Notices. Notice

14,727 words·~67 min read·/register/2007/01/25/07-337

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

BILLING CODE 4410-11-M DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration Importer of Controlled Substances; Correction to Notice of Application The Drug Enforcement Administration

(DEA)is hereby correcting a notice of application that appeared in the **Federal Register** on January 23, 2006 (71 FR 3545). That document announced the application of Cody Laboratories, Inc., to be registered as an importer of raw opium, poppy straw, and concentrate of poppy straw. The January 23, 2006, notice of application incorrectly stated that “[a]ny manufacturer who is presently, or is applying to be, registered with DEA to manufacture such basic classes of controlled substances may file comments or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration and may, at the same time, file a written request for a hearing on such application pursuant to 21 CFR 1301.43 and in such form as prescribed by 21 CFR 1316.47.” Correctly stated, under the Controlled Substances Act

(CSA)and DEA regulations, applications to import narcotic raw materials, including raw opium, poppy straw, and concentrate of poppy straw, are not required to be published in the **Federal Register** . Further, the notice of application, although not required to be published at all, should have stated that “bulk manufacturers” of raw opium, poppy straw, or concentrate of poppy straw may file a written request for a hearing. As explained in the Correction to Notice of Application pertaining to Rhodes Technologies published today, since there are no domestic bulk manufacturers of narcotic raw materials registered with DEA, no registrant has a statutory or regulatory right to a hearing on the application. For the reasons set forth therein, I correct the Notice of Application dated January 23, 2006. I direct the Administrative Law Judge to remove from the agency's administrative docket the hearing on the application of Cody Laboratories, Inc. to be registered as an importer of narcotic raw materials. Dated: January 18, 2007. Michele M. Leonhart, Deputy Administrator. [FR Doc. E7-1052 Filed 1-24-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration Importer of Controlled Substances; Correction to Notice of Application The Drug Enforcement Administration

(DEA)is hereby correcting a notice of application that appeared in the **Federal Register** on April 17, 2006 (71 FR 20729). That document announced the application of Rhodes Technologies to be registered as an importer of raw opium and concentrate of poppy straw. This is the second correction to the original notice of application. This document augments the correction which was published in the **Federal Register** on May 22, 2006 (71 FR 29354). The April 17, 2006, notice of application incorrectly stated that “[a]ny manufacturer who is presently, or is applying to be, registered with DEA to manufacture such basic classes of controlled substances may file comments or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration and may, at the same time, file a written request for a hearing on such application pursuant to 21 CFR 1301.43 and in such form as prescribed by 21 CFR 1316.47.” Correctly stated, under the Controlled Substances Act

(CSA)and DEA regulations, applications to import narcotic raw materials, including raw opium and concentrate of poppy straw, are not required to be published in the **Federal Register** . Further, the notice of application, although not required to be published at all, should have stated that “bulk manufacturers” of raw opium or concentrate of poppy straw may file a written request for a hearing. As explained below, since there are no domestic bulk manufacturers of narcotic raw materials registered with DEA, no registrant has a statutory or regulatory right to a hearing on the application. In response to the notice, several importers of narcotic raw materials who also hold manufacturing registrations (but not as “bulk manufacturers” of narcotic raw materials) requested a hearing on the application. DEA's Administrative Law Judge

