Notices. Notice of Proposed Subsequent Arrangement
17,591 words·~80 min read·
/register/2007/01/23/07-262A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.
BILLING CODE 6820-KF-M DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Office of International Regimes and Agreements Proposed Subsequent Arrangement AGENCY: Department of Energy. ACTION: Notice of Proposed Subsequent Arrangement. SUMMARY: This notice is being issued under the authority of Section 131 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2160). The Department is providing notice of a proposed “subsequent arrangement” under the Agreement for Cooperation in the Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy between the United States and the European Atomic Energy Community (EURATOM).
This subsequent arrangement concerns a request for a one-year extension (April 2007 to April 2008) of the current one-year programmatic approval for retransfer of U.S.-obligated irradiated fuel rods between Studsvik Nuclear AB, Sweden and the Institutt for Energiteknikk, Norway. The rods are being transferred for irradiation service, tests and examination, and returned to Sweden for further tests and disposal. The amounts are the same as under the current approval—a maximum of 30,000 grams uranium, 400 grams U-235 and 400 grams plutonium in all shipments combined, with a maximum of 100 grams of plutonium per shipment.
The original programmatic consent, published in the **Federal Register** June 13, 2006, is set to expire in March 2007. Additional transactions are scheduled to occur between April 2007 and April 2008 and will be subject to U.S.-Euratom Agreement for Cooperation on Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy. In accordance with Section 131 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, we have determined that this subsequent arrangement will not be inimical to the common defense and security.
This subsequent arrangement will take effect no sooner than 15 days after the date of publication of this notice. Dated: January 12, 2007. For the Department of Energy. Richard Goorevich, Director, Office of International Regimes and Agreements. [FR Doc. E7-914 Filed 1-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #1 January 16, 2007. Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings: *Docket Numbers:* ER06-707-000. *Applicants:* Arkansas Electric Cooperative Corporation. *Description:* Arkansas Electric Cooperative Corporation submits a notice, of conditional withdrawal of protests. *Filed Date:* 01/11/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070111-5016. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m.
Eastern Time on Monday, January 22, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER06-739-004; ER06-738-004; ER03-983-003. *Applicants:* Cogen Technologies Linden Venture, L.P.; East Coast Power, Linden Holding, L.L.C. *Description:* Cogen Technologies Linden Venture LP et al notifies FERC, of a change in status resulting from acquisition of an, ownership interest in Babcock & Brown Wind Portfolio, Holdings 1 LLC etc. *Filed Date:* 01/09/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070111-0043. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m.
Eastern Time on Tuesday, January 30, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER06-1452-001. *Applicants:* PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. *Description:* PJM Interconnection, LLC submits a corrected Wholesale, Market Participation Agreement. *Filed Date:* 01/11/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070112-0061. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, February 01, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER06-1453-001. *Applicants:* PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. *Description:* PJM Interconnection, LLC submits a corrected Wholesale, Market Participation Agreement. *Filed Date:* 01/10/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070111-0046. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m.
Eastern Time on Wednesday, January 31, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-233-001. *Applicants:* Occidental Power Services, Inc. *Description:* Occidental Power Services, Inc submits an amendment to its, 11/17/06 rate schedule amendment. *Filed Date:* 01/10/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070111-0044. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, January 31, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-340-001. *Applicants:* Bell Independent Power Corporation. *Description:* Bell Independent Power Corp submits an amended petition, for acceptance of initial Tariff, Original Volume 1, waivers, and blanket authority. *Filed Date:* 01/11/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070112-0062. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m.
Eastern Time on Thursday, February 01, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-358-001. *Applicants:* Southwest Power Pool, Inc. *Description:* Southwest Power Pool, Inc submits a supplement to its, 12/22/06 filing of an executed Service Agreement for Firm, Point-to-Point Transmission Service w/ Western Resources, dba Westar Energy etc. *Filed Date:* 01/11/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070112-0063. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, February 01, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-422-000. *Applicants:* New York Independent System Operator., Inc. *Description:* New York Independent System Operator, Inc submits, proposed revisions to its Open Access Transmission Tariff, and its Market Administration and Control Area Services, Tariff. *Filed Date:* 01/09/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070111-0017. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m.
Eastern Time on Tuesday, January 30, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-423-000. *Applicants:* South Carolina Electric & Gas Company. *Description:* South Carolina Electric & Gas Co submits a Facilities, Agreement with New Horizon Electric Cooperative. *Filed Date:* 01/10/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070111-0045. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, January 31, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-424-000. *Applicants:* PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. *Description:* PJM Interconnection LLC submits a report of the, recommended allocations of cost responsibility for baseline, transmission updgrades reviewed and approved by PJM, Board of Managers and revised tariff sheets. *Filed Date:* 01/11/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070112-0064. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m.
Eastern Time on Monday, February 12, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-425-000. *Applicants:* American Electric Power Service Corporation. *Description:* American Electric Power Service Corp submits notices of, cancellation for two ERCOT Generation Interconnection, Agreements between AEP TCC and La Palma WLE, LP and, AEP TCC and Lon C. Hill. *Filed Date:* 01/12/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070116-0051. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, February 02, 2007. Take notice that the Commission received the following foreign utility company status filings: *Docket Numbers:* FC07-6-000. *Applicants:* Nuovo Pignone s.p.a. *Description:* Nuovo Pignone s.p.a. submits a notice for Self-Certification, of Foreign Utility Company Status pursuant to Section 366.1, of the Commission's regulations. *Filed Date:* 12/29/2006. *Accession Number:* 20070110-0085. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m.
Eastern Time on Friday, January 19, 2007. Take notice that the Commission received the following electric reliability filings: *Docket Numbers:* RR06-1-005. *Applicants:* North American Electric Reliability Corporation. *Description:* North American Electric Reliability Corporation submits a, compliance filing in response to the Commission's order, issued 10/30/06. *Filed Date:* 01/12/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070112-5032. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, February 02, 2007.
Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding, interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline need not be served on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at *http://www.ferc.gov.* To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link.
Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First St. NE., Washington, DC 20426. The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC.
There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* . or call
(866)208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call
(202)502-8659. Magalie R. Salas, Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-874 Filed 1-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [Regional Docket Nos. II-2006-01; FRL-8272-4] Clean Air Act Operating Permit Program; Petition for Objection to State Operating Permit for Marcal Paper Mills, Inc. AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice of final decision concerning a State operating permit. SUMMARY: This document announces a decision the EPA Administrator has made. It responds to a citizen petition submitted by the Rutgers Environmental Law Clinic
(RELC)on behalf of a number of petitioners. The petition requests EPA to object to an operating permit issued to the Marcal Paper Mills, Inc. (“Marcal”) by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). The Administrator has partially granted and partially denied the subject petition. Pursuant to section 505(b)(2) of the Clean Air Act (Act), petitioners may seek judicial review of those portions of the petition which EPA denied in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit. Pursuant to section 307 of the Act, any petition for review shall be filed within 60 days from the date this notice appears in the **Federal Register.** ADDRESSES: You may review copies of the final order, the petition, and all relevant information at the EPA Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway, New York, New York 10007-1866. If you wish to examine these documents, you should make an appointment at least 24 hours before visiting day. Additionally, the final order for Marcal is available electronically at: *http://www.epa.gov/region07/programs/artd/air/title5/petitiondb/petitiondb2002.htm* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven Riva, Chief, Permitting Section, Air Programs Branch, Division of Environmental Planning and Protection, EPA, Region 2, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866, telephone
(212)637-4074. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Act affords EPA a 45-day period to review and object, as appropriate, to operating permits proposed by State permitting authorities. Section 505(b)(2) of the Act authorizes any person to petition the EPA Administrator within 60 days after the expiration of this review period to object to State operating permits if EPA has not done so. Petitions must be based only on objections to the permit that were raised with reasonable specificity during the public comment period provided by the State, unless the petitioner demonstrates that it was impracticable to raise those issues during the comment period or the grounds for the issues arose after this period. On March 1, 2006, EPA Region 2 received a petition from RELC on behalf of a number of petitioners requesting that EPA object to the title V operating permit issued to Marcal on the following bases:
(1)The permit is not accompanied by a statement of basis that is understandable, available to the public and describes the past compliance history of the facility and permitting decisions by DEP;
(2)the permit fails to include a compliance schedule containing the terms of the settlement agreement between Marcal and DEP dated June 20, 2005 that are required to satisfy pending violations;
(3)the permit fails to impose sufficient opacity monitoring, such as continuous opacity monitoring, to assure compliance with particulate matter limits;
(4)the permit fails to require continuous emissions monitoring or more frequent stack testing to monitor VOC and NO <sup>X</sup> ;
(5)the DEP did not adequately address the environmental justice issue raised by Petitioners as is required by state and federal environmental justice executive orders; and
(6)the DEP did not adequately address issues raised by Petitioners during the public hearing. On November 30, 2006, the Administrator issued an order granting on the issue of Statement of Basis and denying on the other issues. The order explains EPA's reasons for granting on the Statement of Basis issue and for denying the remaining issues. Dated: January 4, 2007. Alan J. Steinberg, Regional Administrator, Region 2. [FR Doc. E7-818 Filed 1-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [MI-88-1; FRL-8272-8] Adequacy Status of Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for Four Areas in Michigan for Transportation Conformity Purposes AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice of adequacy. SUMMARY: In this action, EPA is notifying the public that EPA has found that the motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) for four areas across the state of Michigan are adequate for conformity purposes. On March 2, 1999, the D.C. Circuit Court ruled that submitted State Implementation Plans
