Proposed Rules. Proposed rule; request for comments

27,026 words·~123 min read·/register/2006/08/03/06-6660

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 216 [Docket No. 060629183-6183-01; I.D. 022106A] RIN 0648-AT39 Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Conducting Precision Strike Weapons Testing and Training by Eglin Air Force Base in the Gulf of Mexico AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments. SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request from Eglin Air Force Base (Eglin AFB) for an authorization to take marine mammals incidental to conducting Precision Strike Weapons

(PSW)testing and training in the Gulf of Mexico (GOM). By this document, NMFS is proposing regulations to govern that take. In order to issue a Letter of Authorization

(LOA)and final regulations governing the take, NMFS must determine, among other things, that the taking will have a negligible impact on the affected species and stocks of marine mammals. NMFS regulations must set forth the permissible methods of take and other means of effecting the least practicable adverse impact on the affected species or stock of marine mammals and their habitat. NMFS invites comment on the application and the regulations. DATES: Comments and information must be postmarked no later than September 5, 2006. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on the application and proposed rule, using the identifier 022106A, by any of the following methods: E-mail: *PR1.022106A@noaa.gov* . Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: *http://www.regulations.gov* . Hand-delivery or mailing of paper, disk, or CD-ROM comments should be addressed to: P. Michael Payne, Chief, Permits, Conservation and Education Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910-3225. Documents cited in this proposed rule may also be viewed, by appointment, during regular business hours at the above address or at the Department of the Air Force, AAC/EMSN, Natural Resources Branch, 501 DeLeon St., Suite 101, Eglin AFB, FL 32542-5133. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kenneth R. Hollingshead, NMFS, 301-713-2289, ext 128. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Section 101(a)(5)(A) of the Marine Mammal Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 1361 *et seq.* )

(MMPA)directs the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) to allow, upon request, the incidental, but not intentional taking of marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region if certain findings are made and regulations are issued. Permission may be granted for periods of 5 years or less if the Secretary finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or stock(s) and will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses, and if regulations are prescribed setting forth the permissible methods of taking and the requirements pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such taking. NMFS has defined “negligible impact” in 50 CFR 216.103 as “an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival.” With respect to military readiness activities, the MMPA defines “harassment” as:

(i)any act that injures or has the significant potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild [Level A harassment]; or

(ii)any act that disturbs or is likely to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing disruption of natural behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, surfacing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering, to a point where such behavioral patterns are abandoned or significantly altered [Level B harassment]. 16 U.S.C. 1362(18)(B). Summary of Request On February 4, 2004, Eglin AFB submitted a request for a 1-year Incidental Harassment Authorization(IHA) under MMPA section 101(a)(5)(D) and for an LOA (to take effect after the expiration of the IHA), for the incidental, but not intentional taking (in the form of noise-related harassment), of marine mammals incidental to PSW testing within the Eglin Gulf Test and Training Range (EGTTR) for the next five years, as authorized by section 101(a)(5) of the MMPA. The EGTTR is described as the airspace over the GOM that is controlled by Eglin AFB, and is also referred to as the “Eglin Water Range.” PSW missions involve air-to-surface impacts of two weapons, the Joint Air-to-Surface Stand-off Missile (JASSM) AGM-158 A and B and the small-diameter bomb

(SDB)(GBU-39/B), that result in underwater detonations of up to approximately 300 lbs (136 kg) and 96 lbs (43.5 kg, double SDB) of net explosive weight (NEW), respectively. The JASSM is a precision cruise missile designed for launch from outside area defenses to kill hard, medium-hard, soft, and area-type targets. The JASSM has a range of more than 200 nautical miles

(nm)(370 kilometers (km)) and carries a 1,000-lb (453.6 kg) warhead. The JASSM has approximately 300 lbs (136 kg) of TNT equivalent NEW. The explosive used is AFX-757, a type of plastic bonded explosive

(PBX)formulation with higher blast characteristics and less sensitivity to many physical effects that could trigger unwanted explosions. The JASSM would be launched from an aircraft at altitudes greater than 25,000 ft (7620 m). The JASSM would cruise at altitudes greater than 12,000 ft (3658 m) for the majority of the flight profile until it makes the terminal maneuver toward the target. The JASSM exercise involves a maximum of two live shots (single) and 4 inert shots (single) each year for the next 5 years. One live shot will detonate in water and one will detonate in air. Detonation of the JASSM would occur under one of three scenarios:

(1)Detonation upon impact with the target (about 5 ft (1.5 m) above the GOM surface);

(2)detonation upon impact with a barge target at the surface of the GOM; or

(3)detonation at 120 milliseconds after contact with the surface of the GOM. The SDB is a glide bomb. Because of its capabilities, the SDB system is an important element of the Air Force's Global Strike Task Force. The SDB has a range of up to 50 nm (92.6 km) and carries a 217.4-lb (98.6 kg) warhead. The SDB has approximately 48 lbs (21.7 kg) of TNT equivalent NEW. The explosive used is AFX-757. Launch from an aircraft would occur at altitudes greater than 15,000 ft (4572 m). The SDB would commence a non-powered glide to the intended target. The SDB exercise involves a maximum of six live shots a year, with two of the shots occurring simultaneously, and a maximum of 12 inert shots with up to two occurring simultaneously. Detonation of the SDBs would occur under one of two scenarios:

(1)Detonation of one or two bombs upon impact with the target (about 5 ft (1.5 m)above the GOM surface), or

(2)a height of burst

(HOB)test: detonation of one or two bombs 10 to 25 ft (3 to 7.6 m) above the GOM surface. No underwater detonations of the SDB are planned. The JASSM and SDBs would be launched from B-1, B-2, B-52, F-15, F-16, F-18, or F-117 aircraft. Chase aircraft would include F-15, F-16, and T-38 aircraft. These aircraft would follow the test items during captive carry and free flight but would not follow either item below a predetermined altitude as directed by Flight Safety. Other assets on site may include an E-9 turboprop aircraft or MH-60/53 helicopters circling around the target location. Tanker aircraft including KC-10s and KC-135s would also be used. A second unmanned barge may also be on location to hold instrumentation. Targets include a platform of five containers strapped, braced, and welded together to form a single structure and a hopper barge, typical for transportation of grain. The Eglin AFB action would occur in the northern GOM in the EGTTR. Targets would be located in water less than 200 ft (61 m) deep and from 15 to 24 nm (27.8 to 44.5 km) offshore, south of Santa Rosa Island and south of Cape San Blas Site D3-A. PSW test and training exercises are a military readiness activity. Comments and Responses on Eglin AFB's Application A notice of receipt of Eglin AFB's application for a 1-year IHA and 5-year LOA was published in the **Federal Register** on April 22, 2004 (69 FR 21816). That notice described, in detail, Eglin AFB's proposed activity, the marine mammal species that may be affected by the activity, and the anticipated effects on marine mammals. Comments received on Eglin AFB's application during the 30-day public comment period were addressed in the August 19, 2005, **Federal Register** notice (70 FR 48675) announcing issuance of a 1-year IHA to Eglin AFB for PSW activities. Please review the 2005 notice prior to submitting comments on this proposed rule. Description of Marine Mammals Affected by the Activity There are 29 species of marine mammals documented as occurring in Federal waters of the GOM. Information on those species that may be impacted by this activity are discussed in the Eglin AFB application and Eglin's Final PEA. A summary of that information is provided in this section. General information on these marine mammal species can be found in Wursig *et al.*

(2000)and in the NMFS Stock Assessment Report (Waring, 2006). The NMFS Stock Assessment Report is available at: *http://www.nefsc.noaa.gov/nefsc/publications/tm/tm194/* . Marine mammal species that potentially occur within the EGTTR include several species of cetaceans and one sirenian, the West Indian manatee. During winter months, manatee distribution in the GOM is generally confined to southern Florida. During summer months, a few may migrate north as far as Louisiana. However, manatees primarily inhabit coastal and inshore waters and rarely venture offshore. PSW missions would be conducted offshore. Therefore, effects on manatees are considered very unlikely. Cetacean abundance estimates for the study area are derived from GulfCet II (Davis *et al.* , 2000) aerial surveys of the continental shelf within the Minerals Management Service Eastern Planning Area, an area of 70,470 km 2 . Texas A&M University and NMFS conducted these surveys from 1996 to 1998. Abundance and density data from the aerial survey portion of the survey best reflect the occurrence of cetaceans within the EGTTR, given that the survey area overlaps approximately one-third of the EGTTR and nearly the entire continental shelf region of the EGTTR where military activity is highest. The GulfCet II aerial surveys identified different density estimates of marine mammals for the shelf and slope geographic locations. Only the shelf data is used because PSW missions will only be conducted on the shelf. In order to maximize species conservation and protection, the species density estimate data were adjusted to reflect more realistic encounters of these animals in their natural environment. Refer to “Conservative Estimates of Marine Mammal Densities” in this document and Eglin AFB's application for more information on density estimates. The four marine mammal species observed during GulfCet II aerial surveys on the shelf that have the potential to be present in the PSW test area and thereby affected are: Atlantic bottlenose dolphins ( *Tursiops truncatus* ), Atlantic spotted dolphins ( *Stenella frontalis* ), dwarf sperm whales ( *Kogia simus* ), and pygmy sperm whales ( *Kogia breviceps* ). Brief descriptions of these species were provided in earlier **Federal Register** notices (69 FR 21816, April 22, 2004; 70 FR 48675, August 19, 2005) and are not repeated here. Impacts to Marine Mammals Potential impacts to marine mammals from the detonation of the PSWs and SDBs include both lethal and non-lethal injury, as well as Level B harassment in the form of a temporary shift in hearing sensitivity (called temporary threshold shift

(TTS)and behavioral responses due to TTS. Although unlikely due to the extensive mitigation measures proposed herein, marine mammals have the potential to be killed or injured as a result of a blast due to the response of air cavities in the body, such as the lungs and bubbles in the intestines. Any effects would likely be most severe in near-surface waters where the reflected shock wave creates a region of negative pressure called “cavitation.” This is a region of near total physical trauma within which no animals would be expected to survive. A second criterion used by NMFS for categorizing taking by mortality is the onset of extensive lung hemorrhage. Extensive lung hemorrhage is considered to be debilitating and thereby potentially fatal. Suffocation caused by lung hemorrhage would likely be the major cause of any marine mammal death from underwater shock waves. For the acoustic analysis in this document, the exploding charge is characterized as a point source. The impact thresholds used for marine mammals relate to potential effects on hearing from underwater noise from detonations. For the explosives in question, actual detonation heights would range from 0 to 25 ft (7.6 m) above the water surface. Detonation depths would range from 0 to 80 ft (73.2 m) below the surface. To bracket the range of possibilities, detonation scenarios just above and below the surface were used by Eglin AFB to analyze bombs set to detonate on contact with the target barge. Potentially, the barge may interact with the propagation of noise into the water. However, barge effects on the propagation of noise into the water column cannot be determined without in-water noise monitoring at the time of detonation. Potential exposure of a sensitive species to detonation noise could theoretically occur at the surface or at any number of depths with differing consequences. As a conservative measure, a mid-depth scenario was selected by Eglin AFB to ensure the greatest direct path for the harassment ranges, and to give the greatest impact range for the injury thresholds. Explosive Criteria and Thresholds for Impact of Noise on Marine Mammals NMFS' criteria for explosives and thresholds for assessing impacts of explosions on marine mammals were discussed by NMFS in detail in its issuance of an IHA for Eglin's PSW testing activity (70 FR 48675, August 19, 2005) and are not repeated here. Please refer to that document for background information on this criteria. Based on the discussion in that document, Table 1 illustrates estimated zones of impact for potential mortality (31 psi-ms), Level A harassment (injury; 205 dB EFDL) and Level B harassment (TTS; 182 dB EFDL/23 psi). Table 1. Zones of Impact for Underwater Explosions (Mid-depth Animal) Ordnance NEW (TNT in lb) Depth or Height of Explosion

(m)Ranges for 31 psi -ms

(m)Ranges for EFDL > 205 dB

(m)Ranges for 182 dB EFDL in 1/3-Octave Band/ 23 psi

(m)Summer Single SDB 48 1.5 7.6 n/a n/a 12 12 447 447 Double SDB 96 1.5 7.6 n/a n/a 16 17 550 550 Single JASSM 300 0.3 >6.1 75 320 170 550 770 2490 Winter Single SDB 48 1.5 7.6 n/a n/a 12 12 471 471 Double SDB 96 1.5 7.6 n/a n/a 16 16 594 594 Single JASSM 300 0.3 >6.1 75 320 170 590 871 3250 Incidental Take Estimates For Eglin AFB's PSW exercises, three key sources of information are necessary for estimating potential take levels from noise on marine mammals:

(1)The zones of influence

(ZOIs)for noise exposure;

(2)the number of distinct firing or test events; and

(3)the density of animals that potentially reside within a ZOI. Noise ZOIs were calculated for depth detonation scenarios of 1 ft (0.3 m) and 20 ft (6.1 m) for lethality and for harassment (both Level A and Level B). To estimate the number of potential “takes” or animals affected, the adjusted data on cetacean population information from ship and aerial surveys were applied to the various ZOIs. Table 1 in this document gives the estimated ZOI ranges for various explosive weights for summer and wintertime scenarios for JASSM and SDB. For example, for JASSM, the range, in winter, extends to 320 m (1050 ft), 590 m (1936 ft) and 3250 m (10663 ft) for potential mortality (31 psi-ms), injury (205 dB re 1 microPa 2 -s) and TTS (182 dB re 1 microPa 2 -s/23 psi zones), respectively. SDB scenarios are for in-air detonations at heights of 1.5 m (5 ft) and 7.6 m (25 ft) during both seasons (whichever criterion provides the largest zone is used for calculating potential impacts). JASSM detonations were modeled for near- surface (i.e., 1-ft (0.3-m) depth) and below-surface (>20-ft depth (>6.1 m)). To account for “double” (2 nearly simultaneous) events, the charge weights are added (doubled) when modeling for the determination of energy estimates (since energy is proportional to weight). Pressure estimates only utilize the single charge weights for these estimates. Applying the lethality (31 psi) and harassment (205 and 182 dB EFDL) impact ranges shown in Table 1 to the calculated species densities (in Table 3-1 in Eglin AFB's application), the number of animals potentially occurring within the various ZOIs without implementation of mitigation was estimated. These results are presented in Tables 2, 3, and 4 in this document. In summary, without any mitigation, a small possibility exists for one bottlenose and one Atlantic spotted dolphin to be exposed to blast levels sufficient to cause mortality. Additionally, less than 2 cetaceans might be exposed to noise levels sufficient to induce Level A harassment (injury) (205 dB re 1 microPa2-s) annually, and as few as 31 or as many as 52 cetaceans (depending on the season and water depth) could potentially be exposed (annually) to noise levels sufficient to induce Level B harassment in the form of TTS (182 dB re 1 microPa2-s/23 psi). While none of these impact estimates consider the proposed mitigation measures that will be employed by Eglin AFB to minimize potential impacts to protected species, NMFS proposes to authorize Eglin AFB to lethally take one marine mammal, 2 marine mammals by Level A harassment, and up to 53 marine mammals by Level B harassment

