Notices. Proposed rule

9,235 words·~42 min read·/register/2006/11/08/06-9108

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

BILLING CODE 4312-FN-M ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R07-OAR-2006-0836; FRL-8240-7] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of Iowa AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: EPA proposes to approve the State Implementation Plan

(SIP)revision submitted by the state of Iowa. This revision proposes updates to Code of Federal Regulation

(CFR)amendment dates, makes a clarification to the state air quality rules for laundry activities listed under construction permit exemptions, and adopts American Meteorological Society/Environmental Protection Agency Regulatory Model (AERMOD). The proposed SIP revisions are necessary for consistency with Federal regulations. DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be received in writing by December 8, 2006. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2006-0836 by one of the following methods: 1. *http://www.regulations.gov:* Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. 2. E-mail: *hamilton.heather@epa.gov.* 3. Mail: Heather Hamilton, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, KS 66101. 4. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: Heather Hamilton, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, KS 66101. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8 to 4:30, excluding legal holidays. Please see the direct final rule which is located in the Rules section of this **Federal Register** for detailed instructions on how to submit comments. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Heather Hamilton at

(913)551-7039, or by e-mail at *hamilton.heather@epa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the final rules section of the **Federal Register,** EPA is approving the state's revision to the SIP as a direct final rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial revision amendment and anticipates no relevant adverse comments to this action. A detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final rule. If no relevant adverse comments are received in response to this action, no further activity is contemplated in relation to this action. If EPA receives relevant adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed action. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on part of this rule and if that part can be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those parts of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. For additional information, see the direct final rule which is located in the rules section of this **Federal Register.** Dated: October 31, 2006. John B. Askew, Regional Administrator, Region 7. [FR Doc. E6-18843 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 73 [DA 06-2062; MB Docket No. 05-13; RM-11078] Radio Broadcasting Services; Groveland, CA AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Proposed rule; dismissal. SUMMARY: We dismiss the petition for rule making filed by 105 Mountain Air, Inc., proposing the allotment of Channel 264A at Groveland, California, for failure to file a continuing expression of interest. It is the Commission's policy to refrain from making an allotment to a community absent an expression of interest. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sharon P. McDonald, Media Bureau,

(202)418-2180. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's Report and Order, MB Docket No. 05-13, adopted October 18, 2006, and released October 20, 2006. The full text of this Commission decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center (Room CY-A257), 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. The complete text of this decision may also be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20054, telephone 1-800-378-3160 or *http://www.BCPIWEB.com.* This document is not subject to the Congressional Review Act. (The Commission is, therefore, not required to submit a copy of this Report and Order to GAO, pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, *see* 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) because the proposed rule was dismissed. Federal Communications Commission. John A. Karousos, Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media Bureau. [FR Doc. E6-18694 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Part 80 [WT Docket No. 00-48; FCC 06-129] Maritime Communications AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. SUMMARY: In this document, the Federal Communications Commission (Commission or FCC) furthers its ongoing efforts to ensure that its rules governing the Maritime Radio Services continue to promote maritime safety, maximize effective and efficient use of the spectrum available for maritime communications, accommodate technological innovation, avoid unnecessary regulatory burdens, and maintain consistency with international maritime standards to the extent consistent with the United States public interest. The Commission also seeks in this proceeding to ensure that it regulates the Maritime Radio Services in a manner that advances our Nation's homeland security. DATES: Submit comments on or before January 8, 2007, and reply comments are due on or before February 6, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by WT Docket No. 00-48; FCC 06-129, by any of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.* Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • *Federal Communications Commission's Web site: http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/.* Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • *People with Disabilities:* Contact the FCC to request reasonable accommodations (accessible format documents, sign language interpreters, CART, *etc.* ) by e-mail: *FCC504@fcc.gov* or phone 202-418-0530 or TTY: 202-418-0432. For detailed instructions for submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Tobias, *Jeff.Tobias@FCC.gov,* Wireless Telecommunications Bureau,

(202)418-1617, or TTY

(202)418-7233. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's *Third Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making (Third FNPRM)* in WT Docket No. 00-48, FCC 06-129, adopted on August 29, 2006, and released on September 8, 2006. The full text of this document is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC Reference Center, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. The complete text may be purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554. The full text may also be downloaded at: *http://www.fcc.gov.* Alternative formats are available to persons with disabilities by sending an e-mail to *fcc504@fcc.gov* or by calling the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-418-0432 (tty). 1. The WT Docket No. 00-48 rulemaking proceeding was established to develop rules for domestic implementation of the Global Maritime Distress and Safety System (GMDSS), a ship-to-shore and ship-to-ship distress communications system using satellite and digital selective calling

(DSC)technology. The Commission takes the following significant actions in the Third FNPRM in WT Docket No. 00-48:

(i)Proposes to cease authorizing INMARSAT-E emergency position indicating radiobeacons (EPIRBs) due to Inmarsat's planned cessation of service to such EPIRBs;

(ii)requests comment on whether to require Global Positioning System

(GPS)capability in VHF-DSC handheld units;