(SIPs)cannot be used for conformity determinations until EPA has affirmatively found them adequate. As a result of our finding, the Flint (consisting of Genesee and Lapeer Counties), Muskegon County, Berrien County, and Cass County areas can use the (MVEBs) for future conformity determinations. These budgets are effective February 7, 2007. The finding and the response to comments will be available at EPA's conformity Web site: *http://www.epa.gov/otaq/transp.htm,* (once there, click on the “Conformity” button, then look for “Adequacy Review of SIP Submissions for Conformity”). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anthony Maietta, Life Scientist, Criteria Pollutant Section (AR-18J), Air Programs Branch, Air and Radiation Division, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,
(312)353-8777, *Maietta.anthony@epa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, whenever “we”, “us” or “our” is used, we mean EPA. Background Today's action is simply an announcement of a finding that we have already made. EPA Region 5 sent a letter to the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality on November 29, 2006, stating that the 2018 (MVEBs) in the Flint, Muskegon County, Berrien County, and Cass County areas are adequate. Michigan submitted the budgets as part of the 8-hour ozone redesignation requests and maintenance plans for these areas. This finding was announced on EPA's conformity Web site, and received no comments: *http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/adequacy.htm,* (once there, click on “What SIP submissions are currently under EPA adequacy review?”). The 2018 (MVEBs), in tons per day, for volatile organic compounds and oxides of nitrogen for these areas are as follows: Area 2018 VOC MVEB
(tpd)2018 NO <sup>X</sup> MVEB
(tpd)Flint 25.68 37.99 Muskegon County 6.67 11.00 Berrien County 9.16 15.19 Cass County 2.76 3.40 Transportation conformity is required by section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act. EPA's conformity rule requires that transportation plans, programs, and projects conform to state air quality implementation plans and establishes the criteria and procedures for determining whether or not they do. Conformity to a SIP means that transportation activities will not produce new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the national ambient air quality standards. The criteria by which we determine whether a SIP's motor vehicle emission budgets are adequate for conformity purposes are outlined in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). Please note that an adequacy review is separate from EPA's completeness review, and it also should not be used to prejudge EPA's ultimate approval of the SIP. Even if we find a budget adequate, the SIP could later be disapproved. We've described our process for determining the adequacy of submitted SIP budgets in guidance (May 14, 1999 memo titled “Conformity Guidance on Implementation of March 2, 1999 Conformity Court Decision”). We followed this guidance in making our adequacy determination. Dated: January 11, 2007. Mary A. Gade, Regional Administrator, Region 5. [FR Doc. E7-919 Filed 1-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [IL228-2; FRL-8272-7] Notice of Prevention of Significant Deterioration Final Determination for Indeck-Elwood, LLC AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice of withdrawal action. SUMMARY: This notice announces that EPA is withdrawing the Notice of Final Agency Action of November 22, 2006 (71 FR 67560), for the Indeck-Elwood, LLC Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD)permit, because the Environmental Appeals Board
(EAB)remanded the permit in part. On September 27, 2006, the EAB of the EPA denied in part, and remanded in part, a petition for review of a federal PSD permit issued to Indeck-Elwood, LLC by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency. According to 40 CFR part 124, a final permit decision shall be issued by the Regional Administrator when the EAB issues a decision on the merits of the appeal and the decision does not include a remand of the proceedings. Because the EAB's decision on this permit appeal included a partial remand, there is not yet a final agency action subject to review. ADDRESSES: The documents relevant to the above action are available for public inspection during normal business hours at the following address: Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard (AR-18J), Chicago, Illinois 60604. To arrange viewing of these documents, call Constantine Blathras at
(312)886-0671. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Constantine Blathras, Air and Radiation Division, Air Programs Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 W. Jackson Boulevard (AR-18J), Chicago, Illinois 60604. Anyone who wishes to review the EAB decision can obtain it at *http://www.epa.gov/eab/.* Dated: January 17, 2007. Bharat Mathur, Deputy Regional Administrator, Region 5. [FR Doc. E7-920 Filed 1-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0051; FRL-8272-1] Asbestos-Containing Materials in Schools; State Request for Waiver From Requirements AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice of final approval. SUMMARY: EPA is approving a waiver of the requirements of the Federal asbestos-in-schools program for the Commonwealth of Kentucky. A waiver request can be granted if EPA determines that the Commonwealth of Kentucky is implementing or intends to implement a state program of asbestos inspection and management that is at least as stringent as the federal program. This action approves the waiver request submitted by Governor Paul E. Patton, on January 4, 1999. On June 1, 2006, EPA published a notice of proposed approval and request for comments, and on August 31, 2006, published a reopening of comment period and correction. A detailed description of this waiver request and EPA's rationale for approving it was provided in the notice of proposed approval and request for comments and will not be restated here. No significant or adverse comments were received on EPA's proposal. EFFECTIVE DATE: This final approval is effective on February 22, 2007. ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket Identification No. EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0051. All documents in the docket are listed on the *www.regulations.gov* Web site. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business Information 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 electronically through *www.regulations.gov* or in hard copy at the Asbestos Coordinator, Region 4, Environmental Protection Agency, Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, GA 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding legal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information contact: Colby Lintner, Regulatory Coordinator, Environmental Assistance Division (7408M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(202)564-8182; e-mail address: *TSCA-Hotline@epa.gov.* For technical information contact: John Hund, Asbestos Coordinator, Region 4, Environmental Protection Agency, Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, GA 30303-8960; telephone number:
(404)562-8978; e-mail address: *hund.john@epa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. What Action Is the Agency Taking? EPA is granting a waiver of the asbestos-in-schools program to the Commonwealth of Kentucky. This waiver is issued under section 203(m) of the Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA)and 40 CFR 763.98. Section 203 is within Title II of TSCA, the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA). The Agency recognizes that a waiver granted to any State would not encompass schools operated under the defense dependents' education system (the third type of local education agency
(LEA)defined at TSCA section 202(7) and 40 CFR 763.83), which serve dependents in overseas areas, and other elementary and secondary schools outside a State's jurisdiction, which generally includes schools in Indian country. Such schools would remain subject to EPA's asbestos-in-schools program. On June 1, 2006, (71 FR 31183) EPA published a notice of proposed approval and request for comments. A detailed description of this waiver request and EPA's rationale for approving it was provided in the notice of proposed approval and request for comments and will not be restated here. On August 31, 2006, (71 FR 51816) EPA published a reopening of comment period and correction notice. No significant or adverse comments were received on EPA's proposal. II. What Is the Agency's Authority for Taking This Action? In 1987, under TSCA section 203, the Agency promulgated regulations that require the identification and management of asbestos-containing material by LEAs in the nation's elementary and secondary school buildings: The “AHERA Schools Rule” (40 CFR part 763, subpart E). Under section 203(m) of TSCA and 40 CFR 763.98, upon request by a State Governor and after notice and comment and opportunity for a public hearing in the State, EPA may waive, in whole or in part, the requirements of the asbestos-in-schools program (TSCA section 203 and the AHERA Schools Rule) if EPA determines that the State has established and is implementing or intends to implement a program of asbestos inspection and management that contains requirements that are at least as stringent as those in the Agency's asbestos-in-schools program. A State seeking a waiver must submit its request to the EPA Region in which that State is located. III. When Did Kentucky Submit Its Request for a Waiver? On January 4, 1999, Governor Paul E. Patton, submitted to the EPA Region 4 Regional Administrator, a letter with supporting documentation requesting a full waiver of the requirements of EPA's asbestos-in-schools program pursuant to the AHERA statute and 40 CFR 763.98. The EPA Region 4 Administrator indicated by letter dated February 19, 1999, to Kentucky that the request was complete. A subsequent letter dated August 21, 2000, from the Director of Kentucky Division for Air Quality, corrected an inadvertent error in the January 4, 1999, letter. IV. Materials in the Official Record The official record, under Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0051, contains the Kentucky waiver request, and any other supporting or relevant documents. List of Subjects Environmental protection, Asbestos, Hazardous substances, Occupational health and safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Schools. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 *et seq.* Dated: January 8, 2007. A. Stanley Meiburg, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. [FR Doc. E7-922 Filed 1-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION Board Action Cancelling Charter of the Farm Credit System Financial Assistance Corporation AGENCY: Farm Credit Administration. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Farm Credit Administration (FCA or Agency), through the FCA Board, cancelled the charter of the Farm Credit System Financial Assistance Corporation (FAC or Corporation) at the January 11, 2007, Board meeting. The FCA chartered the FAC on January 11, 1988, to carry out a program to provide capital to Farm Credit System (System) institutions that were experiencing financial difficulties, and to assist in the repayment by System institutions to those that provided funds in connection with the program. The FAC discharged all of its responsibilities with respect to the repayment of FAC obligations during June 2005, and as a result, became eligible to terminate its corporate existence. EFFECTIVE DATE: December 31, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric Howard, Senior Policy Analyst, Office of Regulatory Policy, Farm Credit Administration, McLean, Virginia 22102-5090,
(703)883-4481, TTY
(703)883-4056, or Rebecca Orlich, Senior Counsel, Office of General Counsel, Farm Credit Administration, McLean, Virginia 22102-5090,
(703)883-4020, TTY
