Notices. Notice of receipt of application for an incidental take authorization; request for comments

23,530 words·~107 min read·/register/2006/08/23/06-7115

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

BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [I.D. 080806A] Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Specified Activities; Construction of the Knik Arm Bridge AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice of receipt of application for an incidental take authorization; request for comments. SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request from the Knik Arm Bridge and Toll Authority (KABATA) for an authorization to take small numbers of marine mammals, by harassment, incidental to construction of the Knik Arm Bridge at the Knik Arm Crossing in Alaska during the period 2007 through 2012.

In order to promulgate regulations and issue annual Letters of Authorization

(LOAs)to KABATA, NMFS must determine that these takings will have a negligible impact on the affected species and stocks of marine mammals and not have an unmitigable impact on subsistence uses of marine mammals. NMFS invites comment on the application and suggestions on the content of the regulations. DATES: Comments and information must be received no later than September 22, 2006. ADDRESSES: Comments on the application should be addressed to 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. The mailbox address for providing email comments is *PR1.080806A @noaa.gov* . Comments sent via e-mail, including all attachments, must not exceed a 10-megabyte file size. A copy of the application (which includes the reference citations found in this **Federal Register** document) may be obtained by writing to this address or by telephoning the contact listed here and are also available at: *http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/permits/incidental.htm#iha* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kenneth Hollingshead, Office of Protected Resources, 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.” An authorization may be granted for periods of 5 years or less if the Secretary finds that the total taking will have a negligible impact on the species or stock(s), will not have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses, and regulations are prescribed setting forth the permissible methods of taking and the requirements pertaining to the monitoring and reporting of such taking. Except for certain categories of activities not pertinent here, the MMPA defines “harassment “as any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance which

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

(ii)has the potential to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing disruption of behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering [Level B harassment]. Summary of Request On May 6, 2006, NMFS received an application, under section 101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA, from KABATA to take marine mammals, by harassment, incidental to construction of the Knik Arm Bridge in Alaska. KABATA proposes to construct an 8,180 ft (2,493 m) pile-supported steel bridge spanning Knik Arm in Upper Cook Inlet, in Alaska. The project area is located north of Anchorage and west of Elmendorf Air Force Base in the southern portion of Knik Arm. The crossing would traverse Knik Arm over waters between zero and 70 ft (0-20 m) in depth. According to KABATA, the bridge would be used for vehicular traffic in order to:

(1)Move freight and goods between the Port of Anchorage/Ship Creek industrial areas and the Port MacKenzie district;

(2)provide safety and redundant overland routes connecting area airports, military bases, ports and hospitals for emergency response;

(3)provide transportation infrastructure to meet projected local population and economic growth forecasts; and

(4)support economic advancement in the region. Three alternatives for the crossing alignment have been proposed. A complete description of these alternatives are discussed in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Draft EIS) for the Knik Arm Crossing that will be released to the public shortly. A bridge across lower Knik Arm in the southern alignment is KABATA's preferred alternative identified in that document. For the southern alignment, causeways approximately 3,600 ft (1,100 m) and 2,100 ft (640 m) in length would be constructed from the east and west shores, respectively. During year one for construction (presently scheduled for 2007), the east and west bridge causeway foundations and abutments would be constructed in April-May following the establishment of access roads. Pile driving may begin as early as the first year, but is expected to occur primarily during years 2 and 3 of the proposed 3-year construction program. The bridge design requires approximately 132 pilings at 33 locations with an abutment at each end where the bridge meets the east and west causeways. Water depths at the piling sites range from 60 to 80 feet (18 to 24 m) MLLW. Piles will be constructed of pre-stressed steel, approximately 150 ft (46 m) in length, 4 ft (1.2 m) in diameter, and of 1-2 inches (2.54-5.08 cm) wall thickness. Initially, a vibratory hammer will be used to drive each pile approximately 40 percent or more of the way to its final position. Impact hammering will be used to drive the pile the remainder of the way or to refusal (i.e., when further impact pile driving is unproductive). Pilings will be driven one or possibly two at a time and are expected to require 1-2 hours of actual impact hammering per pile to install. On any given day approximately 2-4 hours of impact hammering would be expected. Pile driving will require up to 220 days. A hydraulic impact hammer, or similar equipment, would be used to drive piles during the Knik Arm crossing construction. The proposed impact hammer delivers 30 blows per minute at maximum stroke with a ram weight of 80,000 lb (36,287 kg). Pile driving is planned to take place primarily during the ice-free months from April to November of each year. No piling emplacement is currently planned for months when ice is present due to increased cost and personnel safety limitations. However, KABATA has requested that its incidental take authorization include incidental harassment takings that might occur during pile driving at any time of year. Construction and installation of the superstructure roadbed is proposed to occur over a 2-year period following placement of piles and installation of support framework. Superstructure installation would occur immediately after completion of construction of support structures for a given section of superstructure, and prior to installation of pilings for subsequent sections. Superstructure construction will involve the use of tug and barge combinations fitted with cranes for lifting and placement of roadbed components. Because pile driving, support vessel activities, and general construction noise have the potential to result in behavioral harassment of marine mammals located in Knik Arm, an authorization under section 101(a)(5)(A) of the MMPA is warranted. KABATA believes that the potential taking of marine mammals associated with the construction of the Knik Arm crossing are unlikely to be lethal or have any long-term negative consequences for the affected marine mammal populations, and any short-term impact on the marine mammals would be negligible. In addition, there would be no adverse impact on the availability of marine mammals for subsistence uses. KABATA is requesting a multi-year LOA for incidental harassment takings issued commencing on 1 April 2007. KABATA plans to construct the crossing during a 2-3 year construction program; however, potential delays associated with a project of this size and scope may require a longer construction period. Therefore, KABATA has requested that the multi-year LOAs cover the period 2007 through 2012, should an additional year or more be required to complete construction of the crossing. Marine Mammals Affected by the Activity Knik Arm, including the area of bridge construction, is used by several species of marine mammals. The Cook Inlet beluga whale is the most abundant marine mammal in the area and harbor seals are occasionally present. Harbor porpoises and killer whales have also been sighted in Knik Arm, but are considered rare and are unlikely to be encountered during bridge construction. There have been no published sightings of Steller sea lions in Knik Arm, but a single adult male was documented in the Susitna Flats area. Detailed information on these species and the number of marine mammals within the project area can be found in KABATA's application (see ADDRESSES ) and Draft EIS. Additional information on Alaskan marine mammals can be found in NMFS' Stock Assessment Reports. The Alaska Stock Assessment Report is available at: *http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/sars/region.htm* . Please refer to those documents for information on these species. Sounds and non-acoustic stimuli will be generated by vehicle traffic, vessel operations, roadbed construction, and vibratory and impact pile driving. The sounds generated from construction operations and associated activities will be detectable underwater and/or in air some distance away from the area of activity. The distance will depend on the nature of the sound source, ambient noise conditions, and the sensitivity of the receptor to the sound (Richardson *et al.* , 1995). However, as explained in the application, animals that hear the sound will not necessarily react to it. At times, some of these sounds are likely to be strong enough to cause localized avoidance or other disturbance reactions by small numbers of marine mammals. Harassment will potentially result when marine mammals near the activity have a significant behavioral response to the sounds generated. The type and significance of behavioral reaction is likely to depend on the activity of the animal at the time it receives the stimulus, as well as the distance from the sound source and the level of the sound relative to ambient conditions. Noise from pile driving, in particular, may result in marine mammals near the activity changing their behaviors or activities. In addition to disturbance, some limited masking of whale calls or other sounds potentially relevant to whales could occur. Vessel traffic is also known to cause avoidance reactions by beluga whales at certain times (Richardson et al., 1995). However, Cook Inlet belugas are regularly sighted in and around the Port of Anchorage (NMFS, 2005a) passing near or under vessels (Blackwell and Greene, 2002), and they appear to have high tolerance to vessel traffic. It is possible that belugas exposed to repetitious construction sounds from the proposed construction activities will, after initial exposure to these sounds, tolerate them as they have learned to tolerate vessel traffic. Harbor seals, beluga whales, and harbor porpoises could be exposed to vessel or construction noise and to other stimuli associated with the planned construction. Construction activities are expected to occur seasonally and incidental harassment of marine mammals could potentially occur intermittently when construction occurs. To some extent, beluga whales and harbor seals will likely be in the area throughout the proposed authorization period (2007-2012). Based on sighting rates and telemetry studies, few beluga whales are likely to be in the project area between December and late May, they will be present infrequently from May through July, and highest numbers will occur in August through November (Rugh et al., 2004; NMFS 2005a, Funk et al. 2005a). Only a few harbor seals have been reported near the planned construction site (LGL, unpublished data). With the mitigation and monitoring measures that are planned (see next section), it is very unlikely that any marine mammal will be injured or killed. KABATA believes that the construction activities outlined in its application and described in detail in the Draft EIS have the potential to disturb or displace small numbers of marine mammals. These potential takes would be by Level B harassment (behavioral disturbance) as defined in the 1994 amendments to the MMPA. No take by serious injury or death is likely, given the planned monitoring and mitigation procedures described in the application and summarized in this document. These measures are designed to minimize the possibility of injury to marine mammals and to reduce disturbance caused by construction activities. However, KABATA has requested that the LOA authorize a very small number (1-2 animals) of incidental, non-intentional Level A harassment (injury) takings be authorized in the unlikely event that they might occur. Should a Level A harassment take occur that involves serious injury (or mortality) of a marine mammal occurs, construction activities would be suspended, NMFS would be notified, and a review of the conditions under which construction activity could resume would be immediately undertaken. Mitigation KABATA proposes the following mitigation and monitoring measures to reduce impacts on marine mammals: Scheduling of construction activities to avoid periods of high whale use of Knik Arm Construction activities are planned to occur when beluga whale use of Knik Arm is low. Specifically, construction will occur to the greatest extent practicable during the December through mid-August time period when beluga whale abundance in Knik Arm are generally low. During the fall period when beluga whales are present in the Arm in greater numbers (15 August to 15 November), impact pile driving activities will not occur during the three hour period around low tide when whales are most likely to be in or near the construction area. These measures will greatly reduce the number of beluga whales potentially affected by construction and will assure that impacts on beluga whales are negligible. Soft start to pile driving activities A “soft start” technique will be used at the beginning of each pile installation to allow any marine mammal that may be in the immediate area to leave before impact piling reaches full energy. The soft start requires an initial set of 3 strikes from the impact hammer at 40 percent energy with a one minute waiting period between subsequent 3-strike sets (NMFS, 2003). If marine mammals are sighted within the safety zone prior to pile-driving, or during the soft start, the Resident Engineer (or other authorized individual) will delay pile-driving until the animal has moved outside the safety zone. The safety zone will be defined by the 190 dB re 1 microPa

(rms)radius in the case of pinnipeds and 180 dB rms in the case of odontocetes. Piling will resume only after the marine mammal is determined to have moved outside the safety zone by a qualified observer or after 15 minutes have elapsed since the last sighting of the marine mammal within the safety zone. Acoustic monitoring to determine appropriate safety zones Sound generated by the pile driver will be measured and used to refine the radii of the safety zones for marine mammals. Initially the safety zones will be defined based on measurements made by Blackwell

(2005)at the nearby Port MacKenzie dock reconstruction with allowances for differences in pile size and pile driver energy. Initial safety radii will be 1.5 times the size of those estimated by Blackwell