(TTS)annually. The proposed mitigation measures described later in this document are anticipated to reduce potential impacts to marine mammals, in both numbers and degree of severity. Table 2. Marine Mammal Densities and Risk Estimates for Lethality (31 psi) Noise Exposure for All In-Water and In-Air Detonations Species Density Number of Animals Exposed from All In-Air and In-Water Detonations Adjusted Number Exposed Based on 30% Mitigation Effectiveness Summer Dwarf/pygmy sperm whale 0.013 0.004 0.003 Bottlenose dolphin 0.81 0.262 0.183 Atlantic spotted dolphin 0.677 0.219 0.153 T. truncatus/S. frontalis 0.053 0.017 0.012 TOTAL 0.502 0.351 Winter Dwarf/pygmy sperm whale 0.013 0.004 0.003 Bottlenose dolphin 0.81 0.262 0.183 Atlantic spotted dolphin 0.677 0.219 0.153 T. truncatus/S. frontalis 0.053 0.017 0.012 TOTAL 0.502 0.351 Table 3. Marine Mammal Densities and Risk Estimates for Level A Harassment(205 dB EFD 1/3-Octave Band) Noise Exposure for All In-Water and In-Air Detonations Species Density Number of Animals Exposed from All In-Air and In-Water Detonations Adjusted Number Exposed Based on 30% Mitigation Effectiveness Summer Dwarf/pygmy sperm whale 0.013 0.014 0.010 Bottlenose dolphin 0.81 0.893 0.625 Atlantic spotted dolphin 0.677 0.747 0.523 T. truncatus/S. frontalis 0.053 0.058 0.041 TOTAL 1.712 1.198 Winter Dwarf/pygmy sperm whale 0.013 0.014 0.010 Bottlenose dolphin 0.81 0.893 0.625 Atlantic spotted dolphin 0.677 0.747 0.523 T. truncatus/S. frontalis 0.053 0.058 0.041 TOTAL 1.712 1.198 Table 4. Marine Mammal Densities and Combined Risk Estimates for the 23 psi Peak Pressure and the 182 dB EFD 1/3-Octave Band Level B Harassment Metrics for All In-Water and In-Air Detonations Species Density Number of Animals Exposed from All In-Air and In-Water Detonations Adjusted Number Exposed Based on 30% Mitigation Effectiveness Summer Dwarf/pygmy sperm whale 0.013 0.26 0.182 Bottlenose dolphin 0.81 16.209 11.3463 Atlantic spotted dolphin 0.677 13.547 9.4829 T. truncatus/S. frontalis 0.053 1.061 0.7427 TOTAL 31.076 21.7532 Winter Dwarf/pygmy sperm whale 0.013 0.44 0.308 Bottlenose dolphin 0.81 27.387 19.1709 Atlantic spotted dolphin 0.677 22.89 16.023 T. truncatus/S. frontalis 0.053 1.792 1.2544 TOTAL 52.509 36.7563 Mitigation and Monitoring Under the current IHA and as proposed here, Eglin will establish and survey the relevant ZOIs and buffer zones around a planned detonation site. The ZOI for the JASSM will be a radius of 2.0 nm (3.7 km) around the detonation site and the buffer zone will be established at a 1.0-nm (1.85-km) radius outside the safety zone. The ZOI for the SDB will be a radius of 5-10 nm (9.3-18.5 km) depending upon weight of the explosive and the buffer zone will be established at a 2.5 - 5 nm (4.6 -18.5 km) radius outside the SDB ZOI. Prior to the planned detonation, trained observers aboard aircraft will survey (visually monitor) the ZOI and buffer area, a very effective method for detecting cetaceans. The aircraft/helicopters will fly approximately 500 ft (152 m) above the sea surface to allow observers to scan a large distance. In addition, trained observers aboard surface support vessels will conduct ship-based monitoring for non-participating vessels as well as protected species. Using 25X power “Big-eye” binoculars, surface observation would be effective out to several kilometers. Weather that supports the ability to sight marine life is required to effectively mitigate impacts on marine life (DON, 1998). Wind, visibility, and surface conditions in the GOM are the most critical factors affecting mitigation operations. Higher winds typically increase wave height and create “white cap” conditions, both of which limit an observer's ability to locate surfacing marine mammals. Therefore, PSW missions would be delayed if the Beaufort scale sea state are greater than 3.5. Visibility is also a critical factor for flight safety issues. A minimum ceiling of 305 m (1000 ft) and visibility of 5.6 km (3 nm) is required to support mitigation and safety-of-flight concerns (DON, 2001). Aerial Survey/Monitoring Team Eglin will complete an aerial survey before each mission and train personnel to conduct aerial surveys for protected species. The aerial survey/monitoring team would consist of two observers. Aircraft provide a preferable viewing platform for detection of protected marine species. Each aerial observer will be experienced in marine mammal surveying and familiar with species that may occur in the area. Each aircraft would have a data recorder who would be responsible for relaying the location, the species if possible, the direction of movement, and the number of animals sighted. Standard line transect aerial surveying methods, as developed by NMFS (Blaylock and Hoggard, 1994; Buckland *et al.* , 1993) would be used. Aerial observers are expected to have above average to excellent sighting conditions at sunrise to 1.85 km (1 nm) on either side of the aircraft within the weather limitation noted previously. Observed marine mammals would be identified to the species or the lowest possible taxonomic level and the relative position recorded. In order to ensure adequate daylight for pre- and post-mission monitoring, the mission activity would occur no earlier than 2 hours after sunrise and no later than 2 hours prior to sunset. Shipboard Monitoring Team Eglin AFB will conduct shipboard monitoring to reduce impacts to protected species. The monitoring would be staged from the highest point possible on a mission ship. Observers would be familiar with the marine life of the area. The observer on the vessel must be equipped with optical equipment with sufficient magnification (e.g., 25X power “Big-Eye” binoculars, as these have been successfully used in monitoring activities from ships), which should allow the observer to sight surfacing mammals from as far as 11.6 km (6.3 nm) and provide overlapping coverage from the aerial team. A team leader would be responsible for reporting sighting locations, which would be based on bearing and distance. The aerial and shipboard monitoring teams will have proper lines of communication to avoid communication deficiencies. The observers from the aerial team and operations vessel will have direct communication with the lead scientist aboard the operations vessel. The lead scientist will be a qualified marine biologist familiar with marine surveys. The lead scientist reviews the range conditions and recommends a Go/No-Go decision to the test director. The test director makes the final Go/No-Go decision. Mitigation Procedures Plan All zones (injury, ZOI and buffer zones) are monitored. Although unexpected, any mission may be delayed or aborted due to technical reasons. Actual delay times depend on the aircraft supporting the test, test assets, and range time. Should a technical delay occur, all mitigation procedures would continue and remain in place until either the test takes place or is canceled. The ZOI and buffer zone around JASSM missions will be monitored by shipboard observers from the highest point of the vessel. Vessels will be positioned as close to the safety zone as allowed without infringing on the missile flight corridor. The SDB has many mission profiles and does not have a flight termination system; therefore, the safety buffer zone may be quite large (5-10 nm radius (9.3-18.5 km)). PSW mitigation must be regulated by Air Force safety parameters (pers. comm. Monteith and Nowers, 2004) to ensure personnel safety. Therefore, marine mammal mitigation effectiveness may be reduced for some missions due to mandatory safety buffers which limit the time and type of marine mammal mitigation. Even though mitigation may be limited for PSW and SDB missions, all SDB detonations are above the water surface (5-25 ft (1.5-7.6 m) above the surface) and of much smaller net explosive weight than JASSM. Table 5 describes safety zones and clearance times for JASSM and SDB missions (time in minutes). Table 5. Safety Zone Monitoring Time Frames and Effectiveness Flight Time Safety Clearance Time for Vessels before Launch Safety Clearance Time for Aircraft before Launch Total Time of Vessel Safety Clearance before Detonation Total Time of Aircraft Safety Clearance before Detonation Human Safety Area JASSM :30-1 hr :30 :15 1:30 1:15 2 NM SDB :20 :60 :30 1:20 :50 5-10 NM Stepwise mitigation and monitoring procedures for PSW missions are outlined here. Pre-mission Monitoring The purposes of pre-mission monitoring are to

(1)evaluate the test site for environmental suitability of the mission (e.g., relatively low numbers of marine mammals) and

(2)verify that the ZOI is free of visually detectable marine mammals. On the morning of the test, the lead scientist would confirm that the test sites can still support the mission and that the weather is adequate to support mitigation. Five Hours Prior to Mission Launch Approximately 5 hours prior to mission launch, or at daybreak, the appropriate vessel(s) would be on-site in the primary test site near the location of the earliest planned mission point. Observers onboard the vessel will assess the suitability of the test site, based on visual observation of marine mammals, and overall environmental conditions (visibility, sea state, etc.). This information will be relayed to the lead scientist. Three Hours Prior to Mission Launch Approximately three hours prior to mission launch, aerial monitoring would commence within the test site to evaluate the test site for environmental suitability. Evaluation of the entire test site would take approximately 1 to 1.5 hours. Shipboard observers would monitor the “ZOI” and buffer zone, and the lead scientist would enter all marine mammals sightings, including the time of sighting and the direction of travel, into a marine animal tracking and sighting database. The aerial monitoring team would begin monitoring the ZOI and buffer zone around the target area. The shipboard monitoring team would combine with the aerial team to monitor the area immediately around the mission area including both the ZOI and buffer zone. One to 1.5 Hours Prior to Mission Launch As noted in Table 6 and depending upon the mission, aerial and shipboard viewers would be instructed to leave the area and remain outside the human personnel safety area (over 2 nm (3.7 km) from impact for JASSM and 5-10 nm (9.3-18.5 km) for SDB). The aerial team would report all marine animals spotted and their directions of travel to the lead scientist onboard the vessel. The shipboard monitoring team would continue searching the buffer zone for protected species as it leaves. The aircraft will leave the area and land on base. The surface vessels will stay on the outside of the human personnel safety area (5-10 nm for SDB and 2 nm for JASSM) until after detonation. Fifteen Minutes Prior to Launch and Go/No-Go Decision Process Visual monitoring from surface vessels outside the human personnel safety zone would continue to document any animals that may have gone undetected during the past two hours and track animals moving in the direction of the detonation area. The lead scientist would plot and record sightings and bearing for all marine animals detected. This would depict animal sightings relative to the mission area. The lead scientist would have the authority to declare the range fouled and recommend a hold until monitoring indicates that the ZOI is and will remain clear of detectable animals. The mission would be postponed if:

(1)Any marine mammal is visually detected within the relevant ZOI (see Table 1) prior to mission launch. The delay would continue until the marine mammal that caused the postponement is confirmed to be outside of the ZOI due to the animal moving out of the range, and

(2)Any marine mammal is detected in the buffer zone and cannot be subsequently re-sighted. The mission would not continue until the last verified location is outside of the ZOI and the animal is moving away from the mission area. In the event of a postponement, pre-mission monitoring would continue as long as weather and daylight hours allow. Aerial monitoring is limited by fuel and the on-station time of the monitoring aircraft. If a live warhead failed to explode operations would attempt to recognize and solve the problem while continuing with all mitigation measures in place. The probability of this occurring is very remote but does exist. Should a weapon fail to explode, the activity sponsor would attempt to identify the problem and detonate the charge with all marine mammal mitigation measures in place as described. If a live warhead fails to explode the weapon is rendered safe after 15 minutes. The feasibility and practicality of recovering the warhead will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. If at all feasible, the warhead will be recovered. Launch to Impact Visual monitoring from vessels would continue to survey the ZOI and surrounding buffer zone and track animals moving in the direction of the impact area. The lead scientist would continue to plot and record sightings and bearing for all marine animals detected. This will depict animal sightings relative to the impact area. Due to economic (costs of testing $2 million per test) and practical (in-air destruction of the missile) reasons, NMFS is not proposing to require Eglin AFB to terminate an in-flight missile or bomb due to sighting of a protected species. Post-mission monitoring Post-mission monitoring is designed to gauge the effectiveness of pre-mission mitigation by reporting any sightings of dead or injured marine mammals. Post-detonation monitoring via shipboard surveyors would commence immediately following each detonation; no aerial surveys would be conducted during this monitoring stage. The vessels will move into the ZOI from outside the safety zone and continue monitoring for at least two hours, concentrating on the area down current of the test site. Although it is highly unlikely that marine mammals will be killed or seriously injured by this activity, any marine mammals killed by an explosion would likely suffer lung rupture, which would cause them to float to the surface immediately due to air in the blood stream. Any animals that are not killed instantly but are mortally wounded would likely resurface within a few days, though this would depend on the size and type of animal, fat stores, depth, and water temperature (DON, 2001). The monitoring team would attempt to document any marine mammals that are killed or injured as a result of the test and, if practicable, recover and examine any dead animals. The species, number, location, and behavior of any animals observed by the observation teams would be documented and reported to the lead scientist. Post-mission monitoring activities include coordination with marine animal stranding networks. NMFS maintains stranding networks along coasts to collect and circulate information about marine mammal standings. Local coordinators report stranding data to state and regional coordinators. Any observed dead or injured marine mammals would be reported to the appropriate coordinator. Summary of Mitigation Plan The PSW test will be postponed if any human safety concerns arise, protected species are sighted within the ZOI, any protected species is detected in the buffer zone and subsequently cannot be reacquired, or a marine mammal is moving into the ZOI from the buffer zone. The delay would continue until the marine mammal that caused the postponement is confirmed to be outside of the ZOI due to the animal swimming out of the range. Avoidance of impacts to pods of cetaceans will most likely be realized through these measures since groups of dolphins are relatively easy to spot with the survey distances and methods that will be employed. Typically solitary marine mammals such as dwarf/pygmy sperm whales, while more challenging to detect, will also be afforded substantial protection through pre-test monitoring. The safety vessels would conduct post-mission monitoring for two hours after each mission. The monitoring team would document any marine mammals observed dead or injured and, if practicable, recover and examine any dead animals. Conservative Estimates of Marine Mammal Densities Using conservative mathematical calculations and conservative density estimates can serve as a technique for making conservative “take” estimates. Marine mammal densities used to calculate takes were based on the most current and comprehensive GOM surveys available (GulfCet II). The densities are adjusted for the time the animals are submerged, and further adjusted by applying standard deviations to provide an approximately 99 percent confidence level. As an example, the density estimates for bottlenose dolphins range from 0.06 to 0.15 animals/km2 in GulfCet II aerial surveys of the shelf and slope. However, the final adjusted density used in take calculations is 0.81 animals/km 2 . Reporting As in the current IHA, NMFS proposes to continue to require Eglin AFB to submit an annual report on the results of the monitoring requirements. This annual report will be due within 30 days prior to the expiration of the current LOA. This report will then be used by NMFS to determine whether incidental takings by Eglin AFB from this activity continue to have a negligible impact on affected species and stocks of marine mammals. This report will include a discussion on the effectiveness of the mitigation in addition to the following information:

(1)Date and time of each of the detonations;

(2)a detailed description of the pre-test and post-test activities related to mitigating and monitoring the effects of explosives detonation on marine mammals and marine mammal populations;

(3)the results of the monitoring program, including numbers by species/stock of any marine mammals noted injured or dead, presumably as a result of the detonation and numbers that may have been harassed due to undetected presence within the ZOI (NMFS and Eglin presume that if an area is determined to be clear of marine mammals and later, during post-event monitoring, marine mammals are found in the area, those marine mammals will be considered “taken”); and

(4)results of coordination with coastal marine mammal stranding networks. Research Although Eglin AFB does not currently conduct independent Air Force monitoring efforts, Eglin AFB's Natural Resources Branch does participate in marine animal tagging and monitoring programs led by other agencies. The Natural Resources Branch also supports participation in annual surveys of marine mammals in the GOM with NOAA Fisheries. From 1999 to 2002, Eglin AFB's Natural Resources Branch participated in summer cetacean monitoring and research opportunities through a contract representative. The contractor participated in visual surveys in 1999 for cetaceans in GOM, photographic identification of sperm whales in the northeastern Gulf in 2001, and served as a visual observer during the 2000 Sperm Whale Pilot Study and the 2002 sperm whale Satellite-tag (S-tag) cruise. Support for these research efforts is anticipated to continue. Eglin AFB utilizes marine mammal stranding information to ascertain the effectiveness of its mitigation measures for offshore activities. Stranding data is collected and maintained for the Florida panhandle and Gulf-wide areas. This is undertaken through the establishment and maintenance of contacts with local, state, and regional stranding networks. Eglin AFB assists with stranding data collection by maintaining its own team of stranding personnel. In addition to simply collecting stranding data, various analyses are performed. Stranding events are tracked by year, season, and NMFS statistical zone, both Gulf-wide and on the coastline in proximity to Eglin AFB. Stranding data is combined with records of EGTTR mission activity in each water range and analyzed for any possible correlation. In addition to being used as a measure of the effectiveness of mission mitigation, stranding data can yield insight into the species composition of cetaceans in the region. Endangered Species Act