(703)883-4020. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 11, 2007, the FCA Board took action to cancel the charter and corporate existence of the FAC. The text of the Board action is set forth below: Whereas, on January 11, 1988, the Farm Credit Administration chartered the Farm Credit System Financial Assistance Corporation pursuant to section 6.20, title VI, subtitle B of the Farm Credit Act of 1971, as amended (Act), to carry out a program to provide capital to institutions of the Farm Credit System (System) that were experiencing financial difficulties and to assist in the repayment by System institutions to those that provided funds in connection with the program; and Whereas, section 6.31 of the Act provides that the Farm Credit System Financial Assistance Corporation will terminate upon the complete discharge of its statutory obligations, but in no event later than 2 years following the maturity and full payment of its debt obligations; and Whereas, on June 10, 2005, the last remaining debt obligation issued by the Farm Credit System Financial Assistance Corporation matured and was repaid; and Whereas, on June 10, 2005, all interest advanced by the U.S. Treasury was repaid; and Whereas, the final audit of the Farm Credit System Financial Assistance Corporation as of September 30, 2005, was completed by PricewaterhouseCoopers, an independent auditor; and Whereas, on November 14, 2005, the Farm Credit Administration issued to the Farm Credit System Financial Assistance Corporation a final Report of Examination as of September 30, 2005; and Whereas, the Farm Credit Administration has determined that the Farm Credit System Financial Assistance Corporation has effectively completed its statutory mission, complied with applicable laws and regulations, operated in a safe and sound manner, and thus has fulfilled its statutory obligations and discharged its responsibilities under sections 6.9 and 6.26 of the Act; Now, therefore, it is hereby ordered that: The charter of the Farm Credit System Financial Assistance Corporation is hereby cancelled retroactively to December 31, 2006. Signed by Nancy C. Pellett, Chairman, Farm Credit Administration Board on January 11, 2007. Dated: January 18, 2007. Roland E. Smith, Secretary, Farm Credit Administration Board. [FR Doc. E7-903 Filed 1-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6705-01-P FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisition of Shares of Bank or Bank Holding Companies The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)). The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for inspection at the office of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than February 7, 2007. **A. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City** (Donna J. Ward, Assistant Vice President) 925 Grand Avenue, Kansas City, Missouri 64198-0001: *1. John P. Stinner and Rita E. Stinner, both of Gering, Nebraska,* to acquire voting shares of First Express of Nebraska, Inc., Gering, Nebraska, and thereby indirectly acquire voting shares of Valley Bank and Trust Company, Scottsbluff, Nebraska. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, January 17, 2007. Robert deV. Frierson, Deputy Secretary of the Board. [FR Doc. E7-846 Filed 1-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-S FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 *et seq.* ) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part 225), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, including the companies listed below. The applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The application also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States. Additional information on all bank holding companies may be obtained from the National Information Center website at *www.ffiec.gov/nic/* . Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than February 16, 2007. **A. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City** (Donna J. Ward, Assistant Vice President) 925 Grand Avenue, Kansas City, Missouri 64198-0001: *1. First Wyoming Bancorporation of Laramie, Wyoming;* to become a bank holding company through the acquisition of 100 percent of the voting shares Wyoming State Bank, both in Laramie, Wyoming. **B. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas** (W. Arthur Tribble, Vice President) 2200 North Pearl Street, Dallas, Texas 75201-2272: *1. Family Bancorp, Inc. San Antonio, Texas;* to become a bank holding company by acquiring 100 percent of The First National Bank of Refugio, Refugio, Texas. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, January 17, 2007. Robert deV. Frierson, Deputy Secretary of the Board. [FR Doc. E7-847 Filed 1-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-S FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 *et seq.* ) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part 225), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, including the companies listed below. The applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The application also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States. Additional information on all bank holding companies may be obtained from the National Information Center website at *www.ffiec.gov/nic/* . Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than February 20, 2007. **A. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis** (Glenda Wilson, Community Affairs Officer) 411 Locust Street, St. Louis, Missouri 63166-2034: *1. Heritage Bancorp, Inc. Mason, Tennessee;* to become a bank holding company by acquiring 50 percent of Fayette Bancorp, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire Mason Bancorp, Inc., and Bank of Mason, all of Mason, Tennessee. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, January 18, 2007. Robert deV. Frierson, Deputy Secretary of the Board. [FR Doc. E7-921 Filed 1-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-S DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Administration for Children and Families The Data Measures, Data Composites, and National Standards To Be Used in the Child and Family Services Reviews; Corrections AGENCY: Children's Bureau, Administration on Children, Youth and Families, Administration for Children and Families, Department of Health and Human Services. ACTION: Notice; corrections. SUMMARY: The Administration for Children and Families
(ACF)published a notice in the **Federal Register** of June 7, 2006 (Vol. 71, No. 109), pages 32969-32987, presenting the data measures, data composites, and national standards to be used in the Child and Family Services Review (CFSR). This notice provides corrections to this notice. A consolidated version of the June 7 **Federal Register** Announcement incorporating these corrections is provided on the Children's Bureau's Web site (address). The following are the key changes in the document and the reasons for the changes: • *There are new specifications for each of the individual measures included in each composite.* After publication of the June 7, **Federal Register** Announcement, ACF conducted trainings on the CFSR data indicators at each of the 10 ACF Regional Offices. The trainings were provided to key administrators and staff of State child welfare agencies. During these trainings, issues were identified and questions were raised regarding the individual measures included in the composite. After reviewing these issues and questions, ACF determined that more specific information about the measures was needed and that some measures required revision in order to better target the outcome being assessed. The increased specification includes using the precise terminology that is used in the Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (AFCARS) and describing in greater detail the children who are in the denominator and numerator of each measure. The revisions to some of the measures required changes in the syntax used to calculate the measures. • *There is a new definition of foster parent used by the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System (NCANDS).* The change was made in this definition because the definition of a foster parent used by NCANDS was recently revised. • *There is a new version of the table of ranges, percentiles, and national standards for the data indicators and measures to be used in the second round of the Child and Family Services Review.* This table replaces the Table 1 provided in the June 7, 2006 **Federal Register.** *It was revised to reflect new data and new national standards for all of the CFSR data indicators.* The data in the table and the national standards for all of the data indicators and measures are different than those presented in the June 7 **Federal Register** notice. This difference is due to one or both of the following reasons:
(1)A change in the syntax for calculating some of the measures, and
(2)a change in the process for calculating the national standards. The reason for the change in the procedures for calculating the national standards is provided in the following bullet. • * There are revisions and corrections to Attachment B: Methodology for Developing the Composites. The revisions in Attachment B were made to
(1)correct an error in the original attachment B,
(2)provide the new coefficients (weights) for the composite measures that resulted from the changes in the syntax, and
(3)explain the new procedure for calculating the national standards. * The error in the original attachment B occurred in Step 10 of the process of calculating the composite scores. The new coefficients (weights) for each of the measures included in the composites are presented in Table 1 of the attachment—Coefficients (Weights) for the Measures Included in the Permanency Related Data Composites. The coefficients/weights changed due to changes in the syntax used to calculate some of the individual measures. The new procedure for calculating the national standards involved changes in the statistical requirements for fitting the data to a normal curve and to changes in the parameters used in calculating the sampling error. Correction 1 In the **Federal Register** of June 7, 2006, the text beginning on page 32974, column 1, Section Heading B (CFSR Composites and Measures That will be Used as Part of the Assessment of a State's Substantial Conformity with CFSR Permanency Outcome 1—Children have permanency and stability in their living situations) should be replaced with the specifications presented below for the individual measures included in each composite. The new specifications increase the precision of the measures and address requests for clarification by participants of several training sessions focusing on the data indicators. In some instances, increasing precision involved changes to the syntax used to calculate performance on the measure. Specifications of Individual Measures Included in Each Composite The following provides specifications of the individual measures included in each data composite used to evaluate State performance for the second round of the CFSR. More detailed specifications are provided in a “pseudo code” as well as the SPSS syntax, both of which will be made available on the Web site of the National Resource Center for Child Welfare Data Technology ( *http://www.nrccwdt.org/* ). All measures included in the composites are derived from data reported to AFCARS. The AFCARS data set used to calculate the measures excludes children who are 18 years of age or older on the first day of the CFSR “12-month target period.” The term “12-month target period” refers to the primary timeframe for which a State is assessed under the CFSR. Depending upon the time of its CFSR, a State's 12-month target period may include either the combination of an AFCARS A file (the first 6 months of a fiscal year) and B file (the second 6 months of a fiscal year), or it may include the combination of an AFCARS B file (the second 6 months of a fiscal year) and A file (the first 6 months of the subsequent fiscal year). The 12-month target period used for establishing the national standards was fiscal year
(FY)2004. Composite 1: Timeliness and Permanency of Reunification For the CFSR data measures, reunification occurs if the child is reported to AFCARS as discharged from foster care and the reason for discharge is either “reunification with parents or primary caretakers” or “living with other relatives.” Children who are reported to AFCARS as discharged to a legal guardianship are not included in the count of reunifications, even if the legal guardian to whom the child is discharged is a relative. If the relative is a legal guardian, the discharge reason of “guardianship” is to be used in the AFCARS submission. Component A: Timeliness of Reunification The measures for the Timeliness of reunification component include an adjustment to account for State policies or practices in which children are reunified but the State continues to have care and supervision responsibilities for a period of time before discharging the child from foster care. This is referred to as the “Trial Home Visit adjustment.” A child is eligible for the trial home visit adjustment if all of the following criteria are met: • The child has a date of discharge from foster care that occurs during the 12-month target period and the reason for discharge is either “reunification with parents or caretakers” or “living with other relatives;” • At the time of discharge from foster care, the child is in a “current placement setting” of “Trial Home Visit,” and • At the time of discharge from foster care, the child had been in the placement setting of trial home visit for longer than 30 days. *If these criteria are met, the child's calculated length of stay in foster care prior to reunification or live with relative is determined in the following way:* First, the number of days between the child's latest removal from home and the date of placement in the trial home visit setting is determined. Then, 30 days are added to that number of days to provide the calculated “length of stay in foster care” prior to reunification. Individual Measure C1.1: Of all children who were discharged from foster care to reunification in the target 12-month period, and who had been in foster care for 8 days or longer, what percent were reunified in less than 12 months from the date of the latest removal from home? *The denominator for this measure includes children who meet all of the following criteria:* • The child is in foster care for 8 days or longer; • The child's date of discharge from foster care occurs during the 12-month target period; and • The child has a reason for discharge, and the reason is either “reunification with parents or primary caretakers” or “living with other relatives.” *The numerator for this measure includes children who meet all of the criteria for inclusion in the denominator and also meet one of the following criteria:* • The child's date of discharge from foster care occurs less than 12 months from the date of the latest removal from home; or • Using the Trial Home Visit adjustment, the child's “length of stay” in foster care is less than 12 months from the date of the child's latest removal from home. Individual Measure C1.2: Of all children who were discharged from foster care to reunification in the 12-month target period, and who had been in foster care for 8 days or longer, what