(2005)until actual safety radii can be determined. Safety zones appropriate to the conditions and equipment used for the Knik Arm Bridge will be empirically determined and implemented as soon as practicable. Observer Monitoring and shut down procedures The safety zone around the pile driving activity will be monitored for the presence of marine mammals before, during, and after any pile driving activity. The safety zone will be monitored for 30 minutes prior to initiating the soft start for pile driving. If the safety radius is obscured by fog or poor lighting conditions, pile driving will not be initiated until the entire safety radius is visible for the 30 minute period. If marine mammals are present within the safety zone, the start of pile driving will be delayed until the animals leave the area. The safety zone will also be monitored throughout the time required to drive a pile. If a marine mammal is observed entering the safety zone, pile driving operations will be discontinued until the animal is clear of the safety zone. Monitoring of the safety zone will continue for 30 minutes following pile driving. Monitoring Land-based Visual Monitoring Two experienced marine mammal observers will be positioned at sites appropriate for monitoring whales and seals within and approaching the safety zone and the larger area where marine mammals might be disturbed by pile-driving operations. Established observation sites near Cairn Point and Sixmile Creek will be used initially. Based on measurements by Blackwell (2005), observers at those sites will be able to see the area within the 180 dB safety radius and the area within which behavioral disturbance may potentially occur (160 dB). These observers will monitor the safety radius and the surrounding areas commencing 30 minutes prior to the beginning of pile-driving operations, during pile driving, and for 30 minutes after pile driving is completed. If whales or other marine mammals are sighted within the safety zone, pile driving operations will be halted until the animals are outside of the area. Boat-based Monitoring Two trained boat-based observers will survey Knik Arm and adjacent areas once per week during pile driving operations. The primary purpose of these observers will be to inform construction and shore-based observation personnel of whale group locations and the potential of these groups to approach and/or enter the safety zone. The boat based observers will also obtain information on the distribution and movements of belugas, noting especially any apparent blockage or delay of normal whale movement within Knik Arm over tidal cycles. Reporting During the period of bridge construction, KABATA proposes to submit brief progress reports concerning recent construction activities, marine mammal and acoustic monitoring work, and any other information required under an LOA will be provided to NMFS on a weekly, monthly or such other schedule as may be specified in the LOA. Any significant observations concerning impacts on marine mammals will be transmitted to NMFS within 48 hours. Any Level A takes observed will be required to be immediately reported to NMFS. Preliminary results of the acoustical measurements, as necessary to refine and validate the safety radii, will be reported to NMFS as soon as the relevant data can be obtained and analyzed. These data will be available no later than 1 month after the onset of pile driving. During construction, KABATA proposes to submit a preliminary report on activities and results (acoustical and mammal) to NMFS within 90 days after the termination of the fall construction season-the season when most belugas are likely to be present in the area. This report will provide summaries of the dates and locations of construction operations, details of marine mammal sightings (dates, times, locations, activities, associated construction activities), estimates of the amount and nature of marine mammal takings, and any apparent effects on accessibility of marine mammals to subsistence hunters. It will also provide a fuller account of the levels, durations, and spectral characteristics of the impact and vibratory pile driving sounds. For the impact pile driving, the peak, rms, and energy levels of the sound pulses and their durations will be reported as a function of distance, water depth, and tidal cycle. In addition to the 90-day reports, KABATA proposes to submit a draft technical summary report to NMFS 60-120 days before the LOA expires. All technical reports will provide full documentation of methods, results and interpretation of all monitoring tasks. The draft final report may be subject to a review process determined by NMFS, and will then be finalized if comments are received from NMFS. The final comprehensive report will be submitted within 90 days following expiration of the final LOA. Request for Information As this document is being published in conformance with NMFS regulations implementing the incidental take program (50 CFR Part 216 Subpart I), NMFS requests interested persons to submit comments, information, and suggestions concerning the request and the possible structure and content of the regulations to allow the taking. As provided by 50 CFR 216.105, NMFS will consider this information in developing any proposed regulations to authorize the taking. Comments regarding activities that do not relate to the incidental taking of marine mammals will not be considered by NMFS in its decision-making process. Prior to submitting comments, NMFS recommends reviewers of this document read KABATA's MMPA application as that document contains information necessary to respond appropriately to this action. If NMFS proposes regulations to allow this take, interested parties will be provided with a 30-day comment period within which to submit comments on the proposed rule. Dated: August 16, 2006. James H. Lecky, Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E6-13970 Filed 8-22-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [I.D. 081706A] New England Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce ACTION: Notice; public meetings. SUMMARY: The New England Fishery Management Council (Council) is scheduling public meetings of its Standardized Bycatch Reporting Methodology

(SBRM)Committee in September, 2006 to consider actions affecting New England fisheries in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ). Recommendations from this group will be brought to the full Council for formal consideration and action, if appropriate. DATES: These meetings will be held on Wednesday, September 6, 2006, at 10 a.m. and Monday, September 25, 2006,at 10 a.m. ADDRESSES: The September 6 meeting will be held at the Hilton Garden Inn, One Thurber Street, Warwick, RI 02886; telephone:

(401)734-9600; fax:

(401)734-9700. The September 25 meeting will be held at the Homeward Suites Hotel, 57 Newbury Street, Peabody, MA 01960; telephone:

(978)536-5050; fax:

(978)535-6840. *Council address* : New England Fishery Management Council, 50 Water Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul J. Howard, Executive Director, New England Fishery Management Council; telephone:

(978)465-0492. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The schedules and agendas for the meetings are as follows: 1. Wednesday, September 6, 2006; SBRM Committee meeting. The Committee will review the New England and Mid-Atlantic Council's Science and Statistical Committees

(SSCs)meeting results. The SSCs conducted a peer-review of the analytical framework and analyses supporting the development of the Omnibus SBRM amendment to the Council's FMPs. In addition, the Committee will review progress of the Fishery Management Action Team

(FMAT)on the development of the SBRM amendment. 2. Monday, September 25, 2006; SBRM Committee meeting. The Committee will review the public hearing draft of the Omnibus SBRM amendment to the Council's FMPs and develop a recommendation for both Councils as to approving the draft amendment. The Committee will report its recommendations to the New England Council at its meeting on September 26-28, 2006 and to the Mid-Atlantic Council at its meeting on October 10-12, 2006. Although non-emergency issues not contained in these agendas may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency. Special Accommodations These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Paul J. Howard, Executive Director, at 978-465-0492, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date. Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 *et seq.* Dated: August 17, 2006. James P. Burgess, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E6-13929 Filed 8-22-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [I.D. 081706B] Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice of public meetings. SUMMARY: The Pacific Fishery Management Council's (Council) Coastal Pelagic Species Advisory Subpanel (CPSAS) and Coastal Pelagic Species Management Team (CPSMT) will hold a joint work session via conference call, which is open to the public. DATES: The CPSMT and the CPSAS will meet via conference call in a joint session on Wednesday, September 6, 2006 from 9 a.m. until business for the day is completed. ADDRESSES: Public listening stations will be available in Portland OR and Long Beach, CA. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for the specific locations. *Council address* : Pacific Fishery Management Council, 7700 NE Ambassador Place, Suite 101, Portland, OR 97220-1384. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Mike Burner, Pacific Fishery Management Council,

(503)820-2280. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Public listening stations will be available at the following locations: Pacific Fishery Management Council, 7700 NE Ambassador Place, Suite 101, Portland, OR 97220-1384, telephone:

(503)820-2280; and National Marine Fisheries Service, 501 W Ocean Boulevard, Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802, telephone:

(562)980-4000. The primary purpose of the meeting is to review items on the Council's September 2006 agenda including research and data needs and marine protected areas within the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary. The CPSMT and CPSAS will develop recommendations for Council consideration at its September meeting in Foster City, CA. The status of 2006 CPS fisheries will also be discussed. Although non-emergency issues not contained in the meeting agenda may be discussed, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this document and any issues arising after publication of this document that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the intent to take final action to address the emergency. Special Accommodations The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Ms. Carolyn Porter at

(503)820-2280 at least 5 days prior to the meeting date. Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 *et seq.* Dated: August 17, 2006. James P. Burgess, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E6-13930 Filed 8-22-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy [Case No. CD-002] Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Publication of the Petition for Waiver and Denial of the Application for Interim Waiver of LG Electronics From the Department of Energy Clothes Dryer Test Procedures AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy. ACTION: Notice of Petition for Waiver, Denial of Application for Interim Waiver, and request for comments. SUMMARY: Today's notice publishes a Petition for Waiver from LG Electronics Inc. (LG). This Petition (hereafter “LG Petition”) requests a waiver from the Department of Energy (hereafter “Department” or “DOE”) test procedures for residential clothes dryers. In addition, today's notice denies LG an Interim Waiver from the DOE test procedures applicable to residential clothes dryers. Today's notice also includes an alternate test procedure the Department may include in the Decision and Order, should the Department grant LG a waiver. The Department is soliciting comments, data, and information with respect to the LG Petition, LG's Application for Interim Waiver, and the proposed alternate test procedure. DATES: The Department will accept comments, data, and information regarding this Petition for Waiver until, but no later than September 22, 2006. ADDRESSES: Please submit comments, identified by case number CD-002, by any of the following methods: • *Mail:* Ms. Brenda Edwards-Jones, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Program, Mailstop EE-2J, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone:

(202)586-2945. Please submit one signed original paper copy. • *Hand Delivery/Courier:* Ms. Brenda Edwards-Jones, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Program, Room 1J-018, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585. • *E-mail:* *Michael.raymond@ee.doe.gov.* Include either the case number CD-002, and/or “LG Petition” in the subject line of the message. • *Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.* Follow the instructions for submitting comments. *Instructions:* All submissions received must include the agency name and case number for this proceeding. Submit electronic comments in WordPerfect, Microsoft Word, PDF, or text (ASCII) file format and avoid the use of special characters or any form of encryption. Wherever possible, include the electronic signature of the author. Absent an electronic signature, comments submitted electronically must be followed and authenticated by submitting the signed original paper document. The Department does not accept telefacsimiles (faxes). Any person submitting written comments must also send a copy of such comments to the petitioner. (10 CFR 430.27(b)(1)(iv)) The contact information for the petitioner of today's notice is: Mr. John I. Taylor, Vice President, Government Relations, LG Electronics USA, Inc., 1750 K St., NW., Washington, DC 20006. According to 10 CFR 1004.11, any person submitting information that he or she believes to be confidential and exempt by law from public disclosure should submit two copies: one copy of the document including all the information believed to be confidential, and one copy of the document with the information believed to be confidential deleted. The Department will make its own determination about the confidential status of the information and treat it according to its determination. *Docket:* For access to the docket to read the background documents relevant to this matter, go to the U.S. Department of Energy, Forrestal Building, Room 1J-018 (Resource Room of the Building Technologies Program), 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121,

(202)586-2945, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Available Documents include the following items: this notice, public comments received, the LG Petition and Application for Interim Waiver, and prior Department rulemakings regarding residential clothes dryers. Please call Ms. Brenda Edwards-Jones at the above telephone number for additional information regarding visiting the Resource Room. Please note: The Department's Freedom of Information Reading Room (formerly Room 1E-190 at the Forrestal Building) is no longer housing rulemaking materials. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Michael G. Raymond, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Program, Mail Stop EE-2J, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585- 0121,

(202)586-9611; e-mail: *Michael.Raymond.ee.doe.gov* ; or Francine Pinto, Esq., U.S. Department of Energy, Office of General Counsel, Mail Stop GC-72, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121,

(202)586-9507; e-mail: *Francine.Pinto@hq.doe.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background and Authority II. Petition for Waiver III. Application for Interim Waiver IV. Alternate Test Procedure V. Summary and Request for Comments I. Background and Authority Title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act

