Notices. Agency information collection activities: proposed collection; comment request

46,653 words·~212 min read·/register/2006/10/25/06-8858

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

BILLING CODE 5001-06-M DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request AGENCY: Department of Education. SUMMARY: The IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of Management invites comments on the submission for OMB review as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. DATES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before November 24, 2006. ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention:

Rachel Potter, Desk Officer, Department of Education, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW., Room 10222, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503 or faxed to

(202)395-6974. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires that the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)provide interested Federal agencies and the public an early opportunity to comment on information collection requests. OMB may amend or waive the requirement for public consultation to the extent that public participation in the approval process would defeat the purpose of the information collection, violate State or Federal law, or substantially interfere with any agency's ability to perform its statutory obligations. The IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of Management, publishes that notice containing proposed information collection requests prior to submission of these requests to OMB. Each proposed information collection, grouped by office, contains the following:

(1)Type of review requested, *e.g.* new, revision, extension, existing or reinstatement;

(2)Title;

(3)Summary of the collection;

(4)Description of the need for, and proposed use of, the information;

(5)Respondents and frequency of collection; and

(6)Reporting and/or Recordkeeping burden. OMB invites public comment. Dated: October 19, 2006. Angela C. Arrington, IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of Management. Institute of Education Sciences *Type of Review:* New. *Title:* Priority Needs for Educational Research Needs of the Southwest and Establishing a Baseline for SWREL Performance. *Frequency:* Annually. *Affected Public:* State, Local, or Tribal Gov't, SEAs or LEAs; Individuals or household; Businesses or other for-profit. *Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour Burden:* *Responses:* 8,052. *Burden Hours:* 2,013. *Abstract:* The Southwestern Regional Educational Laboratory (SWREL) has been tasked with establishing a baseline for SWREL performance and identifying the educational needs (Pre-K through Higher Education) of constituents within its five state region. The respondents will consist of parents, business leaders, and educators ( *e.g.* , teachers, principals, testing directors, etc.) from Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas. The information obtained in this project will provide a landscape of the region. It will also identify the educational research needs of SWREL constituents and create insights needed to most efficiently serve those constituents. In addition, it will identify satisfaction levels with current research available, identify educational issues facing SWREL constituents, and identify unique areas of technical assistance most needed. Requests for copies of the information collection submission for OMB review may be accessed from *http://edicsweb.ed.gov,* by selecting the “Browse Pending Collections” link and by clicking on link number 3165. When you access the information collection, click on “Download Attachments” to view. Written requests for information should be addressed to U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., Potomac Center, 9th Floor, Washington, DC 20202-4700. Requests may also be electronically mailed to *ICDocketMgr@ed.gov* or faxed to 202-245-6623. Please specify the complete title of the information collection when making your request. Comments regarding burden and/or the collection activity requirements should be electronically mailed to *ICDocketMgr@ed.gov.* Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf

(TDD)may call the Federal Information Relay Service

(FIRS)at 1-800-877-8339. [FR Doc. E6-17852 Filed 10-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Energy Information Administration Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request AGENCY: Energy Information Administration (EIA), Department of Energy (DOE). ACTION: Agency information collection activities: proposed collection; comment request. SUMMARY: The EIA is soliciting comments on the proposed reinstatement of the Forms EIA-871A,B,C,E,G, and H, “2007 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey”. DATES: Comments must be filed by December 26, 2006. If you anticipate difficulty in submitting comments within that period, contact the person listed below as soon as possible. ADDRESSES: Send comments to Joelle Michaels. To ensure receipt of the comments by the due date, submission by fax (202-586-0018) or e-mail ( *joelle.michaels@eia.doe.gov* ) is recommended. The mailing address is Joelle Michaels, Survey Manager, EI-63, Forrestal Building, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC 20585. Alternatively, Ms. Michaels may be contacted by telephone at

(202)586-8952. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or copies of any forms and instructions should be directed to Joelle Michaels at the address listed above. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background II. Current Actions III. Request for Comments I. Background The Federal Energy Administration Act of 1974 (Pub. L. 93-275, 15 U.S.C. 761 *et seq.* ) and the DOE Organization Act (Pub. L. 95-91, 42 U.S.C. 7101 *et seq.* ) require the EIA to carry out a centralized, comprehensive, and unified energy information program. This program collects, evaluates, assembles, analyzes, and disseminates information on energy resource reserves, production, demand, technology, and related economic and statistical information. This information is used to assess the adequacy of energy resources to meet near and longer-term domestic demands. The EIA, as part of its effort to comply with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35), provides the general public and other Federal agencies with opportunities to comment on collections of energy information conducted by or in conjunction with the EIA. Any comments received help the EIA to prepare data requests that maximize the utility of the information collected, and to assess the impact of collection requirements on the public. Also, the EIA will later seek approval by the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)under Section 3507(a) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) has been conducted eight times covering the years 1979, 1983 and 1986 under the name of the “Nonresidential Buildings Energy Consumption Survey,” and years 1989, 1992, 1995, 1999, and 2003 under the current name, “Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey.” CBECS collects baseline data on energy consumption and expenditures in commercial buildings, and on the energy-related characteristics of those buildings. To obtain this information, interviews are conducted for a sample of commercial buildings in the 50 States and the District of Columbia. For buildings in the survey, data are collected on the types, amount and cost of energy consumed in the building, how the energy is used, structural characteristics of the buildings, activities conducted inside the buildings that relate to energy use, building ownership and occupancy, energy conservation measures, and energy-using equipment. The information will be collected using Computer Assisted Personal Interviewing

(CAPI)for the 2007 CBECS. For those buildings that cannot provide energy consumption data for the building, the data will be obtained in a mail survey from the suppliers of electricity and natural gas to the building, after receiving permission from the building owner, manager or tenant. This mail survey to the energy suppliers is mandatory. The data obtained from the CBECS are available to the public in a variety of EIA electronic tables and reports at *http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cbecs.* Public use files that have been screened to protect the identity of the individual respondents are also available electronically at the above Web address. Selected data from the surveys are also published in the *Monthly Energy Review* and the *Annual Energy Review* . II. Current Actions This will be a proposed reinstatement of a previously approved collection and three-year clearance request to OMB. The content of the 2007 CBECS will be largely unchanged from the 2003 CBECS. The sampling frame, which was redesigned for the 2003 CBECS, will be updated to account for new construction since 2003. *Proposed changes include:* Form EIA-871I—which collected information from college/university and hospital complexes on the inputs and outputs to their central physical plant, if present—will be discontinued. This form had been added for the 2003 CBECS, but upon review, it was determined that using a separate form was cumbersome and the data that were collected were not of high quality. However, a few questions from the form, such as the total square footage of the entire campus, may be incorporated into the computerized survey instrument for the 2007 CBECS. The Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA)has requested the inclusion of questions on the CBECS, relating to water consumption in commercial buildings. Pending funding from EPA and EIA and OMB approval, these questions will be used to gather some basic water use information to support a program to help consumers select more water efficient products. For the 2003 CBECS, EPA's Energy Star program funded some supplemental sample cases and a few additional questions regarding the building activity. The purpose of their additional work was to help improve their publicly-available benchmarking models. We anticipate that a similar agreement will be put in place for the 2007 CBECS; discussions are currently underway. The CBECS no longer collects data from energy suppliers about fuel oil or district heat consumption (consumption information for these sources are collected only from the building respondents). Forms EIA-871D and F have been eliminated. Existing survey questions may be modified slightly based on knowledge gained from the 2003 CBECS and based on feedback from CBECS data users. III. Request for Comments Prospective respondents and other interested parties should comment on the actions discussed in item II. The following guidelines are provided to assist in the preparation of comments. Please indicate to which form(s) your comments apply. General Issues A. Is the proposed collection of information necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency and does the information have practical utility? Practical utility is defined as the actual usefulness of information to or for an agency, taking into account its accuracy, adequacy, reliability, timeliness, and the agency's ability to process the information it collects. B. What enhancements can be made to the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected? As a Potential Respondent to the Request for Information A. What actions could be taken to help ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of the information to be collected? B. Are the instructions and definitions clear and sufficient? If not, which instructions need clarification? C. Can the information be submitted by the due date? D. Public reporting burden for this collection is estimated to average approximately 45 minutes per interview for the building respondent (Form EIA-871A) and approximately 30 minutes per energy supplier response in those cases where the data must be collected from the energy suppliers (Forms EIA-871C and E). The estimated burden includes the total time necessary to provide the requested information. In your opinion, how accurate is this estimate? E. The agency estimates that the only cost to a respondent is for the time it will take to complete the collection. Will a respondent incur any start-up costs for reporting, or any recurring annual costs for operation, maintenance, and purchase of services associated with the information collection? F. What additional actions could be taken to minimize the burden of this collection of information? Such actions may involve the use of automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. G. Does any other Federal, State, or local agency collect similar information? If so, specify the agency, the data element(s), and the methods of collection. As a Potential User of the Information To Be Collected A. What actions could be taken to help ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of the information disseminated? B. Is the information useful at the levels of detail to be collected? C. For what purpose(s) would the information be used? Be specific. D. Are there alternate sources for the information and are they useful? If so, what are their weaknesses and/or strengths? Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of the form. They also will become a matter of public record. Statutory Authority: Section 3507(h)(1) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). Issued in Washington, DC, October 18, 2006. Jay H. Casselberry, Agency Clearance Officer, Energy Information Administration. [FR Doc. E6-17856 Filed 10-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0616; FRL-8083-6] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Submission of Unreasonable Adverse Effects Information Under FIFRA Section 6(a)(2); EPA ICR No. 1204.10, OMB Control No. 2070-0039 AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act

(PRA)(44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq* .), this document announces that EPA is planning to submit a request to renew an existing approved Information Collection Request

(ICR)to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This ICR, entitled: “Submission of Unreasonable Adverse Effects Information Under Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) Section 6(a)(2)” and identified by EPA ICR No. 1204.10 and OMB Control No.2070-0039, is scheduled to expire on May 31, 2007. Before submitting the ICR to OMB for review and approval, EPA is soliciting comments on specific aspects of the proposed information collection. DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 26, 2006. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification

(ID)number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0616, 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-2006-0616. 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 website 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: Kathryn Boyle, Field and External Affairs Division (7506P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:

(703)305-6304; fax number:

(703)305-5884 e-mail address: *boyle.kathryn@epa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. What Information is EPA Particularly Interested In? Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA specifically solicits comments and information to enable it to: 1. Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical utility. 2. Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimates of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used. 3. Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected. 4. Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. In particular, EPA is requesting comments from very small businesses (those that employ less than 25) on examples of specific additional efforts that EPA could make to reduce the paperwork burden for very small businesses affected by this collection. II. What Should I Consider When I Prepare My Comments for EPA? You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your comments: 1. Explain your views as clearly as possible and provide specific examples. 2. Describe any assumptions that you used. 3. Provide copies of any technical information and/or data you used that support your views. 4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you arrived at the estimate that you provide. 5. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns. 6. Offer alternative ways to improve the collection activity. 7. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline identified under DATES . 8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and **Federal Register** citation. III. What Information Collection Activity or ICR Does This Action Apply To? *Affected entities* : Entities potentially affected by this action are anyone who holds or ever held a registration for a pesticide product issued under FIFRA section 3 or 24(c). The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) code is 325320 (Pesticide and Other Agricultural Chemical Manufacturing). *Title* : Submission of Unreasonable Adverse Effects Information Under FIFRA Section 6(a)(2). *ICR numbers* : EPA ICR No. 1204.10, OMB Control No. 2070-0039. *ICR status* : This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on May 31, 2007. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the **Federal Register** when approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed either by publication in the **Federal Register** or by other appropriate means, such as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9. *Abstract* : Section 6(a)(2) of FIFRA requires pesticide registrants to submit information to the Agency which may be relevant to the balancing of the risks and benefits of a pesticide product. The statute requires the registrant to submit any factual information that it acquires regarding adverse effects associated with its pesticidal products, and it is up to the Agency to determine whether or not that factual information constitutes an unreasonable adverse effect. Responses to this collection are mandatory. The authority for this information collection is section 6(a)(2) of FIFRA. Compliance regulations are contained in 40 CFR part 159. CBI submitted to EPA in response to this information collection is protected from disclosure under FIFRA section 10. *Burden statement* : The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 97.3 hours per registrant (respondent). Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal Agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. The ICR provides a detailed explanation of this estimate, which is only briefly summarized here: *Estimated total number of potential respondents* : 1,720 registrants. *Frequency of response* : As needed. *Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent* : For submission of studies: Less than 1. For submission of incident reports: 1 to 3, since incidents are usually reported as aggregate statistics. *Estimated total annual burden hours* : 167,316 hours. *Estimated total annual costs* : $9,809,591. There are no capital expenditures or operation and maintenance costs associated with this information collection activity. IV. Are There Changes In the Estimates from the Last Approval? This ICR renewal request reflects an increase of approximately 11,677 burden hours to an annual respondent burden of 167,316 hours at a cost of $9,809,591 (in 2006 dollars). Thus, the costs decreased. The change in burden reflects a number of adjustments. First, for this renewal ICR, there are now fewer registrants of active products (1,720 versus 1,877) and therefore fewer employees to be trained (17,200 versus 18,770) than reflected in the existing ICR. The hours used to calculate total burden hours and costs are unchanged from the existing ICR. Total burden hour estimates associated with studies are reduced because the estimated number of study submissions is reduced from 325 studies to 240. Burden estimates associated with the number of incident reports, however, are increased because of the increased volume of incident reporting (17%). Overall, considering both the decrease in studies and the increase in incidents, the total burden hours increased minimally from 155,639 to 167,316. V. What is the Next Step in the Process for This ICR? EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. EPA will issue another **Federal Register** notice pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB. If you have any questions about this ICR or the approval process, please contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . List of Subjects Environmental protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: October 5, 2006. James B. Gulliford, Assistant Administrator, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances. [FR Doc. E6-17763 Filed 10-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0636; FRL-8085-5] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Pesticide Registration Fee Waivers; EPA ICR No. 2147.03, OMB Control No. 2070-0167 AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act

(PRA)(44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq* .), this document announces that EPA is planning to submit a request to renew an existing approved Information Collection Request

(ICR)to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This ICR, entitled: “Pesticide Registration Fee Waivers” and identified by EPA ICR No. 2147.03 and OMB Control No. 2070-0167, is scheduled to expire on December 31, 2007. Before submitting the ICR to OMB for review and approval, EPA is soliciting comments on specific aspects of the proposed information collection. DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 26, 2006. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification

(ID)number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0636, 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-2006-0636. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public 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 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 public 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: Joseph Hogue, Field and External Affairs Division (7506P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:

(703)308-9072; fax number:

(703)305-5884; e-mail address: *hogue.joe@epa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. What Information is EPA Particularly Interested In? Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA specifically solicits comments and information to enable it to: 1. Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical utility. 2. Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimates of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used. 3. Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected. 4. Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. In particular, EPA is requesting comments from very small businesses (those that employ less than 25) on examples of specific additional efforts that EPA could make to reduce the paperwork burden for very small businesses affected by this collection. II. What Should I Consider When I Prepare My Comments for EPA? You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your comments: 1. Explain your views as clearly as possible and provide specific examples. 2. Describe any assumptions that you used. 3. Provide copies of any technical information and/or data you used that support your views. 4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you arrived at the estimate that you provide. 5. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns. 6. Offer alternative ways to improve the collection activity. 7. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline identified under DATES . 8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and **Federal Register** citation. III. What Information Collection Activity or ICR Does This Action Apply To? *Affected entities* : Entities potentially affected by this action are pesticide registrants and applicants for pesticide registration. *Title* : Pesticide Registration Fee Waivers. *ICR numbers* : EPA ICR No. 2147.03, OMB Control No. 2070-0167. *ICR status* : This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on December 31, 2007. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the **Federal Register** when approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed either by publication in the **Federal Register** or by other appropriate means, such as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9. *Abstract* : This information collection will allow EPA to process requests for waivers of fees under the Pesticide Registration Improvement Act of 2003 (PRIA). The ICR covers the collection activities associated with requesting a fee waiver and involves requesters submitting a waiver request, information to demonstrate eligibility for the waiver, and certification of eligibility. Waivers are available for small businesses, for minor uses, and for actions solely associated with the Inter-Regional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4). State and Federal Agencies are exempt from the payment of fees. Information collected will allow EPA to determine whether to grant a waiver of registration fees, according to PRIA requirements. Responses to the collection of information are required to obtain a fee waiver. Data and/or information submitted to the Agency in conjunction with service fee waiver requests may be claimed as trade secret or commercial or financial information and will be protected from disclosure under FIFRA section 10 and the associated regulation as contained in 40 CFR part 2, subpart B. *Burden statement* : The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 37, 12, and 27 hours per response, for the three different types of applications. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal Agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. The ICR provides a detailed explanation of this estimate, which is only briefly summarized here: *Estimated total number of potential respondents* : 389. *Frequency of response* : On occasion. *Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent* : 1. *Estimated total annual burden hours* : 8,368 hours. *Estimated total annual costs* : $521,903. This includes an estimated burden cost of $518,013. There are no capital investment or maintenance and operational costs. IV. Are There Changes In the Estimates From the Last Approval? The total estimated respondent burden hours have decreased by 2,302 hours, from 10,670 to 8,368, compared with that identified in the ICR currently approved by OMB. The number of responses per year was estimated in the currently approved ICR, as it was a new requirement, whereas this proposed renewal uses actual values based on experience. V. What is the Next Step In the Process for This ICR? EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. EPA will issue another **Federal Register** notice pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB. If you have any questions about this ICR or the approval process, please contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . List of Subjects Environmental protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: October 5, 2006. James B. Gulliford, Assistant Administrator, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances. [FR Doc. E6-17765 Filed 10-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0660; FRL-8087-1] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Pesticide Product Registration Maintenance Fee; EPA ICR No. 1214.07, OMB Control No. 2070-0100 AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act

(PRA)(44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq* .), this document announces that EPA is planning to submit a request to renew an existing approved Information Collection Request

(ICR)to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This ICR, entitled: “Pesticide Product Registration Maintenance Fee” and identified by EPA ICR No. 1214.07 and OMB Control No. 2070-0100, is scheduled to expire on May 31, 2007. Before submitting the ICR to OMB for review and approval, EPA is soliciting comments on specific aspects of the proposed information collection. DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 26, 2006. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification

(ID)number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0660, 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-2006-0660. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public 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 regulations.gov website 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 public 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)308-9072; fax number:

(OPP)to collect registration maintenance fees from pesticide registrants as required by law. Respondents complete and submit EPA Form 8570-30 indicating the respondent's liability for the registration maintenance fee. Each affected firm is required to complete the filing form and submit their fee payment by January 15 of each year. No changes in the substance or in the method of collection are proposed in this ICR renewal request. *Burden statement* : The annual “respondent” (applicant) burden for the Pesticide Product Registration Maintenance Fee program is estimated to average 0.96 hours per form. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal Agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. The ICR provides a detailed explanation of this estimate, which is only briefly summarized here: *Estimated total number of potential respondents* : 1,720. *Frequency of response* : Annually. *Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent* : 1. *Estimated total annual burden hours* : 1,645. *Estimated total annual costs* : $125,801. There are no capital investment or maintenance and operational costs. IV. Are There Changes In the Estimates From the Last Approval? The total annual burden for respondents associated with this renewal is 1,645 hours. This reflects a decrease of 118 hours from the last renewal period. The decrease represents the steady decline of the number of pesticide registrants and, therefore, participation under this program. In 2006, the projected estimate is 1,720 registrants. This represents a decrease of 157 respondents from the 1,877 reported in the last ICR renewal. The average time required to complete the maintenance fee filing form depends upon the number of registrations held by the registrant. In addition to fewer respondents in 2006, a smaller percentage of registrants held a small number of registered products. This shift to a slightly larger average number of registrations per registrant resulted in a slight increase in the average burden hours required to complete the form, from 0.94 hours in the last ICR renewal, to 0.96 hours. V. What is the Next Step In the Process for This ICR? EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. EPA will issue another **Federal Register** notice pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB. If you have any questions about this ICR or the approval process, please contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . List of Subjects Environmental protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: October 5, 2006. James B. Gulliford, Assistant Administrator, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances. [FR Doc. E6-17778 Filed 10-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0631; FRL-8083-4] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Recordkeeping Requirements for Certified Applicators Using 1080 Collars for Livestock Protection; EPA ICR No. 1249.08, OMB Control No. 2070-0074 AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act

(PRA)(44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq* .), this document announces that EPA is planning to submit a request to renew an existing approved Information Collection Request

(ICR)to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This ICR, entitled: “Recordkeeping Requirements for Certified Applicators Using 1080 Collars for Livestock Protection” and identified by EPA ICR No. 1249.08 and OMB Control No. 2070-0074, is scheduled to expire on May 31, 2007. Before submitting the ICR to OMB for review and approval, EPA is soliciting comments on specific aspects of the proposed information collection. DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 26, 2006. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification

(ID)number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0631, 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-2006-0631. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public 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 regulations.gov website 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 public 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: Nathanael R. Martin, Field and External Affairs Division (7506P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:

(703)305-6475; fax number:

(703)305-5884; e-mail address: *martin.nathanael@epa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. What Information is EPA Particularly Interested In? Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA specifically solicits comments and information to enable it to: 1. Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical utility. 2. Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimates of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used. 3. Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected. 4. Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. In particular, EPA is requesting comments from very small businesses (those that employ less than 25) on examples of specific additional efforts that EPA could make to reduce the paperwork burden for very small businesses affected by this collection. II. What Should I Consider When I Prepare My Comments for EPA? You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your comments: 1. Explain your views as clearly as possible and provide specific examples. 2. Describe any assumptions that you used. 3. Provide copies of any technical information and/or data you used that support your views. 4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you arrived at the estimate that you provide. 5. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns. 6. Offer alternative ways to improve the collection activity. 7. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline identified under DATES . 8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and **Federal Register** citation. III. What Information Collection Activity or ICR Does This Action Apply To? *Affected entities* : Entities potentially affected by this action are pesticide and other agricultural manufacturers (North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) code 325320), e.g., pesticide registrants whose products include 1080 collars; and government establishments primarily engaged in the administration of agricultural pest control programs and regulation (NAICS code 926140) and environmental quality programs (NAICS code 9241), e.g., goverment agencies involved in the application of 1080 collars and states implementing a 1080 collar monitoring program, respectively. *Title* : Recordkeeping Requirements for Certified Applicators Using 1080 Collars for Livestock Protection. *ICR numbers* : EPA ICR No. 1249.08, OMB Control No. 2070-0074. *ICR status* : This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on May 31, 2007. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the **Federal Register** when approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed either by publication in the **Federal Register** or by other appropriate means, such as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9. *Abstract* : This ICR affects approximately 40 certified pesticide applicators who utilize 1080 toxic collars for livestock protection. Four states (Montana, New Mexico, South Dakota, and Wyoming) monitor the program and five pesticide registrants are required to keep records of: • Number of collars purchased. • Number of collars attached on livestock. • Pasture(s) where collared livestock were placed. • Number and locations of livestock found with ruptured or punctured collars and the apparent cause of the damage. • The dates of each attachment, inspection, and removal. • Number, dates, and approximate location of all collars lost. • Locations and dates of all suspected poisonings of humans, domestic animals or non-target wild animals resulting from collar use location and species data on each animal poisoned as an apparent result of the toxic collar. Applicators maintain records, and the registrants/lead agencies do monitoring studies and submit the reports. These records are monitored by either the: State lead agencies, EPA regional offices, or the registrants. EPA receives annual monitoring reports from registrants or state lead agencies. *Burden statement* : The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated as follows: Average of 9 hours per response for registrant respondents, 40 hours per response for certified applicator respondents, and 77 hours per response for state agency respondents. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal Agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. The ICR provides a detailed explanation of this estimate, which is only briefly summarized here: *Estimated total number of potential respondents* : 49. *Frequency of response* : Annual. *Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent* : 1. *Estimated total annual burden hours* : 1,953 hours. *Estimated total annual costs* : $70,261.59. IV. Are There Changes In the Estimates From the Last Approval? There is an increase of 200 hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared with that identified in the ICR currently approved by OMB. This increase reflects EPA's estimate of increased numbers of certified applicators (from 35 certified applicators in 2003 to 40 in the current ICR). This change is an adjustment. V. What is the Next Step In the Process for This ICR? EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. EPA will issue another **Federal Register** notice pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB. If you have any questions about this ICR or the approval process, please contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . List of Subjects Environmental protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: October 5, 2006. James B. Gulliford, Assistant Administrator, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances. [FR Doc. E6-17779 Filed 10-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0632; FRL-8083-9] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Application for Experimental Use Permit to Ship and Use a Pesticide for Experimental Purposes Only; EPA ICR No. 0276.13, OMB Control No. 2070-0040 AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act