(ALJ)accepted the requests for hearings and placed the case on DEA's administrative hearing docket. This correction notifies the applicant, the public, and those importers/manufacturers that requested a hearing that DEA is denying the requests for hearing and dismissing the case on the agency's administrative docket. Statutory and Regulatory Provisions As set forth in 21 U.S.C. 958(i), the Attorney General (by delegation, the Administrator and Deputy Administrator of DEA) 1 shall, prior to issuing an importer registration to a bulk manufacturer of a controlled substance in schedule I or II, and prior to issuing a regulation under 21 U.S.C. 952(a) authorizing the importation of such a substance, provide “manufacturers holding registrations for the *bulk manufacture of the substance* an opportunity for a hearing.” (Emphasis added.) Thus, the CSA contemplates that only “bulk manufacturers” shall be entitled to hearing on an application to import a schedule I or II controlled substance and, further, that only those who are registered to bulk manufacture the particular substance that the applicant seeks to import. Accordingly, if no one is registered to bulk manufacture the substance that the applicant seeks to import, no one is entitled to a hearing on that application. 1 21 U.S.C. 871(a); 28 CFR 0.100(b) and 0.104, appendix to subpart R, sec. 12. DEA's registration database confirms that no person holds a registration as a bulk manufacturer of raw opium, concentrate of poppy straw, or any of the other narcotic raw materials listed in 21 U.S.C. 952(a)(1). 2 Accordingly, the CSA provides no right to a hearing to any person seeking to challenge the application of another to become registered to import such narcotic raw materials. 2 When applying for registration, manufacturers are required to complete DEA Form-225, which requires the applicant to specify the nature of the proposed manufacturing activity. The categories include, among others, “bulk synthesis/extraction” and “dosage form manufacture.” Likewise, the registration database maintained by DEA indicates the specific type of manufacturing activity that is authorized by each registration. Consistent with the CSA, the DEA regulations provide that the only persons who are entitled to a hearing on an application for a registration to import a schedule I or II controlled substance are those who are either “registered as a bulk manufacturer of that controlled substance” or an “applicant therefor.” 21 CFR 1301.34(a). 3 3 Moreover, as set forth in 21 CFR 1301.34(a), the right to a hearing is limited to cases in which the applicant is seeking to import a controlled substance pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 952(a)(2)(B). In sum, neither the CSA nor the DEA regulations provide a right to a hearing for anyone seeking to contest the application of Rhodes Technologies to import narcotic raw material. Historical Agency Practice and Other Statutory Considerations DEA is aware that the agency has, in some prior cases of applications to import narcotic raw materials, granted requests for hearings made by persons that were not bulk manufacturers of the narcotic raw material—despite the fact that no such hearing right is contemplated by the governing statute or implementing regulations. *See, e.g., Penick Corp.; Importation and Manufacture of Controlled Substances, Objections, Requests for Hearing, and Hearing,* 42 FR 82760 (1980); *Mallinckrodt, Inc.; Approval of Registration,* 46 FR 24747 (1981); *Johnson Matthey, Inc.; Conditional Grant of Registration to Import Schedule II Substances,* 67 FR 39041 (2002); *Penick Corporation, Inc.; Grant of Registration to Import Schedule II Substances,* 68 FR 6947, 6948 (2003); *Chattem Chemicals, Inc.; Grant of Registration to Import Schedule II Substances,* 71 FR 9834 (2006). In these past cases, the agency did not state that such non-bulk-manufacturers were entitled to a hearing under 21 U.S.C. 958(i) or 21 CFR 1301.34(a). Rather, the agency either granted the hearing without explanation or did so based on what it termed its “discretionary authority.” *See, e.g., Penick Corporation, Inc.; Grant of Registration to Import Schedule II Substances,* 68 FR 6947, 6948 (2003). Without addressing whether the agency indeed has the theoretical legal authority to grant such hearing requests, I now conclude that the most sound reading of the statute and regulations is that which limits the right to a hearing to those situations in which Congress expressly provided such a right. As stated above, 21 U.S.C. 958(i), by its plain terms, gives the right to request a hearing *not* in the case of all applications for a registration to import, but only in those in which the applicant for the import registration is a “bulk manufacturer” and only where the person seeking the hearing is a “bulk manufacturer” of the substance the applicant is seeking to import. Because there are no registered bulk manufacturers of narcotic raw materials, 4 the facts triggering the right to a hearing under section 958(i) are not present in cases in which the applicant for an import registration is seeking to import narcotic raw materials under section 952(a)(1). In contrast, the facts needed to invoke the hearing right of section 958(i) will be present when the applicant is seeking to import the substances referred to in section 952(a)(2), since there are registered bulk manufacturers of the substances referred to in section 952(a)(2) (substances which are not narcotic raw materials). 5 4 Since well before the CSA was enacted (beginning with the Narcotic Drugs Import and Export Act of 1922), it has been the policy of the United States (reflected in legislation enacted by Congress) to favor the importation of narcotic raw materials for conversion in the United States into finished narcotic drug products over domestic production of the raw materials and over the importation of processed narcotic materials and finished narcotic products. This is currently reflected in part by in 21 U.S.C. 952(a) and, in particular, by comparing subsection 952(a)(1) with subsection 952(a)(2) (the latter being more restrictive than the former). 5 Section 958(i) expressly excludes from the hearing right applications pursuant to section 952(a)(2)(A) (emergency situations). Congress could have extended the hearing right under 958(i) to importers of narcotic raw materials. That it instead chose to limit that right to bulk manufacturers indicates a determination on its part that extending the hearing right to others is not necessary to advance the goals of the CSA. Among other considerations, invocation of the hearing right by a competitor can add considerable time (months and sometimes years) to the process by which the agency determines whether to grant the application. An existing registrant could ask for a hearing simply to delay a competitor's entry into the market—particularly given that DEA has not promulgated any criteria for deciding whether to grant these types of hearing requests. Such a delay would tend to run counter to the obligation of an agency under the Administrative Procedure Act requires to conclude adjudications “with due regard to the convenience and necessity of the parties * * * and within a reasonable time.” 5 U.S.C. 555(b). Moreover, if DEA were to maintain a policy (not contemplated by the CSA) whereby a competitor could simply request a hearing without making any showing that the hearing either would assist the agency in deciding whether to grant the application or otherwise advance the goals of the CSA, it would be difficult to envision how the agency could act on such hearing requests other than on arbitrary basis. Basic principles of fairness dictate against such an outcome. Of course, the consideration of delay to the applicant also exists when a *bulk manufacturer* seeks a hearing on the application of a potential competitor as allowed under section 958(i). However, that Congress expressly provided for a hearing right in such circumstances indicates that Congress weighed the consideration of delay and, on balance, determined the goals of the CSA were advanced by providing a hearing right in such circumstances. Again, that Congress expressed clear criteria as to when the hearing right applied reflects a clear delineation by Congress as to when such hearing right does—or does not—advance the overall goals of the Act. The mere fact that the agency has followed a procedural practice in the past does not, by itself, compel that the agency repeat the procedure in perpetuity. Finding no valid justification for the past practice, and finding such practice inconsistent with the particular criteria for a hearing rights set forth in the CSA and implementing regulations, I decline to follow this practice. It should be emphasized, however, that this decision to disallow a hearing right beyond that stated in the statute or regulations by no means should be construed as an indication that this application will be approved without the appropriate scrutiny. As mandated by the CSA, DEA will—prior to deciding whether to issue an order to show cause to deny this application—evaluate the application in accordance with the applicable statutory criteria (21 U.S.C. 952(a)(1) and 958(a)). Section 958(a) requires DEA to evaluate the application under the six public interest factors set forth in 21 U.S.C. 823(a). *See Penick Corporation,* 68 FR 6947 (2003); *Roxane Laboratories, Inc.,* 63 FR 55891 (1998). Conclusion For the reasons and in the manner set forth above, I correct the Notice of Application dated April 17, 2006. I direct the ALJ to remove from the agency's administrative docket the hearing on the application of Rhodes Technologies to register as an importer of narcotic raw materials. Dated: January 18, 2007. Michele M. Leonhart, Deputy Administrator. [FR Doc. E7-1053 Filed 1-24-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-60,627] Advanced Technology Corp., Geneva, OH; Notice of Termination of Investigation Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on December 18, 2006 in response to a worker petition filed by the United Steelworkers, Local 905L on behalf of workers of Advanced Technology Corp., Geneva, Ohio. The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated. Signed at Washington, DC this 17th day of January, 2007. Linda G. Poole, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E7-1075 Filed 1-24-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration Notice of Determinations Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2273) the Department of Labor herein presents summaries of determinations regarding eligibility to apply for trade adjustment assistance for workers (TA-W) number and alternative trade adjustment assistance

