U.S. Citizen and
Immigration Services (DHS/USCIS)
replaced the paper secondary
confirmation method with a fully
electronic process, Systematic Alien
Verification for Entitlements (SAVE)
system and the use of the Third Step
Verification Process.
Dated: April 16, 2024.
Kun Mullan,
PRA Coordinator, Strategic Collections and
Clearance, Governance and Strategy Division,
Office of Chief Data Officer, Office of
Planning, Evaluation and Policy
Development.
[FR Doc. 2024–08420 Filed 4–18–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Notice of Request for Information (RFI)
on Critical Materials Market Dynamics
Office of Manufacturing and
Energy Supply Chains, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Request for information.
AGENCY:
The Department of Energy
(DOE or the Department)’s Office of
Manufacturing and Energy Supply
Chains seeks public comment on market
dynamics for critical materials,
including non-competitive practices and
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\19APN1.SGM
19APN1
28760
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 77 / Friday, April 19, 2024 / Notices
price volatility, to identify potential
ways DOE can help address these
concerns.
Responses to the RFI are
requested by May 20, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties may
submit comments electronically to
MESCanalysis@hq.doe.gov and include
‘‘Critical Materials Market Dynamics
RFI’’ in the subject line of the email.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Further questions may be addressed to
Charles Yang, MESCanalysis@
hq.doe.gov or (202) 586–6116.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DATES:
I. Background
This is an RFI issued by the U.S.
Department of Energy’s (DOE) Office of
Manufacturing and Energy Supply
Chains (MESC). This RFI seeks public
input on market dynamics and price
volatility in critical materials
processing, refining, and recycling. This
RFI will inform DOE’s development of
critical materials strategies and
measures to more effectively mitigate
market volatility as critical materials
processing, refining, and recycling are
scaled up in the United States and allied
countries.
MESC seeks input from all types of
critical material market participants:
• Companies that process, refine, or
recycle critical materials;
• Groups that supply feedstock for
such processors or recyclers (e.g.,
miners, scrap collectors);
• Offtakers of critical materials (e.g.,
automobile manufacturers, battery
manufacturers, other clean energy
manufacturers, utilities, heavy
industries);
• Investors in critical material
projects (e.g., project finance investors,
banks, commodity traders, brokers,
private equity);
• Not-for-profit organizations (e.g.,
entities capable of operating demandside support mechanisms to scale up
critical material processing, refining,
and recycling);
• State, local, and tribal government
entities; and
• Other interested entities (e.g., trade
associations, market-clearing
organizations).
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
II. Purpose
On July 31, 2023, DOE released its
Critical Material Assessment,1 which
identified critical materials in the near
and medium term that will face supplydemand imbalances. This assessment
1 https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/202307/doe-critical-material-assessment_07312023.pdf.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
02:06 Apr 19, 2024
Jkt 262001
also informed the DOE’s Critical
Material List.2
MESC is committed to securing the
energy supply chains needed to support
a clean and stable energy transition,
which will be fueled by critical
materials. This RFI will help inform the
development of the U.S. Department of
Energy’s and its Office of Manufacturing
Energy Supply Chain’s strategy towards
securing critical materials for the energy
sector industrial base.
The purpose of this RFI is to solicit
feedback on market dynamics in the
critical material supply chain and how
the Federal Government can play a role
in supporting market stability and price
transparency. DOE is specifically
interested in information on:
• Market dynamics for critical
material producers and implications of
those market dynamics for securing a
secure and resilient critical material
supply chain; and
• What kind of Federal Government
support or coordination would be
essential to scaling up domestic critical
material processing, refining, and
recycling, particularly to mitigate
market volatility.
You may answer as few or as many of
the questions below as you would like.
Please use the question number in your
response to help reviewers. Please also
provide detailed responses.
III. Questions
1. For a given critical material, are
there particular market dynamics DOE
should be aware of?
a. Are there specific critical materials
that have experienced significant market
volatility and price instability?
b. For a given critical material, are
there differences in cost of production
domestically versus cost of production
in other countries? How are those
differences in cost of production
reflected in prices?
c. What, if any, impact has market
volatility and price instability had on
various market participants?
d. For those critical materials that
have experienced significant market
volatility and price instability, what are
the underlying causes?
e. Are there particular critical
materials where processing, refining, or
recycling projects struggle to attract
investment specifically because of
demand-side uncertainty and/or lack of
2 The following materials are on the DOE critical
material list: aluminum, cobalt, copper,
dysprosium, electrical steel, fluorine, gallium,
iridium, lithium, magnesium, natural graphite,
neodymium, nickel, platinum, praseodymium,
silicon, silicon carbide and terbium. https://
www.energy.gov/cmm/what-are-critical-materialsand-critical-minerals.