(PRA)(44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq* .), this document announces that EPA is planning to submit a request to renew an existing approved Information Collection Request

(ICR)to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This ICR, entitled: “Application for Experimental Use Permit to Ship and Use a Pesticide for Experimental Purposes Only” and identified by EPA ICR No. 0276.13 and OMB Control No. 2070-0040, is scheduled to expire on May 31, 2007. Before submitting the ICR to OMB for review and approval, EPA is soliciting comments on specific aspects of the proposed information collection. DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 26, 2006. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification

(ID)number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0632, 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-2006-0632. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public 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 regulations.gov website 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 public 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: Cameo G. Smoot, Field and External Affairs Division (7506P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:

(703)305-5454; fax number:

(703)305-5884; e-mail address: *smoot.cameo@epa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. What Information is EPA Particularly Interested In? Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA specifically solicits comments and information to enable it to: 1. Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical utility. 2. Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimates of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used. 3. Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected. 4. Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. In particular, EPA is requesting comments from very small businesses (those that employ less than 25) on examples of specific additional efforts that EPA could make to reduce the paperwork burden for very small businesses affected by this collection. II. What Should I Consider When I Prepare My Comments for EPA? You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your comments: 1. Explain your views as clearly as possible and provide specific examples. 2. Describe any assumptions that you used. 3. Provide copies of any technical information and/or data you used that support your views. 4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you arrived at the estimate that you provide. 5. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns. 6. Offer alternative ways to improve the collection activity. 7. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline identified under DATES . 8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and **Federal Register** citation. III. What Information Collection Activity or ICR Does This Action Apply To? *Affected entities* : Entities potentially affected by this action are pesticide and other agricultural chemical manufacturers (North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) code 325320). *Title* : Application for Experimental Use Permit to Ship and Use a Pesticide for Experimental Purposes Only. *ICR numbers* : EPA ICR No. 0276.13, OMB Control No. 2070-0040. *ICR status* : This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on May 31, 2007. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the **Federal Register** when approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed either by publication in the **Federal Register** or by other appropriate means, such as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9. *Abstract* : This information collection provides EPA with the data necessary to determine whether to issue an experimental use permit

(EUP)under section 5 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), as amended. FIFRA requires that before a pesticide product may be distributed or sold in the United States it must be registered by EPA. However, section 5 authorizes EPA to issue EUPs which allow pesticide companies to temporarily ship pesticide products for experimental use for the purpose of gathering data necessary to support the application for registration of a pesticide product. In general, EUPs are issued either for a pesticide not registered with the Agency or for a registered pesticide for a use not registered with the Agency. *Burden statement* : The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 10.10 hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal Agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. The ICR provides a detailed explanation of this estimate, which is only briefly summarized here: *Estimated total number of potential respondents* : 75. *Frequency of response* : As needed. *Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent* : 1. *Estimated total annual burden hours* : 757.50 hours. *Estimated total annual costs* : $48,327.45. There are no capital expenditures or operation and maintenance costs associated with this information collection activity. IV. Are There Changes In the Estimates From the Last Approval? There is no change in the number of hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared with that identified in the ICR currently approved by OMB. V. What is the Next Step In the Process for This ICR? EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. EPA will issue another **Federal Register** notice pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB. If you have any questions about this ICR or the approval process, please contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . List of Subjects Environmental protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: October 5, 2006. James B. Gulliford, Assistant Administrator, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances. [FR Doc. E6-17791 Filed 10-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OW-2006-0369; FRL-8234-3] Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; National Estuary Program; EPA ICR No. 1500.06, OMB Control No. 2040-0138 AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act

(PRA)(44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ), this document announces that an Information Collection Request

(ICR)has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for review and approval. This is a request to renew an existing approved collection. The ICR, which is abstracted below, describes the nature of the information collection and its estimated burden and cost. DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before November 24, 2006. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2006-0369, to

(1)EPA online using *http://www.regulations.gov* (our preferred method), by e-mail to *OW-Docket@epa.gov* , or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Water Docket—Mail Code 4101T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460, and

(2)OMB by mail to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503. Note: The EPA Docket Center suffered damage due to flooding during the last week of June 2006. The Docket Center is continuing to operate. However, during the cleanup, there will be temporary changes to Docket Center telephone numbers, addresses, and hours of operation for people who wish to make hand deliveries or visit the Public Reading Room to view documents. Consult EPA's **Federal Register** notice at 71 *FR* 38147 (July 5, 2006) or the EPA Web site at *http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm* for current information on docket operations, locations, and telephone numbers. The Docket Center's mailing address for U.S. mail and the procedure for submitting comments to *http://www.regulations.gov* are not affected by the flooding and will remain the same. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John McShane, Oceans and Coastal Protection Division, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Mail Code 4504T, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:

(202)566-1381; fax number

(202)566-1336; e-mail address: *mcshane.john@epa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR 1320.12. On May 23, 2006 (71 *FR* 29619), EPA sought comments on this ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA did not receive any comments. Any additional comments on this ICR should be submitted to EPA and OMB within 30 days of this notice. EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2006-0369, which is available for online viewing at *http://www.regulations.gov* , or in person viewing at the Water Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room is open from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is

(202)566-1744 and the telephone number for the Water Docket is

(202)566-2426. Use EPA's electronic docket and comment system at *http://www.regulations.gov* , to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, select “docket search,” then key in the docket ID number identified above. Please note that EPA's policy is that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available for public viewing at *http://www.regulations.gov* as EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. For further information about the electronic docket, go to *http://www.regulations.gov* . *Title:* National Estuary Program. *ICR numbers:* EPA ICR No. 1500.06, OMB Control No. 2040-0138. *ICR Status:* This ICR is scheduled to expire on November 30, 2006. Under OMB regulations, the Agency may continue to conduct or sponsor the collection of information while this submission is pending at OMB. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the **Federal Register** when approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed either by publication in the **Federal Register** or by other appropriate means, such as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9. *Abstract:* The National Estuary Program

(NEP)involves collecting information from the state or local agency or nongovernmental organizations that receive funds under Section 320 of the Clean Water Act. The regulation requiring this information is found at 40 CFR part 35. Prospective grant recipients seek funding to develop or oversee and coordinate implementation of Comprehensive Conservation Management Plans (CCMPs) for estuaries of national significance. In order to receive funds, grantees must submit an annual workplan to EPA. The workplan consists of two parts:

(a)Progress on projects funded previously; and

(b)new projects proposed with dollar amounts and completion dates. The workplan is reviewed by EPA and also serves as the scope of work for the grant agreement. EPA also uses these workplans to track performance of each of the 28 estuary programs currently in the NEP. EPA provides funding to NEPs to support long-term implementation of CCMPs if such programs pass an implementation review process. Implementation reviews are used to determine progress each NEP is making in implementing its CCMP and achieving environmental results. In addition to evaluating progress, the results are used to identify areas of weakness each NEP should address for long-term success in protecting and restoring their estuaries. EPA will also compile successful tools and approaches as well as lessons learned from all implementation reviews to transfer to the NEPs and other watershed programs. For this ICR cycle, implementation reviews will be required for seven programs in FY2006, 12 programs in FY2007, and nine programs in 2008. EPA requests that each of the 28 NEPs receiving Section 320 funds report information that can be used in the Government Performance and Results Act

(GPRA)reporting process. This reporting is done on an annual basis and is used to show environmental results that are being achieved within the overall NEP Program. This information is ultimately submitted to Congress along with GPRA information from other EPA programs. *Burden Statement:* The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 218 hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. *Respondents/Affected Entities:* State or local agencies or nongovernmental organizations in the NEP who receive grants under Section 320 of the Clean Water Act. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 28. *Frequency of Response:* Annual. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 5,833. *Estimated Total Annual Cost:* $409,349, includes $0 annualized capital or O&M costs. *Changes in the Estimates:* There is a decrease of 280 hours, which is a result of the information collection process being more streamlined and efficient. Dated: October 10, 2006. Oscar Morales, Director, Collection Strategies Division. [FR Doc. E6-17875 Filed 10-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-8234-2] Agency Information Collection Activities OMB Responses AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This document announces the Office of Management and Budget's

(OMB)response to Agency Clearance requests, in compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et. seq* ). An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Auby

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

(ICR)Number. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OMB Responses to Agency Clearance Requests OMB Approvals EPA ICR No. 2032.04; NESHAP for Hydrochloric Acid Production; in 40 CFR part 63, subpart NNNNN; was approved 09/06/2006; OMB number 2060-0529; expires 09/30/2009. EPA ICR No. 2034.03; NESHAP for Wood Products Surface Coating Industry (Renewal); in 40 CFR part 63, subpart QQQQ; was approved 09/06/2006; OMB Number 2060-0510; expires 09/30/2009. EPA ICR No. 1952.03; NESHAP for Metal Furniture Surface Coating (Renewal); in 40 CFR part 63, subpart RRRR; was approved 09/06/2006; OMB Number 2060-0518; expires 09/30/2009. EPA ICR No. 1894.05; NESHAP for Secondary Aluminum Production (Renewal); in 40 CFR part 63, subpart RRR; was approved 09/06/2006; OMB number 2060-0433; expires 09/30/2009. EPA ICR No. 0633.09; NSPS for Beverage Can Surface Coating (Renewal); in 40 CFR part 60, subpart WW; was approved 10/03/2006; OMB Number 2060-0001; expires 10/31/2009. EPA ICR No. 0794.11; Notification of Substantial Risk of Injury to Health and the Environment under TSCA Sec. 8(e); was approved 10/02/2006; OMB Number 2070-0046; expires 10/31/2009. EPA ICR No. 0649.09; NSPS for Metal Furniture Coating (Renewal); in 40 CFR part 60, subpart EE; was approved 10/02/2006; OMB Number 2060-0106; expires 10/31/2009. EPA ICR No. 2177.02; Standards of Performance for Stationary Combustion Turbines (Final Rule); in 40 CFR part 60, subpart KKKK; was approved 10/02/2006; OMB Number 2060-0582; expires 10/31/2009. EPA ICR No. 1934 .03; National Primary Drinking Water Regulations: Ground Water Rule (Final Rule); in 40 CFR 141.400-406; 40 CFR 142.14-16; OMB Number 2040-0271; was approved 10/11/2006; expires 10/31/2009. EPA ICR No. 2244.01; Reducing the State Reporting Burden and Streamlining Measures; was approved 10/11/2006; OMB Number 2090-0027; expires 04/30/2007. EPA ICR No. 0659.10; NSPS for Surface Coating of Large Appliances; in 40 CFR part 60, subpart SS; was approved 10/10/2006; OMB Number 2060-0108; expires 10/31/2009. EPA ICR No. 2088.02; Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements under EPA's Hospitals for a Healthy Environment

(H2E)Program; was approved 10/10/2006; OMB Number 2070-0166; expires 10/31/2009. Comment Filed EPA ICR No. 1230.13; Information Collection Request for Proposed Rule for Review of New Sources and Modifications in Indian Country; in 40 CFR part 49 and 51; OMB Number 2060-0003; OMB filed comments on 09/27/2006. EPA ICR No. 1975.03; Additional Reporting and Recordkeeeping Requirements for NESHAP for Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (Proposed Rule); in 40 CFR part 63, subpart ZZZZ; OMB Number 2060-0548; OMB filed comments on 09/06/2006. Dated: October 16, 2006. Oscar Morales, Director, Collection Strategies Division. [FR Doc. E6-17876 Filed 10-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OW-2006-0486; FRL-8234-4] Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission to OMB for Review and Approval; Comment Request; 2007 Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey and Assessment; Agency Information Collection; EPA ICR No. 2234.01; OMB Control No. 2040-NEW AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act

(PRA)(44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ), this document announces that an Information Collection Request

(ICR)has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for review and approval. This is a request for a new collection. The ICR, which is abstracted below, describes the nature of the information collection and its estimated burden and cost. DATES: Additional comments may be submitted on or before November 24, 2006. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2006-0486, to

(1)EPA online using *http://www.regulations.gov* (our preferred method), by e-mail to *barles.robert@epa.gov* or by mail to: Water Docket, EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 4101T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460, and

(2)OMB by mail to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503. Note: The EPA Docket Center suffered damage due to flooding during the last week of June 2006. The Docket Center is continuing to operate. However, during the cleanup, there will be temporary changes to Docket Center telephone numbers, addresses, and hours of operation for people who wish to make hand deliveries or visit the Public Reading Room to view documents. Consult EPA's **Federal Register** notice at 71 FR 38147 (July 5, 2006) or the EPA Web site at *http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm* for current information on docket operations, locations and telephone numbers. The Docket Center's mailing address for U.S. mail and the procedure for submitting comments to *www.regulations.gov* are not affected by the flooding and will remain the same. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Barles, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water (4606M) Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:

(202)564-3814; fax number:

(202)564-3757; e-mail address: *barles.robert@epa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has submitted the following ICR to OMB for review and approval according to the procedures prescribed in 5 CFR 1320.12. On June 5, 2006 (71 FR 32344), EPA sought comments on this ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d). EPA received 1 comment during the comment period, which is addressed in the ICR. Any additional comments on this ICR should be submitted to EPA and OMB within 30 days of this notice. EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2006-0486, which is available for online viewing at *http://www.regulations.gov,* or in person viewing at the Water Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is

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

(202)566-2426. Use EPA's electronic docket and comment system at *http://www.regulations.gov,* to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those documents in the docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, select “docket search,” then key in the docket ID number identified above. Please note that EPA's policy is that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available for public viewing at *http://www.regulations.gov* as EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose public disclosure is restricted by statute. For further information about the electronic docket, go to *http://www.regulations.gov.* *Title:* 2007 Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey and Assessment. *ICR numbers:* EPA ICR No. 2234.01; OMB Control No. 2040-new. *ICR Status:* This ICR is for a new information collection activity. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the **Federal Register** when approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed either by publication in the **Federal Register** or by other appropriate means, such as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9. *Abstract:* The purpose of this information collection is to identify the infrastructure needs of community public water systems for the 20-year period from January 2007 through December 2027. EPA's Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water (OGWDW) will collect these data to comply with Sections 1452(h) and 1452(i)(4) of the Safe Drinking Water Act (42 U.S.C. 300j-12). EPA will use a questionnaire to collect capital investment need information from large (serving more than 100,000 people) and medium (serving more than 3,300 people but less than 100,000) community water systems. The questionnaire will also be used by EPA survey teams in visits to 400 to 600 statistically-selected small (serving less than 3,300 people) community water systems to ascertain their infrastructure needs. Participation in the survey is voluntary. The data from the questionnaires will provide EPA with a basis for estimating the nationwide infrastructure needs of community water systems. Also, as mandated by Section 1452(a)(1) (D)(ii) of the Safe Drinking Water Act, EPA uses the results of the latest survey to allocate Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) monies to the States. Under the allotment formula, each State receives a grant of the annual DWSRF appropriation in proportion to its share of the total national need—with the proviso that each State receives at least 1 percent of the total funds available. *Burden Statement:* The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 7.62 hours per response for Local Government Owned Water Systems; 5.68 hours per response for Privately Owned Water Systems; 6.72 hours per response for State Government Owned Water Systems; and 18.7 hours per response for State and U.S. Territories Water Agencies. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. *Respondents/Affected Entities:* Local Government Owned Water Systems, Privately Owned Water Systems, State Government Owned Water Systems, and State and U.S. Territories Water Agencies. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 3,193. *Frequency of Response:* 0.33 times per year. *Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden:* 15,343. *Estimated Total Annual Cost:* $513,462 includes $0 annualized capital or O&M costs. Dated: October 18, 2006. Rick Westlund, Acting Director, Collection Strategies Division. [FR Doc. E6-17877 Filed 10-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-8234-5] Guidelines for Awarding Clean Water Act Section 319 Base Grants to Indian Tribes and Request for Proposals From Indian Tribes for Competitive Grants Under Clean Water Act Section 319 in FY 2007 (CFDA 66.460—Nonpoint Source Implementation Grants; Funding Opportunity Number EPA-OW-OWOW-07-1) AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice of Guidelines for Section 319 Base Grants and Request for Proposals for Section 319 Competitive Grants. SUMMARY: This notice publishes EPA's national guidelines for the award of base grants and EPA's Request for Proposals

(RFP)for the award of supplemental funding in the form of competitive grants under the Clean Water Act

(CWA)section 319(h) nonpoint source

(NPS)grants program to Indian Tribes in FY 2007. Section 319 of the CWA authorizes EPA to award grants to eligible Tribes for the purpose of assisting them in implementing approved NPS management programs developed pursuant to section 319(b). The primary goal of the NPS management program is to control NPS pollution through implementation of management measures and practices to reduce pollutant loadings resulting from each category or subcategory of NPSs identified in the Tribe's NPS assessment report developed pursuant to section 319(a). EPA anticipates, pending enactment of its FY 2007 appropriations, awarding a total of $7,000,000 to eligible Tribes which have approved NPS assessments and management programs and (treatment-as-a-state”

(TAS)status as of October 13, 2006. EPA expects the allocation of funds will be similar to the amount distributed in FY 2006, which included approximately $3.2 million in base grants awarded to 95 Tribes and $3.8 million awarded to 28 Tribes through a competitive process. Section A includes EPA's national guidelines which govern the process for awarding base grants to all eligible Tribes, and section B is the national RFP for awarding the remaining funds on a competitive basis. In future years, EPA intends to post the RFP for competitive grants under section 319 at *http://www.grants.gov* and on EPA's Web site at *http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal.* DATES: These guidelines are effective October 25, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrea Matzke, U.S. EPA, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Assessment and Watershed Protection Division, telephone:

(202)566-1155; fax:

(202)566-1331; e-mail: *matzke.andrea@epa.gov.* Also contact the appropriate EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator identified in section B.VII and also listed on EPA's website under “EPA Tribal NPS Coordinators” at *http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background EPA anticipates that Congress will, for the eighth year in a row, authorize EPA to award NPS control grants to Indian Tribes in FY 2007 in an amount that exceeds the statutory cap (in section 518(f) of the CWA) of 1/3 of 1 percent of the total section 319 appropriation. There is continuing recognition that Indian Tribes need increased financial support to implement NPS programs that address critical water quality concerns on Tribal lands. EPA will continue to work closely with the Tribes to assist them in developing and implementing effective Tribal NPS pollution programs. EPA was pleased by the quality of the Tribes' work plans that formed the basis of the grants awarded to Tribes in FY 2006, which included approximately $3.2 million in base grants awarded to 95 Tribes and $3.8 million awarded to 28 Tribes for specific watershed projects through a competitive process. We believe that the FY 2006 grants were directed towards high-priority activities that will produce improved water quality. We look forward to working with Tribes again in FY 2007 to implement successful projects addressing the extensive NPS control needs throughout Indian country. Guidelines for Awarding CWA Section 319 Base Grants to Indian Tribes (See Section A Below) Overview Information Section 319 of the CWA authorizes EPA to award grants to eligible Tribes for the purpose of assisting them in implementing approved NPS management programs developed pursuant to section 319(b). The primary goal of the NPS management program is to control NPS pollution through implementation of management measures and practices to reduce pollutant loadings resulting from each category or subcategory of NPSs identified in the Tribe's NPS assessment report developed pursuant to section 319(a). EPA anticipates awarding section 319 base grants to eligible Tribes in the amount of $30,000 or $50,000 of Federal section 319 funding (depending on land area). Section 319 base funds may be used for a range of activities that implement the Tribe's approved NPS management program, including: Hiring a program coordinator; conducting NPS education programs; providing training and authorized travel to attend training; updating the NPS management program; developing watershed-based plans; and implementing, alone or in conjunction with other agencies or other funding sources, watershed-based plans and on-the-ground watershed projects. Request for Proposals From Indian Tribes for Competitive Grants Under Clean Water Act Section 319 in FY 2007 (See Section B Below) Overview Information This RFP is issued pursuant to section 319(h) of the CWA. Section 319 of the CWA authorizes EPA to award grants to eligible Tribes for the purpose of assisting them in implementing approved NPS management programs developed pursuant to section 319(b). The primary goal of the NPS management program is to control NPS pollution through implementation of management measures and practices to reduce pollutant loadings resulting from each category or subcategory of NPSs identified in the Tribe's NPS assessment report developed pursuant to section 319(a). EPA anticipates setting aside a portion of section 319 funds for competitive grant awards to Tribes for the purpose of funding the development and implementation of watershed-based plans and other on-the-ground projects that result in a significant step towards solving NPS impairments on a watershed-wide basis. Tribes are strongly encouraged to submit proposals that develop and/or implement watershed-based plans designed to protect unimpaired waters and restore NPS-impaired waters. EPA believes that watershed-based plans provide the best means for preventing and resolving NPS problems and threats. Watershed-based plans provide a coordinating framework for solving water quality problems by providing a specific geographic focus, integrating strong partnerships, integrating strong science and data, and coordinating priority setting and integrated solutions. EPA anticipates awarding approximately 25 competitive grants, subject to availability of funds and the quality of proposals submitted. Eligible Tribes may apply for competitive funding by submitting a proposal for up to a maximum budget of $150,000 of Federal section 319 funding (plus the additional required match of the total project cost). *Federal Agency Name:* EPA. *Funding Opportunity Title:* Tribal Nonpoint Source Implementation Grants. *Announcement Type:* Request for Proposals. *Funding Opportunity Number:* EPA-OW-OWOW-07-1. *Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