(EPCA)sets forth a variety of provisions concerning energy efficiency. Part B of Title III (42 U.S.C. 6291-6309) provides for the “Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products other than Automobiles.” Part B specifically provides for definitions, test procedures, labeling provisions, energy conservation standards, and the authority to require information and reports from manufacturers. With respect to test procedures, it generally authorizes the Secretary of Energy to prescribe test procedures that are reasonably designed to produce results which reflect energy efficiency, energy use and estimated operating costs, and that are not unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3)) EPCA provides that the Secretary of Energy may amend test procedures for consumer products if the Secretary determines that amended test procedures would more accurately reflect energy efficiency, energy use and estimated operating costs, and would not be unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)) Today's notice involves residential products covered under Part B. The LG Petition requests a waiver from the residential test procedures for LG's DLEC733W model of condenser clothes dryer. The test procedures for clothes dryers appear at 10 CFR Part 430, Subpart B, Appendix D. The Department's regulations contain provisions allowing a person to seek a waiver from the test procedure requirements for covered consumer products (10 CFR 430.27). The waiver provisions allow the Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (hereafter “Assistant Secretary”) to temporarily waive test procedures for a particular basic model when a petitioner shows that the basic model contains one or more design characteristics that prevent testing according to the prescribed test procedures, or when the prescribed test procedures may evaluate the basic model in a manner so unrepresentative of its true energy consumption as to provide materially inaccurate comparative data. (10 CFR 430.27(a)(1)) The Assistant Secretary may grant the waiver subject to conditions, including adherence to alternate test procedures. Petitioners are to include in their petition any alternate test procedures known to evaluate the basic model in a manner representative of its energy consumption. (10 CFR 430.27(b)(1)(iii)) Waivers generally remain in effect until final test procedure amendments become effective, thereby resolving the problem that is the subject of the waiver. The waiver process also allows the Assistant Secretary to grant an Interim Waiver from test procedure requirements to manufacturers that have petitioned the Department for a waiver of such prescribed test procedures. (10 CFR 430.27(a)(2)) An Interim Waiver remains in effect for a period of 180 days or until the Department issues its determination on the Petition for Waiver, whichever is sooner, and may be extended for an additionally 180 days, if necessary. (10 CFR 430.27(h)) II. Petition for Waiver On November 14, 2005, LG filed a Petition for Waiver and an Application for Interim Waiver from the test procedures applicable to its residential clothes dryers. LG seeks a waiver from the applicable test procedures for its DLEC733W basic product model because, LG asserts, design characteristics prevent testing according to the currently prescribed test procedures. In 1995, the Department granted Miele Appliance, Inc. (Miele), a waiver from test procedures for a different model of condenser clothes dryer. (60 FR 9330, February 17, 1995) LG claims that its condenser clothes dryers cannot be tested pursuant to the existing test procedures and requests that the same waiver granted to Miele for its T1565CA and T15701C models in 1995 be granted for LG's DLEC733W model. In particular, LG claims that the current clothes dryer test procedures apply only to vented clothes dryers because the test procedures require the use of an exhaust restrictor to simulate the backpressure effects of a vent tube in an installed condition. LG's condenser dryers do not have exhaust vents as they do not exhaust air as conventional, vented dryers. Furthermore, LG states that DOE's test procedures for clothes dryers provide no definition or mention of condenser clothes dryers. In addition, LG asserts that the condenser clothes dryer inherently consumes more energy to dry a load of clothes than a conventional, vented dryer. However, LG claims, condenser dryers offer additional utility to consumers over conventional dryers. LG also claims that the condensing dryer could save substantially more household energy than a conventional dryer if the effects on space heating and cooling requirements are considered. The LG Petition requests that DOE grant a waiver from existing test procedures until DOE prescribes final test procedures and minimum energy conservation standards that are, according to LG, “appropriate to LG's condenser clothes dryers.” (LG Petition for Waiver, page 4) LG did not include an alternate test procedure in its petition, and noted that it is not aware of any alternative test procedure that could appropriately evaluate its products. III. Application for Interim Waiver The LG Petition also requests an Interim Waiver for immediate relief. An Interim Waiver may be granted if it is determined that the applicant will experience economic hardship if the Application for Interim Waiver is denied, if it appears likely that the Petition for Waiver will be granted, and/or the Assistant Secretary determines that it would be desirable for public policy reasons to grant immediate relief pending a determination of the Petition for Waiver. (10 CFR 430.27(g)) LG's Application for Interim Waiver does not provide sufficient information to permit DOE to evaluate the economic hardship LG claims it will experience absent a favorable determination on its Application for Interim Waiver. LG's discussion of anticipated economic hardship is entirely qualitative: “significant investment,” “significant losses in goodwill and brand acceptance.” Furthermore, public policy would not tend to favor granting LG an Interim Waiver, pending determination of the Petition for Waiver. DOE believes that where it grants a waiver from applicable test procedures, an alternate test procedure should be in place, where possible, because testing is necessary to verify compliance with the applicable energy standards. Maintaining proper compliance ensures the public that marketed products meet published energy standards. However, in this case, it appears to DOE that industry has made no effort to develop an alternate test procedure, even though it is possible to develop one. LG did not propose an alternate test procedure in its Petition. To help provide a means to evaluate compliance of condenser dryers, DOE has developed an alternate test procedure on which it is seeking comment in this notice. However, because DOE is still seeking such comment, DOE is not yet prepared to require LG to follow this alternate test procedure and grant this interim waiver. Furthermore, pending public comment, it is not clear to DOE what, if any, type of waiver it would grant LG in the Decision and Order. In 1995, DOE granted Miele Appliances, Inc. a waiver from test procedures because it determined that the clothes dryer test procedure was not applicable to Miele condenser clothes dryers. (60 FR 9330, February 17, 1995) In addition, DOE provided that Miele's condenser dryers would not have to meet the applicable energy efficiency standards because their added utility justified their higher energy consumption compared to traditional clothes dryers, and because the test procedures were not applicable. Though DOE determined in 1995 that Miele's condenser dryers should not be subject to the energy standards, it is not evident that the same conditions exist today to warrant a similar waiver for LG's products. In particular, it appears that the clothes dryer market has developed since 1995 and that it may be possible to manufacture condenser clothes dryers that are as, or more, efficient than traditional vented clothes dryers. Advanced Engineering from Germany (AEG), for example, currently makes a highly efficient heat pump condenser dryer which it offers in Europe. Waiving the applicable clothes dryer energy standard for LG might permit LG to manufacture and sell clothes dryers that are less efficient than existing standards, though the technology to meet or exceed these efficiencies may be available. However, because the potential of current condenser clothes dryer technology is not fully known and it is not clear whether condenser clothes dryers may meet current minimum energy standards, more information is needed to assess what, if any, sort of waiver is appropriate. Furthermore, more information about the LG condensing dryer is needed for DOE to assess the impact of the alternate test procedure that is proposed and published in this notice. In sum, because:

(a)It is not clear that DOE would ultimately exempt LG's products from the applicable energy standards as it did in the case of Miele;

(b)it is desirable for public policy reasons to develop an alternate test procedure, where possible, when energy standards are in effect; and

(c)the proposed alternate test procedure is still undergoing evaluation, DOE is denying LG's Application for an Interim Waiver. This denial of Interim Waiver is based upon the presumed validity of statements submitted by stakeholders. This denial of Interim Waiver may be modified at any time upon a determination that the factual basis underlying the application is incorrect. IV. Alternate Test Procedure The Department will make a judgment on the LG Petition after the period for public comment. However, should DOE grant LG a waiver for its DLEC733W condenser clothes dryer model, DOE would likely prescribe an alternate test procedure. Manufacturers face restrictions with respect to making representations about the energy consumption and energy consumption costs of products covered by EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6293(c)) Consistent representations are important for manufacturers who make claims about the energy efficiency of their products. For example, they are necessary to determine compliance with Federal, state or local energy codes and regulatory requirements, and can provide valuable consumer purchasing information. Therefore, DOE is considering issuing an alternate test procedure for LG in the upcoming Decision and Order. The Department is publishing the proposed alternate test procedure in this notice, though it has not yet made a determination on the petition, to account for the potential need for an alternate test procedure and to allow the public to comment on a proposed alternate test procedure. LG did not include an alternate test procedure in its petition. However, LG noted that it knows of no other test procedure that would rate its condenser dryer products. DOE is considering including in the Decision and Order an alternate test procedure that is based on existing test procedures for clothes dryers, but removes the requirement to use an exhaust restrictor. The Department proposes the following language: 10 CFR Parts 430 Subpart B, Appendix D—“Uniform Test Method for Measuring the Energy Consumption of Clothes Dryers,” as amended:

(A)Section 1 is amended by adding the two following definitions at the end of the section: 1.14 “Conventional clothes dryer” means a clothes dryer that exhausts the evaporated moisture from the cabinet. 1.15 “Condensing clothes dryer” means a clothes dryer that uses a closed loop system with an internal condenser to remove the evaporated moisture from the heated air. The moist air is not discharged from the cabinet.

(B)Section 2.1 is amended by striking the second and third sentences, “The dryer exhaust shall be restricted by adding the AHAM exhaust simulator described in 3.3.5 of HLD-1” and “All external joints should be taped to avoid air leakage,” and by adding the following sentences at the end of the paragraph: “For conventional clothes dryers, the dryer exhaust shall be restricted by adding the AHAM exhaust simulator described in 3.3.5 of HLD-1. All external joints should be taped to avoid air leakage.” V. Summary and Request for Comments Today's notice announces LG's Petition for Waiver and denies LG an Interim Waiver from the test procedures applicable to LG's DLEC733W model condensing clothes dryers. The Department is publishing the LG Petition for Waiver in its entirety. The Petition contains no confidential information. Furthermore, today's notice includes an alternate test procedure that the Department is considering for testing of condensing clothes dryers. In this alternate test procedure, the Department proposes eliminating the requirement to use an exhaust restrictor for condenser clothes dryers. The Department is interested in receiving comments on all aspects of this notice. The Department is particularly interested in receiving comments and views of interested parties concerning whether to grant the LG Petition and regarding the proposed alternate test procedure. Specifically, the Department would like to receive comment on the following questions: • The LG Petition states that the condensing clothes dryer inherently uses more energy to dry a load of clothes than a conventional dryer. However, it appears that full-size condenser dryers may be able to meet existing minimum energy standards. The Department is interested in comment on what, if any, technologies could allow condenser clothes dryers to meet existing minimum energy standards. Furthermore, the Department is interested in comments on whether any condenser clothes dryers available in the U.S. or other consumer markets currently meet the U.S. minimum energy standard. • If other condenser clothes dryers are able to meet the existing minimum energy standards, is it appropriate for DOE to require LG to meet existing energy standards despite their potential added utility? What is appropriate for DOE to require of LG should no other condenser dryers meet current energy standards? • Is it appropriate for LG to use the proposed alternate test procedure for ratings, representations and compliance with energy codes and regulatory requirements? • Are the alternate test procedure's additional definitions for conventional and condenser clothes dryers robust, and do they fully apply to LG's condensing clothes dryers? • Current test procedures for clothes dryers require that the ambient temperature for testing conditions be maintained within a range of 3F, and that the humidity be maintained within a range of 10 percent relative humidity. Is it reasonable to require similar ranges for the testing of condensing clothes dryers? In addition, the Department is interested in receiving general comments on possible modifications to any test procedures or alternative rating methods which the Department could use to fairly represent the energy efficiency LG's condensing clothes dryer products. Any person submitting written comments must also send a copy of such comments to the petitioner, whose contact information is cited above. (10 CFR 430.27(b)(1)(iv)) Issued in Washington, DC, on August 11, 2006. Alexander A. Karsner, Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. November 14, 2005. Assistant Secretary for Conservation and Renewable Energy, United States Department of Energy, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585. Re: Petition for Waiver and Application for Interim Waiver, LG Electronics Condensing Clothes Dryers Dear Assistant Secretary: LG Electronics, Inc