(ESA)NMFS issued a biological opinion regarding the effects of Eglin's PSW activity on ESA-listed species and critical habitat under the jurisdiction of NMFS. That biological opinion concluded that Eglin's PSW activity is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of listed species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. On August 11, 2005, NMFS determined that issuance of an annual authorization under section 101(a)(5) of the MMPA to Eglin AFB for this activity will not have effects beyond what was analyzed in 2004 in the Biological Opinion. NMFS has preliminarily determined that the issuance of up to 5 LOAs to Eglin under these regulations (if implemented) would not have effects beyond what was analyzed in the 2004 Biological Opinion. A copy of the Biological Opinion is available upon request (see ADDRESSES ). National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA)In December, 2003, Eglin AFB released a Draft PEA on the PSW activity. On April 22, 2004 (69 FR 21816), NMFS noted that Eglin AFB had prepared a Draft PEA for PSW activities and made this PEA available upon request. Eglin AFB updated the information in that PEA and issued a Final PEA and a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) on the PSW activities. In accordance with NOAA Administrative Order 216-6 (Environmental Review Procedures for Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act, May 20, 1999), NMFS reviewed the information contained in Eglin AFB's Final PEA and determined that the Eglin AFB's PEA accurately and completely describes the proposed action alternative, reasonable additional alternatives, and the potential impacts on marine mammals, endangered species, and other marine life that could be impacted by the preferred alternative and the other alternatives. Based on this review and analysis, NMFS adopted Eglin's PEA under 40 CFR 1506.3 and made its own FONSI statement on July 25, 2005. Therefore, it was not necessary to issue a new EA, supplemental EA or an environmental impact statement for the issuance of an IHA to Eglin AFB to take marine mammals incidental to this activity. NMFS will review its determination as part of this rulemaking. A decision will be made prior to making a final determination on issuing a final rule for this activity. A copy of NMFS' FONSI for this activity is available upon request (see ADDRESSES ). A paper copy of the Eglin AFB Programmatic EA for this activity is available by contacting either Eglin AFB or NMFS (see ADDRESSES ). Preliminary Determinations NMFS has preliminarily determined that, based on the information provided in Eglin's application, the Final PEA and this document, the total taking of marine mammals by PSW activities will have a negligible impact on the affected species or stocks over the 5-year period of take authorizations. While no take by serious injury or death is anticipated during this period, limited mortality is proposed to be authorized in the event that the extensive mitigation measures are not totally successful. However, even if serious injury or mortality were to occur, the total taking still would have no more than a negligible impact on the affected marine mammal species or stocks. In addition, the potential for temporary or permanent hearing impairment is low and will have the least practicable adverse impact on the affected species or stocks through the incorporation of the mitigation measures mentioned in this document. The information contained in Eglin's EA and incidental take application support NMFS' finding that impacts will be mitigated by implementation of a conservative safety range for marine mammal exclusion, incorporation of aerial and shipboard survey monitoring efforts in the program both prior to and after detonation of explosives, and delay/postponement/cancellation of detonations whenever marine mammals or other specified protected resources are either detected within the safety zone or may enter the safety zone at the time of detonation or if weather and sea conditions preclude adequate aerial surveillance. Since the taking will not result in more than the incidental harassment of certain species of marine mammals, will have only a negligible impact on these stocks, will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of these stocks for subsistence uses (as there are no known subsistence uses of marine mammal stocks in the GOM), and, through implementation of required mitigation and monitoring measures, will result in the least practicable adverse impact on the affected marine mammal stocks, NMFS has preliminarily determined that the requirements of section 101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA have been met and this proposed rule can be issued. Request for Information NMFS requests interested persons to submit comments, information, and suggestions concerning Eglin's application and this proposed rule. Prior to submitting comments, NMFS recommends reviewers of this document read the responses to comments made previously (70 FR 48675, August 19, 2005) for this action as NMFS does not plan to address these issues further without the submission of additional scientific information or reasoning supporting the comment. Comments sent via e-mail, including all attachments, must not exceed a 10-megabyte file size. To submit comments through the Federal e-Rulemaking Portal, go to *http://www.regulations.gov* and follow the instructions for submitting comments. To help us process and review comments more efficiently, please use only one method. A copy of the application containing a list of references used in this document may be obtained by writing to NMFS (see ADDRESSES ), by telephoning the contact listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT , or at: *http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm* . A paper copy of Eglin AFB's Final Programmatic Environmental Assessment (Final PEA) is available by writing to the Department of the Air Force (see ADDRESSES ). Classification This action has been determined to be not significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866. The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce has certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration that this proposed rule, if adopted, would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities since it would apply only to the U.S. Air Force, a federal agency. It may affect a small number of contractors providing services related to reporting the impact of the activity on marine mammals, some of whom may be small businesses, but the number involved would not be substantial. Further, since the monitoring and reporting requirements are what would lead to the need for their services, the economic impact on them would be beneficial. Because of this certification, a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required and none has been prepared. List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 216 Exports, Fish, Imports, Indians, Labeling, Marine mammals, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Seafood, Transportation. Dated: July 27, 2006. John Oliver, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Operations, National Marine Fisheries Service. For reasons set forth in the preamble, 50 CFR part 216 is proposed to be amended as follows: PART 216—REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE TAKING AND IMPORTING OF MARINE MAMMALS 1. The authority citation for part 216 continues to read as follows: Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361 *et seq.* 2. Subpart V is added and reserved. 3. Subpart W is added to part 216 to read as follows: Subpart W—Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Conducting Precision Strike Weapon Missions in the Gulf of Mexico Sec. 216.250 Specified activity and specified geographical region. 216.251 Effective dates. 216.252 Permissible methods of taking. 216.253 Prohibitions. 216.254 Mitigation. 216.255 Requirements for monitoring and reporting. 216.256 Applications for Letters of Authorization. 216.257 Letter of Authorization. 216.258 Renewal of Letters of Authorization. 216.259 Modifications to Letters of Authorization. Subpart W—Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Conducting Precision Strike Weapon Missions in the Gulf of Mexico § 216.250 Specified activity and specified geographical region.

(a)Regulations in this subpart apply only to the incidental taking of those marine mammal species specified in paragraph

(b)of this section by U.S. citizens engaged in U.S. Air Force Precision Strike Weapon missions within the Eglin Air Force Base Gulf Test and Training Range within the northern Gulf of Mexico. The authorized activities as specified in a Letter of Authorization issued under §§ 216.106 and 216.257 include, but are not limited to, activities associated with

(1)The Joint Air-to-Surface Stand-off Missile (JASSM) exercise for a maximum of two live shots (single) and 4 inert shots (single) annually and

(2)The small-diameter bomb

(SDB)exercise for a maximum of six live shots a year, with two of the shots occurring simultaneously and a maximum of 12 inert shots, with up to two occurring simultaneously.

(b)The incidental take by Level A harassment, Level B harassment, or mortality of marine mammals under the activity identified in this section is limited to the following species: Atlantic bottlenose dolphins ( *Tursiops truncatus* ), Atlantic spotted dolphins ( *Stenella frontalis* ), dwarf sperm whales ( *Kogia simus* ) and pygmy sperm whale ( *Kogia breviceps* ). § 216.251 Effective dates. Regulations in this subpart are effective from 30 days after the date of publication of the final rule in the **Federal Register** until 5 years and 30 days after the date of publication of the final rule in the **Federal Register** . § 216.252 Permissible methods of taking.

(a)Under Letters of Authorization issued pursuant to §§ 216.106 and 216.257, the Holder of the Letter of Authorization may incidentally, but not intentionally, take marine mammals by Level A and Level B harassment, and mortality within the area described in § 216.250(a), provided the activity is in compliance with all terms, conditions, and requirements of these regulations and the appropriate Letter of Authorization.

(b)The taking of marine mammals under a Letter of Authorization is limited to the species listed in § 216.252(b) and is limited to a total of 1 mortality, 2 takes by Level A harassment, and 53 takes by Level B harassment annually. § 216.253 Prohibitions. Notwithstanding takings contemplated in § 216.250 and authorized by a Letter of Authorization issued under §§ 216.106 and 216.257, no person in connection with the activities described in § 216.250 shall:

(a)Take any marine mammal not specified in § 216.250(b);

(b)Take any marine mammal specified in § 216.250(b) other than by incidental, unintentional Level A or Level B harassment or mortality;

(c)Take a marine mammal specified in § 216.250(b) if such taking results in more than a negligible impact on the species or stocks of such marine mammal; or

(d)Violate, or fail to comply with, the terms, conditions, and requirements of these regulations or a Letter of Authorization issued under §§ 216.106 and 216.257. § 216.254 Mitigation. The activity identified in § 216.250(a) must be conducted in a manner that minimizes, to the greatest extent practicable, adverse impacts on marine mammals and their habitats. When conducting operations identified in § 216.250(a) under a Letter of Authorization, the following mitigation measures must be implemented: (a)(1) For the JASSM, the holder of the Letter of Authorization must establish and monitor a safety zone for marine mammals with a radius of 2.0 nm (3.7 km) from the center of the detonation and a buffer zone with a radius of 1.0 nm (1.85 km) radius from the outer edge of the safety zone.

(2)For the SDB, the holder of the Letter of Authorization must establish and monitor a safety for marine mammals with a radius of no less than 5 nm (9.3 km) for single bombs and 10 nm (18.5 km) for double bombs and a buffer zone from the outer edge of the safety zone with a radius of at least 2.5 nm (4.6 km) for single bombs and 5 nm (18.5 km) for double bombs.

(b)When detonating explosives:

(1)If any marine mammals are observed within the designated safety zone prescribed in condition (a)(1) of this section, or within the buffer zone prescribed in condition (a)(2) of this section that are on a course that will put them within the safety zone prior to JASSM or SDB launch, the launching must be delayed until all marine mammals are no longer within the designated safety zone.

(2)If any marine mammals are detected in the buffer zone and subsequently cannot be reacquired, the mission launch will not continue until the next verified location is outside of the safety zone and the animal is moving away from the mission area.

(3)If weather and/or sea conditions preclude adequate aerial surveillance for detecting marine mammals, detonation must be delayed until adequate sea conditions exist for aerial surveillance to be undertaken. Adequate sea conditions means the sea state does not exceed Beaufort sea state 3.5 (i.e., whitecaps on 33 to 50 percent of surface; 0.6 m (2 ft) to 0.9 m (3 ft) waves), the visibility is 5.6 km (3 nm) or greater, and the ceiling is 305 m (1,000 ft) or greater.

(4)To ensure adequate daylight for pre- and post-detonation monitoring, mission launches may not take place earlier than 2 hours after sunrise, and detonations may not take place later than 2 hours prior to sunset, or whenever darkness or weather conditions will preclude completion of the post-test survey effort described in § 216.255.

(5)If post-detonation surveys determine that a serious injury or lethal take of a marine mammal has occurred, the test procedure and the monitoring methods must be reviewed with the National Marine Fisheries Service and appropriate changes must be made prior to conducting the next mission detonation.

(6)Mission launches must be delayed if aerial or vessel monitoring programs described under § 216.255 cannot be fully carried out. § 216.255 Requirements for monitoring and reporting.

(a)The Holder of the Letter of Authorization issued pursuant to §§ 216.106 and 216.257 for activities described in § 216.250(a) is required to conduct the monitoring and reporting measures specified in this section and any additional monitoring measures contained in the Letter of Authorization.

(b)The Holder of the Letter of Authorization is required to cooperate with the National Marine Fisheries Service, and any other Federal, state or local agency monitoring the impacts of the activity on marine mammals. Unless specified otherwise in the Letter of Authorization, the Holder of the Letter of Authorization must notify the Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service, or designee, by letter or telephone (301-713-2289), at least 2 weeks prior to any modification to the activity identified in § 216.250(a) that has the potential to result in the mortality or Level A or Level B harassment of marine mammals that was not identified and addressed previously.

(c)The Holder of this Authorization must:

(1)Designate qualified on-site individual(s) to record the effects of mission launches on marine mammals that inhabit the northern Gulf of Mexico;

(2)Have on-site individuals, approved in advance by the National Marine Fisheries Service, to conduct the mitigation, monitoring and reporting activities specified in these regulations and in the Letter of Authorization issued pursuant to § 216.106 and § 216.257.

(3)Conduct aerial surveys to reduce impacts on protected species. The aerial survey/monitoring team will consist of two experienced marine mammal observers, approved in advance by the Southeast Region, National Marine Fisheries Service. The aircraft will also have a data recorder who would be responsible for relaying the location, the species if possible, the direction of movement, and the number of animals sighted.

(4)Conduct shipboard monitoring to reduce impacts to protected species. Trained observers will conduct monitoring from the highest point possible on each mission or support vessel(s). The observer on the vessel must be equipped with optical equipment with sufficient magnification (e.g., 25X power “Big-Eye” binoculars.

(d)The aerial and shipboard monitoring teams will maintain proper lines of communication to avoid communication deficiencies. The observers from the aerial team and operations vessel will have direct communication with the lead scientist aboard the operations vessel.

(e)Pre-mission Monitoring: Approximately 5 hours prior to the mission, or at daybreak, the appropriate vessel(s) would be on-site in the primary test site near the location of the earliest planned mission point. Observers onboard the vessel will assess the suitability of the test site, based on visual observation of marine mammals and overall environmental conditions (visibility, sea state, etc.). This information will be relayed to the lead scientist.

(f)Three Hours Prior to Mission:

(1)Approximately three hours prior to the mission launch, aerial monitoring will commence within the test site to evaluate the test site for environmental suitability. Evaluation of the entire test site would take approximately 1 to 1.5 hours. The aerial monitoring team will begin monitoring the safety zone and buffer zone around the target area.

(2)Shipboard observers will monitor the safety and buffer zone, and the lead scientist will enter all marine mammal sightings, including the time of sighting and the direction of travel, into a marine animal tracking and sighting database.

(g)One to 1.5 Hours Prior to Mission Launch:

(1)Depending upon the mission, aerial and shipboard viewers will be instructed to leave the area and remain outside the safety area. The aerial team will report all marine animals spotted and their directions of travel to the lead scientist onboard the vessel.

(2)The shipboard monitoring team will continue searching the buffer zone for protected species as it leaves the safety zone. The surface vessels will continue to monitor from outside of the safety area until after impact.

(h)Post-mission monitoring:

(1)The vessels will move into the safety zone from outside the safety zone and continue monitoring for at least two hours, concentrating on the area down current of the test site.

(2)The Holder of the Letter of Authorization will closely coordinate mission launches with marine animal stranding networks.

(3)The monitoring team will document any dead or injured marine mammals and, if practicable, recover and examine any dead animals.

(i)Activities related to the monitoring described in this section may include retention of marine mammals without the need for a separate scientific research permit.

(j)In accordance with provisions in § 216.258(b)(2), the Holder of the Letter of Authorization must conduct the research required under the Letter of Authorization.

(k)Reporting

(1)Unless specified otherwise in the Letter of Authorization, the Holder of the Letter of Authorization must submit an annual report to the Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service, no later than 60 days prior to the date of expiration of the Letter of Authorization. This report must contain all information required by these regulations and the Letter of Authorization.

(2)The final comprehensive report on all marine mammal monitoring and research conducted during the period of these regulations must be submitted to the Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service at least 240 days prior to expiration of these regulations or 240 days after the expiration of these regulations if new regulations will not be requested. § 216.256 Applications for Letters of Authorization. To incidentally take marine mammals pursuant to these regulations, the U.S. citizen (as defined at § 216.103 ) conducting the activity identified in § 216.250(a) must apply for and obtain either an initial Letter of Authorization in accordance with §§ 216.106 and 216.257 or a renewal under § 216.258. § 216.257 Letter of Authorization.

(a)A Letter of Authorization, unless suspended or revoked, will be valid for a period of time not to exceed the period of validity of this subpart, but must be renewed annually subject to annual renewal conditions in § 216.258.

(b)Each Letter of Authorization will set forth:

(1)Permissible methods of incidental taking;

(2)Means of effecting the least practicable adverse impact on the species, its habitat, and on the availability of the species for subsistence uses; and

(3)Requirements for monitoring and reporting.