(CFDA)Number:* 66.460. *Dates:* Deadline EPA uses to determine eligibility to receive competitive 319 grants. October 13, 2006. Deadline for receipt of proposals in hard copy by Region or electronically through Grants.gov. December 19, 2006. Headquarters notifies Regions/Tribes of selections for competitive 319 grants. March 5, 2007. Tribes submit final grant application to Region for competitive 319 grants. April 5, 2007. Other than the date EPA will use to determine eligibility to receive 319 grants and the deadline for receipt of proposals in response to the RFP (Section B), the dates above are the anticipated dates for those actions. Section A. Guidelines for Awarding Clean Water Act Section 319 Base Grants to Indian Tribes I. General EPA has developed guidelines for awarding CWA section 319 base grants to Indian Tribes. These guidelines apply to section 319 base grants awarded from funds appropriated by Congress in FY 2007 and in subsequent years. 1. Environmental Results Grants awarded under these guidelines will advance the protection and improvement of water quality in support of Goal 2 (Clean and Safe Water), Objective 2 (Protect Water Quality), Sub-objective 1 (Protect and Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis) of EPA's 2003-2008 Strategic Plan (see *http://www.epa.gov/water/waterplan/documents/Goal2.pdf* ). In support of Sub-objective 2.2.1, and consistent with EPA Order 5700.7, Environmental Results under EPA Assistance Agreements (see *http://www.epa.gov/ogd/grants/award/5700.7.pdf* ), it is anticipated that grants awarded under these guidelines will be expected to accomplish various environmental outputs and outcomes as described below. All proposed work plans must include specific statements describing the environmental results of the proposed project in terms of well-defined outputs, and, to the maximum extent practicable, well-defined outcomes that demonstrate how the project will contribute to the overall protection and improvement of water quality. Environmental outputs (or deliverables) refer to an environmental activity, effort, and/or associated work product related to an environmental goal or objective, that will be produced or provided over a period of time or by a specified date. Outputs may be quantitative or qualitative, but must be measurable during an assistance agreement funding period. Examples of environmental outputs anticipated as a result of section 319 grant awards may include but are not limited to: a watershed-based plan, progress reports, or a particular number of on-the-ground management measures or practices installed or implemented during the project period. Environmental outcomes mean the result, effect, or consequence that will occur from carrying out an environmental program or activity that is related to an environmental or programmatic goal or objective. Outcomes may be environmental, behavioral, health-related or programmatic in nature, must be quantitative, and may not necessarily be achieved within an assistance agreement funding period. Examples of environmental outcomes anticipated as a result of section 319 grants to be awarded may include but are not limited to: an increased number of NPS-impaired waterbodies that have been partially or fully restored to meet water quality standards or other water quality-based goals established by the Tribes; and/or an increased number of waterbodies that have been protected from NPS pollution. 2. Allocation Formula Each eligible Tribe will receive Federal section 319 base funding in accordance with the following land area scale: Square miles (acres) Base amount Less than 1,000 sq. mi. (less than 640,000 acres) $30,000 Over 1,000 sq. mi. (over 640,000 acres) 50,000 The land area scale is the same as used in previous years. EPA continues to rely upon land area as the deciding factor for allocation of funds because NPS pollution is strongly related to land use; thus land area is a reasonable factor that generally is highly relevant to identifying Tribes with the greatest needs (recognizing that many Tribes have needs that significantly exceed available resources). 3. Eligible Activities Section 319 base funds may be used for a range of activities that implement the Tribe's approved NPS management program, including: Hiring a program coordinator; conducting NPS education programs; providing training and authorized travel to attend training; updating the NPS management program; developing watershed-based plans; and implementing, alone or in conjunction with other agencies or other funding sources, watershed-based plans and on-the-ground watershed projects. In general, base funding should not be used for general assessment activities (e.g., monitoring the general status of reservation waters, which may be supported with CWA section 106 funding). EPA encourages Tribes to use section 319 funding, and explore the use of other funding such as CWA section 106 funding, to support project-specific water quality monitoring, data management, data analysis, assessment activities, and the development of watershed-based plans. II. Eligibility and Match Requirements To be eligible for NPS base grants, a Tribe or intertribal consortium must:

(1)Be Federally recognized;

(2)have an approved NPS assessment report in accordance with CWA section 319(a);

(3)have an approved NPS management program in accordance with CWA section 319(b); and

(4)have “treatment-as-a-state”

(TAS)status in accordance with CWA section 518(e). To be eligible for base and competitive NPS grants in FY 2007, Tribes must meet these eligibility requirements as of October 13, 2006, as announced in the FY 2006 guidelines on January 17, 2006, at 71 FR 2531. To be eligible for NPS grants in years beyond FY 2007, Tribes must meet these eligibility requirements as of the second Friday in October for the applicable fiscal year unless otherwise announced. Tribes should contact their EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator for further information about the eligibility process (see section B.VII for Agency contact information and also EPA's Web site under “EPA Tribal NPS Coordinators” at *http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal* ). Section 319(h)(3) of the CWA requires that the match for NPS grants is 40 percent of the total project cost. In general, as required in 40 CFR 31.24, the match requirement can be satisfied by any of the following: allowable costs incurred by the grantee, subgrantee, or a cost-type contractor, including those allowable costs borne by non-Federal grants; by cash donations from non-Federal third parties; or by the value of third party in-kind contributions. EPA's regulations also provide that EPA may decrease the match requirement to as low as 10 percent if the Tribe can demonstrate in writing to the Regional Administrator that fiscal circumstances within the Tribe or within each Tribe that is a member of the intertribal consortium are constrained to such an extent that fulfilling the match requirement would impose undue hardship (see 40 CFR 35.635). In making grant awards to Tribes that provide for a reduced match requirement, Regions must include a brief finding in the final award package that the Tribe has demonstrated that it does not have adequate funds to meet the required match. III. Application Requirements for Base Grants 1. Address To Request Application Package for Base Grants Grant application forms, including Standard Form

(SF)424, are available at *http://www.epa.gov/ogd/grants/how_to_apply.htm* and by mail upon request by calling the EPA Headquarters Grants Administration Division at

(202)564-5320. Tribes may also contact their EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator for further information about the application process (see section B.VII for Agency contact information and also EPA's Web site under “EPA Tribal NPS Coordinators” at *http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal* ). 2. Content and Form of Application Submission for Base Grants Please note that only the proposed work plan, including all of the components outlined in the section immediately below, needs to be included in the initial application for base grants (see section A.VIII for deadlines and milestones for FY 2007 base grants). To apply for section 319 base grants, you must submit a proposed work plan to the appropriate EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator (see section B.VII for Agency contact information and also EPA's Web site under “EPA Tribal NPS Coordinators” at *http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal* ). You may submit the proposed work plan as either a hard copy or an electronic submission. If you submit a hard copy proposed work plan, you have the option to submit it by U.S. Postal Mail, express delivery service, hand delivery, or courier service only. EPA will not accept faxed submissions. If you submit a hard copy proposed work plan, you are encouraged (not required) to include a compact disc

(CD)with the electronic version of the proposed work plan. If you submit your proposed work plan electronically, it should be sent to the appropriate EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator at the e-mail address listed in section B.VII of this announcement and also on EPA's Web site under “EPA Tribal NPS Coordinators” at *http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal.* The specific content and form of the proposed work plan for the award of section 319 base grants is as follows: *a. Proposed Work Plan.* Tribes must submit a work plan to receive base funding. All work plans must be consistent with the Tribe's approved NPS management program and conform to legal requirements that are applicable to all environmental program grants awarded to Tribes (see 40 CFR 35.507 and 35.515) as well as the grant requirements which specifically apply to NPS management grants (see 40 CFR 35.638). As provided in those regulations, and in accordance with EPA Order 5700.7, *Environmental Results under EPA Assistance Agreements* , all work plans must include: i. Description of each significant category of NPS activity to be addressed; ii. Work plan components; iii. Work plan commitments for each work plan component, including anticipated environmental outputs and outcomes (as required by EPA Order 5700.7) and the applicant's plan for tracking and measuring its progress towards achieving the expected outputs and outcomes; iv. Estimated funding amounts for each work plan component; v. Estimated work years for each work plan component; vi. Roles and responsibilities of the recipient and EPA in carrying out the work plan commitments; and vii. Reporting schedule and a description of the performance evaluation process that will be used that accounts for:

(a)A discussion of accomplishments as measured against work plan commitments and anticipated environmental outputs and outcomes;

(b)a discussion of the cumulative effectiveness of the work performed under all work plan components;

(c)a discussion of existing and potential problem areas; and

(d)suggestions for improvement, including, where feasible, schedules for making improvements. *b. Work Plan to Develop a Watershed-Based Plan.* If a Tribe submits a work plan to develop a watershed-based plan, it must include a commitment to incorporate the nine components of a watershed-based plan identified in section A.V.1 below. *c. Work Plan to Implement a Watershed-Based Plan.* If a Tribe submits a work plan to implement a watershed-based plan, it must be accompanied by a statement that the Region finds that the watershed-based plan to be implemented includes the nine components of a watershed-based plan identified in section A.V.1 below. IV. Submission Dates and Times for Proposed Work Plans for Base Grants In FY 2007, eligible Tribes must submit to the appropriate EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator proposed work plans for base funding by December 19, 2006 (see section B.VII for Agency contact information; Agency contact information is also posted on EPA's Web site under “EPA Tribal NPS Coordinators” at *http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal* ). Each EPA Region will review the proposed work plan for base funding and, where appropriate, recommend improvements to the plan by January 19, 2007. The Tribe must submit a final work plan by February 20, 2007. If a Tribe has not submitted an approvable work plan for base funding by February 20, 2007, its allocated amount will be added to the competitive pool which will be used to fund Tribal NPS competitive grants (see section B). Submission dates and times for proposed work plans for NPS base grant funding for years beyond FY 2007 are described in section A.IX below. V. Watershed-Based Plans EPA strongly encourages Tribes to use section 319 funding for the development and/or implementation of watershed-based plans to protect unimpaired waters and restore NPS-impaired waters. EPA also encourages Tribes to explore the use of other funding such as CWA section 106 funding to support the development of watershed-based plans. EPA believes that watershed-based plans provide the best means for preventing and resolving NPS problems and threats. Watershed-based plans provide a coordinating framework for solving water quality problems by providing a specific geographic focus, integrating strong partnerships, integrating strong science and data, and coordinating priority setting and integrated solutions. This section outlines the specific information that should be included in all watershed-based plans that are developed or implemented using section 319 funding. This information correlates with the elements of a watershed-based plan outlined in the NPS grants guidelines for States (see * FY 2004 Nonpoint Source Program and Grants Guidelines for States and Territories * , available at *http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/cwact.html* ). One significant difference from the State guidelines is that a watershed-based plan for Tribes provides for the integration of “water quality-based goals” (see element

(c)below), whereas the State guidelines call for specific estimates of load reductions that are expected to be achieved by implementing the plan. EPA has incorporated this flexibility for Tribes in recognition that not all Tribes have yet developed water quality standards and many Tribes may need additional time and/or technical assistance in order to develop more sophisticated estimates of the NPS pollutants that need to be addressed. Where such information does exist, or is later developed, EPA expects that it will be incorporated as appropriate into the watershed-based plan. To the extent that information already exists in other documents (e.g., NPS assessment reports or NPS management programs), the information may be incorporated by reference into the watershed-based plan. Thus, the Tribe need not duplicate any existing process or document that already provides needed information. 1. Components of a Watershed-Based Plan a. An identification of the causes and sources or groups of similar sources that will need to be controlled to achieve the goal identified in element

(c)below. Sources that need to be controlled should be identified at the significant subcategory level with estimates of the extent to which they are present in the watershed (e.g., X number of dairy cattle feedlots needing upgrading, including a rough estimate of the number of cattle per facility; Y acres of row crops needing improved nutrient management or sediment control; or Z linear miles of eroded streambank needing remediation). b. A description of the NPS management measures that will need to be implemented to achieve a water quality-based goal described in element

(c)below, as well as to achieve other watershed goals identified in the watershed-based plan, and an identification (using a map or a description) of the critical areas for which those measures will be needed to implement the plan. c. An estimate of the water quality-based goals expected to be achieved by implementing the measures described in element

(b)above. To the extent possible, estimates should identify specific water quality-based goals, which may incorporate, for example: load reductions; water quality standards for one or more pollutants/uses; NPS total maximum daily load allocations; measurable, in-stream reductions in a pollutant; or improvements in a parameter that indicates stream health (e.g., increases in fish or macroinvertebrate counts). If information is not available to make specific estimates, water quality-based goals may include narrative descriptions and best professional judgment based on existing information. d. An estimate of the amounts of technical and financial assistance needed, associated costs, and/or the sources and authorities that will be relied upon to implement the plan. As sources of funding, Tribes should consider other relevant Federal, State, local and private funds that may be available to assist in implementing the plan. e. An information and education component that will be used to enhance public understanding and encourage early and continued participation in selecting, designing, and implementing the NPS management measures that will be implemented. f. A schedule for implementing the NPS management measures identified in the plan that is reasonably expeditious. g. A description of interim, measurable milestones for determining whether NPS management measures or other control actions are being implemented. h. A set of criteria that can be used to determine whether the water quality-based goals are being achieved over time and substantial progress is being made towards attaining water quality-based goals and, if not, the criteria for determining whether the watershed-based plan needs to be revised. i. A monitoring component to evaluate the effectiveness of the implementation efforts over time, measured against the criteria established under element

(h)above. EPA recognizes the difficulty of developing the information described above with precision and, as these guidelines reflect, believes that there must be a balanced approach to address this concern. On one hand, it is absolutely critical that Tribes make, at the subcategory level, a reasonable effort to identify the significant sources; identify the management measures that will most effectively address those sources; and broadly estimate the expected water quality-based goals that will be achieved. Without such information to provide focus and direction, it is much less likely that a project that implements the plan can efficiently and effectively address the NPSs of water quality impairments. On the other hand, EPA recognizes that even with reasonable steps to obtain and analyze relevant data, the available information at the planning stage (within reasonable time and cost constraints) may be limited; preliminary information and estimates may need to be modified over time, accompanied by mid-course corrections in the watershed plan; and it often will require a number of years of effective implementation to achieve the goals. EPA fully intends that the watershed planning process described above should be implemented in a dynamic and iterative manner to assure that projects implementing the plan may proceed even though some of the information in the watershed plan is imperfect and may need to be modified over time as information improves. 2. Scale and Scope of Watershed-Based Plans The watershed-based plan should address a large enough geographic area so that its implementation addresses all of the significant sources and causes of impairments and threats to the waterbody in question. EPA recognizes that many Tribes may face jurisdictional limitations outside reservation boundaries. To the extent possible, EPA encourages Tribes to engage other partners and include mixed ownership watersheds when appropriate to solve the water quality problems (e.g., Tribal, Federal, State, and private lands). While there is no rigorous definition or delineation for this concept, the general intent is to avoid single segments or other narrowly defined areas that do not provide an opportunity for addressing a watershed's stressors in a rational and economical manner. At the same time, the scale should not be so large as to minimize the probability of successful implementation. Once a watershed-based plan that contains the information identified above has been established, it can be used as the foundation for preparing annual work plans. Like the NPS management program approved under section 319(b), a watershed-based plan may be a multi-year planning document. Whereas the NPS management program provides overall program guidance to address NPS pollution on Tribal lands, a watershed-based plan focuses NPS planning on a particular watershed identified as a priority in the NPS management program. Due to the greater specificity of a watershed-based plan, it will generally have considerably more detail than a NPS management program, and identified portions may be implemented through highly specific annual work plans. While the watershed-based plan can be considered a subset of the NPS management program, the annual work plan can be considered a subset of the watershed-based plan. A Tribe may choose to implement the watershed-based plan in prioritized portions (e.g., based on particular segments, other geographic subdivisions, NPS categories in the watershed, or specific pollutants or impairments), consistent with the schedule established pursuant to item

(f)above. In doing so, Tribes may submit annual work plans for section 319 grant funding that implement specific portions of the watershed-based plan. A watershed-based plan is a strategic plan for long-term success; annual work plans are the specific “to-do lists” to achieve that long-term success. VI. Base Grant Requirements 1. Grant Requirements A listing and description of general EPA regulations applicable to the award of assistance agreements may be viewed at *http://www.epa.gov/ogd/AppKit/appplicable_epa_regulations_and_description.htm* . All applicable legal requirements including, but not limited to, EPA's regulations on environmental program grants for Tribes (see 40 CFR 35.500 to 35.735) and regulations specific to NPS grants for Tribes (see 40 CFR 35.630 to 35.638), apply to all section 319 grants. 2. Performance Partnership Grants Performance Partnership Grants

(PPG)enable Tribes to combine funds from more than one environmental program grant into a single grant with a single budget. If the Tribe includes the section 319 grant as a part of an approved PPG, the match requirement may be reduced to 5 percent of the allowable cost of the work plan budget for the first 2 years in which the Tribe receives a PPG; after 2 years, the match may be increased up to 10 percent of the work plan budget (as determined by the Regional Administrator). (See 40 CFR 35.536). Where the stated purpose is to include the section 319 base grant in a PPG, a Tribe may prepare a budget and proposed work plan based upon the assumption that EPA will approve the waiver amount for PPGs under 40 CFR 35.536. If a proposed PPG work plan differs significantly from the section 319 work plan approved for funding, the Regional Administrator must consult with the National Program Manager. (See 40 CFR 35.535). The purpose of this consultation requirement is to address the issue of ensuring that a project which is awarded section 319 base funding is implemented once commingled with other grant programs in a PPG. If the Tribe does not or cannot include the section 319 base grant as part of an approved PPG, or chooses to withdraw the section 319 grant from their PPG, the Tribe must then meet the match requirements identified in section A.II above and, as applicable, negotiate a revised work plan with the EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator. 3. Intertribal Consortia Some Tribes have formed intertribal consortia to promote cooperative work. An intertribal consortium is a partnership between two or more Tribes that is authorized by the governing bodies of those Tribes to apply for and receive assistance under this program. (See 40 CFR 35.502.) Individual Tribes who are a part of intertribal consortia that is awarded a section 319 base grant may not also be awarded an individual section 319 base grant. (Note that individual Tribes may still be eligible to apply for competitive funds described in section B if they do not also submit a proposal for competitive funds as part of an intertribal consortium.) The intertribal consortium is eligible only if the consortium demonstrates that all its members meet the eligibility requirements for the section 319 program and authorize the consortium to apply for and receive assistance in accordance with 40 CFR 35.504. An intertribal consortium must submit with their proposed work plan to EPA adequate documentation of the existence of the partnership and the authorization of the consortium by its members to apply for and receive the grant. (See 40 CFR 35.504.) In making grant awards to Tribes who are part of intertribal consortia, Regions must include a brief finding in the final award package that the Tribes have demonstrated the existence of the partnership and the authorization of the consortium by its members to apply for and receive the grant. 4. Non-Tribal Lands The following discussion explains the extent to which section 319 grants may be awarded to Tribes for use outside the reservation. We discuss two types of off-reservation activities:

(1)Activities that are related to waters within a reservation, such as those relating to sources upstream of a waterway entering the reservation; and

(2)activities that are unrelated to waters of a reservation. As discussed below, the first type of these activities may be eligible; the second is not. *a. Activities That Are Related to Waters Within a Reservation.* Section 518(e) of the CWA provides that EPA may treat an Indian Tribe as a State for purposes of section 319 of the CWA if, among other things, “the functions to be exercised by the Indian Tribe pertain to the management and protection of water resources which are * * * within the borders of an Indian reservation” (see 33 U.S.C. 1377(e)(2)). EPA already awards grants to Tribes under section 106 of the CWA for activities performed outside of a reservation (on condition that the Tribe obtains any necessary access agreements and coordinates with the State, as appropriate) that pertain to reservation waters, such as evaluating impacts of upstream waters on water resources within a reservation. Similarly, EPA has awarded section 106 grants to States to conduct monitoring outside of State borders. EPA has concluded that grants awarded to an Indian Tribe pursuant to section 319 may similarly be used to perform eligible section 319 activities outside of a reservation if:

(1)The activity pertains to the management and protection of waters within a reservation; and

(2)just as for on-reservation activities, the Tribe meets all other applicable requirements. *b. Activities That Are Unrelated to Waters of a Reservation.* As discussed above, EPA is authorized to award section 319 grants to Tribes to perform eligible section 319 activities if the activities pertain to the management and protection of waters within a reservation and the Tribe meets all other applicable requirements. In contrast, EPA is not authorized to award section 319 grants for activities that do not pertain to waters of a reservation. For off-reservation areas, including “usual and accustomed” hunting, fishing, and gathering places, EPA must determine whether the activities pertain to waters of a reservation prior to awarding a grant. 5. Administrative Costs Pursuant to CWA section 319(h)(12), administrative costs in the form of salaries, overhead, or indirect costs for services provided and charged against activities and programs carried out with the grant shall not exceed 10 percent of the grant award. The costs of implementing enforcement and regulatory activities, education, training, technical assistance, demonstration projects, and technology transfer are not subject to this limitation. 6. Satisfactory Progress For a Tribe that received section 319 funds in the preceding fiscal year, section 319(h)(8) of the CWA requires that the Region determine whether the Tribe made “satisfactory progress” during the previous fiscal year in meeting the schedule of activities specified in its approved NPS management program. The Region will base this determination on an examination of Tribal activities, reports, reviews, and other documents and discussions with the Tribe in the previous year. Regions must include in each section 319 base grant award (or in a separate document, such as the grant-issuance cover letter, that is signed by the same EPA official who signs the grant), a written determination that the Tribe has made satisfactory progress during the previous fiscal year in meeting the schedule of milestones specified in its NPS management program. The Regions must include brief explanations that support their determinations. 7. Operation and Maintenance Each section 319 grant must contain a condition requiring that the Tribe assure that any management practices implemented for the project be properly operated and maintained for the intended purposes during its life span. Operation includes the administration, management, and performance of non-maintenance actions needed to keep the completed practice safe and functioning as intended. Maintenance includes work to prevent deterioration of the practice, repairing damage, or replacement of the practice to its original condition if one or more components fail. Management practices and projects that are damaged or destroyed due to a natural disaster (e.g., earthquakes, storm events, floods, etc.) or events beyond the control of the grantee are exempt from this condition. The condition must require the Tribe to assure that any subrecipient of section 319 funds similarly include the same condition in the subaward. Additionally, such condition must reserve the right of EPA and the Tribe, respectively, to conduct periodic inspections during the life span of the project to ensure that operation and maintenance are occurring, and shall state that, if it is determined that participants are not operating and maintaining practices in an appropriate manner, EPA or the Tribe, respectively, will request a refund for the project supported by the grant. The life span of a project will be determined on a case-by-case basis, tailored to the types of practices expected to be funded in a particular project, and should be specified in the grant condition. For assistance in determining the appropriate life span of the project, Tribes may wish to examine other programs implementing similar practices, such as the U.S. Department of Agriculture's conservation programs. For example, for conservation practices, it may be appropriate to construct the life span consistent with the life span for similar conservation practices as determined by the Commodity Credit Corporation (pursuant to the implementation of the Environmental Quality Incentives Program). Following the approach used in many Federal funding programs, practices will generally be operated and maintained for a period of at least 5 to 10 years. 8. Reporting As provided in 40 CFR 31.40, 31.41, 35.507, 35.515, and 35.638, all section 319 grants must include a set of reporting requirements and a process for evaluating performance. Some of these requirements have been explicitly incorporated into the required work plan components that all Tribes must include in order to receive section 319 grant funding. The work plan components required for section 319 funding, specifically those relating to work plan commitments and timeframes for their accomplishment, facilitate the management and oversight of Tribal grants by providing specific activities and outputs by which progress can be monitored. The performance evaluation process and reporting schedule (both work plan components) also establish a formal process by which accomplishments can be measured. Additionally, the satisfactory progress determination (for Tribes that received section 319 funding in the preceding fiscal year) helps ensure that Tribes are making progress in achieving the goals in their NPS management programs. Regions will ensure that the required evaluations are performed according to the negotiated schedule (at least annually) and that copies of the performance evaluation reports are placed in the official files and provided to the recipient. VII. Technical Assistance to Tribes In addition to providing NPS grant funding to Tribes, EPA remains committed to providing continued technical assistance to Tribes in their efforts to control NPS pollution. During the past ten years, EPA has presented many workshops to Tribes nationwide to assist them in developing:

(1)NPS assessments to further their understanding of NPS pollution and its impact on water quality;

(2)NPS management programs to apply solutions to address their NPS problems; and

(3)specific projects to effect on-the-ground solutions. The workshops have provided information on related EPA and other programs that can help Tribes address NPS pollution, including the provision of technical and funding assistance. Other areas of technical assistance include watershed-based planning, water quality monitoring, section 305(b) reports on water quality, and section 303(d) lists of impaired waters. EPA intends to continue providing NPS workshops to interested Tribes in FY 2007 (and beyond) and to provide other appropriate technical assistance as needed. EPA also intends to include special emphasis in the workshops on the development and implementation of watershed-based plans that are designed to address on-the-ground water quality improvements. VIII. Anticipated Deadlines and Milestones for FY 2007 Base Grants Deadline for Tribes to be eligible for 319 grants October 13, 2006. Tribes submit base grant proposed work plan to Region December 19, 2006. Region comments on Tribe's base grant proposed work plan January 19, 2007. Tribes submit final base grant work plan to Region February 20, 2007. Tribes submit final base grant application to Region April 5, 2007. Other than the date EPA will use to determine eligibility to receive 319 grants, the dates above are the anticipated dates for those actions. IX. Anticipated Deadlines and Milestones for Base Grants Beyond FY 2007 Listed below are the anticipated deadlines and milestones for NPS base grants for years beyond FY 2007 unless otherwise announced. The deadlines and milestones below refer to the dates within the particular fiscal year for which the Tribe is applying for NPS base grants. Each year, the specific dates will be posted on EPA's Web site at *http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal.* Tribes should also contact their EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator for further information about deadlines and milestones for years beyond FY 2007 (see EPA's Web site under “EPA Tribal NPS Coordinators” at *http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal* for Agency contact information). Deadline for Tribes to be eligible for 319 grants Second Friday in October. Tribes submit base grant proposed work plan to Region First Friday in December. Region comments on Tribe's base grant proposed work plan Second Wednesday in January. Tribes submit final base grant work plan to Region Second Friday in February. Tribes submit final base grant application to Region First Wednesday in April. X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is not a “significant regulatory action” and is therefore not subject to OMB review. Because this grant action is not subject to notice and comment requirements under the Administrative Procedures Act or any other statute, it is not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. Section 601 et seq.) or sections 202 and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1999

(UMRA)(Pub. L. 104-4). In addition, this action does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Although this action does not generally create new binding legal requirements, where it does, such requirements do not substantially and directly affect Tribes under Executive Order 13175 (63 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action will not have federalism implications, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, “Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. This action does not involve technical standards; thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This action does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ). The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 *et seq.* , generally provides that before certain actions may take effect, the Agency promulgating the action must submit a report, which includes a copy of the action, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. Since this grant action contains legally binding requirements, it is subject to the Congressional Review Act, and EPA will submit its final action in its report to Congress under the Act. This applies only to section A of this announcement. Section B. Request for Proposals From Indian Tribes for Competitive Grants Under Clean Water Act Section 319 in FY 2007 (Funding Opportunity Number EPA-OW-OWOW-07-1) Deadline EPA uses to determine eligibility to receive competitive 319 grants October 13, 2006. Deadline for receipt of proposals in hard copy by Region or electronically through Grants.gov December 19, 2006. Headquarters notifies Regions/Tribes of selections for competitive 319 grants March 5, 2007. Tribes submit final grant application to Region for competitive 319 grants April 5, 2007. Other than the date EPA will use to determine eligibility to receive 319 grants and the deadline for receipt of proposals in response to this RFP, the dates above are the anticipated dates for those actions. I. Funding Opportunity Description for Competitive Grants This RFP is issued pursuant to section 319(h) of the Clean Water Act (CWA). Section 319 of the CWA authorizes EPA to award grants to eligible Tribes for the purpose of assisting them in implementing approved nonpoint source

(NPS)management programs developed pursuant to section 319(b). The primary goal of the NPS management program is to control NPS pollution through implementation of management measures and practices to reduce pollutant loadings resulting from each category or subcategory of NPSs identified in the Tribe's NPS assessment report developed pursuant to section 319(a). EPA anticipates, pending enactment of its FY 2007 appropriations, setting aside a portion of section 319 funds for competitive grant awards to Tribes for the purpose of funding the development and implementation of watershed-based plans and other on-the-ground projects that result in a significant step towards solving NPS impairments on a watershed-wide basis. Tribes are strongly encouraged to submit proposals that develop and/or implement watershed-based plans designed to protect unimpaired waters and restore NPS-impaired waters. Grants awarded under this RFP will advance the protection and improvement of water quality in support of Goal 2 (Clean and Safe Water), Objective 2 (Protect Water Quality), Sub-objective 1 (Protect and Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis) of EPA's 2003-2008 Strategic Plan (see *http://www.epa.gov/water/waterplan/documents/Goal2.pdf* ). In support of Sub-objective 2.2.1, and consistent with EPA Order 5700.7, *Environmental Results under EPA Assistance Agreements* (see *http://www.epa.gov/ogd/grants/award/5700.7.pdf* ), it is anticipated that grants awarded under this RFP will accomplish various environmental outputs and outcomes described below. All proposed work plans must include specific statements describing the anticipated environmental results of the proposed project in terms of well-defined outputs, and, to the maximum extent practicable, well-defined outcomes that demonstrate how the project will contribute to the overall protection and improvement of water quality. Environmental outputs (or deliverables) refer to an environmental activity, effort, and/or associated work product related to an environmental goal or objective, that will be produced or provided over a period of time or by a specified date. Outputs may be quantitative or qualitative but must be measurable during an assistance agreement funding period. Examples of environmental outputs anticipated as a result of grants awarded under this RFP may include but are not limited to: a watershed-based plan, progress reports, or a particular number of on-the-ground management measures or practices installed or implemented during the project period. Including the environmental output of a watershed-based plan furthers progress towards achieving the specific indicator measure for Sub-objective 2.2.1 in EPA's Strategic Plan which measures the number of Tribes that have developed and begun to implement a watershed-based plan for Tribal waters (see Measure WQ-28, EPA's National Water Program Guidance for FY 2007 at *http://www.epa.gov/water/waterplan/#nwp07* ). Environmental outcomes mean the result, effect, or consequence that will occur from carrying out an environmental program or activity that is related to an environmental or programmatic goal or objective. Outcomes may be environmental, behavioral, health-related or programmatic in nature, must be quantitative, and may not necessarily be achieved within an assistance agreement funding period. Examples of environmental outcomes anticipated as a result of grants to be awarded under this RFP may include but are not limited to: an increased number of NPS-impaired waterbodies that have been partially or fully restored to meet water quality standards or other water quality-based goals established by the Tribes; and/or an increased number of waterbodies that have been protected from NPS pollution. II. Award Information In FY 2006, EPA awarded approximately $3.8 million to 28 Tribes for specific watershed projects through a competitive process. EPA anticipates that the amount of competitive funding available in FY 2007 will be similar or slightly lower than the amount available in FY 2006, since the availability of competitive funding is dependent, in part, upon the amount of funding that remains after a portion is first distributed as base grants to all eligible Tribes (which may increase due to additional Tribes entering the NPS program). EPA anticipates awarding approximately 25 competitive grants, subject to availability of funds and the quality of proposals submitted under this RFP. Eligible Tribes may apply for competitive funding by submitting a proposal up to a maximum budget of $150,000 of Federal section 319 funding (plus the additional required match of the total project cost). Proposals evaluated, but not selected for this funding, may be retained for consideration for possible future awards under this RFP if additional funding materializes. Any additional selections for award under this RFP based on additional funding will be in accordance with the rankings developed by the review Committee (discussed below in section B.V.2) and Agency policy, and must be made within six months of the original competitive funding decisions. EPA reserves the right to make partial awards by funding discrete activities, portions, or phases of the proposal. If EPA decides to partially fund the proposal, it will do so in a manner that does not prejudice any applicants or affect the basis upon which the proposal, or portion thereof, was evaluated and selected for award, and that maintains the integrity of the competition and the evaluation/selection process. EPA reserves the right to reject all proposals and make no award as a result of this announcement, or make fewer awards than anticipated. The EPA Award Official is the only official that can bind the Agency to the expenditure of funds for selected projects resulting from this announcement. III. Eligibility Information 1. Eligible Applicants To be eligible for NPS grants, a Tribe or intertribal consortium must:

(1)Be Federally recognized;

(2)have an approved NPS assessment report in accordance with CWA section 319(a);

(3)have an approved NPS management program in accordance with CWA section 319(b); and

(4)have “treatment-as-a-state”

(TAS)status in accordance with CWA section 518(e). To be eligible for NPS grants in FY 2007, Tribes must meet these eligibility requirements as of October 13, 2006. Some Tribes have formed intertribal consortia to promote cooperative work. An intertribal consortium is a partnership between two or more Tribes that is authorized by the governing bodies of those Tribes to apply for and receive assistance under this program. (See 40 CFR 35.502.) Individual Tribes who are a part of an intertribal consortia that is awarded a section 319 competitive grant may not also be awarded an individual section 319 competitive grant. The intertribal consortium is eligible only if the consortium demonstrates that all its members meet the eligibility requirements for the section 319 program and authorize the consortium to apply for and receive assistance in accordance with 40 CFR 35.504. An intertribal consortium must submit with its proposal to EPA adequate documentation of the existence of the partnership and the authorization of the consortium by its members to apply for and receive the grant. (See 40 CFR 35.504.) 2. Cost Sharing or Matching Section 319(h)(3) of the CWA requires that the match for NPS grants is 40 percent of the total project cost. In general, as required in 40 CFR 31.24, the match requirement can be satisfied by any of the following: allowable costs incurred by the grantee, subgrantee, or a cost-type contractor, including those allowable costs borne by non-Federal grants; by cash donations from non-Federal third parties; or by the value of third party in-kind contributions. EPA's regulations also provide that EPA may decrease the match requirement to as low as 10 percent if the Tribe can demonstrate in writing to the Regional Administrator that fiscal circumstances within the Tribe or within each Tribe that is a member of the intertribal consortium are constrained to such an extent that fulfilling the match requirement would impose undue hardship. (See 40 CFR 35.635.) Where the stated purpose is to decrease the match requirement based upon undue hardship, a Tribe may prepare a budget and proposal based upon the assumption that EPA will approve the reduced match under 40 CFR 35.635. If the Tribe does not demonstrate undue hardship, the Tribe must then meet the 40 percent match requirement. The Tribe must also provide a new budget with the final grant application based upon the program's 40 percent match requirement and the Federal award will be reduced to reflect the work plan and budget provided in the original proposal. The purpose of this requirement is to ensure that all work plan activities for a project which is evaluated and competitively awarded will be implemented as described in the original proposal. Performance Partnership Grants

(PPG)enable Tribes to combine funds from more than one environmental program grant into a single grant with a single budget. If the Tribe includes the section 319 competitive grant as a part of an approved PPG, the match requirement may be reduced to 5 percent of the allowable cost of the work plan budget for the first 2 years in which the Tribe receives a PPG; after 2 years, the match may be increased up to 10 percent of the work plan budget (as determined by the Regional Administrator). (See 40 CFR 35.536). Where the stated purpose is to include the section 319 grant in a PPG, a Tribe may prepare a budget and proposal based upon the assumption that EPA will approve the waiver amount for PPGs under 40 CFR 35.536. If a proposed PPG work plan differs significantly from the section 319 work plan approved for funding under this RFP, the Regional Administrator must consult with the National Program Manager. (See 40 CFR 35.535). The purpose of this consultation requirement is to address the issue of ensuring that a project which is competitively awarded is implemented once commingled with other grant programs in a PPG. If the Tribe does not or cannot include the section 319 grant as part of an approved PPG, or chooses to withdraw the section 319 grant from their PPG, the Tribe must then meet the 40 percent match requirement (or 10 percent if undue hardship is demonstrated). The Tribe must also provide a new budget with the final grant application based upon the program's match requirement and the Federal award will be reduced to reflect the budget provided in the original proposal. The purpose of this requirement is to ensure that all work plan activities for a project which is competitively awarded will be implemented in accordance with the same budget and as described in the original proposal. 3. Threshold Evaluation Criteria In addition to applicant eligibility and cost-share (discussed above in sections B.III.1 and B.III.2, respectively), all of the following threshold evaluation criteria must be met in order for a Tribe's proposal to be evaluated under section B.V and be considered for award. The appropriate EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator will notify applicants who do not meet the threshold eligibility criteria under this section within 15 calendar days of EPA's decision on applicant eligibility. a. An individual Tribe (or intertribal consortium) may not be awarded competitive funding for more than one competitive grant proposal in a given year. b. An individual Tribe (or intertribal consortium) may apply for competitive funding by submitting a proposal up to a maximum budget of $150,000 of Federal section 319 funding (plus the additional required match of the total project cost). If a Tribe submits a proposal that exceeds $150,000 of Federal section 319 funding, it will be rejected from further consideration. c. All proposals must propose to fund activities that are related to waters within a reservation or they will be rejected. Section 319 grants may be awarded to Tribes for use outside the reservation only if they fund activities that are related to waters within a reservation, such as those relating to sources upstream of a waterway entering the reservation. i. Activities That Are Related to Waters Within a Reservation. Section 518(e) of the CWA provides that EPA may treat an Indian Tribe as a State for purposes of section 319 of the CWA if, among other things, “the functions to be exercised by the Indian Tribe pertain to the management and protection of water resources which are * * * within the borders of an Indian reservation” (see 33 U.S.C. 1377(e)(2)). EPA already awards grants to Tribes under section 106 of the CWA for activities performed outside of a reservation (on condition that the Tribe obtains any necessary access agreements and coordinates with the State, as appropriate) that pertain to reservation waters, such as evaluating impacts of upstream waters on water resources within a reservation. Similarly, EPA has awarded section 106 grants to States to conduct monitoring outside of State borders. EPA has concluded that grants awarded to an Indian Tribe pursuant to section 319 may similarly be used to perform eligible section 319 activities outside of a reservation if:

(1)the activity pertains to the management and protection of waters within a reservation; and

(2)just as for on-reservation activities, the Tribe meets all other applicable requirements. ii. Activities That Are Unrelated to Waters of a Reservation. As discussed above, EPA is authorized to award section 319 grants to Tribes to perform eligible section 319 activities if the activities pertain to the management and protection of waters within a reservation and the Tribe meets all other applicable requirements. In contrast, EPA is not authorized to award section 319 grants for activities that do not pertain to waters of a reservation. For off-reservation areas, including “usual and accustomed” hunting, fishing, and gathering places, EPA must determine whether the activities pertain to waters of a reservation prior to awarding a grant. d. All work plans must address one of the following four factors: i. The work plan develops a watershed-based plan and implements a watershed-based plan; ii. The work plan develops a watershed-based plan and implements a watershed project (that does not implement a watershed-based plan); iii. The work plan implements a watershed-based plan; or iv. The work plan implements a watershed project that is a significant step towards solving NPS impairments or threats on a watershed-wide basis. e. All work plans must be consistent with the Tribe's approved NPS management program and conform to legal requirements that are applicable to all environmental program grants awarded to Tribes (see 40 CFR 35.507 and 35.515) as well as the legal requirements that specifically apply to NPS management grants (see 40 CFR 35.638). As provided in those regulations, and in accordance with EPA Order 5700.7, *Environmental Results under EPA Assistance Agreements* , all work plans must include: i. Description of each significant category of NPS activity to be addressed; ii. Work plan components; iii. Work plan commitments for each work plan component, including anticipated environmental outputs and outcomes (as required by EPA Order 5700.7) and the applicant's plan for tracking and measuring its progress towards achieving the expected outputs and outcomes including those identified in section B.I of this RFP; iv. Estimated funding amounts for each work plan component; v. Estimated work years for each work plan component; vi. Roles and responsibilities of the recipient and EPA in carrying out the work plan commitments; vii. Reporting schedule and a description of the performance evaluation process that will be used that accounts for:

(a)A discussion of accomplishments as measured against work plan commitments and anticipated environmental outputs and outcomes;

(b)a discussion of the cumulative effectiveness of the work performed under all work plan components;

(c)a discussion of existing and potential problem areas; and

(d)suggestions for improvement, including, where feasible, schedules for making improvements; and viii. Description of past performance on reporting environmental results, including a description of Federally funded assistance agreements performed within the last 3 years (no more than 5 agreements, and preferably EPA agreements) and how progress towards achieving the expected results (i.e., outputs and outcomes) under those agreements was documented and/or reported. If there was no progress, please indicate whether, and how, this was documented. If information on relevant or available environmental results past performance does not exist, please indicate this in the proposal and a neutral score will be given for this factor under Section B.V. f. Except as stated above in sections B.III.3.d and B.III.3.e, proposals must *substantially* comply with the proposal submission instructions and requirements set forth below in section B.IV of this announcement or they will be rejected. g. Proposals submitted in hard copy must be received by the appropriate EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator (identified in section B.VII) or received electronically through Grants.gov on or before the submission closing date and time published in section B.IV.3. EPA will not accept faxed or e-mail submissions and they will be rejected from consideration. Proposals received after the published closing date and time will be returned to the sender without further consideration. IV. Application and Submission Information EPA will respond to questions from individual applicants regarding threshold eligibility criteria, administrative issues related to the submission of the proposal, and requests for clarification about this announcement. Questions must be submitted before December 5, 2006 in writing to the appropriate EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator and written responses will be posted on EPA's Web site at *http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal.* In accordance with EPA's Competition Policy (EPA Order 5700.5A1), EPA staff will not meet with individual applicants to discuss draft proposals, provide informal comments on draft proposals, or provide advice to applicants on how to respond to ranking criteria. Applicants are responsible for the contents of their proposals. 1. Address to Request Application Package Grant application forms, including SF 424s, are available at *http://www.epa.gov/ogd/grants/how_to_apply.htm* and by mail upon request by calling the EPA Headquarters Grants Administration Division at

(202)564-5320. Tribes may also contact their EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator for further information about the application process (see section B.VII for Agency contact information). 2. Content and Form of Application Submission You may submit either a hard copy proposal or an electronic proposal through *http://www.grants.gov* (but not both) for this announcement. If you submit a hard copy proposal, you have the option to submit it by express delivery service, hand delivery, or courier service. EPA will not accept faxed submissions and they will be rejected from consideration. If you submit a hard copy proposal, you are encouraged (not required) to include with it a CD with the electronic version of the narrative work plan. If you submit your proposal electronically, it must be submitted through *http://www.grants.gov* . EPA will not accept submissions by e-mail and they will be rejected from consideration. All proposal packages, regardless of how submitted, must include the following documents: a. Complete narrative work plan addressing the requirements described above in sections B.III.3.d and B.III.3.e. b. Signed SF 424. c. Any supplemental information, if applicable, relating to: i. Eligibility (e.g., adequate documentation to demonstrate eligibility of intertribal consortium); ii. Documentation of a finding from the Region that the watershed-based plan to be implemented includes the nine components identified in Attachment A (if the work plan includes a component to implement a watershed-based plan); and iii. Any other supplemental information that may be relevant or applicable to the proposal. 3. Submission Dates and Times for Proposals for Competitive Funding If you submit a hard copy proposal, the appropriate EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator must receive the signed SF 424, work plan, and any other supplemental information that may be relevant or applicable to the proposal by 5 p.m. local time on December 19, 2006 (see section B.VII for Agency contact information). If you submit your proposal electronically through *http://www.grants.gov* , you must meet the requirements for electronic submission outlined in section B.IV.6 below and your proposal must be received through *http://www.grants.gov* no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on December 19, 2006. Any hard copy or electronic proposals received after the due date and time will not be considered for funding. 4. Funding Restrictions The use of competitive funding for the development of a watershed-based plan will be limited to 20 percent of the total competitive grant (e.g., up to $30,000 of a $150,000 grant) to assure that these competitive funds are primarily focused on implementation activities. If a Tribe submits a work plan to develop a watershed-based plan, it must be submitted as a component of the overall work plan for implementing a watershed project (i.e., a Tribe will not receive competitive funding only for the development of a watershed-based plan). 5. Confidential Business Information In accordance with 40 CFR 2.203, applicants may claim all or a portion of their proposal as confidential business information. EPA will evaluate confidentiality claims in accordance with 40 CFR part 2. Applicants must clearly mark proposals or portions of proposals they claim as confidential. If no claim of confidentiality is made, EPA is not required to make the inquiry to the applicant otherwise required by 40 CFR 2.204(c)(2) prior to disclosure. 6. Submission Instructions for Electronic Applications Using Grants.gov In lieu of hard copy submission, you may submit the proposal electronically through *http://www.grants.gov* as explained below. The electronic submission of your proposal must be made by an official representative of your institution who is registered with Grants.gov and is authorized to sign applications for Federal assistance. For more information, go to *http://www.grants.gov* and click on “Get Registered” on the left side of the page. *Note that the registration process may take a week or longer to complete.* If your organization is not currently registered with Grants.gov, please encourage your office to designate an Authorized Organizational Representative