(LG)hereby submits this Petition for Waiver and Application for Interim Waiver, pursuant to 10 CFR 430.27, for its condenser clothes dryers. A waiver was granted to Miele Appliance, Inc for the same type of product. 60 FR 9330 (Feb. 17, 1995). LG is a manufacturer of digital appliances, as well as mobile communications, digital displays, and digital media products. Its appliances include washing machines, clothes dryers, refrigerator-freezers, air-conditioners, air cleaners, ovens, microwave ovens, dishwashers, and vacuum cleaners and are sold worldwide, including in the United States. LG's U.S. operations are LG Electronics USA, Inc, with headquarters at 1000 Sylvan Avenue, Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632 (tel. 202-816-2000). Its worldwide headquarters are located at LG Twin Towers 20, Yoido-dong, Youngdungpo-gu Seoul, Korea 150-721 (tel. 011-82-2-3777-1114) URL: *http.www.LGE.com.* LG's principal brands include LG®, and OEM brands including GE® and Kenmore®. LG's appliances are produced in Korea and Mexico. LG plans to market highly efficient, advanced-design condenser (non-vented) clothes dryers. (The current LG model number of these products is DLEC733W.) This product does not vent exhaust air to the outside as a conventional dryer does, but rather uses ambient air to cool the hot, humid inside the appliance thereby condensing out the moisture. Thus, there is no exhaust air, only a wastewater stream that can be drained into a water container. This type of product is suited for installation conditions where exhaust venting is not practical or is cost prohibitive. It thus benefits those dwellers of high-rise apartments and others who in many cases have no way to vent to the outside or at least not without considerable remodeling/construction expense. The advantageous no-exhaust design characteristic produces a more complex drying process than the regular vented dryer. Condenser clothes dryers offer additional utility to the consumer that affects energy consumption, and the characteristics of the product are not reflected by the test procedure. The condenser clothes dryer does not have an outside vent exhaust, and extracting the moisture from the warm moist air in the drum requires more energy to dry clothes than simply exhausting the warm moist air to the outdoors. 1 1 However, while the condensing dryer inherently uses more energy to dry a load of clothes than a conventional dryer, the condensing dryer could save substantially more household energy than a conventional dryer if the effects on space heating and cooling requirements are considered. The air lost from dryer exhaust vent can impose a significant load on the space-conditioning unit as cool or hot outdoor air is drawn inside the room or home to replace the exhausted air. DOE's existing test procedure for clothes dryers requires the use of an exhaust restrictor to simulate the backpressure effects of a vent tube in an installed condition. And the test procedure does not provide any definition or mention of condenser clothes dryers. Since LG's condenser clothes dryers do not have an exhaust vent and the DOE test procedure does not provide any definition or mention of condenser clothes dryers, the products cannot be tested in accordance with the test procedure. Thus, the test procedure does not apply to them. Consequently, the DOE energy conservation standard for clothes dryers does not apply to LG condenser dryers since the DOE standard must be “determined in accordance with test procedures prescribed under section 6293 of this title.” 42 U.S.C. 6291(6). These circumstances clearly warrant a waiver. 10 CFR 430.27 provides for waiver of DOE test procedures on the grounds that a basic model contains design characteristics that either prevent testing according to the prescribed test procedure or produce data so unrepresentative of a covered product's true energy consumption characteristics as to provide materially inaccurate comparative data. As discussed above, the LG condenser clothes dryer contains a design characteristic—lack of an exhaust—that prevents testing according to the DOE test procedure. Further, the test procedure does not provide any definition or mention of condenser clothes dryers. A waiver should therefore be granted that provides that LG is not required to test its condenser clothes dryers. The existing minimum energy conservation standard for clothes dryers also should not apply to these LG condenser clothes dryers. The waiver should remain in effect until DOE prescribes final test procedures and minimum energy conservation standards appropriate to LG's condenser clothes dryers. That a waiver is warranted is borne out by the fact that DOE has granted a waiver to Miele for the same type of product. 60 FR 9330 (Feb. 17, 1995). DOE stated: “The Department agrees with Miele and AHAM that the condenser clothes dryer offers the consumer additional utility, and is justified to consum[e] more energy (lower energy factor) versus non-condenser clothes dryers. Furthermore, the Department believes that the existing clothes dryer test procedure is not applicable to the Miele condenser clothes dryers. This assertion is based on the fact that the existing test procedure requires the use of an exhaust restrictor and does not provide any definition or mention of condenser clothes dryers. The Department agrees with Miele that the current clothes dryer minimum energy conservation standard does not apply to Miele's condenser clothes dryers. Today's Decision and Order exempts Miele from testing its condenser clothes dryer and determining an Energy Factor. The Department is not publishing an amended test procedure for Miele at this time because there is not any reason to. The existing minimum energy conservation standard for clothes dryers is not applicable to the Miele condenser clothes dryer. Furthermore, the FTC does not have a labeling program for clothes dryers, therefore, Miele is not required to test its condenser clothes dryers.” LG urges that the same waiver be granted to LG as was granted to Miele for its comparable product. Manufacturers of all other basic models marketed in the United States and known to LG to incorporate similar design characteristics as the LG condenser clothes dryer include Miele and Bosch (model number WTL5410). LG is not aware of any alternative test procedure to evaluate in a manner representative of the energy consumption characteristics of the LG condenser clothes dryers. LG notes that DOE's February 17, 1995 decision on Miele's application indicated that Miele proposed that DOE consider adding a class for condenser clothes dryers in the then current clothes dryer rulemaking for minimum efficiency standards, along with an appropriate test procedure. DOE's decision indicated that DOE would consider adding a new product class for condenser clothes dryers in that rulemaking and would initiate a clothes dryers test procedure rulemaking to add the capability of testing condenser clothes dryers to the existing test procedure for any potential future use. To the best of LG's knowledge, DOE has not done so. LG also requests immediate relief by grant of an interim waiver. Grant of an interim waiver is fully justified: The petition for waiver is likely to be granted, as evidenced not only by its merits but also because DOE has already granted a similar waiver to Miele. Lack of relief will impose economic hardship on LG. LG would be placed in an untenable situation: The product would be subject to a set of regulations that DOE already acknowledges is not applicable to such a product and cannot be complied with, while at the same time another manufacturer is allowed to operate under a waiver from such regulations. Significant investment has already been made in LG condensing clothes dryers. Lack of relief would not allow LG to recoup this investment and would deny LG anticipated sales revenue. This does not take into account significant losses in goodwill and brand acceptance. Beyond that, since the LG condensing clothes dryer is intended to be sold as a pair with LG washing machines an inability to sell the clothes dryer will harm sales of the washing machine as well. The basic purpose of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, as amended by the National Appliance Energy Conservation Act, is to foster purchase of energy-efficient appliances, not hinder such purchases. The LG condenser clothes dryer makes a dryer available to households where for physical, structural reasons a vented dryer could otherwise not be installed. LG condenser clothes dryers thus offer benefits in the public interest. To encourage and foster the availability of these products is in the public interest. Standards programs should not be used as a means to block innovative, improved designs. 2 DOE's rules thus should accommodate and encourage—not act to block—such a product. 2 See FTC Advisory Opinion No. 457, TRRP 1718.20 (1971 Transfer Binder); 49 FR 32213 (Aug. 13, 1984); 52 FR 49141, 49147-48 (Dec. 30, 1987). Granting the interim waiver and waiver would also eliminate a non-tariff trade barrier. In addition, grant of relief would help enhance economic development and employment, including not only LG Electronics USA's operations in New Jersey, Illinois and Alabama, but also at major national retailers and regional dealers that carry LG products. Furthermore, continued employment creation and ongoing investments in its marketing, sales and servicing activities will be fostered by approval of the interim waiver. Conversely, denial of the requested relief would harm the company and would be anticompetitive. We would be pleased to discuss this request with DOE and provide further information as needed. We hereby certify that all clothes dryer manufacturers of domestically marketed units known to LG have been notified by letter of this petition and application, copies of which letters are attached. Sincerely, Richard Donner, Product Planning Manager, North America Product Planning Group, LG Electronics USA, Inc, 2000 Millbrook Drive, Lincolnshire, IL 60069, *Phone:* 201-906-9878, *Fax:* 847-941-8340, *E-mail: rdonner@lge.com.* John I. Taylor, Vice President, Government Relations, LG Electronics USA, Inc, 1750 K Street, NW., Washington, DC 20006, *Phone:* 202-719-3490, *Fax:* 847-941-8177, *E-mail: jtaylor@lge.com.* *Of counsel:* John A. Hodges, James T. Bruce, Wiley Rein & Fielding LLP, Washington, DC 20006, *Phone:* 202-719-7000, *Fax* : 202-719-7049, *E-mail: jhodges@wrf.com, jbruce@wrf.com.* [FR Doc. E6-13945 Filed 8-22-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-8212-7] National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology Environmental Technology Subcommittee AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice of meeting. SUMMARY: Under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, P.L. 92463, EPA gives notice of a meeting of the Environmental Technology Subcommittee of the National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology (NACEPT). NACEPT provides advice and recommendations to the Administrator of EPA on a broad range of environmental policy, technology, and management issues. The Environmental Technology Subcommittee was formed to assist EPA in evaluating its current and potential role in the development and commercialization of environmental technologies by suggesting how to optimize existing EPA programs to facilitate the development of sustainable private sector technologies, and by suggesting alternative approaches to achieving these goals. The purpose of the meeting is to continue the Subcommittee's consideration of these issues. A copy of the agenda for the meeting will be posted at *http://www.epa.gov/ocem/nacept/cal-nacept.htm.* DATES: The NACEPT Environmental Technology Subcommittee will hold a two day open meeting on Thursday, September 14, 2006 from 9 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. and Friday, September 15, 2006 from 8:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Marriott Crystal City Hotel, 1999 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, Virginia 22202. The meeting is open to the public, with limited seating on a first-come, first-served basis. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Joyce, Designated Federal Officer, *joyce.mark@epa.gov* , 202-233-0068, U.S. EPA, Office of Cooperative Environmental Management (1601E), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Requests to make oral comments or provide written comments to the Subcommittee should be sent to Mark Joyce, Designated Federal Officer, at the contact information above. The public is welcome to attend all portions of the meeting. *Meeting Access:* For information on access or services for individuals with disabilities, please contact Mark Joyce at 202-233-0068 or *joyce.mark@epa.gov.* To request accommodation of a disability, please contact Mark Joyce, preferably at least 10 days prior to the meeting, to give EPA as much time as possible to process your request. Dated: August 16, 2006. Mark Joyce, Designated Federal Officer. [FR Doc. E6-13950 Filed 8-22-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPP-2004-0048; FRL-8087-5] Amitraz; Tolerance Reassessment Decision; Notice of Availability AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of EPA's Tolerance Reassessment Decision

(TRED)for the pesticide amitraz, and opens a public comment period on this document. The Agency's risk assessments and other related documents also are available in the amitraz Docket. Through the tolerance reassessment program, EPA is ensuring that all pesticides meet current health and food safety standards. DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 23, 2006. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification

(ID)number EPA-HQ-OPP-2004-0048, by one of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: *http://www.regulations.gov* . Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. • *Mail* : Office of Pesticide Programs

(OPP)Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. • *Delivery* : OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays). Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The Docket telephone number is

(703)305-5805. *Instructions* : Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2004-0048. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the docket without change and may be made available on-line at *http://www.regulations.gov* , including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information

(CBI)or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-mail. The Federal regulations.gov Web site is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. *Docket* : All documents in the docket are listed in the docket 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, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either in the electronic docket at *http://www.regulations.gov* , or, if only available in hard copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. The hours of operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket telephone number is

(703)305-5805. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amaris Johnson, Special Review and Reregistration Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:

(703)305-9542; fax number:

(703)308-7070; e-mail address: *johnson.amaris@epa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me? This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human health, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry; pesticide users; and members of the public interested in the sale, distribution, or use of pesticides. Since others also may be interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA? 1. *Submitting CBI* . Do not submit this information to EPA through regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. 2. *Tips for preparing your comments* . When submitting comments, remember to: i. Identify the document by docket

(ID)number and other identifying information (subject heading, **Federal Register** date and page number). ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal Regulations

(FQPA)Tolerance Reassessment Progress and Risk Management Decision for amitraz, known as a TRED. EPA must review tolerances and tolerance exemptions that were in effect when FQPA was enacted in August 1996, to ensure that these existing pesticide residue limits for food and feed commodities meet the safety standard established by the new law. Tolerances are considered reassessed once the safety finding has been made or a revocation occurs. EPA has reviewed and made the requisite safety finding for the amitraz tolerances. EPA is applying the principles of public participation to all pesticides undergoing reregistration and tolerance reassessment. The Agency's Pesticide Tolerance Reassessment and Reregistration; Public Participation Process, published in the **Federal Register** on May 14, 2004, (69 FR 26819) (FRL-7357-9) explains that in conducting these programs, EPA is tailoring its public participation process to be commensurate with the level of risk, extent of use, complexity of issues, and degree of public concern associated with each pesticide. Due to its limited uses, risks, and other factors, amitraz was reviewed through the modified 4-Phase public participation process. Through this process, EPA worked extensively with stakeholders and the public to reach the regulatory decisions for amitraz. The tolerance reassessment program is being conducted under Congressionally mandated time frames, and EPA recognizes the need both to make timely decisions and to involve the public. The Agency is issuing the amitraz TRED for public comment. This comment period is intended to provide an additional opportunity for public input and a mechanism for initiating any necessary amendments to the TRED. All comments should be submitted using the methods in ADDRESSES , and must be received by EPA on or before the closing date. These comments will become part of the Agency Docket for amitraz. Comments received after the close of the comment period will be marked “late.” EPA is not required to consider these late comments. The Agency will carefully consider all comments received by the closing date and will provide a Response to Comments Memorandum in the Docket and regulations.gov. If any comment significantly affects the document, EPA also will publish an amendment to the TRED in the **Federal Register** . In the absence of substantive comments requiring changes, the tolerance reassessment decisions reflected in this TRED will be implemented as presented. B. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action? Section 408(q) of the FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 346a(q), required EPA to review tolerances and exemptions for pesticide residues in effect as of August 2, 1996, to determine whether the tolerance or exemption meets the requirements of section 408(b)(2) or (c)(2) of FFDCA. List of Subjects Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests. Dated: August 11, 2006. Debra Edwards, Director, Special Review and Reregistration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs. [FR Doc. E6-13857 Filed 8-22-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0284; FRL-8085-6] Aliphatic Solvents; Reregistration Eligibility Decision for Low Risk Pesticide; Notice of Availability AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of EPA's Reregistration Eligibility Decision

(RED)for the pesticide aliphatic solvents, and opens a public comment period on this document, related risk assessments, and other support documents. EPA has reviewed the low risk pesticide aliphatic solvents through a modified, streamlined version of the public participation process that the Agency uses to involve the public in developing pesticide reregistration and tolerance reassessment decisions. Through these programs, EPA is ensuring that all pesticides meet current health and safety standards. DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 23, 2006. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification

(ID)number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0284, by one of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: *http://www.regulations.gov* . Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. • *Mail* : Office of Pesticide Programs

(OPP)Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. • *Delivery* : OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The Docket telephone number is

(703)305-5805. *Instructions* : Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0284. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the docket without change and may be made available on-line at *http://www.regulations.gov* , including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information

(CBI)or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-mail. The Federal regulations.gov Web site is an "anonymous access" system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. *Docket* : All documents in the docket are listed in the docket 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, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either in the electronic docket at *http://www.regulations.gov* , or, if only available in hard copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. The hours of operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket telephone number is

(703)305-5805. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bentley Gregg, Special Review and Reregistration Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:

(703)308-8178; fax number:

(703)308-8005); e-mail address: *gregg.bentley@epa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me? This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human health, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry; pesticide users; and members of the public interested in the sale, distribution, or use of pesticides. Since others also may be interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under **FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT** . B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA? 1. * Submitting CBI* . Do not submit this information to EPA through regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. 2. * Tips for preparing your comments* . When submitting comments, remember to: i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying information (subject heading, **Federal Register** date and page number). ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal Regulations

(FQPA)was enacted in August 1996, to ensure that these existing pesticide residue limits for food and feed commodities meet the safety standard established by the new law. Tolerances are considered reassessed once the safety finding has been made or a revocation occurs. EPA has reviewed and made the requisite safety finding for the aliphatic solvents tolerances. Although, the aliphatic solvents RED was signed on July 12, 2006, certain components of the document, which did not affect the final regulatory decision, were undergoing final editing at that time. These components, including the list of additional generic data requirements, summary of labeling changes, appendices, and other relevant information, have been added to the aliphatic solvents RED document. In addition, subsequent to signature, EPA identified several minor errors and ambiguities in the document. Therefore, for the sake of accuracy, the Agency also has included the appropriate error corrections, amendments, and clarifications. None of these additions or changes alter the conclusions documented in the July 12, 2006 aliphatic solvents RED. All of these changes are described in detail in an errata memorandum which is included in the public docket for aliphatic solvents. EPA is applying the principles of public participation to all pesticides undergoing reregistration and tolerance reassessment. The Agency's Pesticide Tolerance Reassessment and Reregistration; Public Participation Process, published in the **Federal Register** on May 14, 2004, (69 FR 26819)(FRL-7357-9) explains that in conducting these programs, the Agency is tailoring its public participation process to be commensurate with the level of risk, extent of use, complexity of issues, and degree of public concern associated with each pesticide. EPA can expeditiously reach decisions for pesticides like aliphatic solvents, which pose few risk concerns, and require little risk mitigation. Once EPA assesses uses and risks for such low risk pesticides, the Agency may go directly to a decision and prepare a document summarizing its findings, such as the aliphatic solvents RED. The reregistration program is being conducted under Congressionally mandated time frames, and EPA recognizes the need both to make timely decisions and to involve the public in finding ways to effectively mitigate pesticide risks. Aliphatic solvents, however, poses few risks that require mitigation. The Agency therefore is issuing the aliphatic solvents RED, its risk assessments, and related support materials simultaneously for public comment. The comment period is intended to provide an opportunity for public input and a mechanism for initiating any necessary amendments to the RED. All comments should be submitted using the methods in ADDRESSES , and must be received by EPA on or before the closing date. These comments will become part of the Agency Docket for aliphatic solvents. Comments received after the close of the comment period will be marked “late.” EPA is not required to consider these late comments. EPA will carefully consider all comments received by the closing date and will provide a response to Comments Memorandum in the Docket and regulations.gov. If any comment significantly affects the document, EPA also will publish an amendment to the RED in the **Federal Register** . In the absence of substantive comments requiring changes, the aliphatic solvents RED will be implemented as it is now presented. B. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action? Section 4(g)(2) of FIFRA as amended directs that, after submission of all data concerning a pesticide active ingredient, “the Administrator shall determine whether pesticides containing such active ingredient are eligible for reregistration,” before calling in product specific data on individual end-use products and either reregistering products or taking other “appropriate regulatory action.” Section 408(q) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a(q), requires EPA to review tolerances and exemptions for pesticide residues in effect as of August 2, 1996, to determine whether the tolerance or exemption meets the requirements of section 408(b)(2) or (c)(2) of FFDC. List of Subjects Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests. Dated: August 15, 2006. Peter Caulkins, Director, Special Review and Reregistration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs. [FR Doc. E6-13856 Filed 8-22-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPP-2002-0202; FRL-8089-1] Lindane; Notice of Receipt of Requests to Voluntarily Cancel Lindane Pesticide Registrations AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: In accordance with section 6(f)(1) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), as amended, EPA is issuing a notice of receipt of requests by registrants to voluntarily cancel products containing the pesticide lindane. The requests would terminate the last lindane products registered for use in the U.S. EPA intends to grant these requests at the close of the comment period for this announcement unless the Agency receives substantive comments within the comment period that would merit its further review of the requests, or unless the registrants withdraw their requests within this period. Upon acceptance of these requests, any sale, distribution, or use of products listed in this notice will be permitted only if such sale, distribution, or use is consistent with the terms as described in the final order. DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 22, 2006. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification

(ID)number EPA-HQ-OPP-2002-0202, by one of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal* : *http://www.regulations.gov* . Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. • *Mail* : Office of Pesticide Programs

(703)305-5805. *Instructions* : Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2002-0202. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the docket without change and may be made available on-line at *http://www.regulations.gov* , including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information

(CBI)or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-mail. The Federal regulations.gov Web site is an "anonymous access" system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. *Docket* : All documents in the docket are listed in the docket 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, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either in the electronic docket at *http://www.regulations.gov* , or, if only available in hard copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. The hours of operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket telephone number is

(703)305-5805. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark T. Howard, Special Review and Reregistration Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:

(703)308-8172; fax number:

(703)308-7070; e-mail address: *howard.markt@epa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me? This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human health, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry; pesticide users; and members of the public interested in the sale, distribution, or use of pesticides. Since others also may be interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA? 1. * Submitting CBI* . Do not submit this information to EPA through regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. 2. *Tips for preparing your comments* . When submitting comments, remember to: i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying information (subject heading, **Federal Register** date and page number). ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal Regulations