(iii)requests comment on whether to require the carriage of at least one VHF handheld marine radio transceiver on all small passenger vessels that do not have a reserve power supply;

(iv)requests comment on whether there is a need to make additional spectrum available for ship station facsimile communications, or to permit the transmission of data on VHF maritime voice channels;

(v)requests comment on whether there is any need to continue limiting the number of frequencies that may be assigned to any particular private coast station;

(vi)requests comment on updating the standards for ship radar equipment; and

(vii)proposes to add a rule clarifying that GMDSS vessels subject to subpart W are required to test GMDSS radiotelephone equipment on a daily basis. I. Procedural Matters A. Ex Parte Rules—Permit-But-Disclose Proceeding 2. This is a permit-but-disclose notice and comment rulemaking proceeding. Ex parte presentations are permitted, except during the Sunshine Agenda period, provided they are disclosed as provided in the Commission's rules. B. Comment Dates 3. Pursuant to §§ 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.415, and 1.419, interested parties may file comments on or before January 8, 2007 and reply comments on or before February 6, 2007. All filings related to this *Third FNPRM* should refer to WT Docket No. 00-48. 4. Comments may be filed using the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS), the Federal Government's eRulemaking Portal, or by filing paper copies. See Electronic Filing of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 24121, May 1, 1998. 5. Comments may be filed electronically using the Internet by accessing the ECFS: *http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/* or the Federal eRulemaking Portal: *http://www.regulations.gov.* Filers should follow the instructions provided on the Web site for submitting comments. 6. For ECFS filers, if multiple docket or rulemaking numbers appear in the caption of this proceeding, filers must transmit one electronic copy of the comments for each docket or rulemaking number referenced in the caption. In completing the transmittal screen, filers should include their full name, U.S. Postal Service mailing address, and the applicable docket or rulemaking number. Parties may also submit an electronic comment by Internet e-mail. To get filing instructions, filers should send an e-mail to *ecfs@fcc.gov,* and include the following words in the body of the message, “get form.” A sample form and directions will be sent in response. 7. Parties who choose to file by paper must file an original and four copies of each filing. If more than one docket or rulemaking number appears in the caption of this proceeding, filers must submit two additional copies for each additional docket or rulemaking number. 8. Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by commercial overnight courier, or by first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail (although we continue to experience delays in receiving U.S. Postal Service mail). All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission. 9. The Commission's contractor will receive hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings for the Commission's Secretary at 236 Massachusetts Avenue NE., Suite 110, Washington, DC 20002. The filing hours at this location are 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. All hand deliveries must be held together with rubber bands or fasteners. Any envelopes must be disposed of before entering the building. 10. Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) must be sent to 9300 East Hampton Drive, Capitol Heights, MD 20743. 11. U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail should be addressed to 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. 12. All filings must be addressed to the Commission's Secretary, Marlene H. Dortch, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. Parties shall also serve one copy with the Commission's copy contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc. (BCPI), Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554,

(202)488-5300, or via e-mail to *fcc@bcpiweb.com* . 13. *Availability of documents.* The public may view the documents filed in this proceeding during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Information Center, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554, and on the Commission's Internet Home Page: *http://www.fcc.gov* . Copies of comments and reply comments are also available through the Commission's duplicating contractor: Best Copy and Printing, Inc. (BCPI), Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, telephone 1-800-378-3160, may be reached by e-mail at *fcc@bcpiweb.com* or via BCPI's Web site at *http://www.bcpiweb.com* . To request materials in accessible formats for people with disabilities (braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), send an e-mail to *fcc504@fcc.gov* or call the Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice), 202-418-0432 (tty). C. Paperwork Reduction Act 14. This document does not contain proposed information collection(s) subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13. In addition, therefore, it does not contain any new or modified “information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees,” pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, *see* 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4). II. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 15. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), the Commission has prepared this present Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

(IRFA)of the possible significant economic impact on small entities by the policies and rules proposed in the *Third FNPRM* . Written public comments are requested on this IRFA. Comments must be identified as responses to the IRFA and must be filed by the deadlines for comments on the *Third FNPRM* as provided in paragraph 82 of the item. The Commission will send a copy of the *Third FNPRM* , including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the U.S. Small Business Administration. In addition, a copy of the *Third FNPRM* and IRFA (or summaries thereof) will also be published in the **Federal Register** . Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules 16. In the *Third FNPRM* , we seek comment on rule amendments that are intended to enhance maritime safety, promote the efficient use of the maritime radio spectrum, and, to the extent consistent with these first two objectives, remove unnecessary regulatory burdens. We also seek to conform the Commission's part 80 rules with international standards where doing so will not undermine domestic regulatory objectives. In the *Third FNPRM* , we first request comment on whether we should remove part 80 regulatory provisions providing for the certification and authorizing the use of INMARSAT-E EPIRBs in light of the planned cessation of service to such EPIRBs as of December 1, 2006. Second, we invite comment on a Coast Guard recommendation to require that VHF DSC handheld radios include an integral GPS capability to ensure that distress calls include accurate location information. Third, we ask commenters to consider whether small passenger vessels that do not have a reserve power supply should be required to carry at least one VHF marine radio transceiver. Fourth, we request comment on whether additional frequencies should be made available for ship station facsimile use, and whether the Commission should permit the transmission of data on VHF maritime voice channels. Fifth, we request comment on whether we should remove certain restrictions on the assignment of frequencies to private coast stations and marine utility stations in light of the current demand for such frequencies. Sixth, we solicit comment on updating the standards for ship radar equipment. Finally, we request comment on the proposed addition of a rule to subpart W of part 80 to clarify the continued applicability of a daily radiotelephone testing requirement to GMDSS vessels subject to subpart W. Legal Basis for Proposed Rules 17. The proposed action is authorized under sections 4(i), 303(r), and 332(a)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 303(r), and 332(a)(2). Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which the Proposed Rules Will Apply 18. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of and, where feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be affected by the proposed rules, if adopted. The RFA defines the term “small entity” as having the same meaning as the terms “small business,” “small organization,” and “small governmental jurisdiction.” In addition, the term “small business” has the same meaning as the term “small business concern” under the Small Business Act. A small business concern is one which