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
firm offtake (vs., e.g., concerns about
competitiveness on price or lengthy
qualification processes)?
f. How do these market dynamics
implicate the ability of domestic critical
material producers to sign offtake
agreements with end users? How does
this impact DOE investments in the
critical material industry and the path to
securing a resilient supply chain?
2. What measures can DOE take to
promote market stability within a given
critical material market?
a. How can DOE facilitate market
adoption and maturity as a stakeholder
(e.g., facilitating market information
sharing, encouraging price transparency,
supporting consortiums)?
b. How can DOE support critical
material projects beyond capital grants
and loans? Are there particular
programs or policy mechanisms DOE
should leverage with existing statutory
authority to support critical material
projects and successful project offtake?
Are there particular aspects of the
supply chain that DOE should focus on?
c. In operations without co-located
vertical integration across extraction (or
production) and processing, what
specific federal support would be most
useful to provide operational stability?
3. What indicators of market volatility
demonstrate the need for support? What
are effective measures or guiding
principles DOE or the Federal
Government could take to support
critical materials?
a. What are important considerations
in exploring reverse auctions, advanced
market commitments, contracts for
difference, direct procurement, pooled
offtake vehicles, or other support
measures?
b. What are implementation
approaches for DOE to facilitate
demand-side support for critical
materials through existing grant and
loan authorities and/or public-private
partnerships?
4. What are the benefits and
drawbacks of physical offtake of critical
material products for stockpiling
compared to other measures that do not
involve physical offtake? What existing
mechanisms could be used and what
concerns should be considered in terms
of implementation?
5. How would setting up alternative
market exchanges or indices with
international partners for critical
materials enable price transparency,
market stability, and/or reduce
emissions from critical material
production?
a. What premium would firms be
willing to pay for validated attributes
such as ESG standards and supply
chains sourced from domestic/allied
E:\FR\FM\19APN1.SGM
19APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 77 / Friday, April 19, 2024 / Notices
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
countries? How could DOE or the
Federal Government support greater
demand for higher standard materials?
b. How might environmental, social,
and governance (ESG) standards or
critical material grades specific to
energy applications be incorporated into
an exchange and what are the
conditions needed for successful
implementation?
6. What other tools outside of market
exchanges could support price
transparency, market stability, and/or
reduce emissions from critical material
production?
a. What actions could the United
States take in collaboration with its
international partners to enhance price
transparency and stability?
b. Which country partners would be
ideal collaborators?
c. Are there established international
fora that are better suited to have an
impact on these challenges? (i.e.,
International Energy Agency, G7, OECD,
etc.)
IV. Response Guidelines
Commenters are welcome to comment
on any question. RFI responses shall
include:
1. RFI title;
2. Name(s), phone number(s), and
email address(es) for the principal
point(s) of contact;
3. Institution or organization
affiliation and postal address; and
4. Clear indication of the specific
question(s) to which you are
responding.
Responses to this RFI must be
submitted electronically to
MESCanalysis@hq.doe.gov with the
subject line ‘‘Critical Materials Market
Dynamics RFI’’ no later than 5:00 p.m.
(ET) on May 20, 2024. Responses must
be provided as attachments to an email.
It is recommended that attachments
with file sizes exceeding 25 MB be
compressed (i.e., zipped) to ensure
message delivery. Responses must be
provided as a Microsoft Word (*.docx)
or Adobe Acrobat (*.pdf) attachment to
the email, and no more than 10 pages in
length, 12-point font, 1-inch margins.
Only electronic responses will be
accepted.
A response to this RFI will not be
viewed as a binding commitment to
develop or pursue the project or ideas
discussed. MESC may engage in preand post-response conversations with
interested parties.