(CFR)part or section number. iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and substitute language for your requested changes. iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information and/or data that you used. v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be reproduced. vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and suggest alternatives. vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of profanity or personal threats. viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline identified. II. Background on the Receipt of Requests to Cancel and/or Amend Registrations to Delete Uses This notice announces receipt by EPA of requests from registrants AGSCO Inc., Chemtura USA Corporation, Drexel Chemical Company, and JLM International Inc. to cancel 12 lindane product registrations. Lindane, a broad spectrum, organochlorine insecticide, is used as a pre-plant seed treatment on six crops. In letters dated July 20, 2006 (Chemtura); July 25, 2006 (AGSCO); July 26, 2006 (Drexel); and July 27, 2006 (JLM), the registrants requested EPA to cancel the product registrations identified in this notice (Table 1). This action will terminate the last lindane products registered under FIFRA in the United States. III. What Action is the Agency Taking? This notice announces receipt by EPA of requests from registrants to cancel lindane product registrations. The specific products and the registrants making the requests are identified in Tables 1 and 2 of this unit. Under section 6(f)(1)(A) of FIFRA, registrants may request, at any time, that their pesticide registrations be canceled or amended to terminate one or more pesticide uses. Section 6(f)(1)(B) of FIFRA requires that before acting on a request for voluntary cancellation, EPA must provide a 30-day public comment period on the request for voluntary cancellation or use termination. In addition, section 6(f)(1)(C) of FIFRA requires that EPA provide a 180-day comment period on a request for voluntary cancellation or termination of any minor agricultural use before granting the request, unless: 1. The registrants request a waiver of the comment period, or 2. The Administrator determines that continued use of the pesticide would pose an unreasonable adverse effect on the environment. The lindane registrants have requested that EPA waive the 180-day comment period. EPA will provide a 30-day comment period on the proposed requests. Unless a request is withdrawn by the registrant within 30 days of publication of this notice, or if the Agency determines that there are substantive comments that warrant further review of this request, an order will be issued canceling the affected registrations. **Table 1.—Lindane Product Registrations with Pending Requests for Cancellation** Registration No. Product name Company 400-490 Gustafson Flowable Lindane 40% Chemtura USA Corporation 400-532 Sorghum Guard Chemtura USA Corporation 400-538 Gustafson Lindane 30C Flowable Chemtura USA Corporation 400-539 Gustafson Captan Lindane 12.5-25 Chemtura USA Corporation 400-540 Gustafson Vitavax-Thiram-Lindane Flowable Fungicide Insecticide Chemtura USA Corporation 554-140 DB-Green L AGSCO Inc 554-144 Lindane ST-40 AGSCO Inc 19713-61 Lindane Technical Drexel Chemical Co 19713-191 Lindane Technical Drexel Chemical Co 19713-387 Lindane Flowable Drexel Chemical Co 19713-401 Lindane 30% Drexel Chemical Co 82378-1 Lindane Technical JLM International Inc. Table 2 of this unit includes the names and addresses of record for the registrants of the products listed in Table 1 of this unit. **Table 2.—Registrants Requesting Voluntary Cancellation** EPA Company No. Company name and address 400 Chemtura USA Corporation 199 Benson Road Middlebury, Connecticut 06749 554 AGSCO Inc. PO Box 13458 Grand Forks North Dakota 58208-3458 19713 Drexel Chemical Co. 1700 Channel Avenue, PO Box 13327 Memphis, Tennessee 38113-0327 82378 JLM International Inc. 8675 Hidden River Parkway Tampa, Florida 33637 IV. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action? Section 6(f)(1) of FIFRA provides that a registrant of a pesticide product may at any time request that any of its pesticide registrations be canceled or amended to terminate one or more uses. FIFRA further provides that, before acting on the request, EPA must publish a notice of receipt of any such request in the **Federal Register** . Thereafter, following the public comment period, the Administrator may approve such a request. V. Procedures for Withdrawal of Request and Considerations for Reregistration of Lindane Registrants who choose to withdraw a request for cancellation must submit such withdrawal in writing to the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT , postmarked before September 22, 2006. This written withdrawal of the request for cancellation will apply only to the applicable FIFRA section 6(f)(1) request listed in this notice. If the products have been subject to a previous cancellation action, the effective date of cancellation and all other provisions of any earlier cancellation action are controlling. VI. Provisions for Disposition of Existing Stocks If the request for voluntary cancellation is granted as discussed above, the effective date of cancellation will be the date of the cancellation order. EPA intends to issue a cancellation order that will allow continued sale and/or use of existing stocks until such stocks are exhausted, provided that such further sale and use is consistent with the terms of the previously approved labeling on, or that accompany, the applicable product. It is EPA's intent that the order will specifically prohibit any use of existing stocks that is not consistent with such previously approved labeling. List of Subjects Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests. Dated: August 14, 2006. Debra Edwards, Director, Special Review and Reregistration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs. FR Doc. E6-13955 Filed 8-22-06; 8:45 am BILLING CODE 6560-507-S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0497; FRL-8084-5] Propiconazole Reregistration Eligibility Decision AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of EPA's Reregistration Eligibility Decision

(RED)for the pesticide propiconazole. The Agency's risk assessments and other related documents also are available in the propiconazole docket. Propiconazole is used as a conventional fungicide on agricultural crops, ornamentals, and turf and is used as an antimicrobial material preservative and wood preservative. EPA has reviewed propiconazole through the public participation process that the Agency uses to involve the public in developing pesticide reregistration and tolerance reassessment decisions. Through these programs, EPA is ensuring that all pesticides meet current health and safety standards. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christina Scheltema, Special Review and Reregistration Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:

(703)308-2201; fax number:

(703)308-8005; e-mail address: *scheltema.christina@epa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me? This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human health, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry; pesticide users; and members of the public interested in the sale, distribution, or use of pesticides. Since others also may be interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . B. How Can I Get Copies of this Document and Other Related Information? 1. *Docket.* EPA has established a docket for this action under docket identification

(ID)number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0497. Publicly available docket materials are available either in the electronic docket at *http://www.regulations.gov* , or, if only available in hard copy, at the Office of Pesticide Programs

(OPP)Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive Arlington, VA. The hours of operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone number is

(703)305-5805. 2. * Electronic access* . You may access this **Federal Register** document electronically through the EPA Internet under the **Federal Register** listings at *http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr.* II. Background A. What Action is the Agency Taking? Under section 4 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), EPA is reevaluating existing pesticides to ensure that they meet current scientific and regulatory standards. EPA has completed a Reregistration Eligibility Decision

(RED)for the pesticide propiconazole under section 4(g)(2)(A) of FIFRA. Propiconazole is used as a conventional fungicide on agricultural crops, ornamentals, and turf and is used as an antimicrobial material preservative and wood preservative. EPA has determined that the database to support reregistration is substantially complete and that currently registered products containing propiconazole are eligible for reregistration, provided the risks are mitigated either in the manner described in the RED or by another means that achieves equivalent risk reduction. Upon submission of any required product-specific data under section 4(g)(2)(B) and any necessary changes to the registration and labeling (either to address concerns identified in the RED or as a result of product-specific data), EPA will make a final reregistration decision under section 4(g)(2)(C) for products containing propiconazole. EPA must review tolerances and tolerance exemptions that were in effect when the Food Quality Protection Act

(ID)number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0505 and pesticide petition number

(PP)5F6997, by one of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: * http://www.regulations.gov* . Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. • *Mail* : Office of Pesticide Programs

(703)305-5805. *Instructions* : Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0505. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the docket without change and may be made available on-line at *http://www.regulations.gov* , including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information

(CBI)or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-mail. The Federal regulations.gov Web site is an "anonymous access" system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. *Docket* : All documents in the docket are listed in the docket 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, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either in the electronic docket at *http://www.regulations.gov* , or, if only available in hard copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Building), 2777 S. Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA. The hours of operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket telephone number is

(703)305-5805. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa Jones, Registration Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:

(703)308-9424, e-mail address: *jones.lisa@epa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me? You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer. Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to: • Crop production (NAICS code 111). • Animal production (NAICS code 112). • Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311). • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532). This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA? 1. *Submitting CBI* . Do not submit this information to EPA through regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. 2. *Tips for preparing your comments* . When submitting comments, remember to: i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying information (subject heading, **Federal Register** date and page number). ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal Regulations

(LOQ)and the limit of detection

(LOD)were 0.01 ppm and 0.003 ppm, respectively, for all soybean matrices. Final samples were filtered and the final solutions were analyzed using on-line solid phase extraction coupled to high performance liquid chromatography with positive-ion atmospheric pressure chemical ionization

(APCI)tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS). List of Subjects Environmental protection, Agricultural commodities, Feed additives, Food additives, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: August 9, 2006. Donald R. Stubbs, Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs. [FR Doc. E6-13661 Filed 8-22-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-8212-8] Proposed CERCLA Section 122(g) Administrative Agreement for De Minimis Settlement for the Mercury Refining Superfund Site, Towns of Guilderland and Colonie, Albany County, NY AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice; request for public comment. SUMMARY: In accordance with section 122(i) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as amended (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. 9622(i), notice is hereby given by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”), Region II, of a proposed *de minimis* administrative agreement pursuant to section 122(g) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9622(g), between EPA and two hundred ninety two

(292)settling parties pertaining to the Mercury Refining Superfund Site (“Site”) located in the Towns of Guilderland and Colonie, Albany County, New York. The settlement requires specified individual payments by each settling party to the EPA Hazardous Substance Superfund Mercury Refining Superfund Site Special Account, which combined total $2,160,742.74. Each settling party's individual settlement amount is considered to be that party's fair share of cleanup costs incurred and anticipated to be incurred in the future, plus a “premium” that accounts for, among other things, uncertainties associated with the costs of that future work at the Site. The settlement includes a covenant not to sue pursuant to sections 106 and 107 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9606 and 9607, relating to the Site, subject to limited reservations, and protection from contribution actions or claims as provided by sections 113(f)(2) and 122(g)(5) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9613(f)(2) and 9622(g)(5). For thirty

(30)days following the date of publication of this notice, EPA will receive written comments relating to the settlement. EPA will consider all comments received and may modify or withdraw its consent to the settlement if comments received disclose facts or considerations that indicate that the proposed settlement is inappropriate, improper, or inadequate. EPA's response to any comments received will be available for public inspection at EPA Region II, 290 Broadway, New York, New York 10007-1866. DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before September 22, 2006. ADDRESSES: The proposed settlement is available for public inspection at EPA Region II offices at 290 Broadway, New York, New York 10007-1866. Comments should reference the Mercury Refining Superfund Site, Index No. CERCLA-02-2006-2003. To request a copy of the proposed settlement agreement, please contact the individual identified below. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sharon E. Kivowitz, Assistant Regional Counsel, New York/Caribbean Superfund Branch, Office of Regional Counsel, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 17th Floor, 290 Broadway, New York, New York 10007-1866. Telephone: 212-637-3183. Dated: August 8, 2006. Raymond J. Basso, Acting Director, Emergency and Remedial Response Division, Region 2. [FR Doc. E6-13953 Filed 8-22-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Public Information Collections Approved by Office of Management and Budget August 8, 2006. SUMMARY: The Federal Communications Commission

(FCC)has received Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)approval for the following public information collections pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. 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 control number. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cheryl B. Williams, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554,

(202)418-0497 or via the Internet at *CherylB.Williams@fcc.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *OMB Control No.:* 3060-0751. *OMB Approval Date:* 1/05/2006. *Expiration Date:* 1/31/2009. *Title:* Reports Concerning International Private Lines Interconnected to the U.S. Public Switched Network. *Form No.:* N/A. *Estimated Annual Burden:* 10 responses; 80 total annual burden hours; 8 hours average per respondent. *Needs and Uses:* The purpose of this information collection is to review the impact, if any, that end-user private line interconnections have on the U.S. international settlements policy. Without the collection of this information, the Commission would not be able to monitor the impact that end-user private line interconnections have on the U.S. international public switched network. *OMB Control No.:* 3060-0768. *OMB Approval Date:* 1/18/2006. *Expiration Date:* 1/31/2009. *Title:* 28 GHz Band Segmentation Plan Amending the Commission's Rules to Redesignate the 27.5-29.5 GHz Frequency Band, to Reallocate the 29.5-30.0 GHz Frequency Band, and to Establish Rules and Policies for Local Multipoint Distribution Services