(1)is independently owned and operated;

(2)is not dominant in its field of operation; and

(3)satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business Administration (SBA). A small organization is generally “any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.” Nationwide, there are a total of approximately 22.4 million small businesses, according to SBA data. A “small organization” is generally “any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.” Nationwide, as of 2002, there were approximately 1.6 million small organizations. The term “small governmental jurisdiction” is defined generally as “governments of cities, towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special districts, with a population of less than fifty thousand.” Census Bureau data for 2002 indicate that there were 87,525 local governmental jurisdictions in the United States. We estimate that, of this total, 84,377 entities were “small governmental jurisdictions.” Thus, we estimate that most governmental jurisdictions are small. Below, we further describe and estimate the number of small entity licensees and regulatees that may be affected by adoption of rules discussed in the *Third FNPRM* . 19. Small businesses in the aviation and marine radio services use a marine very high frequency (VHF), medium frequency (MF), or high frequency

(HF)radio, any type of emergency position indicating radio beacon (EPIRB) and/or radar, an aircraft radio, and/or any type of emergency locator transmitter (ELT). The Commission has not developed a definition of small entities specifically applicable to these small businesses. For purposes of this IRFA, therefore, the applicable definition of small entity is the definition under the SBA rules applicable to wireless telecommunications. Pursuant to this definition, a “small entity” for purposes of the ship station licensees, public coast station licensees, or other marine radio users that may be affected by these rules, is any entity employing 1,500 of fewer persons. 13 CFR 121.201 (NAICS Code 517212). 20. *Wireless Service Providers.* The SBA has developed a small business size standard for wireless firms within the two broad economic census categories of “Paging” and “Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications.” Under both categories, the SBA deems a wireless business to be small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees. For the census category of Paging, Census Bureau data for 2002 show that there were 807 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 804 firms had employment of 999 or fewer employees, and three firms had employment of 1,000 employees or more. Thus, under this category and associated small business size standard, the majority of firms can be considered small. For the census category of Cellular and Other Wireless Telecommunications, Census Bureau data for 2002 show that there were 1,397 firms in this category that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 1,378 firms had employment of 999 or fewer employees, and 19 firms had employment of 1,000 employees or more. Thus, under this second category and size standard, the majority of firms can, again, be considered small. 21. *VHF Public Coast Stations.* Some of the rules proposed herein affect VHF public coast station licensees. The Commission has defined the term “small entity” specifically applicable to public coast station licensees as any entity employing less than 1,500 persons, based on the definition under the Small Business Administration rules applicable to radiotelephone service providers. *See* Amendment of the Commission's rules Concerning Maritime Communications, *Third Report and Order and Memorandum Opinion and Order* , 13 FCC Rcd 19853, 19893

(1998)(citing 13 CFR 121.201, Standard Industrial Classification

(SIC)Code 4812, now NAICS Code 513322). 22. *Marine Radio Equipment Manufacturers.* Some of the rules proposed herein may also affect small businesses that manufacture marine radio equipment. The Commission has not developed a definition of small entities applicable to marine radio equipment manufacturers. Therefore, the applicable definition is that for Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturers. The Census Bureau defines this category as follows: “This industry comprises establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing radio and television broadcast and wireless communications equipment. Examples of products made by these establishments are: Transmitting and receiving antennas, cable television equipment, GPS equipment, pagers, cellular phones, mobile communications equipment, and radio and television studio and broadcasting equipment.” The SBA has developed a small business size standard for Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturing, which is: all such firms having 750 or fewer employees. According to Census Bureau data for 2002, there were a total of 1,041 establishments in this category that operated for the entire year. Of this total, 1,010 had employment of under 500, and an additional 13 had employment of 500 to 999. Thus, under this size standard, the majority of firms can be considered small. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance Requirements 23. We believe three of the possible rule changes discussed in the *Third FNPRM* may potentially have a direct, significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. As noted, we have requested comment on whether to require GPS capability in VHF-DSC handheld radios, on whether to require that small passenger vessels carry at least one VHF handheld marine radio transceiver, and on whether to update the standards for ship radar equipment. We invite interested parties to address the economic impact of these possible rule changes on small vessel operators, small marine radio equipment manufacturers and other small businesses that may be subject to the new requirements. We seek information on whether the compliance costs may outweigh the safety benefits of these rule changes, and whether there are alternative means of securing the safety benefits of these requirements through means that are less burdensome to regulatees. 24. We do not believe any of the other matters discussed in the *Third FNPRM* would have a direct, significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. However, any commenters that disagree with that tentative conclusion are asked to explain the basis of that disagreement. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered 25. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant alternatives that it has considered in reaching its proposed approach, which may include the following four alternatives, among others:

(1)The establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into account the resources available to small entities;

(2)the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance or reporting requirements under the rule for small entities;

(3)the use of performance, rather than design standards; and

(4)an exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small entities. 26. In the *Third FNPRM* , we ask that commenters provide information on the incremental cost to manufacturers and consumers if the Commission were to adopt a requirement for GPS capability in VHF-DSC handheld units. We describe here, and seek comment on, possible alternatives to imposing such a requirement that might minimize the economic impact on small entities. First, we ask commenters to consider whether it would be appropriate to exempt any class of small entities from such a requirement. Commenters advocating such an exemption should propose criteria for identifying entities that should be exempt, and should explain why they believe such an exemption represents a reasonable compromise between the goals of promoting maritime safety and minimizing compliance costs for small entities. In addition, if we do determine to impose a new requirement for GPS capability in VHF-DSC handheld radio equipment, we would consider whether we should continue to certify VHF-DSC equipment without such capability for a specified additional period of time, and/or whether we should adopt grandfathering protections to allow the continued sale and use of such non-GPS VHF-DSC handheld equipment for a specified period of time or indefinitely. Interested parties should address these alternatives. Finally, we seek comment on whether an alternative, less costly equipment requirement could adequately address the concern that distress communications include accurate coordinates for the vessel in distress. 27. In the *Third FNPRM* , we also seek comment on whether the Commission should require carriage of at least one VHF handheld marine radio transceiver on small passenger vessels that do not carry a reserve power supply. Our understanding is that such handheld radio equipment can be purchased for under fifty dollars at retail, making it a far less expensive proposition for small vessel owners and operators than would expanding the reserve power supply requirement to all small passenger vessels, regardless of size. Notwithstanding the relative inexpensiveness of VHF handheld marine radios, and the important safety benefits that would accrue from imposing such a carriage requirement, we request that interested parties address whether the costs of such a requirement would outweigh the safety benefits, and to suggest any alternatives, exemptions or phased-in implementation schedules that the Commission might adopt to reduce the compliance burden of such a requirement on small entities. 28. In the *Third FNPRM* , we also invite comment on revising the standards for ship radar equipment. We seek comment on the impact of such a revision on radar equipment manufacturers and on the owners and operators of vessels required to be fitted with radar equipment. Given that we contemplate amending our rules only to reflect the most up-to-date international standards for ship radar equipment, we question whether such an amendment would impose any new compliance burden on small entities, since they may already be required to, or have decided it is prudent to, manufacture and use equipment that conforms to those international standards. To the extent such an amendment would be deemed to create a new compliance burden, we ask interested parties whether and how that burden can be eliminated or mitigated for small entities, both small manufacturers and small owners and operators of vessels fitted with radar equipment. Commenters should consider the possibility of retaining the existing part 80 radar standards, incorporating by reference only some of the newer international radar standards, exempting certain entities from the requirement to comply with the newer international radar standards, and/or providing transition periods before compliance is required (so that, *e.g.* , radar equipment can still be certified based on compliance with the current standards for a specified period of time) and grandfathering protection (to permit the continued manufacture, sale, importation, and use of radar equipment certified under the old standards, either for a specified period of years or indefinitely). Commenters are also invited to suggest alternatives other than those discussed here. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed Rules 29. None. III. Ordering Clauses 30. Pursuant to sections 4(i), 303(r), and 403 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 303(r) and 403, this *Third FNPRM* is adopted. 31. Pursuant to the applicable procedures set forth in §§ 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR 1.415, and 1.419, interested parties may file comments on this *Third FNPRM* on or before January 8, 2007 and reply comments on or before February 6, 2007. 32. The Commission's Consumer Information Bureau, Reference Information Center, *shall send* a copy of this *Third FNPRM* and also the IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration. Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-18755 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P 71 216 Wednesday, November 8, 2006 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service [Docket No. APHIS-2006-0142] Notice of Request for Extension of Approval of an Information Collection; Importation of Live Swine, Pork, and Pork Products From Chile AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA. ACTION: Extension of approval of an information collection; comment request. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service's intention to request an extension of approval of an information collection associated with regulations for the importation of live swine, pork, and pork products from Chile into the United States. DATES: We will consider all comments that we receive on or before January 8, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by either of the following methods: Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to *http://regulations.gov,* select “Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service” from the agency drop-down menu, then click “Submit.” In the Docket ID column, select APHIS-2006-0142 to submit or view public comments and to view supporting and related materials available electronically. Information on using Regulations.gov, including instructions for accessing documents, submitting comments, and viewing the docket after the close of the comment period, is available through the site's “User Tips” link. Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Please send four copies of your comment (an original and three copies) to Docket No. APHIS-2006-0142, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238. Please state that your comment refers to Docket No. APHIS-2006-0142. *Reading Room:* You may read any comments that we receive on this docket in our reading room. The reading room is located in room 1141 of the USDA South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, please call