(ATAA)by (TA-W) number issued during the period of January 1 through January 5, 2007. In order for an affirmative determination to be made for workers of a primary firm and a certification issued regarding eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance, each of the group eligibility requirements of Section 222(a) of the Act must be met. I. Section (a)(2)(A) all of the following must be satisfied: A. A significant number or proportion of the workers in such workers' firm, or an appropriate subdivision of the firm, have become totally or partially separated, or are threatened to become totally or partially separated; B. The sales or production, or both, of such firm or subdivision have decreased absolutely; and C. Increased imports of articles like or directly competitive with articles produced by such firm or subdivision have contributed importantly to such workers' separation or threat of separation and to the decline in sales or production of such firm or subdivision; or II. Section (a)(2)(B) both of the following must be satisfied: A. A significant number or proportion of the workers in such workers' firm, or an appropriate subdivision of the firm, have become totally or partially separated, or are threatened to become totally or partially separated; B. There has been a shift in production by such workers' firm or subdivision to a foreign country of articles like or directly competitive with articles which are produced by such firm or subdivision; and C. One of the following must be satisfied: 1. The country to which the workers' firm has shifted production of the articles is a party to a free trade agreement with the United States; 2. The country to which the workers' firm has shifted production of the articles to a beneficiary country under the Andean Trade Preference Act, African Growth and Opportunity Act, or the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act; or 3. There has been or is likely to be an increase in imports of articles that are like or directly competitive with articles which are or were produced by such firm or subdivision. Also, in order for an affirmative determination to be made for secondarily affected workers of a firm and a certification issued regarding eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance, each of the group eligibility requirements of Section 222(b) of the Act must be met.

(1)Significant number or proportion of the workers in the workers' firm or an appropriate subdivision of the firm have become totally or partially separated, or are threatened to become totally or partially separated;

(2)The workers' firm (or subdivision) is a supplier or downstream producer to a firm (or subdivision) that employed a group of workers who received a certification of eligibility to apply for trade adjustment assistance benefits and such supply or production is related to the article that was the basis for such certification; and

(3)Either—

(A)The workers' firm is a supplier and the component parts it supplied for the firm (or subdivision) described in paragraph

(2)accounted for at least 20 percent of the production or sales of the workers' firm; or

(B)A loss or business by the workers' firm with the firm (or subdivision) described in paragraph

(2)contributed importantly to the workers' separation or threat of separation. In order for the Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance to issue a certification of eligibility to apply for Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance

(ATAA)for older workers, the group eligibility requirements of Section 246(a)(3)(A)(ii) of the Trade Act must be met. 1. Whether a significant number of workers in the workers' firm are 50 years of age or older. 2. Whether the workers in the workers' firm possess skills that are not easily transferable. 3. The competitive conditions within the workers' industry ( *i.e.* , conditions within the industry are adverse). Affirmative Determinations for Worker Adjustment Assistance The following certifications have been issued. The date following the company name and location of each determination references the impact date for all workers of such determination. The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of Section 222(a)(2)(A) (increased imports) of the Trade Act have been met. *None.* The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of Section 222(a)(2)(B) (shift in production) of the Trade Act have been met. *TA-W-60,534; Ceramaspeed, Inc., Maryville, TN: December 4, 2005.* The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of Section 222(b) (supplier to a firm whose workers are certified eligible to apply for TAA) of the Trade Act have been met. *None.* The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of Section 222(b) (downstream producer for a firm whose workers are certified eligible to apply for TAA based on increased imports from or a shift in production to Mexico or Canada) of the Trade Act have been met. *None.* Affirmative Determinations for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance The following certifications have been issued. The date following the company name and location of each determination references the impact date for all workers of such determination. The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of Section 222(a)(2)(A) (increased imports) and Section 246(a)(3)(A)(ii) of the Trade Act have been met. *TA-W-60,511; Saturday Knight Limited, Cincinnati, OH: November 27, 2005.* *TA-W-60,576; Schnadig Corporation, Corona, CA #16, Corona, CA: November 30, 2005.* *TA-W-60,576A; Schnadig Corporation, Belmont, MS #15, Belmont, MS: November 30, 2005.* *TA-W-60,621; Lighting By Renee, West Memphis, AR: December 13, 2005.* *TA-W-60,636; Fencemaster, A Subsidiary of Radio Systems Corp., Jackson, TN: December 14, 2005.* *TA-W-60,691; Baxter Corporation (The), Shelby, NC: January 2, 2006.* *TA-W-60,489; Roseburg Forest Products, Plywood Plant #4, Riddle, OR: November 21, 2005.* *TA-W-60,497; Bruard's, Inc., Conover, NC: November 27, 2005.* *TA-W-60,525; Special Tool and Engineering, Inc., Fraser, MI: November 29, 2005.* The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of Section 222(a)(2)(B) (shift in production) and Section 246(a)(3)(A)(ii) of the Trade Act have been met. *TA-W-60,466; International Textile Group, Burlington Worldwide, Richmond Plant, Cordova, NC: December 23, 2006.* *TA-W-60,518; DeSoto Mills LLC, A Subsidiary of Russell Corp., Fort Payne, AL: December 1, 2005.* *TA-W-60,523; Brunswick Family Boat Group, U.S. Marine Division, Plant One, Cumberland, MD: December 1, 2005.* *TA-W-60,537; Plastex Extruders, Inc., Fort Payne, AL: December 1, 2005.* *TA-W-60,539; Moll Industries, Inc., New Braunfels, TX: December 5, 2005.* *TA-W-60,599; Swak, LLC, Formerly Known as E.S. Sutton, Ridgewood, NY: December 8, 2005.* *TA-W-60,655; David Brooks Company, Costa Mesa, CA: December 20, 2005.* The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of Section 222(b) (supplier to a firm whose workers are certified eligible to apply for TAA) and Section 246(a)(3)(A)(ii) of the Trade Act have been met. *TA-W-60,590; Unifi, Inc., Plant 4, Reidsville, NC: December 8, 2005.* *TA-W-60,630; Bloomsburg Mills, Inc., A Subsidiary of Penn Columbia Corp., Bloomsburg Location, Bloomsburg, PA: December 15, 2005.* *TA-W-60,635; Mastercraft Fabrics, LLC, Lakewood Dyed Yarns Division, Cramerton, NC: December 16, 2006.* *TA-W-60,638; Acme Face Veneer Co., Inc., Lexington, NC: December 13, 2005.* *TA-W-60,660; Reynolds Wheels International Virginia, Doing Business as Alcoa Wheel Products, Lebanon, VA: December 21, 2005.* *TA-W-60,670; Jeld-Wen Millwork Mfg., Klamath Falls, OR: December 20, 2005.* The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of Section 222(b) (downstream producer for a firm whose workers are certified eligible to apply for TAA based on increased imports from or a shift in production to Mexico or Canada) and Section 246(a)(3)(A)(ii) of the Trade Act have been met. *None.* Negative Determinations for Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance In the following cases, it has been determined that the requirements of 246(a)(3)(A)(ii) have not been met for the reasons specified. The Department has determined that criterion