Confidential Business Information
Because information received in
response to this RFI may be used to
structure future programs and/or
otherwise be made available to the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
02:06 Apr 19, 2024
Jkt 262001
public, respondents are strongly advised
NOT to include any information in their
responses that might be considered
business sensitive, proprietary, or
otherwise confidential.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.11, any
person submitting information that he
or she believes to be confidential and
exempt by law from public disclosure
should submit via email two wellmarked copies: one copy of the
document marked ‘‘confidential’’
including all the information believed to
be confidential, and one copy of the
document marked ‘‘non-confidential’’
with the information believed to be
confidential deleted. Failure to comply
with these marking requirements may
result in the disclosure of the unmarked
information under the Freedom of
Information Act or otherwise. The U.S.
Government is not liable for the
disclosure or use of unmarked
information and may use or disclose
such information for any purpose. If
your response contains confidential,
proprietary, or privileged information,
you must include a cover sheet marked
as follows identifying the specific pages
containing confidential, proprietary, or
privileged information:
Notice of Restriction on Disclosure
and Use of Data:
Pages [list applicable pages] of this
response may contain confidential,
proprietary, or privileged information
that is exempt from public disclosure.
Such information shall be used or
disclosed only for the purposes
described in this RFI. The Government
may use or disclose any information
that is not appropriately marked or
otherwise restricted, regardless of
source.
In addition, (1) the header and footer
of every page that contains confidential,
proprietary, or privileged information
must be marked as follows: ‘‘Contains,
Confidential, Proprietary, or Privileged
Information Exempt from Public
Disclosure’’ and (2) every line and
paragraph containing proprietary,
privileged, or trade secret information
must be clearly marked with [[double
brackets]] or highlighting. Submissions
containing CBI should be sent to:
MESCanalysis@hq.doe.gov.
Signing Authority
This document of the Department of
Energy was signed on April 12, 2024, by
Giulia Siccardo, Director, Office of
Manufacturing and Energy Supply
Chains, pursuant to delegated authority
from the Secretary of Energy. That
document with the original signature
and date is maintained by DOE. For
administrative purposes only, and in
compliance with requirements of the
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
28761
Office of the Federal Register, the
undersigned DOE Federal Register
Liaison Officer has been authorized to
sign and submit the document in
electronic format for publication, as an
official document of the Department of
Energy. This administrative process in
no way alters the legal effect of this
document upon publication in the
Federal Register.
Signed in Washington, DC, on April 16,
2024.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S.
Department of Energy.
[FR Doc. 2024–08391 Filed 4–18–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
President’s Council of Advisors on
Science and Technology (PCAST)
Office of Science, Department
of Energy.
AGENCY:
Notice of an open virtual
meeting.
ACTION:
This notice announces an
open virtual meeting of the President’s
Council of Advisors on Science and
Technology (PCAST). The Federal
Advisory Committee Act (FACA)
requires that public notice of these
meetings be announced in the Federal
Register.
SUMMARY:
Tuesday, April 23, 2024; 11:00
a.m. to 12:15 p.m. EST.
DATES:
Information for viewing the
livestream of the meeting can be found
on the PCAST website closer to the
meeting at: www.whitehouse.gov/
PCAST/meetings.
ADDRESSES:
Dr.
Melissa A. Edwards, Designated Federal
Officer, PCAST, email: PCAST@
ostp.eop.gov; telephone: 202–881–9018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
PCAST is
an advisory group of the nation’s
leading scientists and engineers,
appointed by the President to augment
the science and technology advice
available to him from the White House,
cabinet departments, and other Federal
agencies. See the Executive Order at
whitehouse.gov. PCAST is consulted on
and provides analyses and
recommendations concerning a wide
range of issues where understanding of
science, technology, and innovation
may bear on the policy choices before
the President. The Designated Federal
Officer is Dr. Melissa A. Edwards.
Information about PCAST can be found
at: www.whitehouse.gov/PCAST.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\19APN1.SGM
19APN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 77 (Friday, April 19, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28759-28761]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-08391]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Notice of Request for Information (RFI) on Critical Materials
Market Dynamics
AGENCY: Office of Manufacturing and Energy Supply Chains, Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Request for information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Energy (DOE or the Department)'s Office of
Manufacturing and Energy Supply Chains seeks public comment on market
dynamics for critical materials, including non-competitive practices
and
[[Page 28760]]
price volatility, to identify potential ways DOE can help address these
concerns.