was the median length of stay in months from the date of the latest removal from home until the date of discharge to reunification? *This measure includes children who meet all of the following criteria:* • The child is in foster care for 8 days or longer; • The child's date of discharge from foster care occurs during the 12-month target period; and • The child has a reason for discharge, and the reason is either “reunification with parents or primary caretakers” or “living with other relatives.” *Median length of stay is calculated based on one of the following procedures:* • The difference between the child's date of discharge from foster care and the child's date of latest removal from home; or • The child's “length of stay” in foster care using the Trial Home Visit adjustment calculation. Individual Measure C1.3: Of all children who entered foster care for the first time in the 6-month period just prior to the target 12-month period, and who remained in foster care for 8 days or longer, what percent were discharged from foster care to reunification in less than 12 months from the date of latest removal from home? *The denominator for this measure includes children who meet all of the following criteria:* • The child's date of first removal from home occurs during the 6-month period just prior to the 12-month target period, and • The child is in foster care for 8 days or longer. *The numerator for this measure includes children who meet all of the criteria for inclusion in the denominator and who also meet at least one of the following criteria:* • The child has a date of discharge from foster care that is less than 12 months from the date of first removal from home, and the reason for discharge is either “reunification with parents or primary caretakers” or “living with other relatives;” or • Using the Trial Home Visit adjustment, the child's calculated length of stay in foster care is less than 12 months from the date of the child's first removal from home. Component B: Permanency of Reunification Individual Measure C1.4: Of all children who were discharged from foster care to reunification in the 12-month period prior to the target 12-month period, what percent re-entered foster care in less than 12 months from the date of discharge? Individual Measure C1.4: Of all children who were discharged from foster care to reunification in the 12-month period prior to the target 12-month period, what percent re-entered foster care in less than 12 months from the date of discharge? *The denominator for this measure includes children who meet all of the following criteria:* • The child's date of discharge from foster care occurs during the 12-month period just prior to the 12-month target year; and • At the time of the date of discharge, the reason for discharge is either “reunification with parents or primary caretakers” or “living with other relatives.” *The numerator for this measure includes children who meet all of the criteria for inclusion in the denominator and also meet the following criterion:* • The child's date of latest removal from home is less than 12 months from the date of discharge from foster care that occurred during the 12-month period just prior to the 12-month target year. Composite 2: Timeliness of Adoptions Component A: Timeliness of Adoptions of Children Exiting Foster Care Individual Measure C2.1: Of all children who were discharged from foster care to a finalized adoption during the 12-month target period, what percent were discharged in less than 24 months from the date of the latest removal from home? *The denominator for this measure includes children who meet all of the following criteria:* • The child has a date of discharge from foster care during the 12-month target period, and • The reason for discharge is adoption. *The numerator for this measure includes children who meet all of the criteria for inclusion in the denominator, and also meet the following criterion:* • The child's date of discharge is less than 24 months from the date of latest removal from home. Individual Measure C2.2: Of all children who were discharged from foster care to a finalized adoption during the 12-month target period, what was the median length of stay in foster care in months from the date of latest removal from home to the date of discharge to adoption? *This measure includes children who meet all of the following criteria:* • The child's date of discharge from foster care occurs during the 12-month target period; and • The reason for discharge is adoption. The “length of stay” in foster care is the time difference between the date of discharge from foster care to adoption and the date of the latest removal from home. Component B: Progress Toward Adoption of Children Who Have Been in Foster Care for 17 Months or Longer Individual Measure C2.3: Of all children in foster care on the first day of the 12-month target period who were in foster care for 17 continuous months or longer, what percent were discharged from foster care to a finalized adoption by the last day of the 12 month target period? (The denominator for this measure excludes children who, by the last day of the 12-month target period, are discharged from foster care with a discharge reason of reunification with parents or primary caretakers, living with other relatives, or guardianship.) *The denominator for this measure includes children who meet all of the following criteria:* • The child was in foster care for 17 or more continuous months or longer as of the first day of the 12-month target period, and • By the last day of the 12-month target period, the child had not discharged from foster care with a discharge reason of reunification with parents or primary caretakers, living with other relatives, or guardianship. *The numerator for this measure includes children who meet all of the criteria for inclusion in the denominator and also meet all of the following criteria:* • The child's date of discharge from foster care occurs during the 12-month target period (including the first day of the target period); and • The reason for discharge is adoption. Individual Measure C2.4: Of all children in foster care on the first day of the 12-month target period who were in foster care for 17 continuous months or longer, and who were not legally free for adoption prior to that day, what percent became legally free for adoption during the first 6-months of the 12-month target period? A child is considered to be legally free for adoption if there is a parental rights termination date reported to AFCARS for both mother and father. In AFCARS, if a parent is deceased, the date of death is to be reported as the parental rights termination date. *The denominator for this measure includes children who meet ALL of the following criteria:* • The child was in foster care for 17 continuous months or longer as of the first day of the 12-month target period, and • The child was not legally free for adoption prior to the first day of the 12-month target period. The denominator for this measure excludes any child who did not become legally free during the first 6 months of the target year, but who, during that 6-month period, is discharged from foster care with a discharge reason of reunification with parents or primary caretakers, living with other relatives, or guardianship. *The numerator for this measure includes children who meet all of the criteria for inclusion in the denominator and also meet the following criterion:* • The child became legally free for adoption during the first 6 months of the 12-month target period (including the first and last day of the 6-month period). Component C: Timeliness of Adoptions of Children Who Are Legally Free for Adoption Individual Measure C2.5: Of all children who became legally free for adoption during the 12 months prior to the target 12-month period, what percent were discharged from foster care to a finalized adoption in less than 12 months from the date of becoming legally free? The denominator for this measure includes children who meet all of the following criteria: • The child has a parental rights termination date for both mother and father, and • The latest parental rights termination date occurs in the 12-months just prior to the 12-month target period. *The numerator for this measure includes children who meet all of the criteria for inclusion in the denominator and also meet the following criteria:* • The child has a date of discharge from foster care that occurs in less than 12 months of the latest date of parental rights termination, and • The reason for discharge is adoption. Composite 3: Achieving Permanency for Children in Foster Care for Long Periods of Time Component A: Achieving Permanency for Children in Foster Care for Extended Periods of Time Individual Measure C3.1: Of all children who were in foster care for 24 months or longer on the first day of the 12-month target period, what percent were discharged to a permanent home by the last day of the 12-month period and prior to their 18th birthday? A child is considered as discharged to a permanent home if the discharge reason reported to AFCARS is reunification with parents or primary caretakers, living with other relatives, guardianship, or adoption. *The denominator for this measure includes children who meet the following criterion:* • The child is in foster care for 24 continuous months or longer on the first day of the 12-month target period. *The numerator for this measure includes children who meet the criterion for the denominator and also meet all of the following criteria:* • The child's date of discharge from foster care occurs during the 12-month target period; • The child's reason for discharge is reunification with parents or primary caretakers, living with other relatives, guardianship, or adoption; and • The date of discharge from foster care occurs before the child's 18th birthday. Individual Measure C3.2: Of all children who were discharged from foster care during the 12-month target period, and who were legally free for adoption (i.e., there is a parental rights termination date for both parents) at the time of discharge, what percent were discharged to a permanent home prior to their 18th birthday? A child is considered as discharged to a permanent home if the discharge reason reported to AFCARS is reunification with parents or primary caretakers, living with other relatives, guardianship, or adoption. *The denominator for this measure includes children who meet all of the following criteria:* • The child has a parental rights termination date for both mother and father at the time of discharge from foster care, and • The child has a date of discharge from foster care that occurs during the 12-month target period. *The numerator for this measure includes children who meet all of the criteria for inclusion in the denominator, and also meet all of the following criteria:* • The child has a discharge reason of reunification with parents or primary caretakers, living with other relatives, guardianship, or adoption; and • The date of discharge is prior to the child's 18th birthday. Component B: Children Growing Up in Foster Care Individual Measure C3.3: Of all children who either
(1)were, prior to age 18, discharged from foster care during the 12-month target period with a discharge reason of emancipation, or
(2)reached their 18th birthday while in foster care but had not yet been discharged from foster care, what percent were in foster care for 3 years or longer? *The denominator for this measure includes children who meet one of the following criteria:* • The child has a date of discharge from foster care during the 12-month target period that occurs prior to the child's 18th birthday and the reason for discharge is “emancipation;” or • The child reaches his or her 18th birthday during the 12-month target period and is in foster care at the time of the birthday. *The numerator for this measure includes children who meet one of the criteria for inclusion in the denominator and also meet one of the following criteria:* • The time from the date of the latest removal from home and the date of discharge is equal to, or greater than, 3 years; or • The time from the date of the latest removal from home and the date of the child's 18th birthday is equal to, or greater than, 3 years. In AFCARS, emancipation is defined as “the child reached majority according to State law by virtue of age, marriage, etc.” Composite 4: Placement Stability Individual Measure C4.1: Of all children who were served in foster care during the 12-month target period, and who were in foster care for at least 8 days but less than 12 months, what percent had two or fewer placement settings? *The denominator for this measure includes children who meet all of the following criteria:* • The child is in foster care at some time during the 12-month target period, and • The child's length of stay in foster care during the most recent foster care episode is at least 8 days but less than 12 months. *The numerator for this measure includes children who meet all of the criteria for inclusion in the denominator and also meet the following criterion:* • The child's number of placement settings during this removal episode does not exceed two (2). Individual Measure C4.2: Of all children who were served in foster care during the 12-month target period, and who were in foster care for at least 12 months but less than 24 months, what percent had two or fewer placement settings? *The denominator for this measure includes children who meet all of the following criteria:* • The child is in foster care at some time during the 12-month target period, and • The child's length of stay in foster care during the most recent foster care episode is at least 12 months but less than 24 months. *The numerator for this measure includes children who meet all of the criteria for inclusion in the denominator and also meet the following criterion:* • The child's number of placement settings during this removal episode does not exceed two (2). Individual Measure C4.3: Of all children who were served in foster care during the 12-month target period, and who were in foster care for at least 24 months, what percent had two or fewer placement settings? *The denominator for this measure includes children who meet all of the following criteria:* • The child is in foster care at some time during the 12-month target period, and • The child's length of stay in foster care during the most recent foster care episode is at least 24 months. *The numerator for this measure includes children who meet all of the criteria for inclusion in the denominator and also meet the following criterion:* • The child's number of placement settings during this removal episode does not exceed two (2). Correction 2 In the **Federal Register** of June 7, 2006, Table 1 on page 32980 showing the range, percentiles, and national standards for the data indicators to be used in the second round of the CFSR is to be replaced by Table 1 in this current notice. The ranges, percentiles, and national standards for all six data indicators (the two safety-related indicators and the four permanency-related indicators) are different than those reported in the June 7 **Federal Register.