(LMDS)and for the Fixed Satellite Service. *Form No.:* N/A. *Estimated Annual Burden:* 60 responses; 90 total annual burden hours; 1.5 hours average per respondent. *Needs and Uses:* The Federal Communications Commission (“Commission”) and other applicants and/or licensees in the 28 GHz band use the information to determine the technical coordination of systems that are designed to share the same band segment in the 28 GHz frequency band. If this information is compiled less frequently or not filed in conjunction with the Commission's rules, applicants and licensees will not obtain the authorization necessary to provide telecommunications services; the Commission will not be able to carry out it mandate as required by statute; and applicants and licensees will not be able to provide service effectively. *OMB Control No.:* 3060-0901. *OMB Approval Date:* 4/26/2006. *Expiration Date:* 4/30/2009. *Title:* Reports of Common Carriers and Affiliates. *Form No.:* N/A. *Estimated Annual Burden:* 1,200 responses; 6,000 total annual burden hours; 5 hours average per respondent. *Needs and Uses:* Common carriers must file copies of all contracts entered into with a communications entity in a foreign point for the provision of common carrier service between the United States and that foreign point. Carriers are exempt from this requirement if the carrier enters into such a contract with a carrier that lacks market power in the relevant foreign market. The information is used by Commission staff to monitor the operating agreements of the U.S. carriers and their foreign correspondents that possess market power, specifically to monitor the international accounting rates of such carriers to ensure consistency with Commission policies and the public interest. Without the collection of information, the Commission could not preclude one-way bypass and safeguard its international settlements policy. *OMB Control No.:* 3060-0962. *OMB Approval Date:* 11/17/2005. *Expiration Date:* 11/30/2008. *Title:* Redesignation of the 18 GHz Frequency Band, Blanket Licensing of Satellite Earth Stations in the Ka-Band and the Allocation of Additional Spectrum for Broadcast Satellite Service Use. *Form No.:* N/A. *Estimated Annual Burden:* 590 responses; 590 total annual burden hours; 1-4 hours average per respondent. *Needs and Uses:* This information collection is necessary for the Commission to determine whether licensees complied with the rules applicable to satellite earth stations and to deploy new satellite systems. Without this information, the Commission would not be able to verify whether Geostationary Satellite Orbit

(GSO)Fixed Satellite Service

(FSS)earth stations in the Ka-Band were operating in accordance with the Commission's rules. *OMB Control No.:* 3060-1014. *OMB Approval Date:* 4/05/2006. *Expiration Date:* 4/30/2009. *Title:* Ku-band NGSO FSS. *Form No.:* N/A. *Estimated Annual Burden:* 1 response; 1 total annual burden hour; 1 hour average per respondent. *Needs and Uses:* The information collection requirements accounted for in this collection are necessary to ensure that prospective licensees in the Non-geostationary

(NGSO)Fixed Satellite Service

(FSS)follow their service rules. Without such information collection requirements, many existing radio services, both satellite and terrestrial could potentially be interrupted by interference caused by NGSO FSS systems on the same frequencies. *OMB Control No.:* 3060-1035. *OMB Approval Date:* 1/06/2006. *Expiration Date:* 1/31/2009. *Title:* Part 73, Subpart F—International Broadcast Stations. *Form No.:* FCC Forms 309, 310 and 311. *Estimated Annual Burden:* 79 responses; 334 total annual burden hours; 0.5-10 hours average per respondent. *Needs and Uses:* This information collection is used by the Commission to assign frequencies for use by international broadcast stations, to grant authority to operate such stations and to determine if interference or adverse propagation conditions exist that may impact the operation of such stations. The Commission collects this information pursuant to 47 CFR part 73, subpart F. If the Commission did not collect this information, it would not be in a position to effectively coordinate spectrum for international broadcasters or to act for entities in times of frequency interference or adverse propagation conditions. Federal Communications Commission. William F. Caton, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-13738 Filed 8-22-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Notice of Public Information Collection(s) Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission for Extension Under Delegated Authority August 8, 2006. SUMMARY: The Federal Communications Commission, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burden invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection(s), as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act

(PRA)that does not display a valid control number. Comments are requested concerning

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

(b)the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate;

(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. DATES: Persons wishing to comment on this information collection should submit comments October 23, 2006. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contact listed below as soon as possible. ADDRESSES: You may submit your Paperwork Reduction Act

(PRA)comments by e-mail or U.S. postal mail. To submit you comments by e-mail send them to: *PRA@fcc.gov.* To submit your comments by U.S. mail, mark it to the attention of Judith B. Herman, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., Room 1-B441, Washington, DC 20554. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information about the information collection(s) send an e-mail to *PRA@fcc.gov* or contact Judith B. Herman at 202-418-0214. If you would like to obtain or view a copy of this information collection after this 60 day comment period, you may do so by visiting the FCC PRA Web page at: *http://www.fcc.gov/omd/pra.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *OMB Control No.:* 3060-0799. *Title:* FCC Ownership Disclosure Information for the Wireless Telecommunications Services. *Form No.:* FCC Form 602. *Type of Review:* Extension of a currently approved collection. *Respondents:* Business or other for-profit, not-for-profit institutions, state, local or tribal government. *Number of Respondents:* 500 respondents; 5,065 responses. *Estimated Time per Response:* .50-3 hours. *Frequency of Response:* On occasion reporting requirement and third party disclosure requirement. *Total Annual Burden:* 3,565 hours. *Annual Cost Burden:* $478,200. *Privacy Act Impact Assessment:* N/A. *Needs and Uses:* On June 19, 2006, the Commission submitted this collection to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)as a revision under the emergency processing procedures. We obtained OMB approval for the emergency request on July 17, 2006. OMB approval of the emergency request expires on December 31, 2006. This collection will be submitted to the OMB after this 60 day comment period as an extension (no change in requirements) in order to obtain the full three year clearance from them. The information collected on the FCC Form 602 include the FCC Registration Numbers

(FRNs)for the filer, any related FCC regulated businesses of the filer, disclosable interest holders and any related FCC regulated businesses of disclosable interest holders. These data elements will not be displayed to the public. FCC Form 602 consists of a main form and associated schedule(s) for technical information. There is no change to the estimated average burden or the number of respondents. Federal Communications Commission. William F. Caton, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-13739 Filed 8-22-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Notice of Public Information Collection(s) Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission for Extension Under Delegated Authority. August 15, 2006. SUMMARY: The Federal Communications Commission, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burden invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection(s), as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act

(PRA)that does not display a valid control number. Comments are requested concerning

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

(b)the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate;

(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. DATES: Persons wishing to comment on this information collection should submit comments October 23, 2006. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contact listed below as soon as possible. ADDRESSES: You may submit your Paperwork Reduction Act

(PRA)comments by e-mail or U.S. postal mail. To submit you comments by e-mail send them to: *PRA@fcc.gov* . To submit your comments by U.S. mail, mark it to the attention of Leslie F. Smith, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., Room 1-A804, Washington, DC 20554. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information about the information collection(s) send an email to *PRA@fcc.gov* or contact Leslie F. Smith at

(202)418-0217. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *OMB Control Number:* 3060-0773. *Title:* Section 2.803, Marketing of RF Devices Prior to Equipment Authorization. *Form Number:* N/A. *Type of Review:* Extension of a currently approved collection. *Respondents:* Businesses or other for-profit entities. *Number of Respondents:* 6,000. *Estimated Time per Response:* 0.5 hours. *Frequency of Response:* One time and occasion reporting requirements; Third party disclosure. *Total Annual Burden:* 3,000 hours. *Total Annual Costs:* N/A *Privacy Act Impact Assessment:* No impact(s). *Needs and Uses:* FCC rules permit the display and advertising of radio frequency

(RF)devices prior to equipment authorization or a determination of compliance, providing that the advertising or display contains a conspicuous notice as specified at 47 CFR Section 2.803(c). A notice must also accompany RF prototype equipment devices offered for sale, as stated in 47 CFR Section 2.803(c)(1), prior to equipment authorization or a showing of compliance, that the equipment is a prototype and is not for sale. This information informs third parties of the FCC's requirement for the responsible party to comply with its rules. *OMB Control Number:* 3060-0758. *Title:* Amendment of Part 5 of the Commission's Rules to Revise the Experimental Radio Service Regulations, ET Docket No. 96-256. *Form Number:* N/A. *Type of Review:* Extension of a currently approved collection. *Respondents:* Business or other for-profit entities; and Not-for-profit institutions. *Number of Respondents:* 428. *Estimated Time per Response:* 0.10 to 0.25 hours. *Frequency of Response:* On occasion reporting requirement; Third party disclosure. *Total Annual Burden:* 681 hours. *Total Annual Cost:* None. *Privacy Act Impact Assessment:* No impact(s). *Needs and Uses:* Under 47 CFR Part 5 of the FCC's Rules governing the Experimental Radio Service:

(1)Pursuant to Section 5.75, if a blanket license is granted, licensees are required to notify the Commission of the specific details of each individual experiment, including location, number of base and mobile units, power, emission designator, and any other pertinent technical information not specified by the blanket license;

(2)pursuant to Section 5.85(d), when applicants are using public safety frequencies to perform experiments of a public safety nature, the license may be conditioned to require coordination between the experimental licensee and appropriate frequency coordinator and/or all public safety licensees in its area of operation;

(3)pursuant to Section 5.85(e), the Commission may, at its discretion, condition any experimental license or special temporary authority

(STA)on the requirement that before commencing operation, the new licensee coordinate its proposed facility with other licensees that may receive interference as a result of the new licensee's operations; and

(4)pursuant to Section 5.93(b), unless otherwise stated in the instrument of authorization, a license granted for the purpose of limited market studies requires the licensee to inform anyone participating in the experiment that the service or device is granted under an experimental authorization and is strictly temporary. In all cases, it is the responsibility of the licensee to coordinate with other users. Federal Communications Commission. William F. Caton, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-13741 Filed 8-22-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Notice of Public Information Collection(s) Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission, Comments Requested August 15, 2006. SUMMARY: The Federal Communications Commission, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection(s), as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act

(PRA)of 1995, Public Law No. 104-13. An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information, subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act that does not display a valid control number. Comments are requested concerning

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

(b)the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate;

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

(PRA)comments should be submitted on or before October 23, 2006. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contact listed below as soon as possible. ADDRESSES: You may submit your Paperwork Reduction Act

(PRA)comments by e-mail or U.S. postal mail. To submit your comments by e-mail send them to: *PRA@fcc.gov.* To submit your comments by U.S. mail, mark it to the attention of Leslie F. Smith, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., Room 1-A804, Washington, DC 20554. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information about the information collection(s) send an e-mail to *PRA@fcc.gov* or contact Leslie F. Smith at 202-418-0217. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *OMB Control Number:* 3060-0059. *Title:* Statement Regarding the Importation of Radio Frequency Devices Capable of Harmful Interference. *Form Number:* FCC 740. *Type of Review:* Extension of a currently approved collection. *Respondents:* Business or other for-profit entities; Not for profit institutions; Individuals or households; and State, Local, or Tribal Governments. *Number of Respondents:* 5,077. *Estimated Time per Response:* 1-5 minutes. *Frequency of Response:* On occasion reporting requirement; Third party disclosure. *Total Annual Burden:* 28,030 hours. *Total Annual Costs:* None. *Privacy Act Impact Assessment:* No impact(s). *Needs and Uses:* The FCC, working in conjunction with the U.S. Customs Service, is responsible for the regulation of both authorized radio services and devices that can cause interference. FCC Form 740 must be completed for each radio frequency device, which is imported into the United States, and is used to keep non-compliant devices from being distributed to the general public, thereby reducing the potential for harmful interference being caused to authorized communications. FCC Form 740 may be filed on paper or electronically via the FCC's Internet portal. Federal Communications Commission. William F. Caton, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-13742 Filed 8-22-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Notice of Public Information Collection(s) Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission, Comments Requested August 15, 2006. SUMMARY: The Federal Communications Commission, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burden invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection(s), as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act