DATES: Responses to the RFI are requested by May 20, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties may submit comments electronically to
[email protected] and include ``Critical Materials Market
Dynamics RFI'' in the subject line of the email.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Further questions may be addressed to
Charles Yang, [email protected] or (202) 586-6116.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
This is an RFI issued by the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE)
Office of Manufacturing and Energy Supply Chains (MESC). This RFI seeks
public input on market dynamics and price volatility in critical
materials processing, refining, and recycling. This RFI will inform
DOE's development of critical materials strategies and measures to more
effectively mitigate market volatility as critical materials
processing, refining, and recycling are scaled up in the United States
and allied countries.
MESC seeks input from all types of critical material market
participants:
Companies that process, refine, or recycle critical
materials;
Groups that supply feedstock for such processors or
recyclers (e.g., miners, scrap collectors);
Offtakers of critical materials (e.g., automobile
manufacturers, battery manufacturers, other clean energy manufacturers,
utilities, heavy industries);
Investors in critical material projects (e.g., project
finance investors, banks, commodity traders, brokers, private equity);
Not-for-profit organizations (e.g., entities capable of
operating demand-side support mechanisms to scale up critical material
processing, refining, and recycling);
State, local, and tribal government entities; and
Other interested entities (e.g., trade associations,
market-clearing organizations).
II. Purpose
On July 31, 2023, DOE released its Critical Material Assessment,\1\
which identified critical materials in the near and medium term that
will face supply-demand imbalances. This assessment also informed the
DOE's Critical Material List.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2023-07/doe-critical-material-assessment_07312023.pdf.
\2\ The following materials are on the DOE critical material
list: aluminum, cobalt, copper, dysprosium, electrical steel,
fluorine, gallium, iridium, lithium, magnesium, natural graphite,
neodymium, nickel, platinum, praseodymium, silicon, silicon carbide
and terbium. https://www.energy.gov/cmm/what-are-critical-materials-and-critical-minerals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
MESC is committed to securing the energy supply chains needed to
support a clean and stable energy transition, which will be fueled by
critical materials. This RFI will help inform the development of the
U.S. Department of Energy's and its Office of Manufacturing Energy
Supply Chain's strategy towards securing critical materials for the
energy sector industrial base.
The purpose of this RFI is to solicit feedback on market dynamics
in the critical material supply chain and how the Federal Government
can play a role in supporting market stability and price transparency.
DOE is specifically interested in information on:
Market dynamics for critical material producers and
implications of those market dynamics for securing a secure and
resilient critical material supply chain; and
What kind of Federal Government support or coordination
would be essential to scaling up domestic critical material processing,
refining, and recycling, particularly to mitigate market volatility.
You may answer as few or as many of the questions below as you
would like. Please use the question number in your response to help
reviewers. Please also provide detailed responses.
III. Questions
1. For a given critical material, are there particular market
dynamics DOE should be aware of?
a. Are there specific critical materials that have experienced
significant market volatility and price instability?
b. For a given critical material, are there differences in cost of
production domestically versus cost of production in other countries?
How are those differences in cost of production reflected in prices?
c. What, if any, impact has market volatility and price instability
had on various market participants?
d. For those critical materials that have experienced significant
market volatility and price instability, what are the underlying
causes?
e. Are there particular critical materials where processing,
refining, or recycling projects struggle to attract investment
specifically because of demand-side uncertainty and/or lack of firm
offtake (vs., e.g., concerns about competitiveness on price or lengthy
qualification processes)?
f. How do these market dynamics implicate the ability of domestic
critical material producers to sign offtake agreements with end users?
How does this impact DOE investments in the critical material industry
and the path to securing a resilient supply chain?
2. What measures can DOE take to promote market stability within a
given critical material market?
a. How can DOE facilitate market adoption and maturity as a
stakeholder (e.g., facilitating market information sharing, encouraging
price transparency, supporting consortiums)?
b. How can DOE support critical material projects beyond capital
grants and loans? Are there particular programs or policy mechanisms
DOE should leverage with existing statutory authority to support
critical material projects and successful project offtake? Are there
particular aspects of the supply chain that DOE should focus on?
c. In operations without co-located vertical integration across
extraction (or production) and processing, what specific federal
support would be most useful to provide operational stability?
3. What indicators of market volatility demonstrate the need for
support? What are effective measures or guiding principles DOE or the
Federal Government could take to support critical materials?
a. What are important considerations in exploring reverse auctions,
advanced market commitments, contracts for difference, direct
procurement, pooled offtake vehicles, or other support measures?
b. What are implementation approaches for DOE to facilitate demand-
side support for critical materials through existing grant and loan
authorities and/or public-private partnerships?