(AOR)and ask that individual to begin the registration process as soon as possible. To begin the application process under this grant announcement, go to www.grants.gov and click on the “Apply for Grants” tab on the left side of the page. Then click on “Apply Step 1: Download a Grant Application Package and Instructions” to download the PureEdge viewer and obtain the application package for the announcement. To download the PureEdge viewer click on the “PureEdge Viewer” link. Once you have downloaded the viewer, you may retrieve the application package by entering the Funding Opportunity Number, EPA-OW-OWOW-07-1, or the CFDA number that applies to the announcement (CFDA 66.460). You may also be able to access the application package by clicking on the button “How To Apply” at the top right of the synopsis page for this announcement on *http://www.grants.gov* (to find the synopsis page, go to *http://www.grants.gov* and click on the “Find Grants Opportunities” button on the left side of the page and then go to Search Opportunities and use the Browse by Agency feature to find EPA opportunities. *Proposal Submission Deadline:* Your organization's AOR must submit your complete proposal electronically to EPA through Grants.gov ( *http://www.grants.gov* ) no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on December 19, 2006. Proposal Materials The application package *must* include the following materials: *a. Signed SF 424.* Complete the form. There are no attachments. Please be sure to include organization fax number and e-mail address in Block 5 of the signed SF 424. *b. Narrative Work Plan.* The work plan must include the components set forth in sections B.III.3.d and B.III.3.e of this RFP and will be evaluated based on the selection criteria set forth in section B.V.1 of this announcement. Applicants who elect to use *http://www.grants.gov* to apply will need to refer to sections B.III.3.d and B.III.3.e of this RFP when preparing the work plan. *c. Supplemental Information.* The work plan may include additional required information, if applicable, relating to: i. Eligibility (e.g., adequate documentation to demonstrate eligibility of intertribal consortium); ii. Documentation of a finding from the Region that the watershed-based plan to be implemented includes the nine components identified in Attachment A (if the work plan includes a component to implement a watershed-based plan); and iii. Any other supplemental information that may be relevant or applicable to the proposal. Application Preparation and Submission Instructions Documents a and b listed under Proposal Materials above should appear in the “Mandatory Documents” box on the Grants.gov Grant Application Package page. For document a, click on the SF 424 form and then click “Open Form” below the box. The fields that must be completed will be highlighted in yellow. Optional fields and completed fields will be displayed in white. If you enter an invalid response or incomplete information in a field, you will receive an error message. When you have finished filling out the form, click “Save.” When you return to the electronic Grant Application Package page, click on the form you just completed, and then click on the box that says, “Move Form to Submission List.” This action will move the document over to the box that says, “Mandatory Completed Documents for Submission.” For document b, you will need to attach electronic files. Prepare your work plan as described in sections B.III.3.d and B.III.3.e of the RFP and save it to your computer as an MS Word, PDF, or WordPerfect file. When you are ready to attach your work plan to the application package, click on “Project Narrative Attachment Form,” and open the form. Click “Add Mandatory Project Narrative File,” and then attach your work plan (previously saved to your computer) using the browse window that appears. You may then click “View Mandatory Project Narrative File” to view it. Enter a brief descriptive title of your project in the space beside “Mandatory Project Narrative File Filename;” the file name should be no more than 40 characters long. If there are other attachments that you would like to submit to accompany your proposal (e.g., the supplemental information described above), you may click “Add Optional Project Narrative File” and proceed as before. When you have finished attaching the necessary documents, click “Close Form.” When you return to the “Grant Application Package” page, select the “Project Narrative Attachment Form” and click “Move Form to Submission List.” The form should now appear in the box that says, “Mandatory Completed Documents for Submission.” Once you have finished filling out all of the forms/attachments and they appear in one of the “Completed Documents for Submission” boxes, click the “Save” button that appears at the top of the Web page. It is suggested that you save the document a second time, using a different name, since this will make it easier to submit an amended package later if necessary. Please use the following format when saving your file: “Applicant Name—FY07 Tribal 319 Competitive Grants—1st Submission” or “Applicant Name—FY07 Tribal 319 Competitive Grants—Back-up Submission.” If it becomes necessary to submit an amended package at a later date, then the name of the 2nd submission should be changed to “Applicant Name—FY07 Tribal 319 Competitive Grants—2nd Submission.” Once your application package has been completed and saved, send it to your AOR for submission to U.S. EPA through Grants.gov. Please advise your AOR to close all other software programs before attempting to submit the application package through Grants.gov. In the “Application Filing Name” box, your AOR should enter your organization's name (abbreviate where possible), the fiscal year (e.g., FY07), and the grant category (e.g., Tribal 319 Grants). The filing name should not exceed 40 characters. From the “Grant Application Package” page, your AOR may submit the application package by clicking the “Submit” button that appears at the top of the page. The AOR will then be asked to verify the agency and funding opportunity number for which the application package is being submitted. If problems are encountered during the submission process, the AOR should reboot his/her computer before trying to submit the application package again. [It may be necessary to turn off the computer (not just restart it) before attempting to submit the package again.] If the AOR continues to experience submission problems, he/she may contact Grants.gov for assistance by phone at 1-800-518-4726 or e-mail at *http://www.grants.gov/help/help.jsp* or contact Andrea Matzke, EPA Headquarters, at 202-566-1155 or by e-mail at *matzke.andrea@epa.gov.* Proposal packages submitted through Grants.gov will be time/date stamped electronically. If you have not received a confirmation of receipt from EPA (not from Grants.gov) within 15 calendar days of the proposal deadline, please contact Andrea Matzke, EPA Headquarters, at 202-566-1155 or by e-mail at *matzke.andrea@epa.gov.* Failure to do so may result in your proposal not being reviewed. V. Application Review Information 1. Selection Criteria for Competitive Grants Tribes submitting proposals for competitive grants must comply with all of the threshold evaluation criteria described in section B.III.3 of this RFP in order to be considered for further evaluation under this section. The EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator will determine whether the proposals comply with the threshold evaluation criteria, and will forward work plans that meet the threshold evaluation criteria to EPA Headquarters NPS Control Branch for distribution to EPA's Watershed Project Review Committee. Work plans that do not comply with the threshold evaluation criteria will be rejected and not evaluated under this section. EPA's Watershed Project Review Committee will evaluate work plans by assigning a value of 0 to 5 (with 5 being highest) for each factor described below based upon how well the following list of specific elements are addressed and represented in the work plan. Each factor has been assigned a specific weight which will be multiplied (by a value of 0 to 5) to calculate a total point score for the particular factor. The scores for each factor are then combined to result in a total score for the overall work plan—the total maximum score available is 825. EPA's Watershed Project Review Committee will evaluate work plans for competitive grants based upon the following evaluation factors (and corresponding weights): *a. The extent, and quality, to which the subcategories of NPS pollution are identified and described. (Weight = 15; 75 points maximum.).* The work plan will be evaluated based upon the extent, and quality, to which it identifies each significant subcategory of NPS pollution. Since identifying the categories of NPS pollution (e.g., agriculture) is a threshold evaluation criteria, the work plan will be evaluated based upon how well it identifies sources at the *subcategory* level with estimates of the extent to which these subcategories are present in the watershed (e.g., X number of dairy cattle feedlots needing upgrading, including a rough estimate of the number of cattle per facility; Y acres of row crops needing improved nutrient management or sediment control; or Z linear miles of eroded streambank needing remediation). *b. The extent, and quality, to which the water quality problems or threats to be addressed are identified and described. (Weight = 15; 75 points maximum.)* The work plan will be evaluated based upon the extent, and quality, to which it identifies each water quality problem or threat to be addressed caused by the subcategories of NPS pollution identified in evaluation factor

(a)above. EPA encourages Tribes to incorporate specific descriptions of water quality problems or threats, for example, in relation to impairments to water quality standards or other parameters that indicate stream health (e.g., decreases in fish or macroinvertebrate counts). *c. The extent, and quality, to which the goals and objectives of the project specifically identify the project location and activities to be implemented. (Weight = 20; 100 points maximum.)* The work plan will be evaluated based upon how well it specifically identifies where the NPS project will take place and the waterbody affected by the NPS pollutants; and the level of detail provided in relation to the specific activities that will be implemented (e.g., identifies specific management measures and practices to be implemented). *d. The extent to which significant water quality benefits will be achieved as a result of the project. (Weight = 20; 100 points maximum.)* The work plan will be evaluated based upon the extent to which it describes how significant water quality benefits will be achieved as a result of the project, either through restoring NPS-impaired waters or addressing threats to unimpaired waters. EPA encourages Tribes to incorporate specific water quality-based goals that are linked to: load reductions; water quality standards for one or more pollutants/uses; NPS total maximum daily load allocations; measurable, in-stream reductions in a pollutant; or improvements in a parameter that indicates stream health (e.g., increases in fish or macroinvertebrate counts). If information is not available to make specific estimates, water quality-based goals may include narrative descriptions and best professional judgment based on existing information. *e. The specificity of the budget in relation to each work plan component. (Weight = 15; 75 points maximum.)* The work plan will be evaluated based upon the level of specificity of the budget in relation to each work plan component, and the extent to which it outlines the total operational and construction costs of the project (including match). Budget categories may include, but are not limited to, the following items: personnel; travel; equipment; supplies; contractual; and construction costs. *f. The level of detail in relation to the schedule for achieving the activities identified in the work plan. (Weight = 15; 75 points maximum.)* The work plan will be evaluated based upon the level of detail and clarity that it includes in relation to the schedule of activities for each work plan component. Such information includes, but is not limited to, the following: Identifies a specific “start” and “end” date for each work plan component; an estimate of the specific work years for each work plan component; and interim milestone dates for achieving each work plan component. A work plan that includes a schedule that can be implemented with minimal delay upon the award of the grant (i.e., indicates a “readiness to proceed”) will score higher than work plans which may require significant further action before the project can be implemented. *g. The extent to which the roles and responsibilities of the recipient and project partners in carrying out the work plan activities are specifically identified. (Weight = 15; 75 points maximum.)* The work plan will be evaluated based upon how specifically and clearly it defines the roles and responsibilities of each responsible party in relation to each work plan component, which may include, but is not limited to, the following: defining the specific level of effort for the responsible parties for each work plan component; identifying parties who will take the lead in carrying out the work plan commitments; and identifying other programs, parties, and agencies that will provide additional technical and/or financial assistance. *h. The extent to which the performance evaluation process meets each of the following sub-criteria: (Weight = 15; 75 points maximum.)*

(i)Extent and quality to which the work plan demonstrates potential environmental results (i.e., whether the project will result in the protection of water resources), anticipated outputs and outcomes, and how the outcomes are linked to EPA's Strategic Plan. (Value = 2 points maximum.)

(ii)Extent and quality to which the work plan demonstrates a sound plan for measuring progress toward achieving the expected outputs and outcomes (examples of outputs and outcomes can be found in section B.I of this announcement). (Value = 1 point maximum.)

(iii)Extent and quality to which the applicant adequately documented and/or reported on progress towards achieving the expected results (e.g., outputs and outcomes) under Federal agency assistance agreements performed within the last 3 years, and if such progress was not being made, whether the applicant adequately documented and/or reported why not. (Value = 2 points maximum.) Note: In evaluating applicants under

(iii)above, EPA will consider the information provided by the applicant and may also consider relevant programmatic information from other sources including Agency files and prior/current grantors (e.g., to verify and/or supplement the information supplied by the applicant). Applicants with no relevant or available past performance reporting history will not be penalized for absence of this information (and will receive 1 point for this factor). *i. The extent, and quality, to which the work plan addresses one of the following four factors. (Weight = 35; 175 points maximum.)*

(i)The work plan develops a watershed-based plan and implements a watershed-based plan. If a work plan includes a plan to develop a watershed-based plan, it will be evaluated based on the extent to which it: Includes a commitment to incorporate the nine components of a watershed-based plan described in Attachment A; clearly identifies the geographical coverage of the watershed; includes a specific schedule for developing the watershed-based plan; and clearly identifies the estimated funds that will be used to develop the watershed-based plan (not to exceed 20 percent of the total competitive grant). If a Tribe submits a work plan to implement a watershed-based plan, it will be evaluated based on the extent to which it: is accompanied by a statement that the Region finds that the watershed-based plan to be implemented includes the nine components of a watershed-based plan identified in Attachment A; identifies and briefly summarizes the watershed-based plan that will be implemented; and describes how the work plan will make progress towards achieving the overall goals of the watershed-based plan and the specific water quality-based goals identified in the watershed-based plan.

(ii)The proposed work plan develops a watershed-based plan and implements a watershed project (that does not implement a watershed-based plan). If a work plan includes a plan to develop a watershed-based plan, it will be evaluated based on the extent to which it: Includes a commitment to incorporate the nine components of a watershed-based plan described in Attachment A; clearly identifies the geographical coverage of the watershed; includes a specific schedule for developing the watershed-based plan; and clearly identifies the estimated funds that will be used to develop the watershed-based plan (not to exceed 20 percent of the total competitive grant). If a work plan is designed to implement a watershed project that is not implementing a watershed-based plan, it will be evaluated based on the extent to which it can be linked to or expanded upon to address NPS impairments or threats on a watershed-wide basis. For example, a work plan that sets a precedent for future implementation on a watershed-basis will be ranked higher than a work plan that implements an individual demonstration project designed to address an individual threat or problem.

(iii)The work plan implements a watershed-based plan. If a Tribe submits a work plan to implement a watershed-based plan, it will be evaluated based on the extent to which it: is accompanied by a statement that the Region finds that the watershed-based plan to be implemented includes the nine components of a watershed-based plan identified in Attachment A; identifies and briefly summarizes the watershed-based plan that will be implemented; and describes how the work plan will make progress towards achieving the overall goals of the watershed-based plan and the specific water quality-based goals identified in the watershed-based plan.

(iv)The work plan implements a watershed project that is a significant step towards solving NPS impairments or threats on a watershed-wide basis. If a work plan is designed to implement a watershed project that is not implementing a watershed-based plan, it will be evaluated based on the extent to which it can be linked to or expanded upon to address NPS impairments or threats on a watershed-wide basis. For example, a work plan that sets a precedent for future implementation on a watershed-basis will be ranked higher than a work plan that implements an individual demonstration project designed to address an individual threat or problem. 2. Review and Selection Process for Competitive Funding The EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinators will determine whether the proposals comply with the threshold evaluation criteria described in section B.III.3. The EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator will notify applicants who do not meet the threshold eligibility criteria within 15 calendar days of EPA's decision on applicant eligibility. The EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinators will forward those work plans that meet the threshold evaluation criteria to EPA Headquarters NPS Control Branch by approximately January 12, 2007. EPA will establish a Watershed Project Review Committee (Committee) comprised of 9 EPA staff, including 3 EPA Regional State NPS Coordinators, 3 EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinators, 2 staff members of the EPA Headquarters NPS Control Branch, and 1 staff member of EPA's American Indian Environmental Office. EPA Headquarters NPS Control Branch will forward copies of the work plans for competitive funding to the Committee and hold a conference call with the Committee on or around January 19, 2007, to ensure that all Committee members fully understand how to objectively and consistently apply the criteria discussed above. Scores for each work plan will be developed by each Committee member based on evaluating the work plans against the factors identified above in accordance with the weighting system described in section B.V.1. On or around February 16, 2007, each Committee member will forward the scores for each work plan to EPA Headquarters NPS Control Branch. Based on these scores, EPA Headquarters NPS Control Branch will calculate the average score for each work plan and then rank the work plans based on the resulting average scores. On or around February 23, 2007, EPA Headquarters NPS Control Branch will send the resulting average scores and rankings to the Committee and hold a conference call to provide a final opportunity for members of the Committee to discuss the rankings based on the average scores. The Committee will then make funding recommendations to EPA Headquarters NPS Control Branch; in making the funding recommendations, in addition to considering the rankings, the Committee may also give priority consideration to high quality work plans that are designed to develop and/or implement a watershed-based plan. EPA Headquarters NPS Control Branch then will make the final funding decisions based on the Committee's recommendations. The Committee will use the following “Competitive Work Plan Evaluation Review Sheet” to score and rank work plans in accordance with the evaluation criteria discussed above. Competitive Work Plan Evaluation Review Sheet Tribe Name____________ Reviewer____________ (Weight × Value = Score) (Value: 0 is Lowest; 5 is Highest) (Maximum “Max” Score is 825) 1. Assign a value of 0 to 5 for each evaluation factor ( *refer to section B.V.1 for further description of each factor* ). Use only whole numbers. 2. Multiply the value by the designated weight to develop a score for each evaluation factor (the maximum score for each factor is shown in the score box). 3. Add the score for each evaluation factor to calculate the total score at the end. Weight Evaluation factors Value

(max)Score

(max)15

(1)The extent, and quality, to which the subcategories of NPS pollution are identified and described 5 75 COMMENTS (strengths, weaknesses): 15

(2)The extent, and quality, to which the water quality problems or threats to be addressed are identified and described 5 75 COMMENTS (strengths, weaknesses): 20

(3)The extent, and quality, to which the goals and objectives of the project specifically identify the project location and activities to be implemented 5 100 COMMENTS (strengths, weaknesses): 20

(4)The extent to which significant water quality benefits will be achieved as a result of the project 5 100 COMMENTS (strengths, weaknesses): 15

(5)The specificity of the budget in relation to each work plan component 5 75 COMMENTS (strengths, weaknesses): 15

(6)The level of detail in relation to the schedule for achieving the activities identified in the work plan 5 75 COMMENTS (strengths, weaknesses): 15

(7)The extent to which the roles and responsibilities of the recipient and project partners in carrying out the work plan activities are specifically identified 5 75 COMMENTS (strengths, weaknesses): 15

(8)The extent to which the performance evaluation process meets each sub-criteria: 5 75 Demonstrates environmental results, anticipated outputs and outcomes, and how outcomes are linked to EPA's Strategic Plan. (Value = 2 points maximum.)

(b)Demonstrates a sound plan for measuring progress towards achieving expected outcomes and outputs. (Value = 1 point maximum.)

(c)Documentation of progress towards achieving expected results under Federal agency assistance agreements within last 3 years. (Value = 2 points maximum.) Note: Applicants with no relevant or available past performance reporting history will not be penalized for absence of this information (and will receive 1 point for this factor). COMMENTS (strengths, weaknesses): 35

(9)The extent, and quality, to which the work plan addresses one of the following four factors: 5 175

(a)The work plan develops a watershed-based plan and implements a watershed-based plan.

(b)The work plan develops a watershed-based plan and implements a watershed project (that does not implement a watershed-based plan).

(c)The work plan implements a watershed-based plan.

(d)The work plan implements a watershed project that is a significant step towards solving NPS impairments or threats on a watershed-wide basis. COMMENTS (strengths, weaknesses): Total Maximum Score 825 3. Anticipated Selection Date On or around March 5, 2007, EPA Headquarters NPS Control Branch will select the proposals for award and announce to the Regions which Tribes' proposals have been selected for competitive funding. VI. Award Administration Information 1. Award Notices Following final selections, all applicants will be notified regarding their proposal's status. a. EPA anticipates notification to *successful* applicant(s) will be made by the appropriate EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator via e-mail or U.S. Postal Mail on or around March 5, 2007. This notification, which advises that the applicant's proposal has been selected and is being recommended for award, is not an authorization to begin performance. The award notice signed by the EPA Award Official is the authorizing document and will be provided through U.S. Postal Mail. At a minimum, this process can take 90 days from the date of selection notification. EPA reserves the right to negotiate and/or adjust the final grant amount and work plan prior to award, as appropriate and consistent with Agency policy including the Assistance Agreement Competition Policy, EPA Order 5700.5A1. In addition, successful applicants will be required to certify that they have not been Debarred or Suspended from participation in Federal assistance awards in accordance with 40 CFR part 32. b. EPA anticipates notification to *unsuccessful* applicant(s) will be made by the appropriate EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator via e-mail or U.S. Postal Mail within 15 calendar days after final selection of successful applicants. The notification will be sent to the authorization official of the proposal. c. The appropriate EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator will notify applicants who do not meet the threshold eligibility criteria under section B.III.3 via e-mail or U.S. Postal Mail within 15 calendar days of EPA's decision on applicant eligibility. 2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements *a. Grant Requirements.* A listing and description of general EPA regulations applicable to the award of assistance agreements may be viewed at *http://www.epa.gov/ogd/AppKit/appplicable_epa_regulations_and_description.htm* . All applicable legal requirements including, but not limited to, EPA's regulations on environmental program grants for Tribes (see 40 CFR 35.500 to 35.735) and regulations specific to NPS grants for Tribes (see 40 CFR 35.630 to 35.638), apply to all section 319 grants. *b. Dun and Bradstreet Number.* All applicants are required to provide a Dun and Bradstreet (D&B) Data Universal Numbering System