(PRA)of 1995, Public Law No. 104-13. An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act that does not display a valid control number. Comments are requested concerning

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

(b)the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate;

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

(PRA)comments by e-mail or U.S. postal mail. To submit your comments by e-mail send them to *PRA@fcc.gov* . To submit your comments by U.S. mail, mark them to the attention of Cathy Williams, Federal Communications Commission, Room 1-C823, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information about the information collection(s) send an e-mail to *PRA@fcc.gov* or contact Cathy Williams at

(202)418-2918. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *OMB Control Number:* 3060-0912. *Title:* Sections 76.501, 76.503 and 76.504, Cable Ownership and Attribution Rules. *Form Number:* Not applicable. *Type of Review:* Revision of a currently approved collection. *Respondents:* Business or other for-profit entities. *Number of Respondents:* 40. *Estimated Time per Response:* 1 to 4 hours. *Frequency of Response:* On occasion reporting requirement. *Total Annual Burden:* 100 hours. *Total Annual Cost:* None. *Privacy Impact Assessment:* No impact(s). *Needs and Uses:* 47 CFR 76.501 Note 2(f)(1) requires limited partners, Registered Limited Liability Partnerships (“RLLPs”), and Limited Liability Companies (“LLCs”) attempting to insulate themselves from attribution to file a certification of “non-involvement” with the Commission. LLCs who submit the non-involvement certification also are required to submit a statement certifying that the relevant state statute authorizing LLCs permits an LLC member to insulate itself in the manner required by our criteria. 47 CFR 76.501 Note 2, 76.503 Note 2, and 76.504 Note 2, also provide that officers and directors of an entity are considered to have a cognizable interest in the entity with which they are associated. If any such entity engages in businesses other than video programming-related activities, it may request the Commission to waive attribution for any officer or director whose duties and responsibilities are wholly unrelated to the entity's video-programming activities. The officers and directors of a parent company of a video-programming business, with an attributable interest in any such subsidiary entity, shall be deemed to have a cognizable interest in the subsidiary unless the duties and responsibilities of the officer or director involved are wholly unrelated to the video-programming subsidiary and a statement properly documenting this fact is submitted to the Commission. This statement may be included on the Licensee Qualification Report. 47 CFR Section 76.503 Note 2 includes a requirement for limited partners who are not materially involved, directly or indirectly, in the management or operation of the video programming-related activities of the partnership to certify that fact or be attributed to a limited partnership interest. 47 CFR Section 76.503(g) of the Commission's rules states: “Prior to acquiring additional multichannel video-programming providers, any cable operator that serves 20% or more of multichannel video-programming subscribers nationwide shall certify to the Commission, concurrent with its applications to the Commission for transfer of licenses at issue in the acquisition, that no violation of the national subscriber limits prescribed in this section will occur as a result of such acquisition.” The filings required by these rules will be used by the Commission to determine the nature of the corporate, financial, partnership, ownership and other business relationships that confer on their holders a degree of ownership or other economic interest, or influence or control over an entity engaged in the provision of communications services such that the holders are subject to the Commission's regulations. Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-13962 Filed 8-22-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-10-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Notice of Public Information Collection(s) Being Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval August 17, 2006. SUMMARY: The Federal Communications Commissions, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burden invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act

(PRA)that does not display a valid control number. Comments are requested concerning

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

(b)the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate;

(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. DATES: Written comments should be submitted on or before September 22, 2006. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contact listed below as soon as possible. ADDRESSES: You may submit your comments by e-mail or U.S. mail. To submit your comments by e-mail send them to *PRA@fcc.gov* . To submit your comments by U.S. mail send them to Cathy Williams, Federal Communications Commission, Room 1-C823, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554 and Kristy L. LaLonde, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Room 10236 NEOB, Washington, DC 20503,

(202)395-3087 or via the Internet at *Kristy_L._LaLonde@omb.eop.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information about the information collection(s) send an e-mail to *PRA@fcc.gov* or contact Cathy Williams at

(202)418-2918. If you would like to obtain a copy of this revised information collection, you may do so by visiting the FCC PRA Web page at: *http://www.fcc.gov/omd/pra.* SUPPLMENTARY INFORMATION: *OMB Control Number:* 3060-0568. *Title:* Sections 76.970, 76.971 and 76.975, Commercial Leased Access Rates, Terms and Conditions. *Form Number:* Not applicable. *Type of Review:* Extension of a currently approved collection. *Respondents:* Business or other for-profit entities; State, local or tribal government. *Number of Respondents:* 4,031. *Estimated Time per Response:* 2 minutes-10 hours. *Frequency of Response:* Recordkeeping requirement; Third party disclosure requirement. *Total Annual Burden:* 59,686 hours. *Total Annual Cost:* $74,000. *Privacy Impact Assessment:* No impact(s). *Needs and Uses:* The FCC and prospective leased access programmers use this information to verify rate calculations for leased access channels and to eliminate uncertainty negotiations for leased commercial access. The Commission's leased access requirements are designed to promote diversity of programming diversity and competition in programming delivery as required by Section 612 of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992. Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-13963 Filed 8-22-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Notice of Public Information Collection(s) Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission for Extension Under Delegated Authority August 15, 2006. SUMMARY: The Federal Communications Commission, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burden invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection(s), as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act

(PRA)that does not display a valid control number. Comments are requested concerning

(a)Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility;

(b)the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate;

(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. DATES: Persons wishing to comment on this information collection should submit comments October 23, 2006. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contact listed below as soon as possible. ADDRESSES: You may submit your Paperwork Reduction Act

(PRA)comments by e-mail or U.S. postal mail. To submit you comments by e-mail send them to: *PRA@fcc.gov* . To submit your comments by U.S. mail, mark it to the attention of Judith B. Herman, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., Room 1-B441, Washington, DC 20554. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information about the information collection(s) send an e-mail to *PRA@fcc.gov* or contact Judith B. Herman at 202-418-0214. If you would like to obtain or view a copy of this information collection after this 60 day comment period, you may do so by visiting the FCC PRA Web page at: *http://www.fcc.gov/omd/pra.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *OMB Control No.:* 3060-0132. *Title:* Supplemental Information, 72-76 MHz Operational Fixed Stations. *Form No.:* FCC Form 1068A. *Type of Review:* Extension of a currently approved collection. *Respondents:* Individuals or households; business or other for-profit, not-for-profit institutions, state, local or tribal government. *Number of Respondents:* 300. *Estimated Time Per Response:* .50 hours. *Frequency of Response:* On occasion reporting requirement. *Total Annual Burden:* 150 hours. *Annual Cost Burden:* $4,500. *Privacy Act Impact Assessment:* N/A. *Needs and Uses:* FCC rules require that the applicant agrees to eliminate any harmful interference caused by the operation to TV reception on either channel 4 or 5 that might develop. The FCC Form 1068A is required by the Communications Act of 1934, as amended; the International Treaties and 47 CFR 90.257. FCC staff will use the data to determine if the information submitted will meet the FCC rule requirements for the assignment of frequencies in the 72-76 MHz band. There is no change in the estimated average burden or the number of respondents. The Commission is seeking an extension (no change in the reporting requirements) in order to obtain the full three year clearance from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-13982 Filed 8-22-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Notice of Public Information Collection(s) Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission for Extension Under Delegated Authority August 15, 2006. SUMMARY: The Federal Communications Commission, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burden invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection(s), as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act

(PRA)of 1995, Public Law No. 104-13. An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act that does not display a valid control number. Comments are requested concerning

(a)Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility;

(b)the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate;

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

(PRA)comments by email or U.S. postal mail. To submit your comments by e-mail send them to *PRA@fcc.gov* . To submit your comments by U.S. mail, mark them to the attention of Cathy Williams, Federal Communications Commission, Room 1-C823, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information about the information collection(s) send an e-mail to *PRA@fcc.gov* or contact Cathy Williams at

(202)418-2918. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *OMB Control Number:* 3060-0310. *Title:* Cable Community Registration. *Form Number:* FCC Form 322. *Type of Review:* Extension of a currently approved collection. *Respondents:* Business or other for-profit entities; Not-for-profit institutions. *Number of Respondents:* 316. *Estimated Time per Response:* 30 minutes (0.5 hours). *Frequency of Response:* One time reporting requirement. *Total Annual Burden:* 158 hours. *Total Annual Cost:* $15,800. *Privacy Impact Assessment:* No impact(s). *Needs and Uses:* On March 13, 2003, the Commission adopted a Report and Order (R&O), Amendment of the Commission's Rules for Implementation of its Cable Operations and Licensing System (COALS) to Allow for Electronic Filing of Licensing Applications, Forms, Registrations and Notifications in the Multichannel Video and Cable Television Service and the Cable Television Relay Service, FCC 03-55. This R&O provided for electronic filing and standardized information collections. Under 47 CFR Section 76.1801, cable operators are required to file FCC Form 322 with the Commission prior to commencing operation of a community unit. FCC Form 322 identifies biographical information about the operator and system as well as a list of broadcast channels carried on the system. This form replaces the requirement that cable operators send a letter containing the same information. *OMB Control Number:* 3060-0331. *Title:* Aeronautical Frequency Notification. *Form Number:* FCC Form 321. *Type of Review:* Extension of a currently approved collection. *Respondents:* Business or other for-profit entities; Not-for-profit institutions. *Number of Respondents:* 900. *Estimated Time per Response:* 40 minutes. *Frequency of Response:* Recordkeeping requirement; On occasion reporting requirement; One time reporting requirement. *Total Annual Burden:* 603 hours. *Total Annual Cost:* $49,500. *Privacy Impact Assessment:* No impact(s). *Needs and Uses:* The FCC Form 321 is used by multichannel video programming distributors to obtain authority to commence operation of a system on frequencies used by aeronautical services. The information is used to protect aeronautical radio communications from interference. *OMB Control Number:* 3060-0341. *Title:* Section 73.1680, Emergency Antennas. *Form Number:* Not applicable. *Type of Review:* Extension of a currently approved collection. *Respondents:* Business or other for-profit entities; Not-for-profit institutions. *Number of Respondents:* 142. *Estimated Time per Response:* 0.5 hours. *Frequency of Response:* On occasion reporting requirement. *Total Annual Burden:* 71 hours. *Total Annual Cost:* $28,400. *Privacy Impact Assessment:* No impact(s). *Needs and Uses:* 47 CFR Section 73.1680 requires that licensees of AM, FM or TV stations submit an informal request to the FCC within 24 hours of commencement of use to continue operation with an emergency antenna. An emergency antenna is one that is erected for temporary use after the authorized main and auxiliary antennas are damaged and cannot be used. FCC staff uses the data to ensure that interference is not caused to other existing stations. Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-13984 Filed 8-22-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-10-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [Report No. 2786] Petition for Reconsideration of Action in Rulemaking Proceeding August 3, 2006. A Petition for Reconsideration has been filed in the Commission's Rulemaking proceeding listed in this Public Notice and published pursuant to 47 CFR Section 1.429(e). The full text of this document 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 this petition must be filed by September 7, 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 Section 73.202(b), Table of Allotments, FM Broadcast Stations, (Caliente and Moapa, Nevada) (MB Docket No. 05-146). *Number of Petitions Filed:* 1. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. [FR Doc. 06-7115 Filed 8-22-06; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 10

Traces to 10 documents

U.S. Code