(202)690-2817 before coming. *Other Information:* Additional information about APHIS and its programs is available on the Internet at *http://www.aphis.usda.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information regarding regulations for the importation of live swine, pork, and pork products from Chile, contact Dr. Bob Bokma, Regional Trade Director, Sanitary Trade Issues Team, National Center for Import and Export, 4700 River Road Unit 38, Riverdale, MD 20737;

(301)734-8066. For copies of more detailed information on the information collection, contact Mrs. Celeste Sickles, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at

(301)734-7477. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title:* Importation of Live Swine, Pork, and Pork Products from Chile. *OMB Number:* 0579-0235. *Type of Request:* Extension of approval of an information collection. *Abstract:* The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) of the United States Department of Agriculture

(USDA)is authorized, among other things, to prohibit the importation and interstate movement of animals and animal products to prevent the introduction into and dissemination within the United States of animal diseases and pests. To fulfill this mission, APHIS regulates the importation of animals and animal products into the United States. The regulations are contained in title 9, chapter 1, subchapter D, parts 91 through 99, of the Code of Federal Regulations. Part 94, § 94.25, allows the importation, subject to certain conditions, of live swine, pork, and pork products from certain regions, including Chile, that are free of classical swine fever. Among the conditions is a requirement for a certificate that must be completed by Chilean veterinary authorities prior to export. The certificate must identify both the region of export and the region of origin as regions designated in §§ 94.9 and 94.10 as free of classical swine fever at the time the live swine, pork, or pork products were in the regions. We are asking the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)to approve our use of this information collection activity for an additional 3 years. The purpose of this notice is to solicit comments from the public (as well as affected agencies) concerning our information collection. These comments will help us:

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

(2)Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of the information collection, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

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

(4)Minimize the burden of the information collection on those who are to respond, through use, as appropriate, of automated, electronic, mechanical, and other collection technologies, *e.g.* , permitting electronic submission of responses. *Estimate of burden:* The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response. *Respondents:* Full-time salaried veterinarians employed by the national government of Chile. *Estimated annual number of respondents:* 5. *Estimated annual number of responses per respondent:* 10. *Estimated annual number of responses:* 50. *Estimated total annual burden on respondents:* 50 hours. (Due to averaging, the total annual burden hours may not equal the product of the annual number of responses multiplied by the reporting burden per response.) All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter of public record. Done in Washington, DC, this 2nd day of November 2006. W. Ron DeHaven, Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. [FR Doc. E6-18855 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service [Docket No. APHIS-2006-0156] Notice of Request for Extension of Approval of an Information Collection; Importation of Clementines, Mandarins, and Tangerines From Chile AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA. ACTION: Extension of approval of an information collection; comment request. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service's intention to request an extension of approval of an information collection associated with regulations for the importation of clementines, marndarins, and tangerines from Chile. DATES: We will consider all comments that we receive on or before January 8, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by either of the following methods: Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to *http://regulations.gov,* select “Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service” from the agency drop-down menu, then click “Submit.” In the Docket ID column, select APHIS-2006-0156 to submit or view public comments and to view supporting and related materials available electronically. Information on using Regulations.gov, including instructions for accessing documents, submitting comments, and viewing the docket after the close of the comment period, is available through the site's “User Tips” link. Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Please send four copies of your comment (an original and three copies) to Docket No. APHIS-2006-0156, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238. Please state that your comment refers to Docket No. APHIS-2006-0156. *Reading Room:* You may read any comments that we receive on this docket in our reading room. The reading room is located in room 1141 of the USDA South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, please call

(202)690-2817 before coming. *Other Information:* Additional information about APHIS and its programs is available on the Internet at *http://www.aphis.usda.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information on regulations associated with the importation of clementines, mandarins, and tangerines from Chile, contact Mr. Tony Roman, Import Specialist, Commodity Import Analysis and Operations, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 133, Riverdale, MD 20737;

(301)734-3818. For copies of more detailed information on the information collection, contact Mrs. Celeste Sickles, APHIS* Information Collection Coordinator, at