(1)of Section 246 has not been met. Workers at the firm are 50 years of age or older. *None.* The Department has determined that criterion

(2)of Section 246 has not been met. Workers at the firm possess skills that are easily transferable. *TA-W-60,534; Ceramaspeed, Inc., Maryville, TN.* The Department has determined that criterion

(3)of Section 246 has not been met. Competition conditions within the workers' industry are not adverse. *None.* Negative Determinations for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance In the following cases, the investigation revealed that the eligibility criteria for worker adjustment assistance have not been met for the reasons specified. Because the workers of the firm are not eligible to apply for TAA, the workers cannot be certified eligible for ATAA. The investigation revealed that criteria (a)(2)(A)(I.A.) and (a)(2)(B)(II.A.) (employment decline) have not been met. *None.* The investigation revealed that criteria (a)(2)(A)(I.B.) (Sales or production, or both, did not decline) and (a)(2)(B)(II.B.) (shift in production to a foreign country) have not been met. *None.* The investigation revealed that criteria (a)(2)(A)(I.C.) (increased imports) and (a)(2)(B)(II.B.) (shift in production to a foreign country) have not been met. *TA-W-60,540; MII, Inc., Lundia Division, Jacksonville, IL.* *TA-W-60,600; Creative Apparel Associates, Eastport Plant, Eastport, ME.* The investigation revealed that the predominate cause of worker separations is unrelated to criteria (a)(2)(A)(I.C.) (increased imports) and (a)(2)(B)(II.C) (shift in production to a foreign country under a free trade agreement or a beneficiary country under a preferential trade agreement, or there has been or is likely to be an increase in imports). *None.* The workers' firm does not produce an article as required for certification under Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974. *TA-W-60,473; R.G. Barry Corporation, Pickerington, OH.* *TA-W-60,566; E*Trade Mortgage Corporation, Coraopolis, PA.* *TA-W-60,674; New York—New Jersey Joint Board of UNITE, Union City, NJ.* The investigation revealed that criteria of Section 222(b)(2) has not been met. The workers' firm (or subdivision) is not a supplier to or a downstream producer for a firm whose workers were certified eligible to apply for TAA. *None.* I hereby certify that the aforementioned determinations were issued during the period of January 1 through January 5, 2007. Copies of these determinations are available for inspection in Room C-5311, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210 during normal business hours or will be mailed to persons who write to the above address. Dated: January 11, 2007. Ralph Dibattista, Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E7-1067 Filed 1-24-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration Investigations Regarding Certifications of Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance Petitions have been filed with the Secretary of Labor under Section 221(a) of the Trade Act of 1974 (“the Act”) and are identified in the Appendix to this notice. Upon receipt of these petitions, the Director of the Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance, Employment and Training Administration, has instituted investigations pursuant to Section 221(a) of the Act. The purpose of each of the investigations is to determine whether the workers are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Title II, Chapter 2, of the Act. The investigations will further relate, as appropriate, to the determination of the date on which total or partial separations began or threatened to begin and the subdivision of the firm involved. The petitioners or any other persons showing a substantial interest in the subject matter of the investigations may request a public hearing, provided such request is filed in writing with the Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance, at the address shown below, not later than February 5, 2007. Interested persons are invited to submit written comments regarding the subject matter of the investigations to the Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance, at the address shown below, not later than February 5, 2007. The petitions filed in this case are available for inspection at the Office of the Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance, Employment and Training Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, Room C-5311, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210. Signed at Washington, DC, this 17th day of January, 2007. Ralph Dibattista, Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. Appendix [TAA petitions instituted between 1/8/07 and 1/12/07] TA-W Subject firm (petitioners) Location Date of institution Date of petition 60715 Conair

(Wkrs)Franklin, PA 01/08/07 01/05/07 60716 A.O. Smith Corporation

(Comp)Mebane, NC 01/08/07 01/04/07 60717 Lear Corporation

(Wkrs)Romulus, MI 01/08/07 01/05/07 60718 Renfro Charleston, LLC

(Comp)Cleveland, TN 01/09/07 01/02/07 60719 Avondale Mills, Inc.—Townsend Plant

(Wkrs)Graniteville, SC 01/09/07 01/08/07 60720 Delphi Connections Systems/Specialty Electronics

(Comp)Landrum, SC 01/09/07 01/08/07 60721 Future Tool and Die

(Wkrs)Grandville, MI 01/09/07 01/04/07 60722 Kirchner Corporation

(Wkrs)Golden Valley, MN 01/09/07 01/08/07 60723 Pechiney Plastic Packaging

(Comp)Washington, NJ 01/09/07 01/08/07 60724 General Electric—Conneaut Base Plant

(UE)Conneaut, OH 01/09/07 01/09/07 60725 Birds Eye Food, Inc.

(Comp)Watsonville, CA 01/10/07 01/09/07 60726 CNI Duluth, LLC

(Wkrs)Duluth, MN 01/10/07 01/02/07 60727 Johnson Controls, Inc.

(Comp)Chesapeake, VA 01/10/07 01/09/07 60728 Johnson Controls (State) Oklahoma City, OK 01/10/07 12/13/06 60729 G.C.C. Drum

(Wkrs)Franklin Park, IL 01/10/07 12/29/06 60730 Jabil

(Comp)Auburn Hills, MI 01/10/07 01/09/07 60731 Best Manufacturing

(Comp)Menlo, GA 01/10/07 01/09/07 60732 Trend Tool, Inc.

(Comp)Livonia, MI 01/10/07 12/19/06 60733 L and R Knitting, Inc.