(c)Issuance and renewal of the Letter of Authorization will be based on a determination that the total number of marine mammals taken by the activity as a whole will have no more than a negligible impact on the species or stock of affected marine mammals.

(d)Except for the initial Letter of Authorization, notice of issuance or denial of a Letter of Authorization will be published in the **Federal Register** within 30 days of a determination. § 216.258 Renewal of Letters of Authorization.

(a)A Letter of Authorization issued under § 216.106 and § 216.257 for the activity identified in § 216.250(a) will be renewed annually upon:

(1)Notification to the National Marine Fisheries Service that the activity described in the application submitted under § 216.256 will be undertaken and that there will not be a substantial modification to the described work, mitigation or monitoring undertaken during the upcoming 12 months;

(2)Timely receipt of the monitoring report required under § 216.255(b), and the Letter of Authorization, which has been reviewed and accepted by the National Marine Fisheries Service; and

(3)A determination by the National Marine Fisheries Service that the mitigation, monitoring and reporting measures required under § 216.254 and the Letter of Authorization issued under §§ 216.106 and 216.257, were undertaken and will be undertaken during the upcoming annual period of validity of a renewed Letter of Authorization.

(b)If a request for a renewal of a Letter of Authorization issued under §§ 216.106 and 216.258 indicates that a substantial modification to the described work, mitigation, monitoring or research undertaken during the upcoming season will occur, the National Marine Fisheries Service will provide the public a period of 30 days for review and seek comment on:

(1)New cited information and data that indicates that the determinations made for promulgating these regulations are in need of reconsideration, and

(2)Proposed changes to the mitigation, monitoring and research requirements contained in these regulations or in the current Letter of Authorization. § 216.259 Modifications to Letters of Authorization.

(a)Except as provided in paragraph

(b)of this section, no substantive modification (including withdrawal or suspension) to a Letter of Authorization issued pursuant to §§ 216.106 shall be made until after notification and an opportunity for public comment has been provided. For purposes of this paragraph, a renewal of a Letter of Authorization under § 216.258, without modification (except for the period of validity), is not considered a substantive modification.

(b)If the Assistant Administrator determines that an emergency exists that poses a significant risk to the well-being of the species or stocks of marine mammals specified in § 216.250(b), a Letter of Authorization issued pursuant to §§ 216.106 and 216.257 may be substantively modified without prior notification and an opportunity for public comment. Notification will be published in the **Federal Register** within 30 days subsequent to the action. [FR Doc. E6-12556 Filed 8-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S 71 149 Thursday, August 3, 2006 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request July 28, 2006. The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments regarding

(a)whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

(c)ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected;

(d)ways to 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 should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), *OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov* or fax

(202)395-5806 and to Departmental Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250-7602. Comments regarding these information collections are best assured of having their full effect if received within 30 days of this notification. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling

(202)720-8958. An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Animal & Plant Health Inspection Service *Title:* Importation of Poultry Products. *OMB Control Number:* 0579-0141. *Summary of Collection:* The Animal & Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) is authorized, among other things, to prohibit the importation and interstate movement of animals and animal products to prevent the introduction into and dissemination within the United States of animal diseases and pests. The regulations under which disease prevention activities are contained are in Title 9, Chapter 1, Subchapter D, and Parts 91 through 99 of the Code of Federal Regulations. The purpose of these regulations is to allow poultry meat that originates in the United States to be shipped, for processing purposes, to a region where exotic Newcastle disease exists, and then returned to the United States. The process entails the use of four information collection activities in the form of a certificate of origin, serial numbers, records that must be maintained, and cooperative service agreements that must be signed. *Need and Use of the Information:* APHIS will collect information to ensure that imported poultry carcasses pose a negligible risk of introducing END into the United States. *Description of Respondents:* Business or other for-profit. *Number of Respondents:* 4. *Frequency of Responses:* Recordkeeping; Reporting: On occasion. *Total Burden Hours:* 30. Ruth Brown, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E6-12492 Filed 8-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request July 31, 2006. The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments regarding

(a)whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;

(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

(c)ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected;

(202)720-8681. An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Foreign Agricultural Service *Title:* Trade Adjustment Assistance for Farmers (TAA). *OMB Control Number:* 0551-0040. *Summary of Collection:* The Trade Act of 2002 (HR 3009) (PL 107-210), established the Trade Adjustment Assistance for Farmers

(TAA)program. The primary objective of this program is to provide technical and cash assistance to producers of raw agricultural commodities when the Administrator, Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS), determines that increased imports have contributed importantly to specific price decline over 5 preceding marketing years. *Need and Use of the Information:* FAS will collect information to permit producers to petition and apply for program benefits. The information is needed to determine eligibility to obtain benefits under the program providing trade adjustment assistance for farmers and to ascertain the amount of payments an adversely affected producer is entitled to receive. The information collected will provide essential data and economic information for use by FAS, Farm Service Agency, Economic Research Service, Extension Service, and other agencies within the Department. *Description of Respondents:* Farms; not-for-profit institutions; business or other for-profit. *Number of Respondents:* 1,000. *Frequency of Responses:* Reporting: Annually. *Total Burden Hours:* 14,000. Ruth Brown, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E6-12558 Filed 8-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-10-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Foreign Agricultural Service Trade Adjustment Assistance for Farmers AGENCY: Foreign Agricultural Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice. The Administrator, Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS), will begin accepting Trade Adjustment Assistance for Farmers petitions for fiscal year 2007 starting August 15, 2006. Petitioners can file their form FAS-930 or other acceptable petitions to FAS from August 15, 2006, through January 31, 2007. Petitioners should file their petition in accordance with 7 CFR 1580.201. The petition must be received by the TAA office by close of business January 31, 2007. The TAA office address is Foreign Agricultural Service, ITP/IPPD, MS-1021, Washington, DC 20250-1021, or facsimile number is

(202)720-0876, or by e-mail to *trade.adjustment@fas.usda.gov* . Use of fax or email is recommended. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Trade Act of 2002 (Pub. L. 107-210) amended the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2551, *et seq.* ) to add a new chapter 6, which established a program of trade adjustment assistance for farmers, providing both technical assistance and cash benefits to producers and qualified fishermen. The statute authorizes an appropriation of not more than $90 million for each fiscal year 2003 through 2007 to carry out the program. Under this program, a group of agricultural commodity producers and qualified fishermen may petition the Administrator for trade adjustment assistance. Petitions will be reviewed for completeness and timeliness. Once the petition is completed in accordance with 7 CFR 1580.201, the acceptance of the petition will be published in the **Federal Register** . Once a petition has been accepted, a determination will be made to verify that the most recent marketing year price for the commodity produced by the group is less than 80 percent of the average of the national average prices for the 5 marketing years preceding the most recent marketing year and that increases in imports of a like or directly competitive product contributed importantly to the decline in price. If these conditions are met, the Administrator will certify the group as eligible for trade adjustment assistance. Once a petition has been certified, eligible producers and qualified fishermen will have 90 days to contact the Farm Service Agency to apply for assistance. *For Further Information Or Assistance In Completing Form Fas-930, Contact:* Jean-Louis Pajot, Coordinator, Trade Adjustment Assistance for Farmers, FAS, USDA,

(202)720-2916, email: *trade.adjustment@fas.usda.gov* . Additional program information can be obtained at the TAA website. The URL is *http://www.fas.usda.gov/itp/taa/taaindex.htm* . W. Kirk Miller, Acting Administrator, Foreign Agricultural Service. [FR Doc. E6-12504 Filed 8-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-10-P THE BROADCASTING BOARD OF GOVERNORS Proposed Collection Reinstatement; Comment Request AGENCY: The Broadcasting Board of Governors. ACTION: Proposed Collection Reinstatement; Comment Request. SUMMARY: The Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on an information collection titled, “Surveys and Other Audience Research for Radio and TV Marti.” This request for comment is being made pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 [Pub. L. 104-13; 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)]. The information collection activity involved with this program is conducted pursuant to the mandate given to the BBG (formerly the United States Information Agency) in accordance with PL 98-111, the Radio Broadcasting to Cuba Act, dated, October 4, 1983, to provide for the broadcasting of accurate information to the people of Cuba and other purposes. This act was amended by PL 101-246, dated, February 16, 1990, which established the authority for TV Marti. DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before October 2, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Jeannette Mancus, the BBG Clearance Officer, BBG, M/AA, Room 1657, 330 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20237, telephone

(202)203-4664, e-mail address *JGMancus@IBB.GOV.* *Copies:* Copies of the Request for Clearance (OMB 83-I), supporting statement, and other documents that will be submitted to OMB for approval may be obtained from the BBG Clearance Officer. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Public reporting burden for this proposed collection of information is estimated to average 30 minutes (.50 of an hour) per response for field survey respondents (400), and 240 minutes (4 hours) for Focus Group Study respondents (48), including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Responses are voluntary and respondents will be required to respond only one time. Comments are requested on the proposed information collection concerning:

(a)Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the agency, including whether the information has practical utility;

(b)the accuracy of the Agency's burden estimates;

(c)ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; and

(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information to Ms. Jeannette Mancus, the BBG Clearance Officer, BBG, M/AA, Room 1657, 330 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20237, telephone

(202)203-4664, e-mail address *JGMancus@IBB.GOV.* *Current Actions:* BBG is requesting reinstatement of this collection for a three-year period and approval for a revision to the burden hours. *Title:* Surveys and Other Audience Research for Radio and TV Marti *Abstract:* Data from this information collection are used by BBG's Office of Cuba Broadcasting

(OCB)in fulfillment of its mandate to evaluate effectiveness of Radio and TV Marti operations by estimating the audience size and composition for broadcasts; and assess signal reception, credibility and relevance of programming through this research. *Proposed Frequency of Responses:* No. of Respondents—400 Field Study + 48 Group Study = 448 Recordkeeping Hours—.50 Field Study + 4 Group Study =

(200)+

(192)= 392 Total Annual Burden— Dated: July 27, 2006. Carol F. Baker, Director of Administration. [FR Doc. E6-12493 Filed 8-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8610-01-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Economic Development Administration Notice of Petitions by Firms for Determination of Eligibility to Apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance AGENCY: Economic Development Administration, Department of Commerce. ACTION: Notice and Opportunity for Public Comment. Pursuant to Section 251 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2341 *et seq.* ), the Economic Development Administration

(EDA)has received petitions for certification of eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance from the firms listed below. EDA has initiated separate investigations to determine whether increased imports into the United States of articles like or directly competitive with those produced by each firm contributed importantly to the total or partial separation of the firm's workers, or threat thereof, and to a decrease in sales or production of each petitioning firm. List of Petitions Received by EDA for Certification of Eligibility To Apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance for the Period June 8, 2006 Through July 28, 2006 Firm Address Date petition accepted Product Marlen Research Corp 9202 Barton Street, Overland Park, KS 66214 6/8/06 Industrial food processing equipment. Grain Place Foods, Inc 1904 N. Highway 14, Marquette, NE 68854 6/20/06 Pet foods, whole and rolled cereal grains, popcorn. Durex, Inc 5 Stahuber Avenue, Union, NJ 07083 6/20/06 Sheet metal and metal stamping components. Beck's Waffles of Oklahoma 7311 N. Harrison, Shawnee, OK 74804 6/22/06 Waffle irons and waffle mix. Permanent Press, Inc. dba Day Publishing & Training 2903 Saturn Road, Garland, TX 75041 6/22/06 Educational training books. Scott Electric Systems, Inc. 310 Wall Street, Joplin, MO 64801 6/22/06 Electronic products. American Precision Machining, LLC 19503 E. 6th Street, Tulsa, OK 74108 6/22/06 Aircraft parts. TGM, Inc. 299 Old Forks Road, Hammonton, NJ 08037 6/22/06 Precision sheet metal components. Laminating Specialties, Inc. and R&Z Acquisition Corp. dba New England Tool Co 2 New Industrial Road, Warren, RI 02885 6/23/06 Lettered cabinetry and related products. Radia Enterprises, Inc. dba Career Uniforms 3800 Juniper Street, Houston, TX 77087 6/23/06 Uniform apparel. Rose City Archery, Inc 94931 Quiet Valley Lane, Myrtle Point, OR 94758 6/28/06 Archery products. Ace Pattern & Foundry of Kansas, Inc 1001 Sunshine Road, Kansas City, KS 66115 6/30/06 Cast aluminum products. Overland Products 1687 Airport Road, P.O. Box 567, Freemont, NE 68026 7/12/06 Metal stamping tools and dies, metal windows, plated components and assemblies. Eagle Flexible Packaging 1300 W. Washington Street, West Chicago, IL 60185 7/12/06 Flexographic packaging. American Lighting Fixture Corp dba Wilshire Manufacturing Corp. 645 Myles Standish Boulevard, Taunton, MA 02780 7/18/06 Lighting fixtures. Tri-Americas, Inc. 2931 Rosa Avenue, El Paso, TX 79905 7/20/06 Denim jeans. Mechanical Enterprises, Inc. 2961 Olympic Industrial Drive SE, A, Smryna, GA 30080 7/20/06 Plastic assembly parts for aerospace, military and point of purchase display market. Cascade Plastics Company, Inc 7009-45th St Ct East, Fife, WA 98424 7/25/06 Molded plastic products. GreenLeaf Industries, Inc 310 Bussell Ferry Road, Lenoir City, TN 37771 7/25/06 Plastic products and fittings. Market Forge Industries, Inc 35 Garvey Street, Everett, MA 02149 7/25/06 Industrial cookware equipment. HMC International 6247 State Route 233, Rome, NY 13440 7/25/06 Plastic injection molded products. Revere Copper Products, Inc One Revere Park, Rome, NY 13440 7/25/06 Semi finished copper and copper alloy products. Scott Specialties, Inc. 512 M Street, Belleville, KS 66935 7/26/06 Orthopedic goods. Q Corporation 301 River Street, Derby, KS 67037-1528 7/27/06 Parts and accessories for electronic industry. Billy Goat Industries, Inc 1803 SW. Jefferson Street, Lee's Summit, MO 64082 7/27/06 Mowers, blowers, vacuums, specialty and accessories/parts. Southern Bakeries, LLC 2700 E. 3rd, Hope, AR 71801 7/27/06 Bakery products. Dempster Industries, Inc 711 South 6th Street, Beatrice, NE 68310 7/27/06 Pump and pumping equipment. Scandia Packaging Machinery, Inc 15 Industrial Road, Fairfield, NJ 07004 7/27/06 High-speed overwrapping system. The Gaines Company #77 Route 349, P.O. Box 35, Gaines, PA 16921 7/27/06 Fishing lures. Covenant Doors and Millwork, Inc 1604 5th Avenue, P.O. Box 105, Central City, NE 68826 7/28/06 Pump and pumping equipment. Any party having a substantial interest in these proceedings may request a public hearing on the matter. A written request for a hearing must be submitted to the Office of Chief Counsel, Room 7005, Economic Development Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC 20230, no later than ten

(10)calendar days following publication of this notice. Please follow the procedures set forth in Section 315.9 of EDA's interim final rule (70 FR 47002) for procedures for requesting a public hearing. The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance official program number and title of the program under which these petitions are submitted is 11.313, Trade Adjustment Assistance. Barry Bird, Chief Counsel. [FR Doc. E6-12533 Filed 8-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-24-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-549-502] Extension of Time Limit for Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From Thailand AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. *Effective Date:* August 3, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jacqueline Arrowsmith or Myrna Lobo, AD/CVD Operations, Office 6, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:

