Quiero saber acerca de...

47032

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 160 / Monday, August 23, 2021 / Proposed Rules
INA, 8 U.S.C. 1183, to adjustment of status applicants inadmissible only on the public charge ground, which included the minimum bond amount, conditions under which a bond was breached, and when a public charge bond would be cancelled.64
In a future rulemaking, DHS may seek to establish a public charge bond process.
2. Questions for the Public DHS welcomes public comment on all aspects of the topic described above, but would particularly benefit from commenters addressing one or more of the following questions including the reasoning, data, and information behind their comments:
1. What standard should DHS use to determine whether to exercise its discretion and authorize a noncitizen inadmissible only under the public charge ground to submit a public charge bond?
2. Should DHS establish a minimum bond amount? If yes, how should DHS
establish that minimum bond amount and how should DHS adjust that minimum bond amount over time?
3. What factors should DHS consider in establishing a bond amount for a particular inadmissible noncitizen?
4. Under what circumstances should DHS consider a public charge bond breached?
5. Under what circumstances should DHS consider a public charge bond cancelled?
I. Specific Questions for State, Territorial, Local, and Tribal Benefit Granting Agencies and Nonprofit Organizations
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS

1. Background DHS acknowledges that benefit granting agencies and nonprofit organizations may have valuable information and data regarding the receipt of public benefits and how benefit use intersects with the public charge ground of inadmissibility. DHS
intends to formally consult with relevant Federal agencies, including benefits granting agencies, in connection with future rulemaking actions addressing the public charge ground of inadmissibility. As part of this ANPRM, DHS is specifically seeking feedback from state, territorial, local, and tribal benefit granting agencies, as well as nonprofit organizations.
64 See
84 FR 41292, 41299 Aug. 14, 2019.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:56 Aug 20, 2021

Jkt 253001

2. Questions for State, Territorial, Local, and Tribal Benefit Granting Agencies and Nonprofit Organizations DHS welcomes public comment on all aspects of the topic described above, but would particularly benefit from commenters addressing one or more of the following questions including the reasoning, data, and information behind their comments:
1. What costs, if any, has your agency or organization incurred in order to implement changes in public charge policy, such as revising enrollment procedures and public-facing materials?
Please provide relevant data.
2. What costs, if any, has your agency or organization incurred as a result of reduction in enrollment, or disenrollment in public benefits programs generally? Please provide relevant data.
3. What costs, if any, has your agency or organization incurred as a result of disenrollment or reduction in enrollment in public benefits programs caused by the public charge ground of inadmissibility, the 1999 Interim Field Guidance, or the vacated 2019 Final Rule? Please provide relevant data.
4. With respect to the specific types of public benefits overseen by your agency, under what circumstances is the receipt of such benefits relevant, if at all, to assessing whether or not an individual is likely at any time to become a public charge?
5. What, if any, specific concerns does your agency or organization have about how DHS applies the public charge ground of inadmissibility and how should DHS address those concerns?
6. What data does your agency or organization have that can be shared to demonstrate any potential impact of the public charge ground of inadmissibility, the 1999 Interim Field Guidance, or the vacated 2019 Final Rule on applications for or disenrollment from public benefits by individuals who are eligible for such benefits?
7. What information, data, or studies does your agency or organization have that can be shared that would help DHS
identify factors or patterns of benefit use e.g., duration, frequency, or extent of benefits use that suggest whether and to what extent individuals would be likely to use public benefits in the future?
8. How should DHS reduce the possibility that individuals who are eligible for public benefits overseen by your agency would decide to forgo the receipt of those benefits out of concern that receipt of such benefits will make them or a family member or household member inadmissible on public charge grounds, even if receipt of such a benefit
PO 00000

Frm 00008

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

would not be considered by DHS in a public charge determination, or would not be a decisive factor in a public charge inadmissibility determination?
Alejandro N. Mayorkas, Secretary of Homeland Security.
FR Doc. 202117837 Filed 82021; 8:45 am BILLING CODE 911197P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 51
NRC20180300
RIN 3150AK54

Categorical Exclusions from Environmental Review Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking; reopening of comment period.
AGENCY:

On May 7, 2021, the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission NRC
requested public comment on an advance notice of proposed rulemaking to obtain input from stakeholders on the agencys plan to amend its regulations on categorical exclusions for licensing, regulatory, and administrative actions that individually or cumulatively do not have a significant effect on the human environment. The public comment period closed on July 21, 2021. The NRC
has decided to reopen the public comment period until September 21, 2021, to allow more time for members of the public to develop and submit their comments.
DATES: The comment period for the advance notice of proposed rulemaking published on May 7, 2021 86 FR
24514, is reopened and now closes on September 21, 2021. Comments received after this date will be considered, if it is practical to do so, but the NRC is able to ensure consideration only for comments received on or before this date.
SUMMARY:

You may submit comments by any of the following methods;
however, the NRC encourages electronic comment submission through the Federal rulemaking website:
Federal rulemaking website: Go to https www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC20180300. Address questions about NRC dockets to Dawn Forder; telephone: 3014153407;
email: Dawn.Forder@nrc.gov. For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER

ADDRESSES:

E:FRFM23AUP1.SGM

23AUP1