(Comp)Hickory, NC 01/10/07 01/08/07 60734 Pearson Artworks

(Wkrs)York, PA 01/10/07 01/09/07 60735 Waterloo Industries, Inc. (State) Pocahontas, AR 01/10/07 01/09/07 60736 Cooper Power System (State) Fayetteville, AR 01/10/07 01/09/07 60737 Atwood Mobile Products

(UAW)LaGrange, IN 01/10/07 01/03/07 60738 Georgia Pacific Corp—Crossett Paper

(Wkrs)Crossett, AR 01/11/07 01/09/07 60739 Mega Brands

(Wkrs)Woodridge, NJ 01/11/07 12/16/06 60740 Classic Picture Company, Inc.

(Comp)Dallas, TX 01/11/07 01/10/07 60741 E. J. Victor, Inc.

(Comp)Morganton, NC 01/11/07 01/10/07 60742 Jordan Alexander, Inc.

(Comp)Granite Falls, NC 01/11/07 01/10/07 60743 Atotech USA, Inc.

(Comp)Rock Hill, SC 01/11/07 01/09/07 60744 Worthington Precision Metals

(Comp)Franklin, TN 01/11/07 01/10/07 60745 Bush Industries, Inc. (Erie Facility)

(Comp)Erie, PA 01/11/07 01/10/07 60746 D J, Inc.

(Comp)El Paso, TX 01/11/07 01/05/07 60747 Aerotek

(Comp)Charlevoix, MI 01/11/07 01/08/07 60748 Eljer, Inc.

(Comp)Ford City, PA 01/11/07 01/11/07 60749 Narrow Fabric Industries Corp.

(Wkrs)West Reading, PA 01/11/07 01/09/07 60750 White Rodgers (State) Batesville, AR 01/12/07 01/11/07 60751 Reel Quick, Inc.

(Comp)Lincoln, NE 01/12/07 01/11/07 60752 Alcoa Engineered Plastic Components

(Comp)El Paso, TX 01/12/07 01/11/07 60753 Cerf Brothers Bag Company (State) Earth City, MO 01/12/07 02/10/07 60754 Page Foam Cushioned Products

(Comp)Johnstown, PA 01/12/07 01/11/07 60755 ITW Paslode

(Comp)Portage, WI 01/12/07 01/11/07 60756 Eramet Marietta

(USW)Marietta, OH 01/12/07 01/11/07 60757 Alan White

(Wkrs)Shannon, MS 01/12/07 01/11/07 60758 Bosch Security System

(IBEW)Lancaster, PA 01/12/07 01/10/07 60759 Charter Communications

(Wkrs)Irwindale, CA 01/12/07 01/08/07 60760 Ahlstrom, LLC

(USW)Mt. Holly Springs, PA 01/12/07 01/11/07 60761 Doyle Enterprises, Inc.

(Comp)Rock Mount, VA 01/12/07 01/11/07 [FR Doc. E7-1073 Filed 1-24-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-60,301] D-M-E Company, Charlevoix Plant, a Subsidiary of Milacron, Inc., Including On-Site Leased Workers of Aerotek, Charlevoix, MI; Amended Certification Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273), and Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974 (26 U.S.C. 2813), as amended, the Department of Labor issued a Certification of Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance on November 8, 2006, applicable to workers of D-M-E Company, Charlevoix Plant, a subsidiary of Milacron, Inc., Charlevoix, Michigan. The notice was published in the **Federal Register** on November 28, 2006 (71 FR 68844). At the request of the State agency, the Department reviewed the certification for workers of the subject firm. The workers are engaged in the production of pins and sleeves ( *i.e.,* tooling for plastics). New information shows that leased workers of Aerotek were employed on-site at the Charlevoix, Michigan location of D-M-E Company, Charlevoix Plant, a subsidiary of Milacron, Inc. Based on these findings, the Department is amending this certification to include leased workers of Aerotek working on-site at D-M-E Company, Charlevoix Plant, a subsidiary of Milacron, Inc., Charlevoix, Michigan. The intent of the Department's certification is to include all workers employed at D-M-E Company, Charlevoix Plant, a subsidiary of Milacron, Inc., Charlevoix, Michigan who were adversely affected by increased company imports. The amended notice applicable to TA-W-60,301 is hereby issued as follows: All workers of D-M-E Company, Charlevoix Plant, a subsidiary of Milacron, Inc., including on-site leased workers of Aerotek, Charlevoix, Michigan, who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after October 25, 2005, through November 8, 2008, are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, and are also eligible to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance under Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974. Signed at Washington, DC this 18th day of January, 2007. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E7-1074 Filed 1-24-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-60,077] Oxford Collections, Inc., a Wholly Owned Subsidiary of Millwork Trading Co., Ltd D/B/A/ Li & Fung USA, Including On-Site Leased Workers of Ambrose Employer Group, LLC, New York, NY and Gaffney, SC; Amended Certification Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273), and Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974 (26 U.S.C. 2813), as amended, the Department of Labor issued a Certification of Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance on October 24, 2006, applicable to workers of Oxford Collections, Inc., Women's Catalog Division, New York, New York and Gaffney, South Carolina. The notice was published in the **Federal Register** on November 16, 2006 (71 FR 66799). At the request of the State agency, the Department reviewed the certification for workers of the subject firm. The workers are engaged in the production of ladies' apparel, such as women's sportswear separates, coordinated outerwear, dresses and swimwear. New information shows that as of May 5, 2006, the correct name of the subject firm should read Oxford Collections, Inc. a wholly owned subsidiary of Millwork Trading Co., Ltd, d/b/a Li & Fung USA, including on-site leased workers of Ambrose Employer Group, LLC, New York, New York and Gaffney, South Carolina. Information also shows that all workers separated from employment at the subject firm had their wages reported under a separate unemployment insurance