(202)482-5255 or

(202)482-2371, respectively. Background On April 7, 2006, the Department published in the **Federal Register** the preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on circular carbon steel welded pipes and tubes from Thailand. *See Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from Thailand: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review,* 71 FR 17810 (April 7, 2006). The current deadline for the final results of this review is August 7, 2006. Extension of Time Limit for Final Results of Review Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act) requires the Department to issue the final results in an administrative review within 120 days after the date on which the preliminary results were published. However, if it is not practicable to complete the review within this time period, section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the Department to extend the time limit for the final results to 180 days from the date of publication of the preliminary results. The Department finds that it is not practicable to complete the review within the original time frame due to the complex nature of the case. As this case involves complex issues related to Saha Thai's claim that its sales are made at more than one level of trade, and the Department must consider information requested and received after the issuance of the preliminary results, completion of this review is not practicable within the original time limit of August 7, 2006. Consequently, in accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and section 351.213(h)(2) of the Department's regulations, the Department is extending the time limit for the completion of the final results of the review until no later than September 7, 2006, which is within 180 days from the publication of the preliminary results. This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(3)(A) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: July 28, 2006. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E6-12552 Filed 8-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-580-812] Dynamic Random Access Memory Semiconductors of One Megabit or Above From the Republic of Korea; Notice of Amended Final Results Pursuant to Court Decision AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On April 5, 2006, the United States Court of International Trade

(CIT)sustained the final remand redetermination made by the Department of Commerce (the Department) pursuant to the CIT's third remand of the final results of the 1997-1998 administrative review of dynamic random access memory semiconductors of one megabit or above (DRAMs) from the Republic of Korea (Korea). *See Hyundai Electronics Industries Co., Ltd. and Hyundai Electronics America, Inc.* v. *United States and Micron Technology, Inc.,* 425 F. Supp. 2d 1321 (CIT 2006) ( *Hyundai IV* ). Because all litigation in this matter has now concluded, the Department is now issuing its amended final results in accordance with the CIT's decision. *Effective Date:* August 3, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ron Trentham or Tom Futtner, AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone:

(202)482-6320 or 482-3814, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On December 14, 1999, the Department published a notice of final results of the antidumping duty administrative review of DRAMs from Korea covering the period May 1, 1997 through April 30, 1998. *See Dynamic Random Access Memory Semiconductors of One Megabit or Above From the Republic of Korea,* 64 FR 69694 (Dec. 14, 1999) ( *Final Results* ). Subsequently, Hyundai Electronics Industries Co., Ltd. (Hyundai) 1 filed suit at the CIT contesting the *Final Results.* 1 After the 1997-1998 administrative review was completed, respondent Hyundai acquired LG Semicon. Subsequent to the acquisition the name of the combined company was changed to Hynix Semiconductor, Inc. In the *Final Results,* the Department determined that:

(1)The use of total adverse facts available

(AFA)was warranted for LG Semicon

(LG)( *see Final Results* at 64 FR 69695);

(2)Hyundai and LG's reported research and development (R&D) expenses did not reflect the appropriate R&D cost of the subject merchandise ( *see Final Results* at 64 FR 69702); and

(3)the reduced R&D costs recognized by Hyundai and LG, through the amortization and deferral of their R&D expenses, did not reasonably reflect the R&D cost of the subject merchandise ( *see Final Results* at 64 FR 69700). On April 16, 2004, the Court remanded the Department's *Final Results,* in *Hyundai Electronics Industries, Co., Ltd., and Hyundai Electronics America Inc.* v. *United States and Micron Technology, Inc.,* 342 F. Supp. 2d 1141 (CIT 2004) ( *Hyundai I* ). In its remand, the Court ordered the Department to:

(1)Recalculate LG's dumping margin by application of AFA to only a portion of its U.S. sales;

(2)provide additional information regarding the effect of non-subject merchandise R&D on R&D for subject merchandise, or recalculate R&D costs on the most product-specific basis possible;

(3)provide specific evidence showing how Hyundai and LG's actual R&D expenses for the period of review are not reasonably accounted for in their amortized R&D costs, or accept their amortization of R&D expenses, and

(4)provide additional information showing how R&D expenses that are currently deferred by Hyundai and LG affect production or revenue for the instant review period, or accept their deferral methodology. In its first redetermination on remand, the Department:

(1)Recalculated LG's dumping margin using 89.10 percent as partial AFA;

(2)provided information to demonstrate that Hyundai and LG's production of subject merchandise has benefitted from cross-fertilization;

(3)recalculated LG and Hyundai's R&D costs to allow for amortization, and

(4)expensed Hyundai and LG's deferred R&D costs in the period incurred and explained why deferral of certain R&D expenses does not reasonably reflect the R&D expenses related to the subject merchandise. In *Hyundai Electronics Industries, Co., Ltd., and Hyundai Electronics America Inc.* v. * United States and Micron Technology, Inc.,* 395 F. Supp 2d 1231 (CIT 2005) ( *Hyundai II* ), the Court sustained the Department's application of 89.10 percent as partial AFA, and its use of amortized R&D expenses for calculating Hyundai and LG's respective costs of production. The Court remanded the Department's cross-fertilization determination with instructions to recalculate Hyundai and LG's R&D expenses without application of the cross-fertilization theory, and also remanded the Department's recognition of all of Hyundai and LG's 1997 R&D expenses for antidumping duty purposes with instructions to accept Hyundai's and LG's deferral methodology in calculating R&D expenses for their respective costs of production. In *Hyundai Electronics Industries, Co., Ltd., and Hyundai Electronics America Inc.* v. *United States and Micron Technology, Inc.,* 414 F. Supp. 2d 1289 (CIT 2006) ( *Hyundai III* ), the Court ordered that the Department's original findings rejecting LG and Hyundai's cost amortization methodology, as stated in the *Final Results,* shall be reinstated in accordance with *Hynix Semiconductor Inc.* v. * United States,* 424 F.3d 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2005) ( *Hynix IV* ). However, the Court denied the Department's motion that its original findings rejecting LG and Hyundai's R&D deferral methodology, as stated in the *Final Results,* be reinstated in accordance with *Hynix IV.* On April 5, 2006, the CIT found that the Department complied with the CIT's remand order in *Hyundai III* and sustained the Department's remand redetermination. *See Hyundai IV,* 425 F. Supp.2d at 1321. On June 5, 2006, consistent with the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in *Timken Co.* v. *United States,* 893 F. 2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990), the Department notified the public that the CIT's decision was “not in harmony” with the Department's *Final Results. See Dynamic Random Access Memory Semiconductors of One Megabit or Above From the Republic of Korea; Notice of Court Decision Not in Harmony with Final Results of Administrative Review,* 71 FR 32305 (June 5, 2006). We are issuing amended final results to reflect the results of the remand determinations because no party has further appealed and there is now a final and conclusive decision in the court proceeding. Amended Final Results of Review We are amending the final results of the 1997-1998 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on DRAMs from the Republic of Korea for LG and Hyundai. The revised weighted-average dumping margin for LG is 15.87 percent and the revised weighted-average dumping margin for Hyundai is 3.76 percent. Assessment The Department shall determine, and the U.S. Customs and Border Protection

(CBP)shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. In accordance with section 351.212(b)(1) of the Department's regulations, we have calculated importer-specific assessment rates by dividing the dumping margins found on the subject merchandise examined by the estimated entered value of such merchandise. Where the importer-specific assess rates are above *de minimis* , we will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties on that importer's entries of subject merchandise. The Department will issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to CBP within 15 days of publication of these amended final results of review. These amended final results of administrative review are issued and published in accordance with section 516A(c)(1) of the Act. Dated: July 26, 2006. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E6-12554 Filed 8-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-549-822] Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from Thailand; Corrected Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: August 3, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Irina Itkin or Alice Gibbons, AD/CVD Operations, Office 2, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC, 20230; telephone

(202)482-0656 and

(202)482-0498, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On July 20, 2006, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published in the **Federal Register** its notice of partial rescission of the antidumping duty administrative review of certain frozen warmwater shrimp from Thailand for the period August 4, 2004, through January 31, 2006. *See Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from Thailand; Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review* , 71 FR 41200 (July 20, 2006) ( *Partial Rescission* ). In the *Partial Rescission* , the Department noted that it was rescinding the administrative review with respect to Kiang Huat Sea Hull Trading Frozen Food Public Co., Ltd., based on a timely request for withdrawal. *See Partial Rescission* , 71 FR at 41201. However, the Department incorrectly spelled this company's name. Specifically, the correct name for this company is Kiang Huat Sea Gull Trading Frozen Food Public Co., Ltd. We now correct the partial rescission of the 2004-2006 antidumping duty administrative review of certain frozen warmwater shrimp from Thailand as noted above. As a result of this correction, we are rescinding the 2004-2006 administrative review for Kiang Huat Sea Gull Trading Frozen Food Public Co., Ltd. This corrected partial rescission is issued and published in accordance section 751 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4). Dated: July 26, 2006. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E6-12536 Filed 8-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration (A-475-703) Granular Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin From Italy: Second Extension of the Time Limit for the Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: August 3, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Saliha Loucif or Salim Bhabhrawala, at

(202)482-1779 or

(202)482-1784, respectively; AD/CVD Operations, Office 1, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street & Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On September 28, 2005, the Department of Commerce (Department) published a notice of initiation of administrative review of the antidumping duty order on Granular Polytetrafluoroethylene Resin

(PTFE)From Italy, covering the period August 1, 2004, through July 31, 2005. *See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation in Part* , 70 FR 56631 (September 28, 2006). On April 14, 2006, the Department extended the preliminary results from May 3, 2006 to August 1, 2006. *See Extension of the Time Limit for the Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review* , 72 FR 19481 (April 14, 2006). Second Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results of Review Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires the Department to complete the preliminary results of an administrative review within 245 days after the last day of the anniversary month of an order/finding for which a review is requested. However, if it is not practicable to complete the review within this time period, section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the Department to extend the time limit for the preliminary results to a maximum of 365 days after the last day of the anniversary month of an order/finding for which a review is requested. We determine that it is not practicable to complete the preliminary results of this review within the originally extended time limit due to a number of complicated issues ( *e.g.* , further-manufacturing of wet raw polymer into granular PTFE resin, U.S. warehousing), which must be addressed prior to the issuance of those results. The Department requires additional time to analyze the respondent's questionnaire response and issue any necessary supplemental questionnaires. Accordingly, the Department is extending, by 30 days, the time limit for completion of the preliminary results of this administrative review until no later than August 31, 2006. We intend to issue the final results no later than 120 days after publication of the preliminary results notice. This notice of extension of the time limit is published in accordance with 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act. Dated: July 26, 2006. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E6-12566 Filed 8-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-891] Hand Trucks and Certain Parts Thereof From the People's Republic of China; Notice of Extension of Time Limits for Preliminary Results in Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and New Shipper Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. *Effective Date:* August 3, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth Eastwood or Nichole Zink, AD/CVD Operations, Office 2, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:

(202)482-3874 and

(202)482-0049, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On February 1 and February 3, 2006, respectively, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published notices of initiation of administrative and new shipper reviews of the antidumping duty order on hand trucks and certain parts thereof (hand trucks) from the People's Republic of China (PRC). * See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation in Part * , 71 FR 5241 (Feb. 1, 2006); and *Hand Trucks and Certain Parts Thereof From the People's Republic of China; Initiation of New Shipper Review* , 71 FR 5810 (Feb. 3, 2006). On May 31, 2006, the Department published a notice aligning the time limits for the new shipper review with those for the administrative review. *See Hand Trucks and Certain Parts Thereof from the People's Republic of China: Notice of Postponement of Time Limits for New Shipper Antidumping Duty Review in Conjunction with Administrative Review* , 71 FR 30867 (May 31, 2006). Consequently, the preliminary results for both proceedings are currently due no later than September 5, 2006. The period of review for both proceedings is December 1, 2004, through November 30, 2005. The new shipper review covers one producer/exporter of the subject merchandise to the United States. The administrative review covers five producers/exporters of the subject merchandise to the United States. Extension of Time Limits for Preliminary Results Pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(1), the Department shall make a preliminary determination in an administrative review of an antidumping order within 245 days after the last day of the anniversary month of the date of publication of the order. The Act further provides, however, that the Department may extend the 245-day period to 365 days if it determines it is not practicable to complete the review within the foregoing time period. *See also* , 19 CFR 351.213(h)(2). We determine that it is not practicable to complete this administrative review within the time limits mandated by section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act because the Department's selection of mandatory respondents in this administrative review was not completed until May 2006, due to the withdrawal of the request for review of the company originally designated as the sole mandatory respondent. As a result, the Department was required to select additional mandatory respondents from the firms named in the notice of initiation and issue questionnaires to them. Because additional time is required to analyze these parties' responses, we have fully extended the deadline for completing the preliminary results until January 2, 2007, which is the next business day after 365 days from the last day of the anniversary month of the date of publication of the order. The deadline for the final results of the review continues to be 120 days after the publication of the preliminary results. This extension is in accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.213(h)(2). Dated: July 26, 2006. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E6-12551 Filed 8-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration A-549-817 Notice of Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products From Thailand AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: August 3, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen Bailey, AD/CVD Operations, Office 7, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:

(202)482-0193. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The Department of Commerce (the Department) received timely requests for administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products (hot-rolled steel) from Thailand, with respect to Sahaviriya Steel Industries Public Company Limited

(SSI)on November 30, 2005, from domestic producer Nucor Corporation (Nucor). Also on November 30, 2005, the Department received a request for administrative review of the same order for SSI, Nakornthai Strip Mill Public Co., Ltd. (NSM), and G Steel Public Company Limited (G Steel) from petitioner United States Steel Corporation (petitioner). On December 22, 2005, the Department published a notice of initiation of this administrative review for the period of November 1, 2004, through October 31, 2005. *See Notice of Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation in Part* , 70 FR 76024 (December 22, 2005). On January 13, 2006, G Steel submitted a no-shipments letter to the Department in which it claimed it did not have sales, shipments, or entries of subject merchandise to the United States during the current period of review ( *i.e.* , November 1, 2004 through October 31, 2005). On March 22, 2006, both Nucor and petitioner submitted letters withdrawing their requests for administrative review of the above-referenced antidumping duty order with respect to SSI. Accordingly, on April 28, 2006, the Department rescinded this review with respect to SSI. *See Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from Thailand* , 71 FR 25148 (April 28, 2006). Extension of Time Limits for Preliminary Results Pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the Department shall issue preliminary results in an administrative review of an antidumping duty order within 245 days after the last day of the anniversary month of the date of publication of the order. The Act further provides, however, that the Department may extend that 245-day period to 365 days if it determines it is not practicable to complete the review within the foregoing time period. In light of the complexity of analyzing NSM's sales data, its cost calculations and the control number reporting methodology for various products, it is not practicable to complete this review by the current deadline of August 2, 2006. Therefore, in accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act, the Department is extending the time limit for the preliminary results 60 days until October 2, 2006. The final results continue to be due 120 days after the publication of the preliminary results, in accordance with section 351.213

(h)of the Department's regulations. This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: July 24, 2006. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E6-12535 Filed 8-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [I.D. 072806C] Marine Mammals; File No. 87-1851 AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice; receipt of application for permit. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that Daniel P. Costa, Ph.D., Department of Biology and Institute of Marine Sciences, University of California, Santa Cruz, CA 95064, has applied for a permit to conduct research on pinnipeds in Antarctica and California. DATES: Written, telefaxed, or e-mail comments must be received on or before September 5, 2006. ADDRESSES: The application and related documents are available for review upon written request or by appointment in the following office(s): Permits, Conservation and Education Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13705, Silver Spring, MD 20910; phone (301)713-2289; fax (301)427-2521; and Southwest Region, NMFS, 501 West Ocean Blvd., Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802-4213; phone (562)980-4001; fax (562)980-4018. Written comments or requests for a public hearing on this application should be submitted to the Chief, Permits, Conservation and Education Division, F/PR1, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13705, Silver Spring, MD 20910. Those individuals requesting a hearing should set forth the specific reasons why a hearing would be appropriate. Comments may also be submitted by facsimile at