4. What are the benefits and drawbacks of physical offtake of
critical material products for stockpiling compared to other measures
that do not involve physical offtake? What existing mechanisms could be
used and what concerns should be considered in terms of implementation?
5. How would setting up alternative market exchanges or indices
with international partners for critical materials enable price
transparency, market stability, and/or reduce emissions from critical
material production?
a. What premium would firms be willing to pay for validated
attributes such as ESG standards and supply chains sourced from
domestic/allied
[[Page 28761]]
countries? How could DOE or the Federal Government support greater
demand for higher standard materials?
b. How might environmental, social, and governance (ESG) standards
or critical material grades specific to energy applications be
incorporated into an exchange and what are the conditions needed for
successful implementation?
6. What other tools outside of market exchanges could support price
transparency, market stability, and/or reduce emissions from critical
material production?
a. What actions could the United States take in collaboration with
its international partners to enhance price transparency and stability?
b. Which country partners would be ideal collaborators?
c. Are there established international fora that are better suited
to have an impact on these challenges? (i.e., International Energy
Agency, G7, OECD, etc.)
IV. Response Guidelines
Commenters are welcome to comment on any question. RFI responses
shall include:
1. RFI title;
2. Name(s), phone number(s), and email address(es) for the
principal point(s) of contact;
3. Institution or organization affiliation and postal address; and
4. Clear indication of the specific question(s) to which you are
responding.
Responses to this RFI must be submitted electronically to
[email protected] with the subject line ``Critical Materials
Market Dynamics RFI'' no later than 5:00 p.m. (ET) on May 20, 2024.
Responses must be provided as attachments to an email. It is
recommended that attachments with file sizes exceeding 25 MB be
compressed (i.e., zipped) to ensure message delivery. Responses must be
provided as a Microsoft Word (*.docx) or Adobe Acrobat (*.pdf)
attachment to the email, and no more than 10 pages in length, 12-point
font, 1-inch margins. Only electronic responses will be accepted.
A response to this RFI will not be viewed as a binding commitment
to develop or pursue the project or ideas discussed. MESC may engage in
pre- and post-response conversations with interested parties.
Confidential Business Information
Because information received in response to this RFI may be used to
structure future programs and/or otherwise be made available to the
public, respondents are strongly advised NOT to include any information
in their responses that might be considered business sensitive,
proprietary, or otherwise confidential.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 1004.11, any person submitting information that
he or she believes to be confidential and exempt by law from public
disclosure should submit via email two well-marked copies: one copy of
the document marked ``confidential'' including all the information
believed to be confidential, and one copy of the document marked ``non-
confidential'' with the information believed to be confidential
deleted. Failure to comply with these marking requirements may result
in the disclosure of the unmarked information under the Freedom of
Information Act or otherwise. The U.S. Government is not liable for the
disclosure or use of unmarked information and may use or disclose such
information for any purpose. If your response contains confidential,
proprietary, or privileged information, you must include a cover sheet
marked as follows identifying the specific pages containing
confidential, proprietary, or privileged information:
Notice of Restriction on Disclosure and Use of Data:
Pages [list applicable pages] of this response may contain
confidential, proprietary, or privileged information that is exempt
from public disclosure. Such information shall be used or disclosed
only for the purposes described in this RFI. The Government may use or
disclose any information that is not appropriately marked or otherwise
restricted, regardless of source.
In addition, (1) the header and footer of every page that contains
confidential, proprietary, or privileged information must be marked as
follows: ``Contains, Confidential, Proprietary, or Privileged
Information Exempt from Public Disclosure'' and (2) every line and
paragraph containing proprietary, privileged, or trade secret
information must be clearly marked with [[double brackets]] or
highlighting. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to:
[email protected].
Signing Authority
This document of the Department of Energy was signed on April 12,
2024, by Giulia Siccardo, Director, Office of Manufacturing and Energy
Supply Chains, pursuant to delegated authority from the Secretary of
Energy. That document with the original signature and date is
maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes only, and in compliance
with requirements of the Office of the Federal Register, the
undersigned DOE Federal Register Liaison Officer has been authorized to
sign and submit the document in electronic format for publication, as
an official document of the Department of Energy. This administrative
process in no way alters the legal effect of this document upon
publication in the Federal Register.
Signed in Washington, DC, on April 16, 2024.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.
[FR Doc. 2024-08391 Filed 4-18-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P