(UI)tax account for Ambrose Employer Group, LLC. Accordingly, the Department is amending the certification to properly reflect these matters. The intent of the Department's certification is to include all workers of Oxford Collections, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Millwork Trading Co., Ltd, d/b/a Li & Fung USA, New York, New York and Gaffney, South Carolina who were adversely affected by increased customer imports. The amended notice applicable to TA-W-60,077 and TA-W-60,077A are hereby issued as follows: All workers of Oxford Collections, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Millwork Trading Co., Ltd, d/b/a Li & Fung USA, including on-site leased workers of Ambrose Employers Group, LLC, New York, New York (TA-W-60,077) and Oxford Collections, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Millwork Trading Co., Ltd, d/b/a Li & Fung USA, including on-site leased workers of Ambrose Employers Group, LLC, Gaffney, South Carolina (TA-W-60,077A), who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after August 25, 2005, through October 24, 2008, are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, and are also eligible to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance under Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974. Signed at Washington, DC this 11th day of January 2007. Ellott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E7-1068 Filed 1-24-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-60,136] Owens-Brockway, Inc., Global Glass Technologies Division, a Division of Owens-Illinois, Inc., Including On-Site Leased Workers of Manpower, Inc. and Availability, Godfrey, IL; Amended Certification Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2273), and Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974 (26 U.S.C. 2813), as amended, the Department of Labor issued a Certification of Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance on October 3, 2006, applicable to workers of Owens-Brockway, Inc., Global Glass Technologies Division, a division of Owens-Illinois, Inc., including on-site leased workers of Manpower, Inc., Godfrey, Illinois. The notice was published in the **Federal Register** on October 31, 2006 (71 FR 63800). At the request of the State agency, the Department reviewed the certification for workers of the subject firm. The workers were engaged in the production of machined parts for glass forming machines. New information shows that leased workers of Availability were employed on-site at the Godfrey, Illinois location of Owens-Brockway, Inc., Global Glass Technologies Div., a division of Owens-Illinois, Inc. Based on these findings, the Department is amending this certification to include leased workers of Availability working on-site at Owens-Brockway, Inc., Global Glass Technologies Division, a division of Owens-Illinois, Inc., Godfrey, Illinois. The intent of the Department's certification is to include all workers employed at Owens-Brockway, Inc., Global Glass Technologies Division, a division of Owens-Illinois, Inc. who were adversely affected by a shift in production to the United Kingdom, Colombia, South America, Mexico and China. The amended notice applicable to TA-W-60,136 is hereby issued as follows: All workers of Owens-Brockway, Inc., Global Glass Technologies Division, a division of Owens-Illinois, Inc., including on-site leased workers of Manpower, Inc. and Availability, Godfrey, Illinois, who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after September 25, 2005, through October 3, 2008, are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, and are also eligible to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance under Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974. Signed at Washington, DC this 16th day of January, 2007. Richard Church, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E7-1069 Filed 1-24-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration Notice of Determinations Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2273) the Department of Labor herein presents summaries of determinations regarding eligibility to apply for trade adjustment assistance for workers (TA-W) number and alternative trade adjustment assistance

(ATAA)by (TA-W) number issued during the period of January 8 through January 12, 2007. In order for an affirmative determination to be made for workers of a primary firm and a certification issued regarding eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance, each of the group eligibility requirements of Section 222(a) of the Act must be met. I. Section (a)(2)(A), all of the following must be satisfied: A. A significant number or proportion of the workers in such workers' firm, or an appropriate subdivision of the firm, have become totally or partially separated, or are threatened to become totally or partially separated; B. The sales or production, or both, of such firm or subdivision have decreased absolutely; and C. Increased imports of articles like or directly competitive with articles produced by such firm or subdivision have contributed importantly to such workers' separation or threat of separation and to the decline in sales or production of such firm or subdivision; or II. Section (a)(2)(B), both of the following must be satisfied: A. A significant number or proportion of the workers in such workers' firm, or an appropriate subdivision of the firm, have become totally or partially separated, or are threatened to become totally or partially separated; B. There has been a shift in production by such workers' firm or subdivision to a foreign country of articles like or directly competitive with articles which are produced by such firm or subdivision; and C. One of the following must be satisfied: 1. The country to which the workers' firm has shifted production of the articles is a party to a free trade agreement with the United States; 2. The country to which the workers' firm has shifted production of the articles to a beneficiary country under the Andean Trade Preference Act, African Growth and Opportunity Act, or the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act; or 3. There has been or is likely to be an increase in imports of articles that are like or directly competitive with articles which are or were produced by such firm or subdivision. Also, in order for an affirmative determination to be made for secondarily affected workers of a firm and a certification issued regarding eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance, each of the group eligibility requirements of Section 222(b) of the Act must be met.

(2)The workers' firm (or subdivision) is a supplier or downstream producer to a firm (or subdivision) that employed a group of workers who received a certification of eligibility to apply for trade adjustment assistance benefits, and such supply or production is related to the article that was the basis for such certification; and

(3)Either—

(A)The workers' firm is a supplier and the component parts it supplied for the firm (or subdivision) described in paragraph

(2)accounted for at least 20 percent of the production or sales of the workers' firm; or

(B)A loss of business by the workers' firm with the firm (or subdivision) described in paragraph