(DUNS)number when applying for a Federal grant or cooperative agreement. Applicants can receive a DUNS number, at no cost, by calling the dedicated tollfree DUNS Number request line at 1-866-705-5711, or visiting the D&B Web site at: *http://www.dnb.com.* *c. Administrative Costs.* Pursuant to CWA section 319(h)(12), administrative costs in the form of salaries, overhead, or indirect costs for services provided and charged against activities and programs carried out with the grant shall not exceed 10 percent of the grant award. The costs of implementing enforcement and regulatory activities, education, training, technical assistance, demonstration projects, and technology transfer are not subject to this limitation. *d. Satisfactory Progress.* For a Tribe that received section 319 funds in the preceding fiscal year, section 319(h)(8) of the CWA requires that the Region determine whether the Tribe made “satisfactory progress” during the previous fiscal year in meeting the schedule of activities specified in its approved NPS management program in order to receive section 319 funding in the current fiscal year. The Region will base this determination on an examination of Tribal activities, reports, reviews, and other documents and discussions with the Tribe in the previous year. Regions must include in each section 319 grant award (or in a separate document, such as the grant-issuance cover letter, that is signed by the same EPA official who signs the grant), a written determination that the Tribe has made satisfactory progress during the previous fiscal year in meeting the schedule of milestones specified in its NPS management program. The Regions must include brief explanations that support their determinations. *e. Operation and Maintenance.* Each section 319 grant must contain a condition requiring that the Tribe assure that any management practices implemented for the project be properly operated and maintained for the intended purposes during its life span. Operation includes the administration, management, and performance of non-maintenance actions needed to keep the completed practice safe and functioning as intended. Maintenance includes work to prevent deterioration of the practice, repairing damage, or replacement of the practice to its original condition if one or more components fail. Management practices and projects that are damaged or destroyed due to a natural disaster (i.e., earthquakes, storm events, floods, etc.) or events beyond the control of the grantee are exempt from this condition. The condition must require the Tribe to assure that any subrecipient of section 319 funds similarly include the same condition in the subaward. Additionally, such condition must reserve the right of EPA and the Tribe, respectively, to conduct periodic inspections during the life span of the project to ensure that operation and maintenance are occurring, and shall state that, if it is determined that participants are not operating and maintaining practices in an appropriate manner, EPA or the Tribe, respectively, will request a refund for the project supported by the grant. The life span of a project will be determined on a case-by-case basis, tailored to the types of practices expected to be funded in a particular project, and should be specified in the grant condition. For assistance in determining the appropriate life span of the project, Tribes may wish to examine other programs implementing similar practices, such as the U.S. Department of Agriculture's conservation programs. For example, for conservation practices, it may be appropriate to construct the life span consistent with the life span for similar conservation practices as determined by the Commodity Credit Corporation (pursuant to the implementation of the Environmental Quality Incentives Program). Following the approach used in many Federal funding programs, practices will generally be operated and maintained for a period of at least 5 to 10 years. f. In making grant awards to Tribes who are part of an intertribal consortia, Regions must include a brief finding in the final award package that the Tribe has demonstrated the existence of the partnership and the authorization of the consortium by its members to apply for and receive the grant. g. In making grant awards to Tribes that provide for a reduced match requirement, Regions must include a brief finding in the final award package that the Tribe has demonstrated that it does not have adequate funds to meet the required match. 3. Reporting As provided in 40 CFR 31.40, 31.41, 35.507, 35.515, and 35.638, all section 319 grants must include a set of reporting requirements and a process for evaluating performance. Some of these requirements have been explicitly incorporated into the required work plan components that all Tribes must include in order to receive section 319 grant funding. The work plan components required for section 319 funding, specifically those relating to work plan commitments and timeframes for their accomplishment, facilitate the management and oversight of Tribal grants by providing specific activities and outputs by which progress can be monitored. The performance evaluation process and reporting schedule (both work plan components) also establish a formal process by which accomplishments can be measured. Additionally, the satisfactory progress determination (for Tribes that received section 319 funding in the preceding fiscal year) helps ensure that Tribes are making progress in achieving the goals in their NPS management programs. Regions will ensure that the required evaluations are performed according to the negotiated schedule (at least annually) and that copies of the performance evaluation reports are placed in the official files and provided to the recipient. 4. Dispute Resolution Assistance agreement competition-related disputes will be resolved in accordance with the dispute resolution procedures published in 70 FR 3629, 3630 (January 26, 2005) which can be found at *http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20051800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2005/05-1371.htm.* Copies of these procedures may also be requested by contacting the EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator listed in section B.VII below. VII. Agency Contacts: EPA Headquarters and Regional Tribal NPS Coordinators *EPA Headquarters* —Andrea Matzke, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Assessment and Watershed Protection Division, telephone: 202-566-1155; e-mail: *matzke.andrea@epa.gov* . Region I—Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont Warren Howard; mailing address: U.S. EPA Region I, 1 Congress Street, Suite 1100, Boston, MA 02203; telephone: 617-918-1587; e-mail: *howard.warren@epa.gov.* Region II—New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands Donna Somboonlakana; mailing address: U.S. EPA Region II, 290 Broadway—24th Floor (MC DEPP:WPB), New York, NY 10007; telephone: 212-637-3700; e-mail: *somboonlakana.donna@epa.gov* . Region III—Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia, Washington, DC Fred Suffian; mailing address: U.S. EPA Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103; telephone: 215-814-5753; e-mail: *suffian.fred@epa.gov.* Region IV—Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee Yolanda Brown; mailing address: U.S. EPA Region IV, Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, GA 30303; telephone: 404-562-9451; e-mail: *brown.yolanda@epa.gov* . Region V—Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin Daniel Cozza; mailing address: U.S. EPA Region V, 77 West Jackson Blvd. (MC: WS-15J), Chicago, IL 60604; telephone: 312-886-7252; e-mail: *cozza.daniel@epa.gov.* Region VI—Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas George Craft; mailing address: U.S. EPA Region VI, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX 75202; telephone: 214-665-6684; e-mail: *craft.george@epa.gov.* Region VII—Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska Peter Davis; mailing address: U.S. EPA Region VII, 901 N 5th Street, Kansas City, KS 66101; telephone: 913-551-7372; e-mail: *davis.peter@epa.gov.* Region VIII—Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming Mitra Jha; mailing address: U.S. EPA Region VIII, 999 18th Street, Suite 300 (MC: EPR-EP), Denver, CO 80202; telephone: 303-312-6895; e-mail: *jha.mitra@epa.gov.* Region IX—Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, American Samoa, Mariana Islands, Guam Tiffany Eastman; mailing address: U.S. EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street (MC: WTR-10), San Francisco, CA 94105; telephone: 1-800-735-2922, relay #415-972-3404; e-mail: *eastman.tiffany@epa.gov.* Region X—Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Washington Susan Ennes; mailing address: U.S. EPA Region X, 1200 6th Avenue (MC: OWW-137), Seattle, WA 98101; telephone: 206-553-6249; e-mail: *ennes.susan@epa.gov.* VIII. Other Information 1. Anticipated Deadlines and Milestones for FY 2008 Competitive Grants In future years, EPA intends to post the RFP for competitive grants under section 319 at *http://www.grants.gov* and on EPA's Web site at *http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal* . The following estimated dates are provided in order to assist Tribes in planning for EPA's FY 2008 funding cycle for competitive grants: Deadline EPA uses to determine eligibility to receive competitive 319 grants Second Friday in October 2007. Date for receipt of proposals in hard copy by Region or electronically through Grants.gov December 7, 2007. Headquarters notifies Regions/Tribes of selections for competitive 319 grants March 3, 2008. Tribes submit final grant application to Region for competitive 319 grants April 2, 2008. Other than the date EPA will use to determine eligibility to receive 319 grants, the dates above are the anticipated dates for those actions. 2. Right to Reject All Proposals. EPA reserves the right to reject all proposals and make no award as a result of this announcement, or make fewer awards than anticipated. The EPA Award Official is the only official that can bind the Agency to the expenditure of funds for selected projects resulting from this announcement. Dated: October 19, 2006. Benjamin H. Grumbles Assistant Administrator for Water. Attachment A—Components of a Watershed-Based Plan 1. An identification of the causes and sources or groups of similar sources that will need to be controlled to achieve the goal identified in element 3 below. Sources that need to be controlled should be identified at the significant subcategory level with estimates of the extent to which they are present in the watershed (e.g., X number of dairy cattle feedlots needing upgrading, including a rough estimate of the number of cattle per facility; Y acres of row crops needing improved nutrient management or sediment control; or Z linear miles of eroded streambank needing remediation). 2. A description of the NPS management measures that will need to be implemented to achieve a water quality-based goal described in element 3 below, as well as to achieve other watershed goals identified in the watershed-based plan, and an identification (using a map or a description) of the critical areas for which those measures will be needed to implement the plan. 3. An estimate of the water quality-based goals expected to be achieved by implementing the measures described in element 2 above. To the extent possible, estimates should identify specific water quality-based goals, which may incorporate, for example: load reductions; water quality standards for one or more pollutants/uses; NPS total maximum daily load allocations; measurable, in-stream reductions in a pollutant; or improvements in a parameter that indicates stream health (e.g., increases in fish or macroinvertebrate counts). If information is not available to make specific estimates, water quality-based goals may include narrative descriptions and best professional judgment based on existing information. 4. An estimate of the amounts of technical and financial assistance needed, associated costs, and/or the sources and authorities that will be relied upon to implement the plan. As sources of funding, Tribes should consider other relevant Federal, State, local and private funds that may be available to assist in implementing the plan. 5. An information and education component that will be used to enhance public understanding and encourage early and continued participation in selecting, designing, and implementing the NPS management measures that will be implemented. 6. A schedule for implementing the NPS management measures identified in the plan that is reasonably expeditious. 7. A description of interim, measurable milestones for determining whether NPS management measures or other control actions are being implemented. 8. A set of criteria that can be used to determine whether the water quality-based goals are being achieved over time and substantial progress is being made towards attaining water quality-based goals and, if not, the criteria for determining whether the watershed-based plan needs to be revised. 9. A monitoring component to evaluate the effectiveness of the implementation efforts over time, measured against the criteria established under element 8 above. [FR Doc. E6-17895 Filed 10-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0162; FRL-8100-4] Carbofuran; Interim Reregistration Eligibility Decision; Extension of Comment Period AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice; extension of comment period. SUMMARY: EPA issued a notice in the **Federal Register** of August 30, 2006, concerning the availability of the Interim Reregistration Eligibility Decision for the N-methyl carbamate pesticide carbofuran. This document is extending the comment period for 30 days, from October 30, 2006, to November 30, 2006. DATES: Comments, identified by docket identification

(ID)number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0162 must be received on or before November 30, 2006. ADDRESSES: Follow the detailed instructions as provided under ADDRESSES in the **Federal Register** document of August 30, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephanie Plummer, Special Review and Reregistration Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:

(703)305-0076; e-mail address: *plummer.stephanie@epa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me? The Agency included in the notice of August 30, 2006 a list of those who may be potentially affected by this action. If you have 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

(PCNB)Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED); Extension of Comment Period AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice; extension of comment period. SUMMARY: EPA issued a notice in the **Federal Register** of August 2, 2006, concerning the availability of the PCNB reregistration eligibility decision

(RED)and the opening of the 60-day public comment period on the RED. The original comment period was to close on October 2, 2006. The Agency subsequently issued a notice in the **Federal Register** of September 29, 2006, extending the comment period to November 1, 2006. The Agency is now extending the comment period for an additional interval, to **December 4, 2006** . DATES: Comments, identified by docket identification

(ID)number EPA-HQ- OPP-2004-0202 must be received on or before **December 4, 2006** . ADDRESSES: Follow the detailed instructions for submitting comments as provided in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION of the August 2, 2006 FR Notice. In addition, comments may be submitted through the Federal Document Management System Portal: *http://www.regulations.gov* . Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jill Bloom, Special Review and Reregistration Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:

(703)308-8019; e-mail address: *bloom.jill@epa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me? The Agency included in the notice a list of those who may be potentially affected by this action. If you have 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. C. How and to Whom Do I Submit Comments? To submit comments, or access the official public docket, please follow the detailed instructions as provided in Unit I.B. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION of the August 2, 2006 **Federal Register** document. If you have questions, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . II. What Action is EPA Taking? This document extends the public comment period established in the **Federal Register** of August 2, 2006 (70 FR 43746) (FRL-8066-6) and later extended in the **Federal Register** of September 29, 2006 (71 FR 57506) (FRL-8096-6). In the first notice, the Agency provided a 60-day comment period for public input on the reregistration decision for PCNB, particularly on the benefits associated with certain minor uses of PCNB. This original comment period was to close on October 2, 2006. EPA then extended the comment period until November 1, 2006, based on requests from a PCNB registrant and the National Potato Council. Both entities had requested that the comment period be extended by 60 days, but the Agency granted an extension of approximately 30 days. The registrant and the National Potato Council subsequently reiterated their requests for the longer extension, and the Agency determined that the longer time period would facilitate comments from potato growers, many of whom will be busy with the potato harvest through November, and provide additional time for technical review by the registrant. The Agency is hereby extending the comment period to **December 4, 2006** . This new extension brings the total duration of the comment period to four months. III. 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. Further provisions are made to allow a public comment period. However, the Administrator may extend the comment period if additional time for comment is requested. In this case, two different public entities have requested additional time to develop comments. List of Subjects Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests. Dated: October 19, 2006. Debra Edwards, Director, Special Review and Reregistration Division. [FR Doc. E6-17861 Filed 10-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0572; FRL-8099-6] Notice of Filing of Pesticide Petition for Amendment to Regulations for Residues of Di-n-Alkyl (C8-10) Dimethyl Ammonium Chloride

(DDAC)Compounds on Food Applied to Food Contact Surfaces AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This notice announces the initial filing of pesticide petitions proposing the amendment of regulations for residues of antimicrobial pesticide formulation containing Di-n-Alkyl (C 8 - 10 ) dimethyl ammonium chloride compound and total quaternary ammonium compounds applied to food contact surfaces in public eating places, dairy processing equipment, and food processing equipment and utensils. DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 24, 2006. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification

(ID)number EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0572 and pesticide petition number

(PP)6F7045, 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-2006-0572. 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 regulations.gov website 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, i.e., 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 Facility telephone number is

(703)305-5805. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Velma Noble, Antimicrobials Division (7510P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:

(703)308-6233; e-mail address: *noble.velma@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

(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. What Action is the Agency Taking? EPA is printing a summary of a pesticide petition received under section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a, proposing the establishment or amendment of regulations in 40 CFR part 180 for residues of pesticide chemicals in or on various food commodities. EPA has determined that this pesticide petition contains data or information regarding the elements set forth in FFDCA section 408(d)(2); however, EPA has not fully evaluated the sufficiency of the submitted data at this time or whether the data support granting of the pesticide petition. Additional data may be needed before EPA rules on this pesticide petition. Pursuant to 40 CFR 180.7(f), a summary of the petition included in this notice, prepared by the petitioner is available on EPA's Electronic Docket at *http://www.regulations.gov* . To locate this information on the home page of EPA's Electronic Docket, select “Quick Search” and type the OPP docket ID number. Once the search has located the docket, clicking on the “Docket ID” will bring up a list of all documents in the docket for the pesticide including the petition summary. Amendment to Existing Tolerance *PP 6F7045* . Lonza Inc., 90 Boroline Road, Allendale, NJ 07401, proposes to amend the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.190(a) for residues of the antimicrobial pesticide formulation Di-n-Alkyl (C 8 - 10 ) dimethyl ammonium chloride compound and total quaternary ammonium compounds may be applied to food contact surfaces in public eating places, dairy processing equipment, and food processing equipment and utensils at 400 parts per million (ppm). Analytical method is not necessary since these quaternary ammonium compounds are exempt from the requirement of a tolerance. List of Subjects Environmental protection, Food Contact Sanitizers, DDAC, Feed additives, Food additives, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: October 16, 2006. Frank Sanders, Director, Antimicrobials Division, Office of Pesticide Programs. [FR Doc. E6-17880 Filed 10-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-S FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Notice of Public Information Collection(s) Being Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval October 17, 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, 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

(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 and Allison E. Zaleski, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Room 10236 NEOB, Washington, DC 20503,

(202)395-6466 or via the Internet at *Allison_E._Zaleski@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 the information collection, you may do so by visiting the FCC PRA Web page at: *http://www.fcc.gov/omd/pra* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title:* Broadcast EEO Program Report; Broadcast Equal Employment Opportunity Model Program Report. *Form Number:* FCC Forms 396 and 396-A. *Type of Review:* Revision of a currently approved collection. *Respondents:* Business or other for-profit entities; Not-for-profit institutions. *Number of Respondents:* 7,000. *Estimated Time per Response:* 1 to 1.5 hours. *Frequency of Response:* Recordkeeping requirement; On occasion reporting requirement; Renewal reporting requirement. *Total Annual Burden:* 8,000 hours. *Total Annual Cost:* $350,000. *Privacy Impact Assessment:* No impact(s). *Needs and Uses:* The Broadcast Equal Employment Opportunity Program Report (FCC Form 396) is a device that is used to evaluate a broadcaster's EEO program to ensure that satisfactory efforts are being made to comply with FCC's EEO requirements. FCC Form 396 is required to be filed at the time of renewal of license by all AM, FM, TV, Low Power TV and International stations. FCC Form 396-A is filed in conjunction with applicants seeking authority to construct a new broadcast station, to obtain assignment of construction permit or license and/or seeking authority to acquire control of an entity holding construction permit or license. This program is designed to assist the applicant in establishing an effective EEO program for its station. Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-17857 Filed 10-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Notice of Public Information Collection(s) Being Submitted for Review to the Office of Management and Budget October 19, 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 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

(PRA)comments should be submitted on or before November 24, 2006. If you anticipate that you will be submitting PRA 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: Direct all Paperwork Reduction Act

(PRA)comments to Judith B. Herman, Federal Communications Commission, Room 1-B441, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554 or via the Internet to *PRA@fcc.gov* . If you would like to obtain or view a copy of this information collection, you may do so by visiting the FCC PRA Web page at: *http://www.fcc.gov/omd/pra* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information or copies of the information collection(s), send an e-mail to *PRA@fcc.gov* or contact Judith B. Herman at 202-418-0214. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *OMB Control No.:* 3060-XXXX. *Title:* Surrenders of Authorizations for International Carrier, Space Station and Earth Station Licensees. *Form No.:* N/A. *Type of Review:* New collection. *Respondents:* Business or other for-profit. *Number of Respondents:* 306. *Estimated Time per Response:* 1 hour. *Frequency of Response:* On occasion reporting requirement. *Total Annual Burden:* 306 hours. *Total Annual Cost:* N/A. *Privacy Act Impact Assessment:* N/A. *Needs and Uses:* This collection will be submitted as a new collection to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)in order to obtain the full three year clearance. The Federal Communications Commission (“Commission”) is requesting that the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)approve the establishment of a new collection for surrenders of authorization for international carriers (214 authorizations), space stations and earth stations. A surrender of authorization is the licensee's voluntary cancellation of a license (or authorization) to provide international telecommunications services, such as discontinuing operation of a space station. This new collection is being initiated as a result of the Commission's release of Public Notice (DA 06-569) on March 15, 2006 titled, “International Bureau Announces New and Improved Filing Modules Within Its MyIBFS Electronic Filing System: Surrender of Authorization and Improved Space Station Milestone Filing.” The Public Notice announced the International Bureau's launching of an E-filing module for surrendering authorizations and an improved milestone filing module for satellite space stations within its MyIBFS consolidated licensing and electronic filing system. ( **Note:** The OMB approved the electronic filing of milestones under OMB Control No. 3060-1007). Additionally, the Commission is requesting the OMB's approval of mandatory electronic filing of surrenders of authorizations that do not fall under Part 25 of the Commission's rules. Currently, the surrender module is available to licensees in MyIBFS who are not required to comply with Part 25 on a voluntary basis. ( **Note:** The OMB approved electronic filing of all Part 25-related applications and associated documents under OMB Control No. 3060-0678). Without this collection of information, licensees would be required to submit surrenders of authorizations to the Commission by letter which is more time consuming than submitting such requests to the Commission electronically. In addition, Commission staff would spend an extensive amount of time processing surrenders of authorizations received by letter. This new collection of information saves time (and burden) for both licensees and Commission staff since they are received in MyIBFS electronically and include only the information that is essential to process the request(s) in a timely manner. Furthermore, the E-filing module expedites the Commission staff's announcement of surrenders of authorizations via Public Notice. *OMB Control No.:* 3060-0775. *Title:* Section 64.1903, Obligations of All Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers (LECs). *Form No.:* N/A. *Type of Review:* Extension of a currently approved collection. *Respondents:* Business or other for-profit. *Number of Respondents:* 10. *Estimated Time per Response:* 6,056 hours. *Frequency of Response:* Recordkeeping requirement. *Total Annual Burden:* 60,560 hours. *Total Annual Cost:* $1,215,000. *Privacy Act Impact Assessment:* N/A. *Needs and Uses:* This collection will be submitted as an extension of a currently approved collection to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)in order to obtain the full three year clearance. In CC Docket Nos. 96-149 and 96-61, the Commission imposed recordkeeping requirements on independent local exchange carriers (LECs). Independent LECs wishing to offer international, interexchange services must comply with the separate affiliate requirements of the Competitive Carrier Fifth Report and Order in order to do so. One of these requirements is that the independent LEC's international, interexchange affiliate must maintain books of account separate from such LEC's local exchange and other activities. This regulation does not require that the affiliate maintain books of account that comply with the Commission's Part 32 rules; rather, it refers to the fact that as a separate legal entity, the international, interexchange affiliate must maintain its own books of accounts in the ordinary course of its business. This recordkeeping requirement is used by Commission staff to ensure that independent LECs providing international, interexchange services through a separate affiliate are in compliance with the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and with Commission policies and regulations. Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-17869 Filed 10-24-06; 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 October 17, 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

(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 December 26, 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 all 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 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:* 3060-0928. *Title:* Application for Class A Television Broadcast Station Construction Permit or License. *Form Number:* FCC Form 302-CA. *Type of Review:* Extension of a currently approved collection. *Respondents:* Business or other for-profit entities; Not-for-profit institutions. *Number of Respondents:* 50. *Estimated Time per Response:* 2 hours. *Frequency of Response:* On occasion reporting requirement. *Total Annual Burden:* 100 hours. *Total Annual Cost:* $13,500. *Privacy Impact Assessment:* No impact(s). *Needs and Uses:* Low Power TV

(LPTV)stations use FCC Form 302-CA when applying to convert to Class A status and for existing Class A stations to file for a license to cover a construction permit. The FCC Form 302-CA requires a series of certifications by the Class A applicant as prescribed by the Community Broadcasters Protection Act (CBPA). Licensees are required to provide weekly announcements to their listeners informing them that the applicant has applied for a Class A license and announcing the public's ability to comment on the application prior to Commission action. FCC staff use the data to confirm that the station meets the eligibility standards to convert their licenses to Class A status. The FCC Form 302-CA data is also included in any subsequent license to operate the station. Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-17871 Filed 10-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Notice of Public Information Collection(s) Being Submitted to OMB for Review and Approval October 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

(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 and Allison E. Zaleski, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Room 10236 NEOB, Washington, DC 20503,

(202)418-2918. If you would like to obtain a copy of the information collection, you may do so by visiting the FCC PRA Web page at: *http://www.fcc.gov/omd/pra.* 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 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 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. E6-17872 Filed 10-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Notice of Public Information Collection(s) Being Submitted for Review to the Office of Management and Budget October 16, 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)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 December 26, 2006. If you anticipate that you will be submitting PRA comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the FCC contact listed below as soon as possible. ADDRESSES: Direct all PRA comments to Allison E. Zaleski, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10236 NEOB, Washington, DC 20503,

(202)395-6466, or via fax at 202-395-5167 or via Internet at *Allison_E._Zaleski@eop.omb.gov* and to *Judith-B.Herman@fcc.gov* , Federal Communications Commission, Room 1-B441, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554 or an e-mail to *PRA@fcc.gov* . If you would like to obtain or view a copy of this information collection after the 60-day comment period, you may do so by visiting the FCC PRA Web page at: *http://www.fcc.gov/omd/pra* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information or copies of the information collection(s), contact Judith B. Herman at 202-418-0214 or via the Internet at *Judith-B.Herman@fcc.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *OMB Control Number:* 3060-0678. *Title:* Part 25 of the Commission's Rules Governing the Licensing of, and Spectrum Usage by Satellite Network Stations and Space Stations. *Form No.:* FCC Form 312, including Schedule B; Schedule S. *Type of Review:* Revision of a currently approved collection. *Respondents:* Business or other for-profit. *Number of Respondents:* 3,473. *Estimated Time per Response:* .50-40 hours. *Frequency of Response:* On occasion and annual reporting requirements and third party disclosure requirements. *Total Annual Burden:* 42,136 hours. *Total Annual Cost:* $610,644,061. *Privacy Act Impact Assessment:* N/A. *Needs and Uses:* The Commission will submit this revised information collection to OMB after this 60-day comment period to obtain the full three-year clearance from them. The Federal Communications Commission (“Commission”), on its own motion, proposes to revise OMB Control No. 3060-0678 to add a section to the Application for Satellite Space and Earth Station Authorizations (FCC Form 312) which will enable satellite applicants to certify whether or not they are subject to geographic service or geographic coverage requirements and whether they will comply with the requirements. Currently, Section 25.148(c) of the Commission's rules requires Direct Broadcast Satellite

(DBS)operators to provide service to Alaska and Hawaii if “technically feasible,” or to provide a technical analysis showing that such service is not technically feasible. In addition, some Mobile Satellite Service

(MSS)operators and Non-geostationary Satellite Orbit Fixed Satellite Service (NGSO FSS) operators have similar geographic coverage requirements. For example, Ka-band NGSO FSS systems must provide service between 70° North Latitude and 55° South Latitude for at least 75 percent of every 24-hour period in accordance with Section 25.145(c)(1) of the Commission's rules. The Commission also proposes to require other applicants to provide this certification in the event that it expands its geographic rules, as proposed in two pending rulemakings. See 71 FR 43687 (Aug. 2, 2006); 71 FR 56923 (Sept. 28, 2006). The addition of the certification will require modification of the FCC Form 312 which is housed in the International Bureau Filing System (“MyIBFS”), an electronic filing system. In 2005, the Commission received approval from the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for mandatory electronic filing of all satellite and earth station applications. Therefore, all certifications must be filed with the Commission electronically in MyIBFS. This collection is used by the Commission staff in carrying out its duties concerning satellite communications as required by Sections 301, 308, 309 and 310 of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. 301, 308, 309, 310. This collection is also used by the Commission staff in carrying out its duties under the World Trade Organizations

(WTO)Basic Telecom Agreement. The information collection requirements accounted for in this collection are necessary to determine the technical and legal qualifications of applicants or licensees to operate a station, transfer or assign a license, and to determine whether the authorization is in the public interest, convenience and necessity. Without such information, the Commission could not determine whether to permit respondents to provide telecommunication services in the U.S. Therefore, the Commission would be unable to fulfill its statutory responsibilities in accordance with the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and the obligations imposed on parties to the WTO Basic Telecom Agreement. Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-17873 Filed 10-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Notice of Public Information Collection(s) Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission October 17, 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 (PRA), Public Law 104-13. An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a current valid control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the 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 PRA comments should be submitted on or before December 26, 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: Direct all PRA comments to Les Smith, Federal Communications Commission, Room 1-C216, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554, or via the Internet to *PRA@fcc.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information or copies of the information collection(s) contact Les Smith at