** For the safety-related indicators, the differences are due to a change in the procedure for calculating the sampling error used for establishing the national standards. For the permanency-related composite indicators, the differences are a result of an increased precision of the measures and/or a change in the procedure for calculating the sampling error used for establishing the national standards (See correction 7 for information on the change in calculation of the sampling error.) Correction 3 In the **Federal Register** of June 7, 2006, on page 32973, in the second column, the definition of the term “foster parent,” as it is used by the NCANDS has been changed. The new definition is the following: An individual who provides a home for orphaned, abused, neglected, delinquent, or disabled children under the placement, care or supervision of the State. The individual may be a relative or non-relative and need not be licensed by the State agency to be considered a foster parent. Correction 4 In the **Federal Register** of June 7, 2006, page 32981, column A, under the heading *Attachment A: List of Data to be Included in the State Data Profile,* the descriptive information currently included in the State Data Profile from NCANDS (section A) did not include all of the information included in the profile. This section should be replaced with the following text: Descriptive Information Currently Included in the State Data Profile A. Descriptive Information From the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System (NCANDS) 1. The number of reports alleging maltreatment of children that reached a disposition within the reporting year, the total number of reports, the number of unique children associated with reports alleging maltreatment, and the number of “duplicate children.” 2. The numbers and percentages of reports that were given a disposition of Substantiated and Indicated, Unsubstantiated, or Other, and the numbers and percentages of duplicate and unique children. 3. The numbers and percentages of unique and duplicate child victim cases opened for services, based on the number of victims during the reporting period under review. 4. The numbers and percentages of duplicate and unique victims entering foster care in response to a child abuse/neglect report. 5. The number of child fatalities. Correction 5 In the **Federal Register** of June 7, 2006, page 32985, second column, the text for section 10 did not accurately describe the final step in calculating the composite score. This section should be replaced by the following: 10. *Generate the composite scores for each State.* After the composite score for each county is calculated, that score is multiplied by the number of children served in foster care in that county during the 12-month target period. The result is a “weighted” county composite score. This “weighting” allows counties with larger foster care populations to make a greater contribution to the overall State score. The weighted county scores are then summed and divided by the total number of children served in foster care in all of the counties included in the calculation. The result is the State composite score. Correction 6 In the **Federal Register** of June 7, 2006, page 32986, in column 1, information in the first bullet point was not included in the publication. The first bullet point should read as follows: Set Bullets • *PCA does not compensate for measures that are currently misunderstood or inadequately defined; it compounds the existing weakness in each measure.* It is incorrect to say that PCA compounds weaknesses in each measure. PCA provides a well understood empirical strategy for combining variables or measures. The main body of the **Federal Register** Announcement provides a response to concerns about the adequacy of the measures. Correction 7 In the **Federal Register** of June 7, 2006, page 32986, column 3, the paragraph under the heading *Establishing the National Standards* should be replaced because of changes that ACF has made in the procedures for calculating the national standard. The text should read as follows: Establishing the National Standard The process for establishing the national standards on the composite scores differs from that used for the first round of the CFSR. In the first round of the CFSR, the procedure for establishing the national standard for each measure involved fitting the data to a normal curve based on a level of significance of .05, and adjusting for the 75th percentile by calculating the sampling error using the lower limit of a 95 percent confidence interval for estimating the population mean. ACF determined that this procedure was not appropriate for the second round of the CFSR. One concern was that using a level of significance of .05 would result in eliminating States at either end of the range of each of the State permanency composite data indicators and safety-related data indicators in order to fit the distribution to a normal curve. Consequently, not all States would be included in the calculation of the national standards. Although this was appropriate for the first round of the CFSR because of data quality problems at the time that the standards were established, these data quality problems are no longer as significant an issue. Another concern was that using the 95 percent confidence interval would result in a considerable reduction in the actual percentile represented by each of the permanency and safety standards. To address the concern relevant to eliminating States from the calculation of the national standard, ACF changed the level of significance for fitting the data to a normal curve from .05 to .01. At this higher significance level, all States could be included in the fitted normal probability distribution for both the composite data indicators and the safety-related data indicators. Consequently, performance of all States was used to determine the national standards for all data indicators. To address the concern relevant to the considerable reduction in the actual percentile represented by the national standard for each of the indicators, the basis for calculating the sampling error was changed from the lower limit of 95 percent confidence interval to the lower limit of an 80 percent confidence interval. As a result of this change, the adjusted 75th percentile is close to the 69th percentile, with the percentile based on the distribution to the normal curve. Correction 8 In the **Federal Register** of June 7, 2006, page 32986, Attachment B, table 1 showing the coefficients (weights) for the individual measures included in the permanency composites is to be replaced by Table 2 in this document. There are differences in the coefficients for the individual measures. The differences are due to changes in the syntax resulting from increasing the precision of the measures. Dated: January 16, 2007. Joan E. Ohl, Commissioner, Administration on Children, Youth and Families. Table A.—Data Indicators for the Child and Family Services Review [Ranges, medians, and national standards for the Child and Family Services Review
(CFSR)data indicators*] Data indicators Range Median** National standard** Data Indicators Associated With CFSR Safety Outcome 1—Children Are, First and Foremost, Protected From Abuse and Neglect Of all children who were victims of a substantiated or indicated maltreatment allegation during the first 6 months of FY 2004, what percent were not victims of another substantiated or indicated maltreatment allegation within the 6-months following that maltreatment incident? (45 States) 86.0-98.0 93.3 94.6 or higher. Of all children served in foster care in FY 2004, what percent were not victims of a substantiated or indicated maltreatment by a foster parent or facility staff member during the fiscal year? (37 States) 98.59-100 99.52 99.68 or higher. Data Indicators Associated With CFSR Permanency Outcome 1—Children Have Permanency and Stability In Their Living Situations Permanency Composite 1: Timeliness and Permanency of Reunification (47 States)*** 50-150 113.7 122.6 or higher. Component A: Timeliness of reunification****: Measure C1.1: Of all children discharged from foster care to reunification in FY 2004 who had been in foster care for 8 days or longer, what percent were reunified in less than 12 months from the date of the latest removal from home? (This includes the “trial home visit adjustment.”) (51 States) 44.3-92.5 69.9 No Standard. Measure C1.2: Of all children who were discharged from foster care to reunification in FY 2004, and who had been in foster care for 8 days or longer, what was the median length of stay in months from the date of the latest removal from home until the date of discharge to reunification? (This includes the “trial home visit adjustment.”) (51 States) 1.1-13. 7 6.5 No Standard. Measure C1.3: Of all children who entered foster care for the first time in the 6-month period just prior to FY 2004, and who remained in foster care for 8 days or longer, what percent were discharged from foster care to reunification in less than 12 months from the date of latest removal from home? (This includes the “trial home visit adjustment.”) (47 States) 17.7-68.9 39.4 No Standard. Component B: Permanency of reunification****: Measure C14: Of all children who were discharged from foster care to reunification in the 12-month period prior to FY 2004 (i.e., FY 2003), what percent re-entered foster care in less than 12 months from the date of discharge? (47 States) 1.6-29.8 15.0 No Standard. * The data shown are for the national standard target year of FY 2004. Each State will be evaluated against the standard on data relevant to its specific CFSR 12-month target period. The national standards will remain the same throughout the second round of the CFSR. ** The medians and the national standards for the safety and composite data indicators are based on an adjustment to the distribution using the sampling error for each data indicator. The medians and national standards for the composite data indicators are from a dataset that excluded counties in a State that did not have data for all measures within a particular composite. The range and medians for each individual measure reflect the distribution of all counties that had data for that particular measure, even if that county was not included in the overall composite calculation. *** A State was excluded from the calculation of the composite national standard if
(1)it did not submit FIPS codes in its AFCARS submissions (1 State), or