(301)427-2521, provided the facsimile is confirmed by hard copy submitted by mail and postmarked no later than the closing date of the comment period. Comments may also be submitted by e-mail. The mailbox address for providing email comments is *NMFS.Pr1Comments@noaa.gov* . Include in the subject line of the e-mail comment the following document identifier: File No. 87-1851. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amy Sloan, (301)713-2289. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The permit is requested under the authority of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 *et seq.* ), the regulations governing the taking and importing of marine mammals (50 CFR part 216), the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 *et seq.* ), and the regulations governing the taking, importing, and exporting of endangered and threatened species (50 CFR 222-226). The applicant proposes to conduct two projects over a 5-year period. Project I involves research in Antarctica to conduct tagging studies and physiological measurements on up to 35 Crabeater seals ( *Lobodon carcinophagus* ), 35 southern elephant seals ( *Mirounga leonina* ), 10 leopard seals ( *Hydrurga leptonyx* ), 10 Weddell seals ( *Leptonychotes weddellii* ), and five Ross seals ( *Ommatophoca rossii* ) of any age annually. Procedures would include capture, sedation, ultrasound, morphometrics, isotope and Evans blue dye administration, blood sampling, tagging/marking, instrument attachment, stomach lavage, specimen collection (whisker, claw, tooth, muscle and blubber biopsy), and recapture to remove instruments. An additional 50 juvenile southern elephant seals would be captured, weighed, measured, and flipper tagged annually. An additional 10 adult leopard seals, 10 adult Weddell seals, and 30 adult female southern elephant seals would have flipper tags applied annually. Up to 100 additional southern elephant seals and 100 additional seals of the other four species combined would be harassed annually incidental to these activities. The applicant also requests unintentional research-related mortality of up to three seals of any of these five seal species annually, not to exceed eight seals over the five years of the permit. Tissue samples would be imported into the United States. Project II would involve research on California sea lions ( *Zalophus californianus* ) to investigate foraging, diving, energetics, food habits, and at-sea distribution along the California coast. Procedures would include capture, sedation, morphometrics, isotope and Evans blue dye administration, blood sampling, tagging/marking, instrument attachment, stomach lavage and enema, blubber/muscle biopsy, metabolic measurements, stomach temperature telemeters, and milk sampling. Up to 100 pups/juveniles and 100 adults would be sampled annually, with some or all of the procedures performed. Harassment of unlimited numbers of California sea lions, harbor seals ( *Phoca vitulina* ), northern elephant seals ( *Mirounga augustirostris* ), and northern fur seals ( *Callorhinus ursinus* ) and up to 20 threatened Steller sea lions ( *Eumetopias jubatus* ) annually incidental to these activities is requested. The applicant also requests unintentional research-related mortality of up to five California sea lions over the course of the permit. Concurrent with the publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** , NMFS is forwarding copies of these applications to the Marine Mammal Commission and its Committee of Scientific Advisors. Dated: July 28, 2006. Tammy C. Adams, Acting Chief, Permits, Conservation and Education Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E6-12555 Filed 8-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Navy Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the Development of the Westside of Marine Corps Base Quantico, Including the 2005 Base Realignment and Closure

(BRAC)Action, Marine Corps Base Quantico (MCBQ), Virginia AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DoD. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA)of 1969, as implemented by the Council on Environmental Quality regulations (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), and applicable Marine Corps Order P5090.2A, guidelines for NEPA, the Marine Corps announces its intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement

(EIS)for the development of the westside of MCBQ, including the 2005 BRAC action at MCBQ, VA. The Marine Corps previously published a Notice of Intent

(NOI)to prepare a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (Vol. 67 FR 37405) for the development of the westside of MCBQ on May 29, 2002. This NOI cancels the previous NOI, and establishes the opportunity for the public to comment on the proposed action which now includes the BRAC 2005 actions at MCBQ. The Marine Corps will hold a public scoping meeting open house for the purpose of further identifying the scope of issues to be addressed in the EIS. Written and recorded comments will be accepted during this time. To ensure that the full range of issues related to this proposed action will be addressed, representatives from MCBQ will be available to answer questions and solicit public comments from all interested parties during the open house. Following future publication of the draft EIS, at a time to be determined, a second public meeting will be held to address comments on the draft document. DATES: All written comments must be received by September 8, 2006. The public scoping meeting will be held on Tuesday, August 22, 2006, at the Ramada Inn, 4316 Inn Street, Triangle, VA between 7 p.m. and 9:30 p.m. ADDRESSES: Agencies and the public are also encouraged to provide written comments in addition to, or in lieu of, oral comments at the scoping open house. Written comments and requests for inclusion on the EIS mailing list may be submitted to: Commander, NREA Branch (B 046), Attn: J. Gardner, 3250 Catlin Avenue, Marine Corps Base, Quantico, VA 22134-0855. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Jeff Gardner, 703-432-6770. Please submit requests for special assistance, sign language interpretation for the hearing impaired, or other auxiliary aids at the public meeting to Mr. Gardner by August 14, 2006. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: MCBQ is a 60,000-acre combat education and training base located approximately 30 miles south of Washington DC. The 2005 BRAC law has directed the relocation and collocation of Military Department Investigation Agencies and the Department of Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency to MCBQ. This is expected to add approximately 3,000 personnel at MCBQ by 2011. Other Federal and Marine Corps initiatives are expected to continue to identify MCBQ as a possible site for relocation. As part of a long-range planning effort to accommodate these anticipated requirements, the Quantico Land Use Plan, I-95 West, was developed for the Marine Corps which evaluated potential areas within the installation that are the most suitable/practical for locating new development, including the BRAC 2005 actions, without impacting its primary mission of military education and training. The age and deteriorating condition of many facilities on the Mainside of MCBQ dictate a need for their replacement. Space available for new development or redevelopment is limited due to many factors including acreage, current land use, topography, and environmental constraints. To eliminate existing incompatible land uses and better utilize land within the installation, MCBQ has identified two parcels within the westside of MCBQ (hereon referred to as the Westside Development Area) for potential future development. These areas were determined to have suitable acreage for the proposed development, reduced construction costs, and are not overly constrained by environmental or operational factors. These locations are: the Russell Road parcel and MCB-1 parcel. The proposed action for this EIS is to use the Westside Development Area of MCBQ for relocation of existing and future potential base functions and to accommodate the BRAC 2005 actions. The components of the proposed action include construction and operation of new facilities with a mix of uses to include administrative, warehouse, maintenance, and industrial facilities and the necessary infrastructure, road improvements, and security measures to support the proposed action. A range of alternatives was developed to assess the proposed action based on the *Quantico Land Use Plan, I-95 West* (MCBQ, 2006). This study identified potential development scenarios based on present and future mission needs and land use analysis. Alternatives to implement the proposed action include four intensities of development and two proposed alternative locations for implementing the BRAC action. For each development intensity alternative, sub-alternatives analyzing development at either Location A or Location B will be addressed. First alternative, high-intensity development would add up to 10,000 personnel, including 3,000 under BRAC. The construction would include facilities designed primarily for administrative and operational functions, including warehousing, maintenance, and support facilities. Parking and road improvements would be included. Second alternative, medium-intensity development would add up to 7,000 personnel, including 3,000 under BRAC. The construction under this alternative would remain mixed use with a lower intensity of administrative facilities and include parking and road improvements. Third alternative, low-intensity development would add 5,000 personnel, including 3,000 under BRAC. The majority of the construction under this alternative would include warehousing and maintenance facilities and to a lesser extent administrative and operational facilities. Road improvements would be limited to those necessary to accommodate the BRAC action. Additionally, a fourth alternative, the BRAC Action alternative, would add only the development required to accommodate those personnel (3,000) associated with the BRAC 2005 action. The construction footprint would include 70 to 100 acres of land, construction of approximately 735,000 square feet of new construction, and improvement of existing roads. The No Action Alternative will also be evaluated as required by NEPA. The EIS will address the following environmental areas: topography, geology, and soils; water and biological resources; air quality; noise; infrastructure and utilities; traffic; cultural resources; land use; socioeconomics; and hazardous waste and materials. Dated: July 27, 2006. M.A. Harvison, Lieutenant Commander, Judge Advocate General's Corps, U.S. Navy, Federal Register Liaison Officer. [FR Doc. E6-12532 Filed 8-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3810-FF-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. RP06-443-000] Alliance Pipeline L.P.; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas Tariff July 27, 2006. Take notice that on July 24, 2006, Alliance Pipeline L.P. (Alliance) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, to become effective August 1, 2006: Second Revised Sheet No. 2 Original Sheet No. 277E Alliance states that copies of its filing have been mailed to all customers, state commissions, and other interested parties. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov.* Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible online at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, D.C. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* , or call

(866)208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. Magalie R. Salas, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-12505 Filed 8-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket Nos. CP06-425-000 and CP06-426-000] Discovery Producer Services LLC, Discovery Gas Transmission LLC; Notice of Filing July 27, 2006. Take notice that on July 20, 2006, Discovery Producer Services LLC

(DPS)and Discovery Gas Transmission LLC (Discovery) jointly filed an abbreviated application for the certificates of public convenience and necessity, pursuant to section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act

(NGA)and Part 157 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations, authorizing DPS to provide Discovery the use of capacity on DPS' non-jurisdictional gathering facilities through a capacity lease, to effectuate the transportation of natural gas received from Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Texas Eastern) for delivery to DPS' Larose processing plant and for ultimate delivery downstream into the interstate pipeline grid. The application is on file with the Commission and open for public inspection. This filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* or toll free at

(866)208-3676, or for TTY, contact

(202)502-8659. On October 11, 2005, the Commission granted the emergency authorization allowing DPS to deliver gas supplies received from Texas Eastern, into its 20-inch non-jurisdictional gathering line to Discovery's jurisdictional facilities for subsequent delivery to the Larose processing plant. Because of the threat of potential supply disruptions due to the storms in the Gulf Coast region remains an ongoing concern, DPS and Discovery request Commission authorization to make permanent the limited term emergency transportation service which will expire on November 30, 2006. DPS will make available capacity, up to 300,000 Dts per day, on DPS' 20-inch non-jurisdictional gathering line to Discovery. This proposed capacity will be provided to Discovery on an interruptible basis through a capacity lease arrangement (Lease Agreement). The service offered to Discovery through the Lease Agreement will be strictly ancillary to DPS' primary business of providing gathering, processing, treating, and compression services in Louisiana. DPS requests a limited jurisdiction certificate to permit Discovery's use of DPS' non-jurisdictional facilities without having DPS' gathering and processing facilities, and operations becoming subject to the Commission's jurisdiction and the full panoply of the NGA. The pipeline interconnects and facilities necessary to provide this transportation service already exist. No new facilities will be required. Any questions regarding the application are to be directed to Kevin R. Rehm, Vice President, Discovery Producer Services LLC, Discovery Gas Transmission LLC, 2800 Post Oak Boulevard, Houston, Texas 77056; phone number

(713)215-2694. Any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or before the below listed comment date, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must submit 14 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the proceeding. Motions to intervene, protests and comments may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper, see, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. *Comment Date:* August 17, 2006. Magalie R. Salas, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-12506 Filed 8-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. RP06-393-002] National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation; Notice of Compliance Filing July 27, 2006. Take notice that on July 5, 2006, National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation (National Fuel) filed in RP06-393-002 to comply with a Commission Letter Order issued June 29, 2006 [115 FERC ¶ 61,381 (2006)]. In its filing, National Fuel filed an explanation of section 3.4 of Rate Schedule FT as it relates to discounting fuel charges. Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Such protests must be filed on or before the date as indicated below. Anyone filing a protest must serve a copy of that document on all parties to the proceeding. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov.* Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible on-line at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* , or call

(866)208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on August 3, 2006. Magalie R. Salas, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-12509 Filed 8-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. RP06-394-001] Northwest Pipeline Corporation; Notice of Supplemental Information July 27, 2006. Take notice that on July 24, 2006, Northwest Pipeline Corporation (Northwest) tendered for filing its supplemental explanatory information in compliance with the Commission's July 14, 2006, letter order. Any person desiring to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211). Protests to this filing will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Such protests must be filed on or before the date as indicated below. Anyone filing a protest must serve a copy of that document on all the parties to the proceeding. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov.* Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible online at *http://www.ferc.gov,* using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov,* or call

(866)208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on August 3, 2006. Magalie R. Salas, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-12510 Filed 8-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP06-423-000] Questar Overthrust Pipeline Company; Notice of Application July 27, 2006 Take notice that on July 19, 2006, Questar Overthrust Pipeline Company (Overthrust), 180 East 100 South, Salt Lake City, Utah 84111, filed an application under section 7 of the Natural Gas Act seeking authority to construct and operate the Wamsutter Expansion Project consisting of:

(i)77.2 miles of 36-inch diameter pipeline and related facilities extending from the eastern terminus of its transmission system located at Questar Pipeline Company's Kanda-Nightingale-Coleman Compressor Complex and terminating at the proposed interconnect with Rockies Express Pipeline LLC

(REX)near Wamsutter, Wyoming (Wamsutter) in Sweetwater County;

(ii)700 feet of 20-inch diameter main-line connector pipeline and related facilities extending from the Rendezvous Tap Valve 1 to a tie-in point with Tie Line

(TL)90 in Lincoln County, Wyoming;

(iii)the new Roberson compressor station, totaling 30,000 horsepower (Hp), in Lincoln County, Wyoming;

(iv)the new Rock Springs compressor station, totaling 15,000 Hp, in Sweetwater County, Wyoming;

(v)three new receipt points; and

(vi)one new delivery point, with the project components located within Lincoln, Uinta and Sweetwater Counties, Wyoming, all as more fully set forth in the application which is on file with the Commission and open for public inspection. These filings are available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* or toll free at

(866)208-3676, or for TTY, contact

(202)502-8659. Any questions regarding this application should be directed to Lenard G. Wright, Manager, Federal Regulatory Affairs, Questar Pipeline Company, 180 East 100 South, P.O. Box 45360, Salt Lake City, Utah 84145-0360 at

(801)324-2459, or by fax at

(801)324-5834. The proposed Wamsutter Expansion project will enable Overthrust to transport an additional 750,000 Dth/d of natural gas from the proposed new receipt points on Overthrust's interstate transmission system to an existing interconnect with Wyoming Interstate Company, Ltd. (WIC), and 625,000 Dth/d to the proposed delivery point with REX near Wamsutter, Wyoming. It is further explained that Overthrust has negotiated a long-term capacity lease with REX, initially for 625,000 Dth/d of incremental transportation capacity and a firm precedent agreement with WIC for 125,000 Dth/d that supports construction of the proposed project. Overthrust estimates the total cost for the Wamsutter Expansion to be $202.3 million and requests the Commission issue an order by March 31, 2007. On March 29, 2006, the Commission staff granted Overthrust's request to utilize the National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA)Pre-Filing Process and assigned Docket No. PF06-19-000 to staff activities involving the Overthrust's expansion project. Now, as of the filing of Overthrust's application on July 19, 2006, the NEPA Pre-Filing Process for this project has ended. From this time forward, Overthrust's proceeding will be conducted in Docket No. CP06-423-000, as noted in the caption of this Notice. Additionally, the Commission will review the project as a part of the Environmental Impact Statement being prepared for the REX Project in Docket No. CP06-354-000. There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or before the below listed comment date, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must submit 14 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the proceeding. However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project. The Commission will consider these comments in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly involved in the protest. Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings associated with the Commission's environmental review process. Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court review of the Commission's final order. Motions to intervene, protests and comments may be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper; see, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. *Comment Date:* August 17, 2006. Magalie R. Salas, Secretary. 1 The Rendezvous Tap Valve is proposed to be installed as part of Overthrust's expansion project in Docket No. CP06-167-000. [FR Doc. E6-12511 Filed 8-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket Nos. EL06-91-000, P-12252-023] Fourth Branch Associates (Mechanicville), Complainant, v Hudson River-Black Regulating District, Respondent; Notice of Complaint July 27, 2006. On July 25, 2006, Fourth Branch Associates (Fourth Branch) filed a formal complaint against Hudson River-Black River Regulating District (District) pursuant to Rule 206 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.206 (2006), and section 306 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), 16 U.S.C. 825(e). In 2002, the Commission issued an original license to the District for the continued operation of the Great Sacandaga Lake Project No. 12252. 1 The project is located on the Sacandaga River, a tributary of the Hudson River. Fourth Branch is the licensee for the Mechanicville Project No. 6032, located on the Hudson River downstream of the Sacandaga River. 2 1 *Hudson River-Black River Regulating District* , 100 FERC ¶ 61,319 (2002); order on rehearing, 102 FERC ¶ 61,133 (2003). 2 There are a number of other licensed projects located downstream of the District's project. Fourth Branch alleges that when the District became a licensee in 2002, its annual assessment of charges against Fourth Branch to cover a portion of the District's costs of operating and maintaining Great Sacandaga Lake came under the headwater benefits provisions of section 10(f) of the FPA, 16 U.S.C. 803(f) (2000), and sections 11.10 through 11.17 of the Commission's regulations, 18 CFR 11.10-11.17 (2006). Fourth Branch further alleges that since 2002, the District has continued to assess and collect these charges from Fourth Branch notwithstanding the absence of an agreement with Fourth Branch for those charges or Commission approval of the charges. Moreover, Fourth Branch contends, despite Commission orders in 2002 and 2004 requiring the District to submit both its headwater benefits charges agreement and actual charges to the Commission for approval, 3 the District has failed to do so, and is therefore in violation of the FPA and the Commission's regulations. 3 See 100 FERC ¶ 61,319 at P 47-49; and 102 FERC ¶ 61,133 at P 13-14. Fourth Branch certifies that copies of the complaint were served on the District, as well as all Hudson River hydroelectric and municipal flood control recipients of annual assessment bills from the District. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. The Respondent's answer and all interventions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. The Respondent's answer, motions to intervene, and protests must be served on the Complainants. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov* . Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible on-line at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* , or call