(202)418-0217 or via the Internet at *PRA@fcc.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *OMB Control Number:* 3060-0749. *Title:* Section 64.1509, Disclosure and Dissemination of Pay-Per-Call Information. *Form Number:* N/A. *Type of Review:* Revision of a currently approved collection. *Respondents:* Business or other for-profit entities. *Number of Respondents:* 25. *Estimated Time per Response:* 410 hours. *Frequency of Response:* Annual and on occasion reporting requirements; Third party disclosure. *Total Annual Burden:* 10,250 hours. *Total Annual Cost:* None. *Privacy Impact Assessment:* No impact(s). *Needs and Uses:* On July 16, 2004, the Commission released the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), In the Matter of Policies and Rules Governing Interstate Pay-Per-Call and Other Information Services, and Toll-free Number Usage; Truth-in-Billing and Billing Format, CC Docket No. 98-170 and CG Docket No. 04-244, FCC 04-162, which initiated a new proceeding to review the effectiveness of the Commission's rules governing pay-per-call services, related audiotext information services, and toll-free numbers. The *NPRM* sought comment as to whether the Commission's existing rules governing billing specifically for pay-per-call services and those for charges billed through toll-free numbers are sufficient to address any current billing concerns. The *NPRM* sought comment specifically on whether the Commission should adopt a requirement that charges for presubscribed audiotext information services accessed through toll-free numbers must be displayed separately from local and long-distance telephone service. Common carriers that assign telephone numbers to pay-per-call services must disclose to all interested parties, upon request, a list of all assigned pay-per-call numbers. For each assigned number, carriers must also make available

(1)a description of the pay-per-call services;

(2)the total cost per minute or other fees associated with the service; and

(3)the service provider's name, business address, and telephone number. In addition, carriers handling pay-per-call services must establish a toll-free number that consumers may call to receive information about pay-per-call services. Finally, the Commission requires carriers to provide statements of pay-per-call rights and responsibilities to new telephone subscribers at the time service is established and, although not required by statute, to all subscribers annually. Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-17874 Filed 10-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION No FEAR Act Notice AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Commission is hereby providing notice to its employees, former employees, and applicants for federal employment about the rights and remedies that are available to them under the Federal antidiscrimination laws and whistleblower protection laws. This notice fulfills FCC's initial notification obligations under the Notification and Federal Employees Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act (No FEAR Act), as implemented by Office of Personnel Management

(OPM)regulations at 5 CFR part 724. DATES: October 25, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: P. June Taylor, Acting Director, FCC's Office of Workplace Diversity at

(202)418-1799. Additional information can be found on the FCC's Web site at *http://www.fcc.gov/owd.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 15, 2002, Congress enacted the “Notification and Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002,” which is now known as the No FEAR Act. One purpose of the Act is to “require that Federal agencies be accountable for violations of antidiscrimination and whistleblower protection laws.” Public Law 107-174, Summary. In support of this purpose, Congress found that “agencies cannot be run effectively if those agencies practice or tolerate discrimination.” Public Law 107-174, Title I, General Provisions, section 101(1). The Act also requires this agency to provide this notice to Federal employees, former Federal employees and applicants for Federal employment to inform you of the rights and protections available to you under Federal antidiscrimination and whistleblower protection laws. Antidiscrimination Laws A Federal agency cannot discriminate against an employee or applicant with respect to the terms, conditions or privileges of employment on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, marital status or political affiliation. Discrimination on these bases is prohibited by one or more of the following statutes: 5 U.S.C. 2302(b)(1), 29 U.S.C. 206(d), 29 U.S.C. 631, 29 U.S.C. 633a, 29 U.S.C. 791 and 42 U.S.C. 2000e-16. If you believe that you have been the victim of unlawful discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin or disability, you must contact an Equal Employment Opportunity

(EEO)counselor within 45 calendar days of the alleged discriminatory action, or, in the case of a personnel action, within 45 calendar days of the effective date of the action, before you can file a formal complaint of discrimination with your agency. See, e.g., 29 CFR 1614. If you believe that you have been the victim of unlawful discrimination on the basis of age, you must either contact an EEO counselor as noted above or give notice of intent to sue to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

(EEOC)within 180 calendar days of the alleged discriminatory action. If you are alleging discrimination based on marital status or political affiliation, you may file a written complaint with the U.S. Office of Special Counsel

(OSC)(See contact information above). In the alternative (or in some cases, in addition), you may pursue a discrimination complaint by filing a grievance through your agency's administrative or negotiated grievance procedures, if such procedures apply and are available. Whistleblower Protection Laws A Federal employee with authority to take, direct others to take, recommend or approve any personnel action must not use that authority to take or fail to take, or threaten to take or fail to take, a personnel action against an employee or applicant because of disclosure of information by that individual that is reasonably believed to evidence violations of law, rule or regulation; gross mismanagement; gross waste of funds; an abuse of authority; or a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety, unless disclosure of such information is specifically prohibited by law and such information is specifically required by Executive order to be kept secret in the interest of national defense or the conduct of foreign affairs. Retaliation against an employee or applicant for making a protected disclosure is prohibited by 5 U.S.C. 2302(b)(8). If you believe that you have been the victim of whistleblower retaliation, you may file a written complaint (Form OSC-11) with the U.S. Office of Special Counsel at 1730 M Street, NW., Suite 218, Washington, DC 20036-4505 or online through the OSC Web site— *http://www.osc.gov* . Retaliation for Engaging in Protected Activity A Federal agency cannot retaliate against an employee or applicant because that individual exercises his or her rights under any of the Federal antidiscrimination or whistleblower protection laws listed above. If you believe that you are the victim of retaliation for engaging in protected activity, you must follow, as appropriate, the procedures described in the Antidiscrimination Laws and Whistleblower Protection Laws sections or, if applicable, the administrative or negotiated grievance procedures in order to pursue any legal remedy. Disciplinary Actions Under the existing laws, each agency retains the right, where appropriate, to discipline a Federal employee for conduct that is inconsistent with Federal Antidiscrimination and Whistleblower Protection Laws up to and including removal. If OSC has initiated an investigation under 5 U.S.C. 1214, however, according to 5 U.S.C. 1214(f), agencies must seek approval from the Special Counsel to discipline employees for, among other activities, engaging in prohibited retaliation. Nothing in the No FEAR Act alters existing laws or permits an agency to take unfounded disciplinary action against a Federal employee or to violate the procedural rights of a Federal employee who has been accused of discrimination. Additional Information For further information regarding the No FEAR Act regulations, refer to 5 CFR Part 724, as well as the appropriate offices within your agency (e.g., EEO/civil rights office, human resources office or legal office). Additional information regarding Federal antidiscrimination, whistleblower protection and retaliation laws can be found at the EEOC Web site— *http://www.eeoc.gov* and the OSC Web site— *http://www.osc.gov* . Existing Rights Unchanged Pursuant to section 205 of the No FEAR Act, neither the Act nor this notice creates, expands or reduces any rights otherwise available to any employee, former employee or applicant under the laws of the United States, including the provisions of law specified in 5 U.S.C. 2302(d). Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-17903 Filed 10-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION Notice of Agreements Filed The Commission hereby gives notice of the filing of the following agreements under the Shipping Act of 1984. Interested parties may submit comments on agreements to the Secretary, Federal Maritime Commission, Washington, DC 20573, within ten days of the date this notice appears in the **Federal Register** . Copies of agreements are available through the Commission's Office of Agreements (202-523-5793 or *tradeanalysis@fmc.gov* ). *Agreement No.:* 011975. *Title:* “K” Line/HMM Space Charter Agreement. *Parties:* Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha, Ltd. and Hyundai Merchant Marine Co., Ltd. *Filing Party:* John P. Meade, Esq.; “K” Line America, Inc.; P.O. Box 9; Preston, Maryland 21655. *Synopsis:* The agreement authorizes the parties to exchange space on their respective vessels in the trade between U.S. ports and ports on the East Coast of South American and in the Caribbean Sea. *Agreement No.:* 201132-008. *Title:* New York/New Jersey-Port Newark Container Terminal LLC Lease (Lease No. L-PN-264). *Parties:* The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and Port Newark Container Terminal LLC. *Filing Party:* Patricia W. Duemig, Senior Property Representative, The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, New Jersey Marine Terminals, 260 Kellogg Street, Port Newark, NJ 07114. *Synopsis:* The amendment extends the letting of PNCT's rail facility. *Title:* Hampton Road Chassis Pool II Agreement. *Parties:* Virginia International Terminals, Inc., and the Ocean Carrier Equipment Management Association, for itself and on behalf of the following of its member lines: APL Co. Pte. Ltd.; American President Lines, Ltd.; Atlantic Container Line; Australia-New Zealand Direct Line, a division of CP Ships

(UK)Limited; CMA CGM, S.A.; Compania Sud Americana de Vapores, S.A.; Contship Containerlines, a division of CP Ships

(UK)Limited; COSCO Containerlines Company Limited; Evergreen Marine Corp. (Taiwan) Ltd.; Hanjin Shipping Co., Ltd.; Hamburg-Süd; Hapag-Lloyd AG; Hyundai Merchant Marine Co. Ltd.; Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha, Ltd.; CP Ships USA, LLC; Mitsui O.S.K. Lines Ltd.; Nippon Yusen Kaisha Line; Orient Overseas Container Line Limited; and Yangming Marine Transport Corp. *Filing Party:* Wayne R. Rohde, Esq.; Sher & Blackwell LLP; 1850 M Street, NW., Suite 900, Washington, DC 20036. *Synopsis:* The amendment changes Hapag-Lloyd name and deletes P&O Nedlloyd B.V. and P&O Nedlloyd Limited as parties to the agreement. Dated: October 20, 2006. By order of the Federal Maritime Commission. Karen V. Gregory, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-17881 Filed 10-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6730-01-P FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION Ocean Transportation Intermediary License Applicants Notice is hereby given that the following applicants have filed with the Federal Maritime Commission an application for license as a Non-Vessel-Operating Common Carrier and Ocean Freight Forwarder-Ocean Transportation Intermediary pursuant to section 19 of the Shipping Act of 1984 as amended (46 U.S.C. app. chapter 409 and 46 CFR 515). Persons knowing of any reason why the following applicants should not receive a license are requested to contact the Office of Transportation Intermediaries, Federal Maritime Commission,Washington, DC 20573. Non-Vessel-Operating Common Carrier Ocean Transportation Intermediary Applicants AJC Logistics, LLC dba Eagle Logistics Systems, 5188 Roswell Road, NW., Atlanta, GA 30342. Officers: Christopher Swartz, Vice President, (Qualifying Individual), Gerald L. Alliston, President. Ben-New Shipping, Inc., 1383 Kale Drive, Lithonia, GA 30058. Officers: Dionne Newell, Director, (Qualifying Individual), Desrine Bennett, Director. Marine Express Shipping, Inc., 2380 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02140. Officer: Petrus Alesy, President, (Qualifying Individual). Oriental Camden Inc. dba Embarque Carden, 2011 River Avenue, Camden, NJ 08105. Officers: Elpidio Alcantara, President, (Qualifying Individual), Cristiana Alcantara, Vice President. A1 Courier, Corp., 8236 NW. 68th Street, Miami, FL 33166. Officers: Claudio Varanese, President, (Qualifying Individual), Geraldine Arevalo, Vice President. El Siglo Shipping Corp., 1306 Morrison Avenue, Bronx, NY 10472. Officer: Luis Manuel Clander-Evans, President, (Qualifying Individual). Pacific Road Logistics, Inc., 520 E. Carson Plaza Ct., Suite 204, Carson, CA 90746. Officers: Brendan Sheen, Treasurer, (Qualifying Individual), Yoon Yeon Jung, President. Findlay International, Inc. dba Findlay International, 326 South Fulton Avenue, Mount Vernon, NY 10553. Officers: Andrew C. Churchill, Vice President, (Qualifying Individual), Gregory J. Mouracade, President. Non-Vessel-Operating Common Carrier and Ocean Freight Forwarder Transportation Intermediary Applicants Austoromar Logistics USA, LLC, 1325 Mittel Blvd., Wood Dale, IL 60191. Officer: Tadeusz Andrzej Krafft, Manager, (Qualifying Individual). KP Freight, LLC, 8399 NW 66 Street, Suite 3, Miami, FL 33166. Officer: John F. Mylott, President, (Qualifying Individual). Pak Mail Centers of America, Inc., dba Platinum Worldwide Logistics, 7173 S. Havana Street, Suite 600, Centennial, CO 80112. Officers: Justin Andres, Vice President, (Qualifying Individual), P. Evan Lasky, CEO. Ocean Freight Forwarder-Ocean Transportation Intermediary Applicants KOC Enterprise Inc., 111 Lakeview Drive, Old Tappan, NJ 07675. Officer: Eock S. Oh, President, (Qualifying Individual). World Applicances, Inc., 2822 Juniper Street, Fairfax, VA 22031. Officer: Max Llaneza, President, (Qualifying Individual). Ocean Air Cargo and Brokerage Corp. dba Ocean Air Cargo, 16 Corning Avenue, Suite 154, Milpitas, CA 95035. Officers: Blas De Leon Caliva, General Manager, (Qualifying Individual), Antonio Alve, Director. Dated: October 20, 2006. Karen V. Gregory, Assistant Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-17891 Filed 10-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6730-01-P FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION Ocean Transportation Intermediary License Reissuances Notice is hereby given that the following Ocean Transportation Intermediary license has been reissued by the Federal Maritime Commission pursuant to section 19 of the Shipping Act of 1984 (46 U.S.C. Chapter 409), and the regulations of the Commission pertaining to the licensing of Ocean Transportation Intermediaries, 46 CFR part 515. License No. Name/address Date resissued 004130NF GSG Investment Inc., dba Worldwide Logistics Company, dba WWL dba Trade Passage, 2411 Santa Fe Avenue, Unit C, Redondo Beach, CA 90278 August 26, 2006. Peter J. King, Deputy Director, Bureau of Certification and Licensing. [FR Doc. E6-17882 Filed 10-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6730-01-P FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Notice of Proposals to Engage in Permissible Nonbanking Activities or to Acquire Companies that are Engaged in Permissible Nonbanking Activities The companies listed in this notice have given notice under section 4 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1843) (BHC Act) and Regulation Y (12 CFR Part 225) to engage *de novo* , or to acquire or control voting securities or assets of a company, including the companies listed below, that engages either directly or through a subsidiary or other company, in a nonbanking activity that is listed in § 225.28 of Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.28) or that the Board has determined by Order to be closely related to banking and permissible for bank holding companies. Unless otherwise noted, these activities will be conducted throughout the United States. Each notice is available for inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notice also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the question whether the proposal complies with the standards of section 4 of the BHC Act. Additional information on all bank holding companies may be obtained from the National Information Center website at *www.ffiec.gov/nic/* . Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding the applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than November 9, 2006. **A. Federal Reserve Bank of New York** (Anne McEwen, Financial Specialist) 33 Liberty Street, New York, New York 10045-0001: *1. Treetops Acquisition Group LP, Treetops Acquisition Group II LP, Treetops Acquisition Group Ltd., Treetops Acquisition Group II Ltd., CAM Discount Ltd.* , all of Georgetown, Grand Cayman, the Edgar M. Bronfman Trusts, A,B,C,D,E,F and G, all of Montreal, Canada; Israel Discount Ltd, Tel Aviv, Israel and Discount Bancorp, New York, New York; to acquire voting shares of IDB Capital Corp, New York, New York, a Securities and Exchange Commission-registered securities broker from its bank subsidiary Israel Discount Bank of New York, New York, and thereby engage in agency transactional services for customers pursuant to section 228.25(b)(7) of Regulation Y. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, October 20, 2006. Jennifer J. Johnson, Secretary of the Board. [FR Doc. E6-17886 Filed 10-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-S FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION [File No. 061 0217] Barr Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Pliva d.d.; Analysis of Proposed Consent Order To Aid Public Comment AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission. ACTION: Proposed consent agreement. SUMMARY: The consent agreement in this matter settles alleged violations of federal law prohibiting unfair or deceptive acts or practices or unfair methods of competition. The attached Analysis to Aid Public Comment describes both the allegations in the draft complaint and the terms of the consent order—embodied in the consent agreement—that would settle these allegations. DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 20, 2006. ADDRESSES: Interested parties are invited to submit written comments. Comments should refer to “Barr Pharmaceuticals, File No. 061 0217,” to facilitate the organization of comments. A comment filed in paper form should include this reference both in the text and on the envelope, and should be mailed or delivered to the following address: Federal Trade Commission/Office of the Secretary, Room 135-H, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20580. Comments containing confidential material must be filed in paper form, must be clearly labeled “Confidential,” and must comply with Commission Rule 4.9(c). 16 CFR 4.9(c) (2005). 1 The FTC is requesting that any comment filed in paper form be sent by courier or overnight service, if possible, because U.S. postal mail in the Washington area and at the Commission is subject to delay due to heightened security precautions. Comments that do not contain any nonpublic information may instead be filed in electronic form as part of or as an attachment to e-mail messages directed to the following e-mail box: *consentagreement@ftc.gov.* 1 The comment must be accompanied by an explicit request for confidential treatment, including the factual and legal basis for the request, and must identify the specific portions of the comment to be withheld from the public record. The request will be granted or denied by the Commission's General Counsel, consistent with applicable law and the public interest. *See* Commission Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR 4.9(c). The FTC Act and other laws the Commission administers permit the collection of public comments to consider and use in this proceeding as appropriate. All timely and responsive public comments, whether filed in paper or electronic form, will be considered by the Commission, and will be available to the public on the FTC Web site, to the extent practicable, at *http://www.ftc.gov.* As a matter of discretion, the FTC makes every effort to remove home contact information for individuals from the public comments it receives before placing those comments on the FTC Web site. More information, including routine uses permitted by the Privacy Act, may be found in the FTC's privacy policy, at *http://www.ftc.gov/ftc/privacy.htm.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephanie C. Bovee, Bureau of Competition, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20580,

(202)326-2083. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 6(f) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 38 Stat. 721, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and § 2.34 of the Commission Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 2.34, notice is hereby given that the above-captioned consent agreement containing a consent order to cease and desist, having been filed with and accepted, subject to final approval, by the Commission, has been placed on the public record for a period of thirty

(30)days. The following Analysis to Aid Public Comment describes the terms of the consent agreement, and the allegations in the complaint. An electronic copy of the full text of the consent agreement package can be obtained from the FTC Home Page (for October 20, 2006), on the World Wide Web, at *http://www.ftc.gov/os/2006/10/index.htm.* A paper copy can be obtained from the FTC Public Reference Room, Room 130-H, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20580, either in person or by calling

(202)326-2222. Public comments are invited, and may be filed with the Commission in either paper or electronic form. All comments should be filed as prescribed in the ADDRESSES section above, and must be received on or before the date specified in the DATES section. Analysis of Agreement Containing Consent Order to Aid Public Comment I. Introduction The Federal Trade Commission (“Commission”) has accepted, subject to final approval, an Agreement Containing Consent Orders (“Consent Agreement”) from Barr Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Barr”), which is designed to remedy the anticompetitive effects of its proposed acquisition of Pliva d.d. (“Pliva”). Under the terms of the Consent Agreement, Barr is required to divest to Apotex, Inc. (“Apotex”) Barr's generic trazodone and generic triamterene with hydrochlorothiazide (“triamterene/HCTZ”) businesses. Further, the Consent Agreement requires Barr to return marketing rights to Pliva's generic nimodipine product in development to its joint venture partner, Banner Pharmacaps, Inc. (“Banner”), or in the alternative, that Barr return marketing rights to its nimodipine product in development to its development partner, Cardinal Health, Inc. (“Cardinal”). Lastly, the Consent Agreement requires Barr to divest Pliva's branded organ preservation solution, Custodiol, to New Custodiol LLC, a company formed for the purpose of marketing and selling Custodiol. The assets for each of the divestitures includes all of the relevant intellectual property, customer lists, research and development information, and regulatory materials. With these divestitures the competition that would otherwise be eliminated through the proposed acquisition of Pliva by Barr will be fully preserved. The proposed Consent Agreement has been placed on the public record for thirty days for receipt of comments by interested persons. Comments received during this period will become part of the public record. After thirty days, the Commission will again review the proposed Consent Agreement and the comments received, and will decide whether it should withdraw from the proposed Consent Agreement, modify it, or make final the Decision and Order (“Order”). Pursuant to an announcement dated June 27, 2006, Barr intends to acquire all of the outstanding shares of Pliva by cash tender offer for approximately $2.5 billion. Both parties manufacture and sell generic pharmaceuticals in the United States. The Commission's Complaint alleges that the proposed acquisition, if consummated, would violate Section 7 of the Clayton Act, as amended, 15 U.S.C. 18, and Section 5 of the FTC Act, as amended, 15 U.S.C. 45, in the markets for the manufacture and sale of:

(1)Generic trazodone hydrochloride tablets;

(2)generic triamterene/HCTZ tablets;