(301)734-7477. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title:* Importation of Clementines, Mandarins, and Tangerines from Chile. *OMB Number:* 0579-0242. *Type of Request:* Extension of approval of an information collection. *Abstract:* As authorized by the Plant Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 7701 *et seq.* ) (PPA), the Secretary of Agriculture may prohibit or restrict the importation, entry, exportation, or movement in interstate commerce of any plant, plant product, biological control organism, noxious weed, means of conveyance, or other article if the Secretary determines that the prohibition or restriction is necessary to prevent a plant pest or noxious weed from being introduced into or disseminated within the United States. This authority has been delegated to the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), which administers regulations to implement the PPA. The regulations in Subpart—Fruits and Vegetables (7 CFR 319.56 through 319.56-8) prohibit or restrict the importation of fruits and vegetables into the United States from certain parts of the world to prevent the introduction and dissemination of plant pests. Under these regulations, clementines, mandarins, and tangerines from Chile are subject to certain conditions before entering the United States. These requirements include that production sites participating in an export program from Chile to the United States must register with the national plant protection organization

(NPPO)of Chile and be certified as low prevalence production sites. Each consignment of clementines, mandarins, and tangerines must be inspected by APHIS and the NPPO of Chile, and a phytosanitary certificate must be issued before the consignment may leave Chile. In addition, Chile must enter into a trust fund agreement with the United States before beginning any export program. We are asking the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)to approve our use of these information collection activities for an additional 3 years. The purpose of this notice is to solicit comments from the public (as well as affected agencies) concerning our information collection. These comments will help us:

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

(2)Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of the information collection, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

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

(4)Minimize the burden of the information collection on those who are to respond, through use, as appropriate, of automated, electronic, mechanical, and other collection technologies, *e.g.* , permitting electronic submission of responses. *Estimate of burden:* The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 0.249575 hours per response. *Respondents:* Growers, shippers, and Chilean health officials. *Estimated annual number of respondents:* 19. *Estimated annual number of responses per respondent:* 31. *Estimated annual number of responses:* 589. *Estimated total annual burden on respondents:* 147 hours. (Due to averaging, the total annual burden hours may not equal the product of the annual number of responses multiplied by the reporting burden per response.) All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter of public record. Done in Washington, DC, this 2nd day of November 2006. W. Ron DeHaven, Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. [FR Doc. E6-18857 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service [Docket No. APHIS-2006-0165] Notice of Request for Reinstatement of an Information Collection; Dairy 2007 Study AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA. ACTION: Reinstatement of an information collection; comment request. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service's intention to request a reinstatement of an information collection to support the National Animal Health Monitoring System's national Dairy 2007 Study. DATES: We will consider all comments that we receive on or before January 8, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by either of the following methods: Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to *http://regulations.gov* , select “Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service” from the agency drop-down menu, then click “Submit.” In the Docket ID column, select APHIS-2006-0165 to submit or view public comments and to view supporting and related materials available electronically. Information on using Regulations.gov, including instructions for accessing documents, submitting comments, and viewing the docket after the close of the comment period, is available through the site's “User Tips” link. Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Please send four copies of your comment (an original and three copies) to Docket No. APHIS-2006-0165, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238. Please state that your comment refers to Docket No. APHIS-2006-0165. *Reading Room:* You may read any comments that we receive on this docket in our reading room. The reading room is located in room 1141 of the USDA South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, please call

(202)690-2817 before coming. *Other Information:* Additional information about APHIS and its programs is available on the Internet at *http://www.aphis.usda.gov* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information on the Dairy 2007 Study, contact Ms. Sandra Warnken, Management and Program Analyst, Centers for Epidemiology and Animal Health, VS, APHIS, 2150 Centre Avenue, Building B MS 2E6, Fort Collins, CO 80526;

(970)494-7193. For copies of more detailed information on the information collection, contact Mrs. Celeste Sickles, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at

(301)734-7477. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title:* National Animal Health Monitoring System; Dairy 2007 Study. *OMB Number:* 0579-0205. *Type of Request:* Reinstatement of an information collection. *Abstract:* The United States Department of Agriculture is responsible for protecting the health of our Nation's livestock and poultry populations by preventing the introduction and interstate spread of serious diseases and pests of livestock and for eradicating such diseases from the United States when feasible. In connection with this mission, the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) operates the National Animal Health Monitoring System (NAHMS), which collects, on a national basis, statistically valid and scientifically sound data on the prevalence and economic importance of livestock and poultry disease risk factors. NAHMS' national studies have evolved into a collaborative industry and government initiative to help determine the most effective means of preventing and controlling diseases of livestock. APHIS is the only agency responsible for collecting national data on livestock health. Participation in any NAHMS study is voluntary, and all data are confidential. APHIS plans to conduct the Dairy 2007 Study as part of an ongoing series of NAHMS studies on the U.S. dairy population. The purpose of this fourth dairy study is to collect information, through questionnaires and biologic sampling, to: Describe trends in dairy cattle health and management practices. Evaluate management factors related to cow comfort and removal rates. Describe dairy calf health and nutrition from birth to weaning and evaluate heifer disease prevention practices. Estimate the prevalence of herds infected with bovine viral diarrhea virus. Describe current milking procedures and estimate the prevalence of contagious mastitis pathogens. Estimate the herd-level prevalence and associated costs of *Mycobacterium paratuberculosis* . Describe current biosecurity practices and determine producer motivation for implementing or not implementing biosecurity practices. Determine the prevalence of specific food safety pathogens and describe antimicrobial resistance patterns. This information will help the United States detect trends in the management, production, and health status of the nation's dairy industry over time. The study will take place in the top 17 dairy producing States: California, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin. The study will consist of a series of on-farm questionnaires, with biologic sampling, which will be administered by APHIS-designated data collectors. The information collected through the Dairy 2007 Study will be analyzed and organized into descriptive reports. Information sheets will be derived from these reports, and the data will be disseminated to and used by a variety of constituents, including producers, veterinarians, stakeholders, academia, and others. The data will help APHIS address emerging issues and examine the economic impact of selected health management practices. We are asking the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)to approve our use of these information collection activities for 3 years. The purpose of this notice is to solicit comments from the public (as well as affected agencies) concerning our information collection. These comments will help us:

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

(2)Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of the 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; and

(4)Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, through use, as appropriate, of automated, electronic, mechanical, and other collection technologies; e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. *Estimate of burden:* The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 0.9137215 hours per response. *Respondents:* Dairy producers in 17 States. *Estimated annual number of respondents:* 4,000. *Estimated annual number of responses per respondent:* 2.46875. *Estimated annual number of responses:* 9,875. *Estimated total annual burden on respondents:* 9,023 hours. (Due to averaging, the total annual burden hours may not equal the product of the annual number of responses multiplied by the reporting burden per response.) All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter of public record. Done in Washington, DC, this 2nd day of November 2006. W. Ron DeHaven, Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. [FR Doc. E6-18859 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service [Docket No. APHIS-2006-0172] Interstate Movement of Garbage From Hawaii; Availability of an Environmental Assessment and a Pest Risk Assessment AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice of availability and request for comments. SUMMARY: We are advising the public that the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service has prepared a site-specific environmental assessment and a pest risk assessment relative to a request to allow the interstate movement of garbage from Hawaii to a landfill in the State of Washington. The environmental assessment contains a general assessment of the potential environmental effects associated with moving garbage interstate from Hawaii to Washington, subject to certain pest risk mitigation measures and documents our review and analysis of the environmental impacts associated with, and alternatives to, the proposed action. The pest risk assessment evaluates the risks associated with the interstate movement of garbage from Hawaii to Washington. We are making these assessments available to the public for review and comment. DATES: We will consider all comments that we receive on or before December 8, 2006. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by either of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal:* Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* , select “Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service” from the agency drop-down menu, then click “Submit.” In the Docket ID column, select Docket No. APHIS-2006-0172 to submit or view public comments and to view supporting and related materials available electronically. Information on using Regulations.gov, including instructions for accessing documents, submitting comments, and viewing the docket after the close of the comment period, is available through the site's “User Tips” link. • *Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery:* Please send four copies of your comment (an original and three copies) to Docket No. APHIS-2006-0172, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238. Please state that your comment refers to Docket No. APHIS-2006-0172. *Reading Room:* You may read any comments that we receive on the assessments in our reading room. The reading room is located in room 1141 of the USDA South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, please call

(202)690-2817 before coming. *Other Information:* Additional information about APHIS and its programs is available on the Internet at *http://www.aphis.usda.gov* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Shannon Hamm, Assistant Deputy Administrator, Policy and Program Development, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 20, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231;

(301)734-4957. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The importation and interstate movement of garbage is regulated by the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) under 7 CFR 330.400 and 9 CFR 94.5 (referred to below as the regulations) in order to protect against the introduction into and dissemination within the United States of plant and animal pests and diseases. APHIS is advising the public that we have prepared a site-specific environmental assessment and a pest risk assessment relative to a request to allow the interstate movement of garbage from Hawaii to the State of Washington. The environmental assessment, titled “Movement of Plastic-baled Municipal Solid Waste from Honolulu, Hawaii to Roosevelt Regional Landfill, Washington” (October 2006), contains a general assessment of the potential environmental effects associated with moving garbage interstate from Hawaii to the Roosevelt Regional Landfill in Klickitat County, WA, subject to certain pest risk mitigation measures. The environmental assessment documents our review and analysis of environmental impacts associated with, and alternatives to, the proposed action. The pest risk assessment, titled “The Risk of Introduction of Pests to Washington State via Plastic-Baled Municipal Solid Waste from Hawaii” (September 2006), evaluates the plant pest risks associated with the interstate movement of garbage from Hawaii to the Roosevelt Regional Landfill. We are making these assessments available to the public for review and comment. We will consider all comments that we receive on or before the date listed under the heading DATES at the beginning of this notice. The environmental assessment and pest risk assessment may be viewed on the Internet on the *Regulations.gov* Web site or in our reading room (see ADDRESSES above for instructions for accessing Regulations.gov and information on the location and hours of the reading room). You may request paper copies of the documents by calling or writing to the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . Please refer to the title of the document(s) you wish to receive when requesting copies. The environmental assessment has been prepared in accordance with:

(1)The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 *et seq.* ),

(2)regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality for implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500-1508),