(2)with regard to composite 1 and 2, it did not provide unique identifiers that would permit tracking children across fiscal years (4 States). **** Children are included in the count of reunifications if the reason for discharge reported to AFCARS was either “reunification” or “live with relative.” They are not included in the count of “reunifications” if the reason for discharge reported to AFCARS was “guardianship,” even if the guardian is a relative. Data Indicators Associated With CFSR Permanency Outcome 1—Children Have Permanency and Stability in Their Living Situations* Permanency Composite 2: Timeliness of Adoptions (47 States) 50-150 95.3 106.4 or higher. Component A: Timeliness of adoptions of children discharged from foster care: Measure C2.1: Of all children who were discharged from foster care to a finalized adoption during FY 2004, what percent were discharged in less than 24 months from the date of the latest removal from home? (51 States) 6.4-74.9 26.8 No Standard. Measure C2.2: Of all children who were discharged from foster care to a finalized adoption during FY 2004, what was the median length of stay in foster care in months from the date of latest removal from home to the date of discharge to adoption? (51 States) 16.2-55.7 32.4 No Standard. Component B: Progress toward adoption for children in foster care for 17 months or longer: Measure C2.3: Of all children who were in foster care on the first day of FY 2004, and who were in foster care for 17 continuous months or longer, what percent were discharged from foster care to a finalized adoption by the last day of FY 2004? The denominator for this measure excludes children who, by the end of FY 2004, were discharged from foster care with a discharge reason of live with relative, reunification, or guardianship. (51 States) 2.4-26.2 20.2 No Standard. Measure C2.4: Of all children who were in foster care on the first day of FY 2004 for 17 continuous months or longer, and who were not legally free for adoption prior to that day, what percent became legally free for adoption during the first 6 months of FY 2004? (Legally free means that there was a parental rights termination date reported to AFCARS for both mother and father.) The denominator for this measure excludes children who, by the last day of the first 6 months of FY 2004, were not legally free, but had been discharged from foster care with a discharge reason of live with relative, reunification, or guardianship. (51 States) 0.1-17.8 8.8 No Standard. Component C: Progress toward adoption of children who are legally free for adoption: Measure C2.5: Of all children who became legally free for adoption during FY 2003 (i.e., there was a parental rights termination date reported to AFCARS for both mother and father), what percent were discharged from foster care to a finalized adoption in less than 12 months of becoming legally free? (47 States) 20.0-100 45.8 No Standard. * The data shown are for the national standard target year of FY 2004. Each State will be evaluated against the standard on data relevant to its specific CFSR 12-month target period. The national standards will remain the same throughout the second round of the CFSR. ** The medians and the national standards for the safety and composite data indicators are based on an adjustment to the distribution using the sampling error for each data indicator. The medians and national standards for the composite data indicators are from a dataset that excluded counties in a State that did not have data for all measures within a particular composite. The range and medians for each individual measure reflect the distribution of all counties that had data for that particular measure, even if that county was not included in the overall composite calculation. *** A State was excluded from the calculation of this composite either because
(1)it did not submit FIPS codes in its AFCARS submissions (1 State), or
(2)with regard to composite 1 and 2, it did not provide unique identifiers that would permit tracking children across fiscal years (4 States). Data Indicators Associated With CFSR Permanency Outcome 1—Children Have Permanency and Stability in Their Living Situations* Permanency Composite 3: Achieving Permanency for Children in Foster Care for Long Periods of Time (51 States)*** 50-150 112.7 121.7 or higher. Component A: Permanency for children in foster care for long periods of time: Measure C3.1: Of all children who were in foster care for 24 months or longer on the first day of FY 2004, what percent were discharged to a permanent home prior to their 18th birthday and by the end of the fiscal year? A child is considered discharged to a permanent home if the discharge reason is adoption, guardianship, reunification, or live with relative. (51 States) 8.1-35.3 25.0 No Standard. Measure C3.2: Of all children who were discharged from foster care in FY 2004 who were legally free for adoption at the time of discharge ( *i.e.* , there was a parental rights termination date reported to AFCARS for both mother and father), what percent were discharged to a permanent home prior to their 18th birthday? A child is considered discharged to a permanent home if the discharge reason is adoption, guardianship, reunification, or live with relative. (51 States) 84.9-100 96.8 No Standard. Component B: Children growing up in foster care: Measure C3.3: Of all children who either
(1)were discharged from foster care in FY 2004 with a discharge reason of emancipation, or
(2)reached their 18th birthday in FY 2004 while in foster care, what percent were in foster care for 3 years or longer? (51 States) 15.8-76.9 47.8 No Standard. Permanency Composite 4: Placement Stability (51 States) 50-150 93.3 101.5 or higher. Measure C4.1: Of all children who were served in foster care during FY 2004, and who were in foster care for at least 8 days but less than 12 months, what percent had two or fewer placement settings? (51 States) 55.0-99.6 83.3 No Standard. Measure C4.2: Of all children who were served in foster care during FY 2004, and who were in foster care for at least 12 months but less than 24 months, what percent had two or fewer placement settings? (51 States) 27.0-99.8 59.9 No Standard. Measure C4.3: Of all children who were served in foster care during FY 2004, and who were in foster care for at least 24 months, what percent had two or fewer placement settings? (51 States) 13.7-98.9 33.9 No Standard. * The data shown are for the national standard target year of FY 2004. Each State will be evaluated against the standard on data relevant to its specific CFSR 12-month target period. The national standards will remain the same throughout the second round of the CFSR. ** The medians and the national standards for the safety and composite data indicators are based on an adjustment to the distribution using the sampling error. The medians and national standards for the composite data indicators are from a dataset that excluded counties in a State that did not have data for all measures within a particular composite. The range and medians for each individual measure reflect the distribution of all counties that had data for that particular measure, even if that county was not included in the overall composite calculation. *** A State was excluded from the calculation of this composite because it did not submit FIPS codes in its AFCARS submissions. Table B.—Coefficients (Weights) for Individual Measures in the CFSR Data Composites [Coefficients (weights) for individual measures] Composites and Individual Measures* Components and weights Component A Timeliness of reunification Component B Permanency of reunification Component C Not applicable to this composite Permanency Composite 1: Timeliness and Premanency of Reunification** (1,975 Counties): Measure C1.1: Of all children who were discharged from foster care to reunification in FY 2004, and who had been in foster care for 8 days or longer, what percent were reunified in less than 12 months from the date of the latest removal from home? (This includes the “trial home visit adjustment.”) (51 States) 0.462 0.085 Measure C1.2: Of all children who were discharged from foster care to reunification in FY 2004, and who had been in foster care for 8 days or longer, what was the median length of stay in months from the date of the latest removal from home until the date of discharge to reunification? (This includes the “trial home visit adjustment.”) (51 States) 0.451 0.070 Measure C1.3: Of all children who entered foster care for the first time in the 6-month period just prior to FY 2004, and who remained in foster care for 8 days or longer, what percent were discharged from foster care to reunification in less than 12 months from the date of latest removal from home? (This includes the “trial home visit adjustment.”) (47 States) 0.295 −0.005 Measure C1.4: Of all children who were discharged from foster care to reunification in the 12-month period prior to FY 2004, what percent re-entered foster care in less than 12 months from the date of discharge? (47 States) 0.129 1.025 *The coefficients were determined from a national data set incorporating only those counties that had data for all of the individual measures included in a particular composite. This data set includes those “counties” constructed by combining small counties in a State to reach the requirement of at least 50 children served in foster care during FY 2004. **Children are included in the count of reunifications if the reason for discharge reported to AFCARS is either “reunify” or “live with relative.” They are not included if the reason for discharge is guardianship, even if the guardian is a relative. Composites and individual measures Components and weights Length of time in foster care to adoption Progress toward adoption—children in foster care for 17 months or longer Timeliness of adoptions for children who are legally free Permanency Composite 2: Timeliness of Adoptions (1,512 Counties)*: Measure C2.1: Of all children who were discharged from foster care to a finalized adoption during FY 2004, what percent were discharged in less than 24 months from the date of the latest removal from home? (51 States) 0.533 −0.032 −0.026 Measure C2.2: Of all children who were discharged from foster care to a finalized adoption during FY 2004, what was the median length of stay in foster care in months from the date of latest removal from home to the date of discharge to adoption? (51 States) 0.551 0.106 −0.032 Measure C2.3: Of all children in foster care on the first day of FY 2004 who were in foster care for 17 continuous months or longer, what percent were discharged from foster care to a finalized adoption by the last day of FY 2004? The denominator for this measure excludes children who, by the end of FY 2004 had been discharged from foster care with a discharge reason of reunification, live with relative, or guardianship. (51 States) −0.087 0.526 0.255 Measure C2.4: Of all children in foster care on the first day of FY 2004 who were in foster care for 17 continuous months or longer, and who were not legally free for adoption prior to that day, what percent became legally free for adoption during the first 6 months of FY 2004? (Legally free means that there was a parental rights termination date reported to AFCARS for both mother and father.) The denominator for this measure excludes children who, by the last day of the first 6 months of FY 2004, were not legally free but had been discharged from foster care with a discharge reason of reunification, live with relative, or guardianship. (51 States) 0.140 0.699 −0.256 Measure C2.5: Of all children who became legally free for adoption during FY 2003 (i.e., there was a parental rights termination date reported to AFCARS for both mother and father), what percent were discharged from foster care to a finalized adoption in less than 12 months of becoming legally free? (47 States) −0.030 −0.059 0.930 *The coefficients were determined from a national data set that incorporated only those counties that had data for all of the individual measures included in a particular composite. This data set includes those “counties” constructed by combining small counties in a particular State to reach the requirement of at least 50 children served in foster care during FY 2004. Composites and individual measures Component A Children discharged to permanent homes Component B Children discharged to emancipation Component C Not applicable to this composite Permanency Composite 3: Achieving permanency for children in foster care for long periods of time (1,681 Counties)*: Measure C3.1: Of all children who were in foster care for 24 months or longer on the first day of FY 2004, what percent were discharged to a permanent home prior to their 18th birthday and by the end of the fiscal year? A child is considered discharged to a permanent home if the discharge reason is adoption, guardianship, reunification, or live with relative. (51 States) 0.545 0.137 No Standard. Measure C3.2: Of all children who were discharged from foster care in FY 2004, and who were legally free for adoption at the time of discharge (i.e., there was a parental rights termination date reported to AFCARS for both mother and father), what percent were discharged to a permanent home prior to their 18th birthday? A child is considered discharged to a permanent home if the discharge reason is adoption, guardianship, reunification, or live with relative. (51 States) 0.746 −0.220 No Standard. Measure C3.3: Of all children who either
(1)were, prior to their 18th birthday, discharged from foster care in FY 2004 with a discharge reason of emancipation, or
(2)reached their 18th birthday in FY 2004 while in foster care, what percent were in foster care for 3 years or longer? (51 States) −0.108 0.979 No Standard. Placement stability Not applicable for this composite Not applicable for this composite Permanency Composite 4: Placement stability (2,140 Counties)*: Measure C4.1: Of all children who were served in foster care during FY 2004, and who were in foster care for at least 8 days but less than 12 months, what percent had two or fewer placement settings? (51 States) 0.398 Measure C4.2: Of all children who were served in foster care during FY 2004, and who were in foster care for at least 12 months but less than 24 months, what percent had two or fewer placement settings? (51 States) 0.417 Measure C4.3: Of all children who were served in foster care during FY 2004, and who were in foster care for at least 24 months, what percent had two or fewer placement settings? (51 States) 0.400 *The coefficients were determined from a national data set that incorporated only those counties that had data for all of the individual measures included in a particular composite. This data set includes those “counties” constructed by combining small counties in a particular State to reach the requirement of at least 50 children served in foster care during FY 2004. [FR Doc. E7-808 Filed 1-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4184-01-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. 2006N-0279] Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review; Comment Request; Bar Code Label Requirement for Human Drug and Biological Products AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration
(FDA)is announcing that a proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. DATES: Fax written comments on the collection of information by February 22, 2007. ADDRESSES: To ensure that comments on the information collection are received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer, FAX: 202-395-6974. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth Berbakos, Office of the Chief Information Officer (HFA-250), Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, 301-827-1482. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for review and clearance. Bar Code Label Requirement for Human Drug and Biological Products—(OMB Control Number 0910-0537)—Extension In the **Federal Register** of February 26, 2004 (69 FR 9120), FDA issued a new rule that required human drug product and biological product labels to have bar codes. The rule required bar codes on most human prescription drug products and on over-the-counter
(OTC)drug products that are dispensed under an order and commonly used in health care facilities. The rule also required machine-readable information on blood and blood components. For human prescription drug products and OTC drug products that are dispensed under an order and commonly used in health care facilities, the bar code must contain the National Drug Code number for the product. For blood and blood components, the rule specifies the minimum contents of the machine-readable information in a format approved by the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research Director as blood centers have generally agreed upon the information to be encoded on the label. The rule is intended to help reduce the number of medication errors in hospitals and other health care settings by allowing health care professionals to use bar code scanning equipment to verify that the right drug (in the right dose and right route of administration) is being given to the right patient at the right time. Most of the information collection burden resulting from the final rule, as calculated in table 1 of the final rule (69 FR 9120 at 9149), was a one-time burden that does not occur after the rule's compliance date of April 26, 2006. In addition, some of the information collection burden estimated in the final rule is now covered in other OMB-approved information collection packages for FDA. However, parties may continue to seek an exemption from the bar code requirement under certain, limited circumstances. Section 201.25(d) (21 CFR 201.25(d)) requires submission of a written request for an exemption and describes the contents of such requests. Based on the number of exemption requests submitted during 2004 and 2005, we estimate that approximately 2 waiver requests may be submitted annually, and that each exemption request will require 24 hours to complete. This would result in an annual reporting burden of 48 hours. In the **Federal Register** of July 24, 2006 (71 FR 41817), FDA published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the information collection provisions. No comments were received. ** Table 1.—Estimated Annual Reporting Burden 1 ** 21 CFR Section No. of Respondents Annual Frequency per Response Total Annual Responses Hours per Response Total Hours 201.25(d) 2 1 2 24 48 Total 48 1 There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information. Dated: January 16, 2007. Jeffrey Shuren, Assistant Commissioner for Policy. [FR Doc. E7-916 Filed 1-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4160-01-S DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel of the Medical Devices Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. This notice announces a forthcoming meeting of a public advisory committee of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The meeting will be open to the public. *Name of Committee* : Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Devices Panel of the Medical Devices Advisory Committee. *General Function of the Committee* : To provide advice and recommendations to the agency on FDA's regulatory issues. *Date and Time* : The meeting will be held on February 22, 2007, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. *Location* : Hilton Washington DC North/Gaithersburg, Salons A, B and C, 620 Perry Pkwy., Gaithersburg, MD. *Contact Person* : Ronald P. Jean, Center for Devices and Radiological Health (HFZ-410), Food and Drug Administration, 9200 Corporate Blvd., Rockville, MD 20850, 240-276-3676, or FDA Advisory Committee Information Line, 1-800-741-8138 (301-443-0572 in the Washington, DC area), code 3014512521. Please call the Information Line for up-to-date information on this meeting. *Agenda* : On February 22, 2007, the committee will discuss, make recommendations and vote on a premarket approval application for the Cormet 2000 Hip Resurfacing System, sponsored by Corin U.S.A. This system is intended for use in resurfacing hip arthroplasty for reduction or relief of pain and/or improved hip function in skeletally mature patients with non-inflammatory degenerative arthritis or inflammatory arthritis. FDA intends to make background material available to the public no later than 1 business day before the meeting. If FDA is unable to post the background material on its Web site prior to the meeting, the background material will be made publicly available at the location of the advisory committee meeting, and the background material will be posted on FDA's Web site after the meeting. Background material is available at *http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/acmenu.htm* , click on the year 2007 and scroll down to the appropriate advisory committee link. *Procedure* : Interested persons may present data, information, or views, orally or in writing, on issues pending before the committee. Written submissions may be made to the contact person on or before February 8, 2007. Oral presentations from the public will be scheduled for 30 minutes at the beginning of the committee deliberations and for 30 minutes near the end of the deliberations on February 22, 2007. Those desiring to make formal oral presentations should notify the contact person and submit a brief statement of the general nature of the evidence or arguments they wish to present, the names and addresses of proposed participants, and an indication of the approximate time requested to make their presentation on or before January 31, 2007. Time allotted for each presentation may be limited. If the number of registrants requesting to speak is greater than can be reasonably accommodated during the scheduled open public hearing session, FDA may conduct a lottery to determine the speakers for the scheduled open public hearing session. The contact person will notify interested persons regarding their request to speak by February 1, 2007. Persons attending FDA's advisory committee meetings are advised that the agency is not responsible for providing access to electrical outlets. FDA welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with physical disabilities or special needs. If you require special accommodations due to a disability, please contact AnnMarie Williams at 301-827-7292 at least 7 days in advance of the meeting. Notice of this meeting is given under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. app. 2). Dated: January 17, 2007. Randall W. Lutter, Associate Commissioner for Policy and Planning. [FR Doc. E7-946 Filed 1-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4160-01-S DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration Hydrogen Peroxide Solution for Control of Various Fungal and Bacterial Diseases in Fish; Availability of Data AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration
(FDA)is announcing the availability of effectiveness, target animal safety, and environmental data that may be used in support of a new animal drug application
(NADA)or supplemental NADA for use of a 35 percent solution of hydrogen peroxide by immersion for control of mortality in several life stages of certain freshwater-reared finfish species due to various fungal and bacterial diseases. The data, contained in Public Master File
(PMF)5639, were compiled by the United States Geological Survey, Biological Resources Section, Upper Midwest Environmental Sciences Center. ADDRESSES: Submit NADAs or supplemental NADAs to the Document Control Unit (HFV-199), Center for Veterinary Medicine, Food and Drug Administration, 7500 Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joan Gotthardt, Center for Veterinary Medicine (HFV-130), Food and Drug Administration, 7500 Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855, 301-827-7571, e-mail: *joan.gotthardt@fda.hhs.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Hydrogen peroxide solution used by immersion for control of mortality in several life stages of certain freshwater-reared finfish species due to various fungal and bacterial diseases is a new animal drug under section 201(v) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the act) (21 U.S.C. 321(v)). As a new animal drug, hydrogen peroxide is subject to section 512 of the act (21 U.S.C. 360b) which requires that its uses be the subject of an approved NADA or supplemental NADA. Fish are a minor species under § 514.1(d)(1)(ii) (21 CFR 514.1(d)(1)(ii)). The United States Geological Survey, Biological Resources Section, Upper Midwest Environmental Sciences Center, 2630 Fanta Reed Rd., La Crosse, WI 54603, has provided effectiveness and target animal safety data; and an environmental assessment
(EA)for use of a 35 percent solution of hydrogen peroxide by immersion for control of mortality in certain freshwater-reared finfish species in several life stages due to various fungal and bacterial diseases. These data and the EA are contained in PMF 5639. FDA has reviewed the EA, carefully considered the environmental impacts of the use of a 35 percent solution of hydrogen peroxide on freshwater finfish, and has concluded that the use will not have a significant impact on the human environment. A finding of no significant impact (FONSI) has been prepared and is also contained in PMF 5639. Sponsors of NADAs or supplemental NADAs may, without further authorization, reference the PMF 5639 to support approval of an application filed under § 514.1(d). An NADA or supplemental NADA must include, in addition to reference to the PMF, animal drug labeling and other information needed for approval, such as: data concerning human food safety; and manufacturing methods, facilities, and controls. Persons desiring more information concerning PMF 5639 or requirements for approval of an NADA or supplemental NADA may contact Joan C. Gotthardt (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT ). In accordance with the freedom of information provisions of 21 CFR part 20, a summary of safety and effectiveness data provided in PMF 5639 to support approval of an application may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852, from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. The EA and FONSI contained in PMF 5639 have also been placed in the docket. Dated: January 11, 2007. Stephen F. Sundlof, Director, Center for Veterinary Medicine. [FR Doc. E7-947 Filed 1-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4160-01-S DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Health Resources and Services Administration Establishment of Advisory Council on Blood Stem Cell Transplantation and Solicitation of Nominations for Membership AGENCY: Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), HHS. ACTION: Notice of establishment of the Advisory Council on Blood Stem Cell Transplantation and Solicitation of Nominations for Membership. SUMMARY: Pursuant to Public Law 109-129, 42 U.S.C. 274k (section 379 of the Public Health Service Act, as amended) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), the Administrator, HRSA, announces the establishment of the Advisory Council on Blood Stem Cell Transplantation by the Secretary, HHS. The Council will advise the Secretary on proposed C.W. Bill Young Cell Transplantation Program policies and other such matters as the Secretary determines. Duration of this Council is for two years unless renewed by the Secretary, HHS. This notice also requests nominations for membership on the Council. DATES: Nominations for members must be received on or before February 22, 2007. ADDRESSES: All nominations should be submitted to the Executive Secretary, Advisory Council on Blood Stem Cell Transplantation, Healthcare Systems Bureau, HRSA, Parklawn Building, Room 12C-06, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, Maryland 20857. Federal Express, Airborne, or UPS, mail delivery should be addressed to Executive Secretary, Advisory Council on Blood Stem Cell Transplantation, Healthcare Systems Bureau, HRSA, at the above address. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Remy Aronoff, Executive Secretary, Advisory Council on Blood Stem Cell Transplantation, at
(301)443-3264 or e-mail *Remy.Aronoff@hrsa.hhs.gov* or Robert Baitty, Director, Blood Stem Cell Transplantation Program, Division of Transplantation, at