(3)generic nimodipine soft-gel capsules; and

(4)organ preservation solutions. The proposed Consent Agreement remedies the alleged violations by replacing in each of these markets the lost competition that would result from the acquisition. II. The Products and Structure of the Markets Barr's acquisition of Pliva would reduce the number of current or future competing generic suppliers in the following three pharmaceutical products: trazodone hydrochloride tablets, triamterene/HCTZ tablets and nimodipine soft-gel capsules. The number of generic suppliers has a direct and substantial effect on generic pricing, as each additional generic supplier can have a competitive impact on the market. Because there are (or will be) multiple generic equivalents for the three products at issue here, the branded versions do not (or will not) significantly constrain the generics' pricing. For each of the three generic products at issue here, Barr and Pliva currently are two of a small number of suppliers offering the product or are the only two future competitors. Trazodone hydrochloride is an antidepressant. The branded product, Desyrel, is manufactured and sold by Apothecon, Inc., and typically sells for 50 times the generic price. Thus, Desyrel does not have a significant effect on pricing for generic trazodone. Sales of generic trazodone were over $53 million in 2005. Currently, Barr, Pliva, Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Watson”), Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. (“Teva”), and United Research Laboratories/Mutual Pharmaceutical Company (“URL/Mutual”) are the only active suppliers of generic trazodone in the United States, although not all five suppliers are capable of supplying all formulations. For instance, Barr and Pliva are two of only three suppliers of the 150 mg formulation. Because many customers prefer to purchase the 50 mg, 100 mg and 150 mg formulations of generic trazodone from one supplier, the competitive significance of the other two suppliers who do not sell these formulations is limited. Moreover, the acquisition would reduce the number of suppliers of generic trazodone from five to four, and significantly increase Barr's market share to over 64 percent in all formulations. Triamterene/HCTZ is a combination product used to treat high blood pressure. The branded traimterene/HCTZ product, Maxzide, is manufactured and sold by Mylan Laboratories, Inc. (“Mylan”) and is priced more than five times higher than its generic equivalent. Maxzide does not have a significant effect on the pricing of generic triamterene/HCTZ, while the competition between generic producers has a direct and substantial effect on generic triamterene/HCTZ pricing. Currently, Barr, Pliva, Watson, Mylan and Sandoz, Inc. (“Sandoz”) are the only active suppliers of various formulations of generic triamterene/HCTZ tablets in the United States. Furthermore, there is evidence that several of these suppliers may have a more limited competitive significance in the market than Barr and Pliva. The proposed acquisition would reduce the number of suppliers from five to four, and would increase Barr's market share to about 35 percent. Nimodipine is used to treat symptoms resulting from a ruptured blood vessel in the brain. The branded version of this product, Nimotop, is manufactured and sold by Bayer. Although the patent for the branded version of the drug has already expired, there are no generic suppliers of nimodipine on the market. Barr, in conjunction with Cardinal, plans to introduce generic nimodipine in the fall of 2006. Pliva also has plans to introduce generic nimodipine with its partner, Banner in the same time frame. Pliva and Barr are the only firms in the process of entering this market. The acquisition would, therefore, eliminate future competition between Barr and Pliva and result in a monopoly in the generic nimodipine market. Barr's acquisition of Pliva would also have an impact in one additional market, organ preservation solutions. These solutions are used during the harvesting of donor organs to flush and preserve the viability of the donor organ prior to transplantation. The market for organ preservation solutions in the United States is highly concentrated. Barr and Pliva have market shares of approximately 60 and 30 percent, respectively, in this $17 million market. The rest of the market is divided among several smaller, niche players. The acquisition would significantly increase concentration in this market with Barr achieving near monopoly share with approximately 90 percent of the organ preservation solution market. III. Entry Entry into manufacture and sale of generic trazodone, generic triamterene/HCTZ, generic nimodipine, and organ preservation solutions would not be timely, likely, or sufficient in its magnitude, character, and scope to deter or counteract the anticompetitive effects of the acquisition. Developing and obtaining FDA approval for the manufacture and sale of each of the relevant products takes at least 2 years due to substantial regulatory, technological, and intellectual property barriers. In addition to regulatory barriers, penetrating the organ preservation solution market is further hindered by the reluctance of transplant surgeons to switch to a new organ preservation product. IV. Effects of the Acquisition The proposed acquisition would cause significant competitive harm to consumers in the U.S. markets for generic trazodone, generic triamterene/HCTZ, and organ preservation solutions by eliminating actual, direct, and substantial competition between Barr and Pliva, by increasing the likelihood that Barr will be able to unilaterally exercise market power, by increasing the likelihood and degree of coordinated interaction between the few remaining competitors, and by increasing the likelihood that consumers will pay higher prices. In these markets, the evidence shows that consumers have obtained lower prices due to the competitive rivalry that exists between market participants. The evidence also shows that as new rivals have entered the markets, consumers have obtained lower prices. The acquisition would also cause significant competitive harm to consumers in the U.S. market for generic nimodipine by eliminating future competition between Barr and Pliva. V. The Consent Agreement The proposed Consent Agreement preserves competition in the generic trazodone and triamterene/HCTZ markets by requiring that Barr divest all of the Barr assets for these two products to Apotex within 10 days after the acquisition. The proposed Consent Agreement contains several provisions designed to ensure these divestitures are successful. Barr must provide various transitional services to enable Apotex to compete against Barr immediately following the divestiture. These services include providing Apotex with existing inventory of generic trazodone and triamterene/HCTZ, supplying Apotex with generic trazodone and triamterene/HCTZ until Apotex secures FDA approval to manufacture the products for itself in its own facility, and providing Apotex with all technical assistance necessary to obtain any FDA approvals. Apotex is a reputable generic manufacturer and is well-positioned to manufacture and market the acquired products and to compete effectively in those markets. In the United States, Apotex is roughly the tenth-largest generic pharmaceutical company with over 50 products. Moreover, the acquisition by Apotex does not present competitive problems in either the generic trazodone market or the generic triamterene/HCTZ market because it does not currently compete in those markets. The proposed Consent Agreement preserves the actual and potential competition in the generic nimodipine market by requiring Barr to divest the Pliva nimodipine assets to Banner no later than 10 days after the acquisition, or to divest its own nimodipine assets to Cardinal no later than 60 days after the acquisition. Banner and Cardinal are both reputable soft-gel capsule manufacturers and particularly well-positioned to manufacture and market generic nimodipine because they are already manufacturing generic nimodipine soft-gel capsules pursuant to their respective joint ventures with Pliva and Barr. The proposed Consent Agreement preserves the competition in the organ preservation solution market by requiring Barr to divest the Pliva organ preservation solution business to New Custodiol LLC no later than 10 days after the acquisition. The Custodiol product is currently manufactured by a third party, Dr. Franz Kohler Chemie GmbH, who will continue to supply the product to new New Custodiol LLC. New Custodiol LLC is a company that was formed by Pliva's current head of marketing for organ preservation solutions, Mr. Allen Weber, for the purpose of acquiring, marketing and selling Custodiol in the United States. New Custodiol LLC has obtained funding from venture capitalists sufficient to allow it to manufacture and sell Custodiol effectively. The combination of Mr. Allen Weber's industry experience and venture capital backing makes New Custodiol LLC well positioned to acquire Custodiol and to restore the competition that would be lost if the proposed acquisition were to proceed unremedied. If the sale of Pliva's Custodiol is not successful, the Consent Agreement requires that Barr divest its organ preservation solution, ViaSpan, to a Commission-approved acquirer. If the Commission determines that any of the divestitures or divestees are not acceptable, Barr must rescind the transaction(s) and divest the assets to Commission-approved buyer(s) not later than 6 months from the date the Order becomes final. If Barr fails to divest within the 6 months, the Commission may appoint a trustee to divest the assets. The proposed remedy also allows for the appointment of an Interim Trustee, experienced in obtaining regulatory approval and the manufacture of pharmaceuticals, to oversee the technology transfer and to assist the divestees in the event of difficulties. As part of the proposed remedy, Barr is required to execute an agreement conferring all rights and powers necessary for the Interim Trustee to satisfy his responsibilities under the Order to assure successful divestitures. The Commission has appointed Mr. William Rahe to be the Interim Monitor and the divestees have consented to his selection. The monitor will ensure that the Commission remains informed about the status of the proposed divestitures and asset transfers. The purpose of this analysis is to facilitate public comment on the proposed Consent Agreement, and it is not intended to constitute an official interpretation of the proposed Consent Agreement or to modify its terms in any way. By direction of the Commission. Donald S. Clark, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-17904 Filed 10-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6750-01-P GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION Privacy Act of 1974; Privacy Act System of Records AGENCY: General Services Administration ACTION: Notice of proposed system of records. SUMMARY: The General Services Administration

(GSA)proposes to establish a system of records subject to the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a. This system of records notice is for the GSA Smart Card Program (GSA/CIO-1), which covers the Homeland Security Presidential Directive 12, Policy for a Common Identification Standard for Federal Employees and Contractors (HSPD-12), process after adjudication and determines if the individual can receive identification

(ID)card. The records include both mandatory and optional information necessary to the request for an ID card, registration, verification, and issuance procedures, the index/database of active and invalid ID cards, and the information stored on the ID cards. The system may include records of individuals who entered and exited Federal facilities or accessed systems. The GSA Smart Card Program will ensure the safety and security of Federal facilities, information systems, and their occupants and users, by verifying that all persons entering Federal facilities, using Federal information resources, or accessing classified information are authorized to do so. The system also will track and control identification ID cards issued to individuals for these purposes. DATE: The system of records will become effective on December 4, 2006 unless comments received on or before that date result in a contrary determination. ADDRESSES: Comments relating to the GSA Smart Card Program should be directed to: Director, GSA HSPD-12 Smart Card Program Management Office, Office of the Chief Information Officer, General Services Administration, 1800 F Street NW., Room G-006, Washington DC 20405-0002; telephone

(202)501-1500; fax

(202)219-5818. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: GSA Privacy Act Officer (CIB), General Services Administration, 1800 F Street NW, Washington, DC 20405; telephone

(202)501-1452. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The GSA notice entitled Credentials, Passes, and Licenses (GSA/HRO-8) is cancelled. However, existing GSA forms and associated databases covered by that system will continue in effect until replaced with those covered by this notice. The existing forms include: GSA Form 48, Request and Record of Identification; GSA Form 277, Employee Identification and Authorization Credential; GSA Form 277U, Temporary Pass; GSA Form 277V, Visitor Pass; GSA Form 2941 Parking Application; as well as biometric information including photo, fingerprints and signature. The new forms and databases covered by this notice will be phased in to ensure a controlled and structured process. Dated: October 6, 2006. Cheryl M. Paige, Acting Director, Office of Information Management. GSA/CIO-1 **System name:** GSA Smart Card Program **System location:** Data are maintained in GSA Central Office databases with access from GSA regional offices. Additionally, some access control data may be located in Federal buildings and Federally-leased facilities where staffed guard stations have been established to handle the GSA Smart Card Personal Identity Verification

(PIV)process as well as the physical security and computer security offices at those locations. Contact the System Manager for additional information. **Security classification:** Most identity records are not classified. However, in some cases, records of certain individuals or portions of some records may be classified in the interest of national security. **Categories of individuals covered by the system:** Individuals who require regular, ongoing access to agency facilities, information technology systems, or information classified in the interest of national security, including: a. Applicants for employment or contracts b. Federal employees c. Contractors d. Students e. Interns f. Volunteers g. Individuals formerly in any of these positions Also included are individuals authorized to perform or use services provided in agency facilities ( *e.g.* , Credit Union, Fitness Center, Cafeteria, etc.). The system does not apply to occasional visitors or short-term guests, to whom GSA will issue temporary identification and credentials. Categories of records in the system: a. Records maintained on individuals issued credentials by GSA include the following data fields: • Full name, • Social Security Number

(SSN)• Date of birth • Signature • Image (photograph) • Fingerprints • Hair color • Eye color • Height • Organization / office of assignment • Company / agency name • Telephone number • ID card issuance and expiration dates • ID card request form • Registrar approval signature • ID card number • Emergency responder designation • Copies of documents used to verify identification or information derived from those documents such as document title, document issuing authority, document number, document expiration date, other document information b. Records maintained on cardholders entering GSA facilities or using GSA systems may include: • Name • ID card number • Date and Time of entry/exit • Location of entry and exit • Computer access dates, times, and locations Authorities for maintenance of the system: a. 5 U.S.C. 301; b. Federal Information Security Management Act (Pub. L. 107-296); c. E-Government Act (Pub. L. 107-347, Sec. 203); d. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et al.) e. Government Paperwork Elimination Act (Pub. L. 105-277, 44 U.S.C. 3504); f. Homeland Security Presidential Directive 12 (HSPD-12), Policy for a Common Identification Standard for Federal Employees and Contractors, August 27, 2004; and g. Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949, as amended. **Purpose:** The primary purposes of the system are: a. To ensure the safety and security of GSA facilities, systems or information, and our occupants and users; b. To verify that all persons entering federal facilities, using federal information resources, or accessing classified information are authorized to do so; and c. To track and control ID cards issued to persons entering and exiting the facilities, using systems, or accessing classified information. Routine uses of the system records, including categories of users and their purpose for using the system: Information about covered individuals may be disclosed without consent as permitted by the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. § 552a(b), and: a. To the Department of Justice when:

(1)GSA or any component thereof;

(2)any employee of GSA in his or her official capacity;

(3)any employee of GSA in his or her individual capacity where GSA or the Department of Justice

(DOJ)has agreed to represent the employee; or

(1)GSA or any component thereof;

(2)any employee of GSA in his or her official capacity;

(3)any employee of GSA in his or her individual capacity where GSA or the Department of Justice has agreed to represent the employee; or

(4)the United States Government, is a party to litigation or has an interest in such litigation, and by careful review, GSA determines that the records are both relevant and necessary to the litigation, and the use of such records is therefore deemed by GSA to be for a purpose that is compatible with the purpose for which the agency collected the records. c. Except as noted on Forms SF 85, 85-P, and 86, when a record on its face, or in conjunction with other records, indicates a violation or potential violation of law, whether civil, criminal, or regulatory in nature, and whether arising by general statute or particular program statute, or by regulation, rule, or order issued pursuant thereto, disclosure may be made to the appropriate public authority, whether Federal, foreign, State, local, or tribal, or otherwise responsible for enforcing, investigating or prosecuting such violation or charged with enforcing or implementing the statute, or rule, regulation, or order issued pursuant thereto, if the information disclosed is relevant to any enforcement, regulatory, investigative or prosecutorial responsibility of the receiving entity. d. To a Member of Congress or to a Congressional staff member in response to an inquiry of the Congressional office made at the written request of the constituent whose record is maintained. e. To the National Archives and Records Administration for records management purposes. f. To agency contractors, grantees, or volunteers who have been engaged to assist the agency in the performance of a contract service, grant, cooperative agreement, or other activity related to this system of records and who need to have access to the records in order to perform their activity. Recipients shall be required to comply with the requirements of the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, 5 U.S.C. § 552a. g. To a Federal, State, local, foreign, tribal, or other public authority the fact that this system of records contains information relevant to the retention of an employee, the retention of a security clearance, the letting of a contract, or the issuance or retention of a license, grant, or other benefit. The other agency or licensing organization may then make a request supported by the written consent of the individual for the entire record if it so chooses. No disclosure will be made unless the information has been determined to be sufficiently reliable to support a referral to another office within the agency or to another Federal agency for criminal, civil, administrative, personnel, or regulatory action. h. To the Office of Management and Budget when necessary to the review of private relief legislation pursuant to OMB Circular No. A-19. i. To a Federal, State, or local agency, or other appropriate entities or individuals, or through established liaison channels to selected foreign governments, in order to enable an intelligence agency to carry out its responsibilities under the National Security Act of 1947 as amended, the CIA Act of 1949 as amended, Executive Order 12333 or any successor order, applicable national security directives, or classified implementing procedures approved by the Attorney General and promulgated pursuant to such statutes, orders, or directives. j. To notify another federal agency when, or verify whether, an ID card is no longer valid. **Note:** Disclosures within GSA of data pertaining to date and time of entry and exit of an agency employee working in the District of Columbia may not be made to supervisors, managers or any other persons (other than the individual to whom the information applies) to verify employee time and attendance record for personnel actions because 5 U.S.C. § 6106 prohibits Federal executive agencies (other than the Bureau of Engraving and Printing) from using a recording clock within the District of Columbia, unless used as a part of a flexible schedule program under 5 U.S.C. § 6120 *et seq* . Policies and practices for storing, retrieving, accessing, retaining, and disposing of system records: **Storage:** Information may be collected on paper or electronically and may be stored on paper or on electronic media, as appropriate. **Retrievability:** Records are retrievable by name, Social Security Number, other ID number, ID card number, image (photograph), and fingerprint. **Safeguards:** Paper records are kept in locked cabinets in secure facilities and access to them is restricted to individuals whose role requires use of the records. The computer servers in which records are stored are located in facilities that are secured by alarm systems and off-master key access. The computer servers themselves are password-protected. Access to individuals working at guard stations is password-protected; each person granted access by the system at guard stations must be individually authorized to use the system. A Privacy Act Warning Notice appears on the monitor screen when records containing information on individuals are first displayed. Data exchanged between the servers and the client PCs at the guard stations and badging office are encrypted. Backup tapes are stored in a locked and controlled room in a secure, off-site location. Each of the component computer servers at the GSA Regions, or at the contract Card Production and Card Management Systems has been only authorized to act when it has been Certified and Accredited in accord with GSA Information Technology Security Policy and HSPD-12 criteria. This Certification is updated periodically on a 3 year basis, or less if cause to do so has become apparent. An audit trail is maintained and reviewed periodically to identify unauthorized access. Persons given roles in the personal identity verification process must complete training specific to their roles to ensure they are knowledgeable about how to protect individually identifiable information. **Retention and disposal:** Records relating to persons covered by this system are retained in accordance with General Records Schedule 18, Item 17. Unless retained for specific, ongoing security investigations for maximum security facilities, records of access are maintained for five years and then destroyed by degaussing hard drives and shredding paper. For other facilities, records are maintained for two years and then destroyed by wiping hard drives and shredding paper. All other records relating to employees are destroyed two years after the ID card expiration date. In accordance with HSPD-12, ID cards are deactivated within 18 hours of cardholder separation, loss of card, or expiration. The information on ID cards is maintained in accordance with General Records Schedule 11, Item 4. ID cards are destroyed by shredding 90 days after deactivation. Once notification of deactivation has been received, the ID number is placed on a revocation list within no more than 2 hours, which immediately invalidates the access privileges for that card in accord with GSA policy. **System manager and address:** Director, GSA HSPD-12 Smart Card Program Management Office Office of the Chief Information Officer 1800 F Street NW, Room G-006 Washington DC 20405-0002 **Notification procedure:** An individual can determine if this system contains a record pertaining to him/her by sending a request in writing, signed, to the System Manager at the above address. When requesting notification of or access to records covered by this notice, an individual should provide his/her full name, date of birth, agency name, and work location. An individual requesting notification of records in person must provide identity documents sufficient to satisfy the custodian of the records that the requester is entitled to access, such as a government-issued photo ID. **Record access procedures:** Same as notification procedures. Requesters also should reasonably specify the record contents being sought. Rules regarding access to Privacy Act records appear in 41 CFR part 105-64. If additional information or assistance is required, contact the GSA Privacy Act Officer (CIB), General Services Administration, 1800 F Street NW, Washington, DC 20405; telephone

(202)501-1452. **Contesting record procedures:** Same as notification procedures. Requesters also should reasonably identify the record, specify the information they are contesting, state the corrective action sought and the reasons for the correction, along with supporting justification showing why the record is not accurate, timely, relevant, or complete. Rules regarding amendment of Privacy Act records appear in 41 CFR part 105-64. If additional information or assistance is required, contact the GSA Privacy Act Officer. **Record source categories:** Employee, contractor, or applicant; sponsoring agency; former sponsoring agency; other Federal agencies; contract employer; former employer. **Exemptions claimed for the system:** None. [FR Doc. E6-17896 Filed 10-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6820-34-S OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT ETHICS No FEAR Act Notice AGENCY: Office of Government Ethics (OGE). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Office of Government Ethics is publishing this notice under the “Notification and Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002,” which is known as the No FEAR Act, to inform current employees, former employees, and applicants for OGE employment of the rights and protections available to them under Federal antidiscrimination, whistleblower protection and retaliation laws. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vincent J. Salamone, Associate General Counsel, Office of General Counsel and Legal Policy, Office of Government Ethics, Suite 500, 1201 New York Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20005-3917; OGE Internet E-mail: *usoge@oge.gov* (for E-mail messages, the subject line should include the following reference—“No FEAR Act Notice”); Telephone: 202-482-9274; TDD: 202-482-9293; FAX: 202-482-9237. A copy of the No FEAR Act Notice will be posted on OGE's Web site ( *http://www.usoge.gov* ). Persons who cannot access this No FEAR Act notice through the Internet may request a paper or electronic copy by contacting Mr. Salamone at the address, E-mail address, telephone numbers, or FAX number listed above. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 15, 2002, Congress enacted the “Notification and Federal Employee Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002,” which is now known as the No FEAR Act. One purpose of the Act is to require that Federal agencies be accountable for violations of antidiscrimination and whistleblower protection laws. In support of this purpose, Congress found that “agencies cannot be run effectively if those agencies practice or tolerate discrimination.” Public Law 107-174, Section 101(1), 116 Stat. 566. The Act also requires this Agency to provide this notice to Federal employees, former Federal employees and applicants for Federal employment to inform them of the rights and protections available to them under Federal antidiscrimination, whistleblower protection, and retaliation laws. Antidiscrimination Laws A Federal agency cannot discriminate against an employee or applicant with respect to the terms, conditions or privileges of employment on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, marital status or political affiliation. Discrimination on these bases is prohibited by one or more of the following statutes: 5 U.S.C. 2302(b)(1), 29 U.S.C. 206(d), 29 U.S.C. 631, 29 U.S.C. 633a, 29 U.S.C. 791 and 42 U.S.C. 2000e-16. If you believe that you have been the victim of unlawful discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin or disability, you must contact an Equal Employment Opportunity

(EEO)counselor within 45 calendar days of the alleged discriminatory action, or, in the case of a personnel action, within 45 calendar days of the effective date of the action, before you can file a formal complaint of discrimination with your agency. *See, e.g.* , 29 CFR part 1614. If you believe that you have been the victim of unlawful discrimination on the basis of age, you must either contact an EEO counselor as noted above or give notice of intent to sue to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

(OSC)at 1730 M Street, NW., Suite 218, Washington, DC 20036-4505 or online through the OSC Web site— *http://www.osc.gov.* In the alternative (or in some cases, in addition), you may pursue a discrimination complaint by filing a grievance through your agency's administrative or negotiated grievance procedures, if such procedures apply and are available. Whistleblower Protection Laws A Federal employee with authority to take, direct others to take, recommend or approve any personnel action must not use that authority to take or fail to take, or threaten to take or fail to take, a personnel action against an employee or applicant because of disclosure of information by that individual that is reasonably believed to evidence violations of law, rule or regulation; gross mismanagement; gross waste of funds; an abuse of authority; or a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety, unless disclosure of such information is specifically prohibited by law and such information is specifically required by Executive order to be kept secret in the interest of national defense or the conduct of foreign affairs. Retaliation against an employee or applicant for making a protected disclosure is prohibited by 5 U.S.C. 2302(b)(8). If you believe that you have been the victim of whistleblower retaliation, you may file a written complaint (Form OSC-11) with OSC at 1730 M Street, NW., Suite 218, Washington, DC 20036-4505 or online through the OSC Web site— *http://www.osc.gov.* Retaliation for Engaging in Protected Activity A Federal agency cannot retaliate against an employee or applicant because that individual exercises his or her rights under any of the Federal antidiscrimination or whistleblower protection laws listed above. If you believe that you are the victim of retaliation for engaging in protected activity, you must follow, as appropriate, the procedures described in the Antidiscrimination Laws and Whistleblower Protection Laws or, if applicable, the administrative or negotiated grievance procedures in order to pursue any legal remedy. Disciplinary Actions Under the existing laws, each agency retains the right, where appropriate, to discipline a Federal employee for conduct that is inconsistent with Federal Antidiscrimination and Whistleblower Protection Laws, up to and including removal. If OSC has initiated an investigation under 5 U.S.C. 1214, however, according to 5 U.S.C. 1214(f), agencies must seek approval from the Special Counsel to discipline employees for, among other activities, engaging in prohibited retaliation. Nothing in the No FEAR Act alters existing laws or permits an agency to take unfounded disciplinary action against a Federal employee or to violate the procedural rights of a Federal employee who has been accused of discrimination. Additional Information For further information regarding the No FEAR Act regulations, refer to 5 CFR part 724, as well as the appropriate offices within your agency ( *e.g.* , EEO/civil rights office, human resources office or legal office). At the Office of Government Ethics, the Equal Employment Opportunity Officer is Grace A. Clark and she may be contacted by telephone at 202-482-9225, TDD at 202-482-9293, E-mail at *gaclark@oge.gov* or by FAX at 202-482-9238. Additional information regarding Federal antidiscrimination, whistleblower protection and retaliation laws can be found at the EEOC Web site— *http://www.eeoc.gov* and the OSC Web site— *http://www.osc.gov.* Existing Rights Unchanged Pursuant to section 205 of the No FEAR Act, neither the Act nor this notice creates, expands or reduces any rights otherwise available to any employee, former employee or applicant under the laws of the United States, including the provisions of law specified in 5 U.S.C. 2302(d). Approved: October 17, 2006. Robert I. Cusick, Director, Office of Government Ethics. [FR Doc. E6-17847 Filed 10-24-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6345-02-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology; American Health Information Community Biosurveillance Workgroup Meeting ACTION: Announcement of meeting. SUMMARY: This notice announces the eleventh meeting of the American Health Information Community Biosurveillance Workgroup in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.) DATES: November 9, 2006, from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. ADDRESSES: Mary C. Switzer Building (330 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20201), Conference Room 4090 (please bring photo ID for entry to a Federal building). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: *http://www.hhs.gov/healthit/ahic/bio_main.html.* supplementary information: The Workgroup will continue reviewing and discussing the “Biosurveillance Priority Area Matrix,” and further review information on a Minimum Data Set from the Data Steering Group. The meeting will be available via Web cast at *http://www.hhs.gov/healthit/ahic/bio_instruct.html.* Dated: October 12, 2006. Judith Sparrow, Director, American Health Information Community, Office of Programs and Coordination, Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology. [FR Doc. 06-8858 Filed 10-24-06; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 45

Traces to 45 documents

U.S. Code