(866)208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on August 16, 2006. Magalie R. Salas, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-12507 Filed 8-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #1 July 28, 2006 Take notice that the Commission received the following electric corporate filings: *Docket Numbers:* EC06-143-000. *Applicants:* Mesquite Investors, L.L.C.; Chaparral Investors, L.L.C.; Capital District Energy Center Cogeneration Associates; Hartford Power Company I LLC; Hartford Power Company II LLC. *Description:* Chaparral Investors, LLC, *et al.* submit an application for order authorizing transfer of control of jurisdictional facilities under Section 203 of the Federal Power Act. *Filed Date:* 07/25/2006. *Accession Number:* 20060727-0090. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, August 15, 2006. Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt wholesale generator filings: *Docket Numbers:* EG06-51-000. *Applicants:* SAF Hydroelectric LLC. *Description:* SAF Hydroelectric LLC submits an amended Notice of Self Certification demonstrating that it is an Exempt Wholesale Generator as defined in Section 366.1 of FERC's Regulations. *Filed Date:* 07/26/2006. *Accession Number:* 20060727-0037. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, August 16, 2006. Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings: *Docket Numbers:* ER03-879-004; ER03-880-004; ER03-882-004. *Applicants:* D.E. Shaw Plasma Trading, L.L.C.; D.E. Shaw & Co. Energy, L.L.C.; D.E. Shaw Plasma Power, L.L.C. *Description:* D.E. Shaw Plasma Trading L.L.C., *et al.* jointly submit an updated triennial market power analysis pursuant to Commission's 4/14/04; 7/8/04; & 7/23/03 Orders. *Filed Date:* 07/24/2006. *Accession Number:* 20060727-0092. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, August 14, 2006. *Docket Numbers:* ER04-954-002. *Applicants:* Ritchie Energy Products, L.L.C. *Description:* Ritchie Energy Products, LLC submits its triennial market power update pursuant to FERC's order issued 7/25/03. *Filed Date:* 07/25/2006. *Accession Number:* 20060727-0035. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, August 15, 2006. *Docket Numbers:* ER06-368-000; ER06-368-001; ER06-368-002. *Applicants:* MidAmerican Energy Company. *Description:* MidAmerican Energy submits its compliance filing pursuant to FERC's 5/26/06 Order. *Filed Date:* 07/25/2006. *Accession Number:* 20060727-0088. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, August 15, 2006. *Docket Numbers:* ER06-1162-001. *Applicants:* Select Energy New York, Inc. *Description:* Select Energy New York, Inc submits a Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 2 to First Revised FERC Electric Rate Schedule 1. *Filed Date:* 07/26/2006. *Accession Number:* 20060727-0275. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, August 16, 2006. *Docket Numbers:* ER06-1276-000. *Applicants:* Public Service Company of New Mexico. *Description:* Public Service Company of New Mexico submits an executed Network Integration Transmission Service Agreement and an associated executed Network Operating Agreement. *Filed Date:* 07/25/2006. *Accession Number:* 20060726-0085. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, August 15, 2006. *Docket Numbers:* ER06-1278-000. *Applicants:* Southwestern Electric Power Company. *Description:* Southwestern Electric Power Co submits actuarial reports with respect to post-employment benefits other than pensions and post-employment benefits for calendar year 2005. *Filed Date:* 07/26/2006. *Accession Number:* 20060727-0276. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, August 16, 2006. *Docket Numbers:* ER06-1279-000. *Applicants:* E.ON U.S.., LLC; Louisville Gas & Electric Company; Kentucky Utilities. *Description:* E.ON U.S. LLC *et al.* submit their Amended Agreement with the Kentucky Municipals and the TVA Distributor Group. *Filed Date:* 07/26/2006. *Accession Number:* 20060727-0270. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, August 16, 2006. *Docket Numbers:* ER06-1280-000. *Applicants:* Hess Corporation. *Description:* Hess Corporation submits a notice of succession to notify the Commission that as a result of a corporate name change it has succeeded to the market-based rate schedule of Amerada Hess Corp. *Filed Date:* 07/26/2006. *Accession Number:* 20060727-0277. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, August 16, 2006. *Docket Numbers:* ER06-1281-000; ER06-1282-000. *Applicants:* California Independent System Operator Corporation; Pacific Gas and Electric Company. *Description:* California Independent System Operator Corp et al. submit their revised tariff sheets to the ISO Tariff & PG&E's Pass-Through Tariff, effect 1/1/07. *Filed Date:* 07/26/2006. *Accession Number:* 20060727-0278. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, August 16, 2006. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding, interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline need not be served on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at *http://www.ferc.gov.* To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426. The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov.* or call

(866)208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. Magalie R. Salas, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-12512 Filed 8-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Notice of Application and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests July 27, 2006. Take notice that the following report has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection: a. *Filing Type:* Recreation Plan Update. b. *Project No:* 2459-179. c. *Date Filed:* June 29, 2006. d. *Applicant:* Allegheny Energy Supply Company, LLC (AE). e. *Name of Project:* Lake Lynn Hydroelectric Project. f. *Location:* On the Cheat River, in Monongalia County, West Virginia, and Fayette County, Pennsylvania. g. *Filed Pursuant to:* Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r). h. *Applicant Contact:* Mr. Charles L. Simon, 4350 Northern Pike, Monroeville, PA 15146-2841. Phone:

(412)858-1675. i. *FERC Contact:* Any questions on this notice should be addressed to Shana High at

(202)502-8674 or *shana.high@ferc.gov.* j. *Deadline for filing comments and/or motions:* August 28, 2006. All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with: Magalie R. Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Please include the project number (P-2459-179) on any comments or motions filed. Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “eFiling” link. k. *Description of Proposal:* AE developed an Updated Recreation Plan

(plan)to comply with article 417 of the project license. The plan was prepared following an evaluation of facility usage data and addresses recreation use as well as the adequacy of facilities. Specifically, the update addresses safety and security, boating and navigation, swimming, and camping. l. *Locations of the Application:* This filing is available for review and reproduction at the Commission's Public Reference Room, located at 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426, or by calling

(202)502-8371. This filing may also be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* or call toll-free 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY, contact

(202)502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item

(h)above. m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission. n. *Comments, Protests, or Motions To Intervene:* Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, 385.211, 385.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application. o. *Filing and Service of Responsive Documents:* Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TERMS AND CONDITIONS”, “PROTEST”, OR “MOTION TO INTERVENE”, as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing refers. A copy of any motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application. p. *Agency Comments:* Federal, State, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described application. A copy of the application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives. q. Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* under the “eFiling” link. Magalie R. Salas, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-12508 Filed 8-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-8205-5] Agency Information Collection Activities OMB Responses AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This document announces the Office of Management and Budget's

(OMB)response to Agency Clearance requests, in compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ). 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 OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Auby

(202)566-1672, or e-mail at *auby.susan@epa.gov* and please refer to the appropriate EPA Information Collection Request

(ICR)Number. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OMB Responses to Agency Clearance Requests OMB Approvals EPA ICR No. 0261.15; Notification of Regulated Waste Activity (Renewal); in 40 CFR 262.12; 40 CFR 263.11; 40 CFR 264.11; 40 CFR 265.11; 40 CFR 266.21; 40 CFR 266.22; 40 CFR 266.23; 40 CFR 266.70(b)(1); 40 CFR 266.80(b)(1)(i); 40 CFR 266.80(b)(2)(i); 40 CFR 266.100(c)(1)(i); 40 CFR 266.100(f)(1); 40 CFR 266.101(a); 40 CFR 266.101(b); 40 CFR 266.101(c); 40 CFR 266.102(a)(2)(ii); 40 CFR 266.103(a)(4)(ii); 40 CFR 266.108(d); 40 CFR 270.1(b); 40 CFR 273.54; 40 CFR 273.60(a); 40 CFR 279.42; 40 CFR 279.51; 40 CFR 279.62; 40 CFR 279.73; was approved 06/06/2006; OMB Number 2050-0028; expires 06/30/2009. EPA ICR No. 0328.11; Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure

(SPCC)Plans (Renewal); in 40 CFR 112.1-112.15; was approved 06/06/2006; OMB Number 2050-0021; expires 06/30/2009. EPA ICR No. 1571.08; General Hazardous Waste Facility Standards (Renewal); in 40 CFR 264.12(a)-(c); 40 CFR 264.13(a)(1), (b)-(c); 40 CFR 264.15(d); 40 CFR 264.16(d); 40 CFR 264.17(c); 40 CFR 264.37; 40 CFR 264.51-.54; 40 CFR 264.56; 40 CFR 264.73-.74; 40 CFR 264.96; 40 CFR 264.97(g); 40 CFR 264.101(b), (c); 40 CFR 264.112; 40 CFR 264.113(a), (b), (d); 40 CFR 264.115; 40 CFR 264.116; 40 CFR 264.118-.120; 40 CFR 264.142(a), 40 CFR 264.143(a); 40 CFR 264.144(a); 40 CFR 264.145(a); 40 CFR 264.147; 40 CFR 264.148; 40 CFR 264.149; 40 CFR 264.150; 40 CFR 265.12(a)-(b); 40 CFR 265.13(a)(1), (b)-(c); 40 CFR 265.15(d); 40 CFR 265.16(d); 40 CFR 265.19; 40 CFR 265.51-54; 40 CFR 265.56; 40 CFR 265.73-.74; 40 CFR 265.112; 40 CFR 265.113(a), (b), (d); 40 CFR 265.115; 40 CFR 265.116; 40 CFR 265.118-.120; 40 CFR 264.142(a); 40 CFR 265.143(a); 40 CFR 265.144(a); 40 CFR 265.145(a); 40 CFR 265.147; 40 CFR 265.148; 40 CFR 265.149; 40 CFR 265.150; 40 CFR part 264, subpart H; 40 CFR part 265, subpart H; 40 CFR 270.30; was approved 06/06/2006; OMB Number 2050-0120; expires 06/30/2009. EPA ICR No. 1951.03; NESHAP for Paper and Other Web Coating Renewal; in 40 CFR part 63, subpart JJJJ; was approved 06/13/2006; OMB Number 2060-0511; expires 06/30/2009. EPA ICR No. 1954.03; NESHAP for the Surface Coating of Large Household and Commercial Appliances; in 40 CFR part 63, subpart NNNN, (Renewal); was approved 06/13/2006; OMB Number 2060-0457; expires 06/30/2009. EPA ICR No. 1976.03; NESHAP for Reinforced Plastic Composites Production (Renewal); in 40 CFR part 63, subpart WWWW; was approved 06/12/2006; OMB Number 2060-0509; expires 06/30/2009. EPA ICR No. 2022.03; NESHAP for Brick and Structural Clay Manufacturing (Renewal); in 40 CFR part 63, subpart JJJJJ; was approved 06/13/2006; OMB Number 2060-0508; expires 06/30/2009. EPA ICR No. 2040.03; NESHAP for Refractory Products Manufacturing (Renewal); in 40 CFR part 63, subpart SSSSS; was approved 06/12/2006; OMB Number 2060-0515; expires 06/30/2009. EPA ICR No. 2071.03; NESHAP for Printing, Coating and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other Textiles (Renewal); in 40 CFR part 63, subpart OOOO; was approved 06/12/2006; OMB Number 2060-0522; expires 06/30/2009. EPA ICR No. 2211.01; Focus Group Research for Fuel Economy Label Designs; was approved 06/09/2006; OMB Number 2060-0581; expires 08/31/2006. EPA ICR No. 2228.01; Reformulated Gasoline Commingling Provisions; in 40 CFR part 80.78; was approved 06/09/2006; OMB Number 2060-0587; expires 11/30/2006. EPA ICR No. 1591.21; Regulation of Fuel and Fuel Additives: Refiner and Importer Quality Assurance Requirements for Downstream Oxygen Blending and Requirements for Disposition of Pipeline Interfaces (Direct Final Rule); in 40 CFR 80.69; 40 CFR 80.74; 40 CFR 80.77; 40 CFR 80.84; 40 CFR 80.104; 40 CFR 80.213; 40 CFR 80.365; 40 CFR 80.840; was approved 07/12/2006; OMB Number 2060-0277; expires 10/31/2007. EPA ICR No. 2104.02; Brownfields Programs—Revitalization Grantee Reporting (Renewal); was approved 07/05/2006; OMB Number 2050-0192; expires 07/31/2009. EPA ICR No. 0575.10; Health and Safety Data Reporting; Submission of Lists and Copies of Health and Safety Studies; in 40 CFR part 716; was approved 07/06/2006; OMB Number 2070-0004; expires 07/31/2009. EPA ICR No. 2055.02; Data Submissions for the Voluntary Children's Chemical Evaluation Program (VCCEP); was approved 07/09/2006; OMB Number 2070-0165; expires 07/31/2009. EPA ICR No. 2014.03; Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements of the HCFC Allowance System (Renewal); in 40 CFR part 82.23, 40 CFR part 82.24; was approved 07/10/2006; OMB Number 2060-0498; expires 07/31/2009. EPA ICR No. 2184.02; Inclusion of Delaware and New Jersey in the Clean Air Interstate Rule (Final Rule); in 40 CFR 51.123(c)(1), (c)(3), (e)(2), (e)(4)(ii); 40 CFR 51.124(c), (e)(2); 40 CFR 51.125 (a)(1); 40 CFR 96.140; 40 CFR 96.143(a); was approved 07/10/2006; OMB Number 2060-0584; expires 07/31/2009. Comment Filed EPA ICR No. 0328.12; Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure

(SPCC)Plants (Proposed Rule); OMB Number 2050-0021; in 40 CFR 112.3(e); 40 CFR 112.4(a), (e)-(f); 40 CFR 112.5(a); 40 CFR 112.7(a)-(i); OMB filed comments on 06/12/2006. EPA ICR No. 0783.50; Cold Temperature Hydrocarbon Emissions Standards for Light-Duty Vehicles, Light-Duty Trucks, and Medium-Duty Passenger Vehicles (Proposed Rule); in 40 CFR part 85, subparts R, S, T, V, W, and Y; 40 CFR part 86, subparts B, E, F, G, H, J, K, L, O, P, R, and S; 40 CFR part 600, subparts A, B, D, and F; OMB filed comments on 06/23/2006. EPA ICR No. 1989.03; Revised NPDES and Effluent Limitation Guidelines for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations in Response to Waterkeeper Decision (Proposed Rule); in 40 CFR 122, 40 CFR 122.21(i)(1)(i-xi), 40 CFR 122.21(f), 40 CFR 122.21(f)(1), 40 CFR 122.21(f)(7), 40 CFR 122.23(f)(1-3), 40 CFR 122.23(g-h), 40 CFR 122.28(b)(3)(iv), 40 CFR 122.41, 40 CFR 122.42(e)(1), 40 CFR 122.42(e)(1)(i-iv), 40 CFR 122.42(e)(4), 40 CFR 122.42(e)(3), 40 CFR 122.62, 40 CFR 122.62(b)(2-4), 40 CFR 123, 40 CFR 123.25, 40 CFR 123.40, 40 CFR 123.25(a)(22, 27, 30, 31, 33, 34), 40 CFR 123.26(b), 40 CFR 123.42(e)(3-4), 40 CFR 123.42(e)(4)(i-vi), 40 CFR 123.62, 40 CFR 123.62(a), 40 CFR 123.62(b)(1), 40 CFR 412, 40 CFR 412(a)(1)(i-iii), 40 CFR 412.37(b), 40 CFR 412.37(b)(1-6), 40 CFR 412.37(c), 40 CFR 412.37(c)(1-9); OMB filed comments on 07/11/2006. Short Term Extensions EPA ICR No. 2212.01; MBE/WBE Utilization under Federal Grants, Cooperative, Agreements and Interagency Agreements; OMB Number 2090-0025; on 06/29/2006 OMB extended the expiration date to 08/31/2006. EPA ICR No. 1842.04; Notice of Intent for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activity under a NPDES General Permit; OMB Number 2040-0188; on 06/29/2006 OMB extended the expiration date to 09/30/2006. EPA ICR No. 0226.17; applications for NPDES Discharge Permits and the Sewage Sludge Management Permits; OMB Number 2040-0086; on 06/29/2006 OMB extended the expiration date to 09/30/2006. EPA ICR No. 1820.03; NPDES Storm Water Program Phase II; OMB Number 2040-0211; on 06/29/2006 OMB extended the expiration date to 09/30/2006. EPA ICR No. 2003.02; NESHAP for Integrated Iron and Steel Manufacturing (Final Rule); OMB Number 2060-0517; on 06/29/2006 OMB extended the expiration date to 08/30/2006. Dated: July 27, 2006. Oscar Morales, Director, Collection Strategies Division. [FR Doc. E6-12540 Filed 8-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [AMS-FRL-8205-4] California State Motor Vehicle Pollution Control Standards; Waiver of Federal Preemption for Amendments to California's Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for On-Road Motorcycles and Motorcycle Engines; Notice of Decision AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency. ACTION: Notice of Decision Regarding Waiver of Federal Preemption for California Motorcycle Emission Standards. SUMMARY: The California Air Resources Board

(CARB)requested that the Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA)confirm CARB's finding that amendments to its on-road motorcycle and motorcycle engines exhaust emission regulations, approved by CARB on October 22, 1999, are within the scope of previous Clean Air Act Section 209(b) waivers of federal preemption. Instead of confirming CARB's request that the amendments are within the scope of a previously granted waiver of federal preemption EPA is, by today's action, granting a full waiver of federal preemption. ADDRESSES: The Agency's Decision Document, containing an explanation of the Assistant Administrator's decision, as well as all documents relied upon in making that decision, including those submitted to EPA by CARB, are contained in the public docket. The official public docket is the collection of materials that is available for public viewing. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is

(202)566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air and Radiation Docket is

(202)566-1743. The reference number for this docket is EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0486. The location of the Docket Center is the Environmental Protection Agency, (EPA/DC) EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, D.C. Copies of the Decision Document for this determination can also be obtained by contacting David Dickinson as noted below, or can be accessed on the EPA's Office of Transportation and Air Quality Web site, also noted below. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Dickinson, Attorney-Advisor, Certification and Compliance Division, (6405J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460. Telephone:

(202)343-9256, FAX:

(202)343-2804, e-mail: *Dickinson.David@EPA.GOV.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Obtaining Electronic Copies of Documents Electronic copies of this Notice and the accompanying Decision Document are available via the Internet on the Office of Transportation and Air Quality

(OTAQ)Web site ( *http://www.epa.gov/OTAQ* ). Users can find these documents by accessing the OTAQ Home Page and looking at the path entitled “Chronological List of All OTAQ Regulations.” This service is free of charge, except for any cost you already incur for Internet connectivity. The official **Federal Register** version of the Notice is made available on the day of publication on the primary Web site ( *http://www.epa.gov/docs/fedrgstr/EPA-AIR/).* Please note that due to differences between the software used to develop the documents and the software into which the documents may be downloaded, changes in format, page length, etc. may occur. *Docket:* EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0486. All documents in the docket are listed in the *http://www.regulations.gov* index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, *e.g.* , CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy at the Docket Center noted above. II. Determination I have determined that CARB's amendments to its on-highway motorcycle and motorcycle engine regulations constitute new standards and therefore require a new waiver of federal preemption rather than confirmation that the amendments are within the scope of a prior waiver issued under section 209(b) of the Clean Air Act (Act), 42 U.S.C. 7543(b), granted by EPA to CARB. 1 The amendments to the regulations, outlined in CARB's request letter 2 , and fully described in CARB's submissions, provide for:

(1)A combined level of hydrocarbon

(HC)and oxides of nitrogen (NO X ) emissions as HC + NO X for 2004 and subsequent model years (in comparison to the preexisting on-road Class III motorcycle HC-only standard);

(2)two tiers of standard (Tier-1 and -2), with a Tier-1 standard of 1.4 g/km for HC + NO X for model years 2004 through 2007 and a Tier-2 standard of 0.08 for HC + NO X for model year 2008 and beyond;

(3)retention of corporate averaging for Class III engine families but an addition of a not-to-exceed cap limit for each emission level from each engine family; and

(4)a new definition of “small volume manufacturer” that applies in model year 2008 and beyond and clarification of the definition for “motorcycle engine.” 1 EPA previously granted CARB a waiver of federal preemption for California's exhaust emission standards and test procedures for 1978 and subsequent model year motorcycles at 41 FR 44209 (October 7, 1976) and 43 FR 998 (January 5, 1978). EPA also confirmed that a subsequent amendment to the HC exhaust standard for certain small volume manufacturers for the 1982 model year was within the scope of a previously granted waiver at 47 FR 23204 (May 27, 1982). Finally, EPA also confirmed that CARB's HC exhaust standards for 1984 and subsequent model year Class III motorcycles (280 cc and above) was within the scope of a previously granted waiver at 53 FR 6195 (March 1, 1988). EPA also previously waiver federal preemption for California's evaporative emission standards and test procedures for motorcycles and confirmed subsequent amendments as within the scope of previously granted waivers at 47 FR 1015 (January 8, 1982); 47 FR 23204 (May 27, 1982); 53 FR 6195 (March 1, 1988); and 53 FR 36116 (September 16, 1988). 2 Docket entry EPA-HQ-OAR 2004-0486-0002, letter to EPA, from CARB, dated June 18, 2003. In a June 18, 2003 letter to EPA, CARB notified EPA of the above-described amendments to its motorcycle regulations and asked EPA to confirm that these amendments are within-the-scope of EPA's previous waivers. EPA can make such a confirmation if certain conditions are present. Specifically, if California acts to amend a previously waived standard or accompanying enforcement procedure, the amendment may be considered within-the-scope of a previously granted waiver provided that it does not undermine California's determination that its standards, in the aggregate, are as protective of public health and welfare as applicable Federal standards, does not affect the consistency with section 202(a) of the Act, and raises no new issues affecting EPA's previous waiver. 3 3 Decision Document accompanying scope of waiver determination in 51 FR 12391 (April 10, 1986). In its request letter, CARB stated that the amendments will not cause the California standards, in the aggregate, to be less protective of public health and welfare than the applicable Federal standards. Regarding consistency with section 202(a), CARB stated that the amendments do not raise any concerns of inadequate leadtime or technological feasibility or impose any inconsistent certification requirements (compared to the Federal requirements). Finally, CARB stated that the amendments raise no new issues affecting the prior EPA authorization determinations. Because EPA believed it possible that CARB's amendments do in fact raise “new issues” as they impose new more stringent standards, EPA offered the opportunity for a public hearing, and requested public comments, on these new standards, as the Act requires us to do, by publication of a **Federal Register** notice to such effect on November 21, 2005. 4 There was no request for a public hearing, nor were any comments received on the CARB standards at issue. Therefore, EPA has made this determination based on the information submitted by CARB in its request. 4 70 FR 70073 (November 21, 2005). EPA's analysis finds that the criteria for granting a full waiver have been met for these amendments. A full explanation of EPA's decision is contained in a Decision Document which may be obtained from EPA as noted above. My decision will affect not only persons in California but also the manufacturers outside the State who must comply with California's requirements in order to produce vehicles for sale in California. For this reason, I hereby determine and find that this is a final action of national applicability. Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act, judicial review of this final action may be sought only in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Petitions for review must be filed by October 2, 2006. Under section 307(b)(2) of the Act, judicial review of this final action may not be obtained in subsequent enforcement proceedings. As with past waiver decisions, this action is not a rule as defined by Executive Order 12866. Therefore, it is exempt from review by the Office of Management and Budget as required for rules and regulations by Executive Order 12866. In addition, this action is not a rule as defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601(2). Therefore, EPA has not prepared a supporting regulatory flexibility analysis addressing the impact of this action on small business entities. The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 *et seq.* , as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, does not apply because this action is not a rule, for purposes of 5 U.S.C. 804(3). Finally, the Administrator has delegated the authority to make determinations regarding waivers under section 209(b) of the Act to the Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation. Dated: July 27, 2006. William L. Wehrum, Acting Assistant Administrator, Office of Air and Radiation. [FR Doc. E6-12546 Filed 8-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [Report No. 2783] Petitions for Reconsideration of Action in Rulemaking Proceeding July 27, 2006. Petitions for Reconsideration have been filed in the Commission's Rulemaking proceeding listed in this Public Notice and published pursuant to 47 CFR 1.429(e). The full text of these documents is available for viewing and copying in Room CY-B402, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC or may be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc.

(BCPI)(1-800-378-3160). Oppositions to these petitions must be filed by August 18, 2006. See Section 1.4(b)(1) of the Commission's rules (47 CFR 1.4(b)(1)). Replies to an opposition must be filed within 10 days after the time for filing oppositions have expired. *Subject:* In the Matter of Amendment of Parts 1, 21, 73, 74 and 101 of the Commission's Rules to Facilitate the Provision of Fixed and Mobile Broadband Access, Educational And Other Advanced Services in the 2150-2162 and 2500-2690 MHz Bands (WT Docket No. 03-66). Part 1 of the Commission's Rules—Further Competitive Bidding Procedures (WT Docket No. 03-67). Amendment of Parts 21 and 74 to Enable Multipoint Distribution Service and the Instructional Television Fixed Service to Engage in Fixed Two-Way Transmissions (MM Docket No. 97-217). Amendment of Parts 21 and 74 of the Commission's Rules with Regard to Licensing in the Multipoint Distribution Service and in the Instructional Television Fixed Service for the Gulf of Mexico (WT Docket No. 02-68). Promoting Efficient Use of Spectrum through Elimination of Barriers to the Development of Secondary Markets (WT Docket No. 00-230). Review of the Spectrum Sharing Plan among Non-Geostationary Satellite Orbit Mobile Satellite Service Systems in the 1.6/2.4 GHz Bands (IB Docket No. 02-364). *Number of Petitions Filed:* 10. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-12545 Filed 8-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisition of Shares of Bank or Bank Holding Companies The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)). The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for inspection at the office of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than August 18, 2006. **A. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis** (Jacqueline G. King, Community Affairs Officer) 90 Hennepin Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55480-0291: *1. Jon W. Neumann* , Hawley, Minnesota; to acquire voting shares of First Hawley Bancshares, Inc., Hawley, Minnesota, and thereby indirectly acquire voting shares of First National Bank, Hawley, Minnesota. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, July 28, 2006. Robert deV. Frierson, Deputy Secretary of the Board. [FR Doc. E6-12487 Filed 8-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-S FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 *et seq.* ) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part 225), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, including the companies listed below. The applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The application also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States. Additional information on all bank holding companies may be obtained from the National Information Center website at *www.ffiec.gov/nic/* . Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than August 28, 2006. **A. Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia** (Michael E. Collins, Senior Vice President) 100 North 6th Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19105-1521: *1. Graystone Financial Services Corp.* , Lancaster, Pennsylvania; to become a bank holding company by acquiring 100 percent of the voting shares of Graystone Bank, Lancaster, Pennsylvania. **B. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago** (Patrick M. Wilder, Assistant Vice President) 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690-1414: *1. Capitol Bancorp Ltd., and Capitol Development Bancorp Limited V* , both of Lansing, Michigan; to acquire 51 percent of the voting shares of Bank of Maumee, Maumee, Ohio (in organization). Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, July 28, 2006. Robert deV. Frierson, Deputy Secretary of the Board. [FR Doc. E6-12486 Filed 8-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-S DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Office of the Secretary [Document Identifier: OS-0937-0166; 30-day notice] Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, HHS. In compliance with the requirement of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Office of the Secretary (OS), Department of Health and Human Services, is publishing the following summary of a proposed collection for public comment. Interested persons are invited to send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including any of the following subjects:

(1)The necessity and utility of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of the agency's functions;

(2)the accuracy of the estimated burden;

(3)ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(4)the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to minimize the information collection burden. *Type of Information Collection Request:* Regular Clearance, Extension of a currently approved collection. *Title of Information Collection:* 42 CFR Subpart B: Sterilization of Persons in Federally Asssisted Family Planning Projects. *Form/OMB No.:* OS-0937-0166. *Use:* This is a request for an extension, of a currently approved collection for the disclosure and record-keeping requirements codified at 42 CFR part 50, subpart B (``Sterilization of Persons in Federally Assisted Family Planning Projects''). A copy of the Public Health Service

(PHS)regulation, 42 CFR part 50, subpart B, is provided in Attachment B. Consent forms are signed by individuals undergoing a federally funded sterilization procedure and certified by necessary medical authorities. Forms are incorporated into the patient's medical records and the agency's records. Through periodic site audits and visits, PHS staff review completed consent forms to determine compliance with the regulation. Thus, the purpose of the consent form is twofold. First, it serves as a mechanism to ensure that a person receives information about sterilization and voluntarily consents to the procedure. Second, it facilitates compliance monitoring. *Frequency:* Recordkeeping; Reporting, on occasion. *Affected Public:* Individuals or Households, Not-for-profit institutions, and State, Local or Tribal Government. *Annual Number of Respondents:* 100000. *Total Annual Responses:* 10000. *Average Burden Hours Per Response:* 1 hours and 15 minutes. *Total Annual Hours:* 125,000. To obtain copies of the supporting statement and any related forms for the proposed paperwork collections referenced above, access the HHS Web site address at *http://www.hhs.gov/ocio/infocollect/pending/* or e-mail your request, including your address, phone number, OMB number, and OS document identifier, to *Sherette.funncoleman@hhs.gov* , or call the Reports Clearance Office on

(202)690-6162. Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collections must be received within 30 days of this notice directly to the Desk Officer at the address below: OMB Desk Officer: John Kraemer, OMB Human Resources and Housing Branch, Attention: (OMB #0937-0166), New Executive Office Building, Room 10235, Washington DC 20503. Dated: July 25, 2006. Robert E. Polson, Office of the Secretary, Paperwork Reduction Act Reports Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E6-12561 Filed 8-2-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4150-28-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology; American Health Information Community Consumer Empowerment Workgroup Meeting ACTION: Announcement of meeting. SUMMARY: This notice announces the eighth meeting of the American Health Information Community Consumer Empowerment Workgroup in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.). DATES: August 14, 2006 from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. ADDRESSES: Mary C. Switzer Building (330 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20201), Conference Room 4090 (please bring photo ID for entry to a Federal building). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: *http://www.hhs.gov/heatlhit/ahic/bio_main.html* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The meeting will be available via Web cast at *http://www.eventcenterlive.com/cfmx/ec/login/login1.cfm?BID=67* . Judith Sparrow, Director, American Health Information Community, Office of Programs and Coordination, Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology. [FR Doc. 06-6660 Filed 8-2-06; 8:45]

Connectionstraces to 30

Traces to 30 documents

U.S. Code