(ATAA)for older workers, the group eligibility requirements of Section 246(a)(3)(A)(ii) of the Trade Act must be met. 1. Whether a significant number of workers in the workers' firm are 50 years of age or older. 2. Whether the workers in the workers' firm possess skills that are not easily transferable. 3. The competitive conditions within the workers' industry ( *i.e.* , conditions within the industry are adverse). Affirmative Determinations for Worker Adjustment Assistance The following certifications have been issued. The date following the company name and location of each determination references the impact date for all workers of such determination. The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of Section 222(a)(2)(A) (increased imports) of the Trade Act have been met. *None.* The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of Section 222(a)(2)(B) (shift in production) of the Trade Act have been met. *TA-W-60,620; Point Technologies, A Subsidiary of Angiotech Pharmaceuticals, Wheeling, IL: November 17, 2005.* The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of Section 222(b) (supplier to a firm whose workers are certified eligible to apply for TAA) of the Trade Act have been met. *None.* The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of Section 222(b) (downstream producer for a firm whose workers are certified eligible to apply for TAA based on increased imports from or a shift in production to Mexico or Canada) of the Trade Act have been met. *None.* Affirmative Determinations for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance The following certifications have been issued. The date following the company name and location of each determination references the impact date for all workers of such determination. The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of Section 222(a)(2)(A) (increased imports) and Section 246(a)(3)(A)(ii) of the Trade Act have been met. *TA-W-60,535; Broyhill Furniture Industries, Inc., Lenoir Furniture Corporation, Lenoir, NC: September 11, 2006.* *TA-W-60,545; Nice Systems, Inc., Public Safety Division, Shelton, CT: December 5, 2005.* *TA-W-60,585; A.M. Todd Company, Botanical Therapeutics, Eugene, OR: December 11, 2005.* *TA-W-60,588; Clayson Knitting Company, Inc., Star, NC: October 26, 2006.* *TA-W-60,601; Weyerhaeuser Company, Mountain Pine, AR: December 12, 2005.* *TA-W-60,605; Robetex, Inc., Lumberton, NC: October 2, 2005.* *TA-W-60,645; Diamond Back, Inc., A Subsidiary of Cortland Line Co., Morrisville, VT: December 15, 2005.* *TA-W-60,673; Manthei, Inc., Petoskey, MI: December 27, 2005.* *TA-W-60,240; Georgia Pacific Corporation, Consumer Products Division, Camas, WA: October 10, 2005.* *TA-W-60,482; Du-Co Ceramics Co., Saxonburg, PA: December 3, 2005.* *TA-W-60,509; K-C Fish Company, Inc., Blaine, WA: November 29, 2005.* *TA-W-60,521; P.H. Precision Products Corp., Pembroke, NH: November 28, 2005.* *TA-W-60,532; Auburn Apparel, Inc., Auburn, PA: December 6, 2005.* *TA-W-60,547; Enterprise Tool and Die, Grandville, MI: November 29, 2005.* *TA-W-60,563; General Chemical Performance Products, Gibbstown, NJ: December 6, 2005.* *TA-W-60,579; Dana Corporation, Including On-Site Leased Workers of Adecco, Danville, KY: November 22, 2005* *TA-W-60,602; Photocircuits Corporation, Glen Cove, NY: December 2, 2005.* *TA-W-60,348; Del Monte Fresh Produce (Hawaii) Inc., Kunia, HI: October 30, 2005.* The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of Section 222(a)(2)(B) (shift in production) and Section 246(a)(3)(A)(ii) of the Trade Act have been met. *TA-W-60,389; Starkey Laboratories, Inc., Glencoe Division, Glencoe, MN: January 5, 2007.* *TA-W-60,463; Cott Beverages Wyomissing, Inc., Wyomissing, PA: November 20, 2005.* *TA-W-60,543; Edscha Jackson, Inc., Leased Workers of Autotek, Bartech and Accountemps, Jackson, MI: December 5, 2005.* *TA-W-60,553; Graftech International, A Division of UCAR Carbon Company, Clarksville, TN: December 7, 2005.* *TA-W-60,587; Federal Mogul Corporation, Sealing Systems Division, Van Wert, OH: December 11, 2005.* *TA-W-60,615; York Group Metal Casket Assembly (The), Matthews Casket Division, Marshfield, MO: December 12, 2005.* *TA-W-60,632; Pfizer, Inc., Global Manufacturing Division, Holland, MI: December 15, 2005.* *TA-W-60,643; Hutchings Automotive Products, Inc., Grand Blanc, MI: December 14, 2005.* *TA-W-60,661; Lear Corporation, Seating Systems Division, Janesville Plant, Janesville, WI: December 21, 2005.* *TA-W-60,708; Hooven Allison, LLC, Madison, GA: December 29, 2005.* *TA-W-60,716; A.O. Smith Corporation, Electrical Products Division, Mebane, NC: January 4, 2006.* *TA-W-60,559; ESCO Company Limited Partnership, Muskegon, MI: December 7, 2005.* *TA-W-60,593; Paul Lavitt Mills, Inc., Lincolnton, NC: December 12, 2005.* *TA-W-60,613; Stanley Furniture Company, Robbinsville Plant, Robbinsville, NC: December 13, 2005.* *TA-W-60,666; Spaulding Composites, Inc., DeKalb, IL: December 21, 2005.* *TA-W-60,692; Anaheim Manufacturing Co., A Subsidiary of Western Industries, Anaheim, CA: September 25, 2006.* The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of Section 222(b) (supplier to a firm whose workers are certified eligible to apply for TAA) and Section 246(a)(3)(A)(ii) of the Trade Act have been met. *TA-W-60,459; Sandusky Athol International, Sandusky Limited, Sandusky, OH: November 20, 2005.* The following certifications have been issued. The requirements of Section 222(b) (downstream producer for a firm whose workers are certified eligible to apply for TAA based on increased imports from or a shift in production to Mexico or Canada) and Section 246(a)(3)(A)(ii) of the Trade Act have been met. *TA-W-60,552; American Specialty Cars (ASC), Inc., Livonia 04, Livonia, MI: December 5, 2005.* Negative Determinations for Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance In the following cases, it has been determined that the requirements of 246(a)(3)(A)(ii) have not been met for the reasons specified. The Department has determined that criterion

(1)of Section 246 has not been met. Workers at the firm are 50 years of age or older. *None* . The Department has determined that criterion

(2)of Section 246 has not been met. Workers at the firm possess skills that are easily transferable. *TA-W-60,620; Point Technologies, a Subsidiary of Angiotech Pharmaceuticals, Wheeling, IL.* The Department has determined that criterion