(3)USDA regulations implementing NEPA (7 CFR part 1), and

(4)APHIS' NEPA Implementing Procedures (7 CFR part 372). Done in Washington, DC, this 3rd day of November 2006. Kevin Shea, Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. [FR Doc. E6-19027 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Economic Research Service Notice of Intent To Seek Approval To Collect Information AGENCY: Economic Research Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice and request for comments. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13) and Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)regulations at 5 CFR part 1320 (60 FR 44978, August 29, 1995), this Notice invites the general public and other interested parties to comment on a proposed information collection by the Economic Research Service (ERS). This information collection will provide data needed to develop questionnaires and related instruments capable of collecting reliable and valid information on topics including stress and food-related behavior, cognitive load and food-related behavior, and self-control and food-related behavior. ERS plans to conduct data collections that involve formative research, including such methods as cognitive interviews (individuals), and pre-testing and field testing of survey items (in person, telephone). DATES: Comments on this Notice must be received by January 12, 2007 to be assured of consideration. ADDRESSES: Requests for additional information regarding this Notice should be directed to Dr. Mark Denbaly, Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1800 M Street, NW., Room S2078, Washington, DC 20036-5831. Submit electronic comments to *mdenbaly@ers.usda.gov* or fax to 202-694-5390. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title:* Formative Research for Development and Testing of Questionnaires on the Psychological Determinants of Food Consumption Behavior. *OMB Number:* Not yet assigned. *Expiration Date:* N/A. *Type of Request:* Approval to collect information from civilian, non-institutionalized population, especially low-income individuals and households targeted by USDA food assistance programs. *Abstract:* Diet-related health conditions account for a large fraction of morbidity and mortality in the United States. Significant sections of the U.S. population consume sub-optimal diets characterized by overconsumption and poor diet quality. Diet-related health conditions such as obesity have increased rapidly among all population groups, including the low-income and food assistance program recipients. Health care costs related to poor diets and obesity are placing a growing burden on the health insurance system. Poor diets and the growing rate of obesity among children imply that such costs will continue to increase unless dietary behaviors become more healthful. A growing body of research suggests standard economic models modified to account for systematic errors, cognitive biases, and self control problems in decision making may offer a more complete explanation of the persistence of poor dietary choices and offer a wider array of public policy solutions. While such new behavioral economics research has examined decision making in other domains of consumer choice, there has been limited research on food consumption and dietary habits. In particular, there is a lack of reliable, valid questionnaires or other short, practical population measures capable of collecting valid information on topics including stress and food-related behavior, cognitive load and food-related behavior, and self-control and food-related behavior. Dietary assessment through 24-hour dietary recall is well-established. However, development of new questionnaires for assessing stress, cognitive load, and self-control as they relate to dietary behavior and the assessment of their reliability and validity will require formative research. Formative research methods such as cognitive interviewing and field testing will assist ERS to develop questionnaires and related measures that are understandable and yield reliable, valid information on psychological and behavioral underpinnings of food choice. Findings from all subsequent data collections will be included in summary reports submitted to OMB. The reports will describe the data collection methods used in the formative research, findings, conclusions, implications, and recommendations for the development of reliable, valid questionnaires and related measures. There will be no attempt to generalize the findings to be nationally representative. *Methods of Collection:* The data will be collected using a combination of methodologies appropriate to each formative research activity. These methodologies could include cognitive interviews and pretest/field tests. Estimated Number of Respondents and Total Annual Burden on Respondents: Type of data collection Number of respondents Average respondent burden (minutes) Total hours of burden Cognitive Interviews/Pretesting 24 20 8 Field Test 800 120 1,600 Totals 824 N/A 1,608 *Comments:* Comments are invited on:

(a)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;

(b)the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

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

(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. All comments on this Notice will become a matter of public record and be summarized in the request for OMB approval. Dated: October 19, 2006. Susan Offutt, Administrator, Economic Research Service. [FR Doc. E6-18797 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-18-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Allegheny National Forest, Pennsylvania, Brush Creek Project AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. ACTION: Cancellation of notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement. SUMMARY: The Allegheny National Forest is canceling its published notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement for the Brush Creek Project on the Marienville Ranger District (FR Document 99-5430, March 4, 1999) published in the **Federal Register** , Volume 64, No. 43, Friday March 5, 1999, pages 10618-19 and (FR Document 03-5253 filed March 6, 2003) published in the **Federal Register** , Volume 68, No. 45, Friday March 7, 2003, pages 11033-35. This project has been started and delayed twice. It has now been redesigned and the level of impact is no longer anticipated to require an Environment Impact Statement. An Environmental Assessment will be prepared to determine whether an Environmental Impact Statement is needed. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kevin Treese, District NEPA Coordinator, Marienville Ranger District, HC 2 Box 130, Marienville, PA 16239 or by telephone at 814-927-6628. Responsible Official Robert T. Fallon, District Ranger, Marienville Ranger District, HC 2 Box 130, Marienville, PA 16239 or by telephone at 814-927-6628. Dated: October 26, 2006. Kathleen S. Morse, Forest Supervisor. [FR Doc. 06-9108 Filed 11-7-06; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 6

Traces to 6 documents

U.S. Code

CFR