(301)443-2612 or e-mail *Robert.Baitty@hrsa.hhs.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background and Authority Establishment of the Council implements a statutory requirement of the Stem Cell Therapeutic and Research Act of 2005 (Pub. L. 109-129). The Council is governed by the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), which sets forth standards for the formation and use of advisory committees. The Advisory Council shall advise the Secretary and the Administrator, HRSA, on matters related to the activities of the C.W. Bill Young Cell Transplantation Program and the National Cord Blood Inventory Program. The Council shall, as requested by the Secretary, discuss and make recommendations regarding the C.W. Bill Young Cell Transplantation Program (Program). It shall provide a consolidated, comprehensive source of expert, unbiased analysis and recommendations to the Secretary on the latest advances in the science of blood stem cell transplantation. The Council shall advise, assist, consult and make recommendations, at the request of the Secretary, on broad Program policy in areas such as the necessary size and composition of the adult donor pool available through the Program and the composition of the National Cord Blood Inventory, requirements regarding informed consent for cord blood donation, accreditation requirements for cord blood banks, the scientific factors that define a cord blood unit as high quality, public and professional education to encourage the ethical recruitment of genetically diverse donors and ethical donation practices, criteria for selecting the appropriate blood stem source for transplantation, Program priorities, research priorities, and the scope and design of the Stem Cell Therapeutic Outcomes Database. It also shall, at the request of the Secretary, review and advise on issues relating more broadly to the field of blood stem cell transplantation, such as regulatory policy including compatibility of international regulations, and actions that may be taken by the State and Federal Governments and public and private insurers to increase donation and access to transplantation. The Advisory Council also shall make recommendations regarding research on emerging therapies using cells from bone marrow and cord blood. II. Structure The Council shall consist of up to 25 members, including the Chair. Members of the Advisory Council shall be chosen to ensure objectivity and balance, and reduce the potential for conflicts of interest. The Secretary shall establish bylaws and procedures to prohibit any member of the Advisory Council who has an employment, governance, or financial affiliation with a donor center, recruitment organization, transplant center, or cord blood bank from participating in any decision that materially affects the center, recruitment organization, transplant center, or cord blood bank; and to limit the number of members of the Advisory Council with any such affiliation. The members and chair shall be selected by the Secretary from outstanding authorities and representatives of marrow donor centers and marrow transplant centers; representatives of cord blood banks and participating birthing hospitals; recipients of a bone marrow transplant; recipients of a cord blood transplant; persons who require such transplants; family members of such a recipient or family members of a patient who has requested the assistance of the Program in searching for an unrelated donor of bone marrow or cord blood; persons with expertise in bone marrow and cord blood transplantation; persons with expertise in typing, matching, and transplant outcome data analysis; persons with expertise in the social sciences; basic scientists with expertise in the biology of adult stem cells; ethicists, hematology and transfusion medicine researchers with expertise in adult blood stem cells; persons with expertise in cord blood processing; and members of the general public. The Council also shall include as nonvoting members representatives from the Division of Transplantation of the Health Resources and Services Administration, the Department of Defense Marrow Recruitment and Research Program operated by the Department of the Navy, the Food and Drug Administration and the National Institutes of Health. The Secretary may also appoint other non-voting ex officio members, or designees of such officials, as the Secretary deems necessary for the Council to effectively carry out its functions. As necessary, subcommittees composed of members of the parent Council, may be established with the approval of the Secretary of HHS or his designee to perform specific functions within the Council's jurisdiction. The Department Committee Management Officer shall be notified upon establishment of each subcommittee, and shall be provided information on its name, membership, function, and estimated frequency of meetings. Members shall be invited to serve for a term of 2 years, and (assuming the Council's term is extended) each such member may serve as many as 3 consecutive 2-year terms, except that such limitations shall not apply to the Chair of the Council (or the Chair-elect) or to the member of the Council who most recently served as the Chair; and one additional consecutive 2-year term may be served by any member of the Council who has no employment, governance, or financial affiliation with any donor center, recruitment organization, transplant center, or cord blood bank. A member of the Council may continue to serve after the expiration of the term of such member until a successor is appointed. In order to ensure the continuity of the Council, the Council shall be appointed so that each year the terms of approximately one-third of the members of the Council expires. Any member of the Council who has an employment, governance, or financial affiliation with a donor center, recruitment organization, transplant center, or cord blood bank will be prohibited from participating in any decision that materially affects the donor center, recruitment organization, transplant center, or cord blood bank. The number of members with such affiliations on the Council shall be limited. Meetings shall be held up to 3 times per year at the call of the Designated Federal Official or designee who shall approve the agenda and shall be present at all meetings. A vacancy on the Council shall be filled in the manner in which the original appointment was made and shall be subjected to any conditions that applied with respect to the original appointment. An individual chosen to fill a vacancy shall be appointed for the remainder of the term of the member replaced. The vacancy shall not affect the power of the remaining members to execute the duties of the Council. All members of HRSA advisory committees shall adhere to the conflict of interest rules applicable to Special Government Employees as such employees are defined in 18 U.S.C. section 202(a). These rules include relevant provisions in 18 U.S.C. related to criminal activity, Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch (5 CFR part 2635), and Executive Order 12674 (as modified by Executive Order 12731). Management and support services shall be provided by the Director, Division of Transplantation, Healthcare Systems Bureau, HRSA. III. Compensation Members shall be paid at a rate of $200 for each day they are engaged in the performance of their duties as members of the Council. Members shall receive per diem and travel expenses as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5703, as amended, for persons employed intermittently in the Government service. Members who are officers or employees of the United States Government shall not receive compensation for service on the Council. IV. Nominations HHS will consider nominations of all qualified individuals to ensure that the Advisory Council includes the areas of subject matter expertise noted above (see “Structure”). Individuals may nominate themselves or other individuals, and professional associations and organizations may nominate one or more qualified persons for membership on the Advisory Council. Nominations shall state that the nominee is willing to serve as a member of the Council. Potential candidates will be asked to provide detailed information concerning financial interests, consultancies, research grants, and/or contracts that might be affected by recommendations of the Council to permit evaluation of possible sources of conflicts of interest. In addition, nominees will be asked to provide detailed information concerning any employment, governance, or financial affiliation with any donor centers, recruitment organizations, transplant centers, and/or cord blood banks. A nomination package should include the following information for each nominee:
(1)A letter of nomination stating the name, affiliation, and contact information for the nominee, the basis for the nomination (i.e., what specific attributes recommend him/her for service in this capacity), and the nominee's field(s) of expertise;
(2)a biographical sketch of the nominee and a copy of his/her curriculum vitae; and
(3)the name, return address, e-mail address, and daytime telephone number at which the nominator can be contacted. HHS has special interest in assuring that women, minority groups, and the physically disabled are adequately represented on advisory committees; and therefore, extends particular encouragement to nominations for appropriately qualified female, minority, or disabled candidates. HHS also encourages geographic diversity in the composition of the Council. All nomination information should be provided in a single, complete package within 30 days of the publication of this notice. All nominations for membership should be sent to the Executive Secretary of the Council at the address provided above. Dated: January 16, 2007. Elizabeth M. Duke, Administrator. [FR Doc. E7-891 Filed 1-22-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4165-15-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Fogarty International Center; Notice of Meeting Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of a meeting of the Fogarty International Center Advisory Board. The meeting will be open to the public as indicated below, with attendance limited to space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting. The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and/or contract proposals and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications and/or contract proposals, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. *Name of Committee:* Fogarty International Center Advisory Board. *Date:* February 5-6, 2007. *Closed:* February 5, 2007, 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. *Agenda:* To review and evaluate grant applications and/or proposals. *Place:* National Institutes of Health, Lawton Chiles International House, Bethesda, MD 20892. *Open:* February 6, 2007, 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. *Agenda:* Discussions will focus on Fogarty International Center's early draft of the Strategic Plan. *Place:* National Institutes of Health, Lawton Chiles International House, Bethesda, MD 20892. *Contact Person:* Jean L. Flagg-Newton, PhD, Special Assistant to the Director, FIC, Fogarty International Center, National Institutes of Health, 9000 Rockville Pike, Building 31, Room B2C29, Bethesda, MD 20892,
(301)496-2968, *flaggnej@mail.nih.gov.* Any interested person may file written comments with the committee by forwarding the statement to the Contact Person listed on this notice. The statement should include the name, address, telephone number and when applicable, the business or professional affiliation of the interested person. In the interest of security, NIH has instituted stringent procedures for entrance onto the NIH campus. All visitor vehicles, including taxicabs, hotel, and airport shuttles will be inspected before being allowed on campus. Visitors will be asked to show one form of identification (for example, a government-issued photo ID, driver's license, or passport) and to state the purpose of their visit. Information is also available on the Institute's/Center's home page: *www.nih.gov/fic/about/advisory.html* , where an agenda and any additional information for the meeting will be posted when available. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.106, Minority International Research Training Grant in the Biomedical and Behavioral Sciences; 93.154, Special International Postdoctoral Research Program in Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome; 93.168, International Cooperative Biodiversity Groups Program, 93.934, Fogarty International Research Collaboration Award; 93.989, Senior International Fellowship Awards Program, National Institutes of Health, HHS) Dated: January 17, 2007. David Clary, Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy. [FR Doc. 07-262 Filed 1-22-07; 8:45 am]
Connectionstraces to 17
Traces to 17 documents
U.S. Code
- Subsequent arrangements§ 2160
- Congressional findings and declaration of purpose§ 7401
- Assessments§ 1817
- Definitions§ 1841
- Acquisition of bank shares or assets§ 1842
- Interests in nonbanking organizations§ 1843
- Public information collection activities; submission to Director; approval and delegation§ 3507
- Definitions; generally§ 321
- New animal drugs§ 360b
- National Program§ 274k
- Definitions§ 202
- Per diem, travel, and transportation expenses; experts and consultants; individuals serving without pay§ 5703
CFR
9 references not yet in our index
- 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)
- 40 CFR 124
- 40 CFR 763.98
- 40 CFR 763.83
- 40 CFR 763
- 12 CFR 225
- 21 CFR 20
- Pub. L. 109-129
- 5 CFR 2635
Citation graph
cites case law
Notices
Notice of Proposed Subsequent Arrangement
Cite40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)
Cite40 CFR 124
Cite40 CFR 763.98
Cites 26 · showing 12Cited by 0 across 0 sources