(3)of Section 246 has not been met. Competition conditions within the workers' industry are not adverse. *None* . Negative Determinations for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance In the following cases, the investigation revealed that the eligibility criteria for worker adjustment assistance have not been met for the reasons specified. Because the workers of the firm are not eligible to apply for TAA, the workers cannot be certified eligible for ATAA. The investigation revealed that criteria (a)(2)(A)(I.A.) and (a)(2)(B)(II.A.) (employment decline) have not been met. *TA-W-60,485; Lockheed Martin, Operations Manufacturing Group, Orlando, FL.* *TA-W-60,595; Berkline Benchcraft, LLC, Blue Mountain, MS.* The investigation revealed that criteria (a)(2)(A)(I.B.) (Sales or production, or both, did not decline) and (a)(2)(B)(II.B.) (shift in production to a foreign country) have not been met. *TA-W-60,549; Blue Holdings, Inc., Commerce, CA.* *TA-W-60,693; Continental Connector Co., A Subsidiary ASC Group, Inc., Bloomfield, NJ.* The investigation revealed that criteria (a)(2)(A)(I.C.) (increased imports) and (a)(2)(B)(II.B.) (shift in production to a foreign country) have not been met. *TA-W-59,974; Delphi Corporation, Automotive Holdings Group, New Brunswick, NJ.* *TA-W-60,229; City Machine Tool and Die Co., Inc., Muncie, IN.* *TA-W-60,420; Mesick Precision Co., Inc., Mesick, MI.* *TA-W-60,519; Sun Chemical Corporation, Flush Department, Muskegon, MI.* *TA-W-60,524; Eaton Paperboard Convertors, Booneville, MS.* *TA-W-60,614; Weyerhaeuser Bardcor, CBPR Division, West Memphis, AR.* The investigation revealed that the predominate cause of worker separations is unrelated to criteria (a)(2)(A)(I.C.) (increased imports) and (a)(2)(B)(II.C) (shift in production to a foreign country under a free trade agreement or a beneficiary country under a preferential trade agreement, or there has been or is likely to be an increase in imports). *None* . The workers' firm does not produce an article as required for certification under Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974. *TA-W-60,477; American Uniform Company, Headquarters Cleveland, Cleveland, TN.* *TA-W-60,551; Haggar Clothing Company, Technical Design Division, Dallas, TX.* *TA-W-60,558; Supervalu, Inc., Pleasant Prairie Distribution Center, Pleasant Prairie, WI.* *TA-W-60,574; Finegood Moldings, Inc., Carson, CA.* *TA-W-60,581; Jeanne Skin Care Cosmetics, Ltd., New York, NY.* The investigation revealed that criteria of Section 222(b)(2) has not been met. The workers' firm (or subdivision) is not a supplier to or a downstream producer for a firm whose workers were certified eligible to apply for TAA. *None* . I hereby certify that the aforementioned determinations were issued during the period of January 8 through January 12, 2007. Copies of these determinations are available for inspection in Room C-5311, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210 during normal business hours or will be mailed to persons who write to the above address. Dated: January 18, 2007. Ralph Dibattista, Director, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E7-1070 Filed 1-24-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-60,751] Reel Quick, Inc., Lincoln, NE; Notice of Termination of Investigation Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on January 12, 2007 in response to a worker petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers at Reel Quick, Inc., Lincoln, Nebraska. The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated. Signed at Washington, DC this 17th day of January, 2007. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E7-1072 Filed 1-24-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration [TA-W-60,608] Valley Mills, Inc., Valley Head, AL; Notice of Termination of Investigation Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on December 15, 2006 in response to a worker petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers at Valley Mills, Inc., Valley Head, Alabama. The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated. Signed at Washington, DC this 17th day of January, 2007. Elliott S. Kushner, Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance. [FR Doc. E7-1071 Filed 1-24-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration America's Job Bank AGENCY: Employment and Training Administration, Labor. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Labor's (USDOL) Employment and Training Administration

(ETA)intends to provide hyperlinks to Web sites to aid customers to find an alternative job bank when America's Job Bank

(AJB)is phased out on June 30, 2007. ETA is issuing this notice to solicit information from private-sector job bank Web sites interested in applying to be included in the list of Web links. DATES: All interested parties are asked to submit the information requested in this notice at the Web site: *http://www.ajbtransition.org.* Information must be submitted no later than February 26, 2007. ADDRESSES: Address all comments concerning this notice to Anthony D. Dais, U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room S-4231, Washington, DC 20210; or e-mail *ajbtransition@dol.gov* ; or transmit via fax at 202-693-3015 (this is not a toll-free number). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anthony D. Dais, at telephone number 202-693-2650 (this is not a toll-free number). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ETA's transition plan for the phase-out of AJB includes developing the ability to direct employers and job seekers to both public and private sector job banks. This will be accomplished by providing a ‘list of Web links' to qualified Web sites during the AJB phase-out period. The ‘list of Web links' (to include all state workforce agency job banks) will be available for a period of time both before and after the phase-out of AJB on June 30, 2007. ETA will select Web sites to be included in the list of links from applications meeting the requirements of this notice. ETA reserves the right to use the listings for multiple Federal purposes, to edit, and to remove the ‘list of Web links' at its sole discretion. Solicitation for Information About Private, and Non-Profit Sector Job Banks Organizations that operate private and/or non-profit sector job banks or bulletin boards that wish to be considered for inclusion on the ‘list of Web links' are invited to provide information about the services they provide. 1. *Mandatory Requirements.* ETA will only consider for inclusion on this list, a job bank or bulletin board that provides information about the following mandatory requirements: • Is available via the Internet; • Is national in scope, accepting job orders and resumes from all employers and job seekers in all States and Territories and accepting job orders from all occupational categories and industries; • Has been in the business of providing job bank services over the Internet for at least the past 18 months; • Does not require a registration fee or membership fee for job seekers to search for jobs; • Has a state or federal employer identification number (EIN); and • Offers functionality similar to that currently provided by AJB: • Accepts job orders from employers; • Accepts resumes from job seekers at no cost; • Provides matching capability between job seeker resumes and employer job postings at no cost to the job seeker; • Provides the ability for a ‘geographical location or area specific' search; • Monitors job postings to assure there are no discriminatory language or requirements; and • Provides feedback to job posting organizations that their jobs have been accepted and posted to the Web site. 2. *Additional Information.* To help job seekers and employers understand the services offered, private and non-profit job bank or bulletin board organizations must provide additional information. To be included in the list of Web hyperlinks a job bank or bulletin board must provide information about the availability of the services listed below: • Machine language translation services for Spanish speakers; • “Job Scout” capability; • Compliance with section 508 of the Americans with Disabilities Act; and • Specialized service to: ○ Veterans, transitioning military service members and military spouses; ○ Youth; ○ Mature workers; ○ Migrant and seasonal farmworkers; and ○ Other (please specify). In order to be considered for inclusion on the ‘list of Web links', an organization operating a job bank or bulletin board must meet all mandatory requirements and must respond to all of the “additional information” questions. Submittals that do not address the mandatory requirements and the additional information functionality questions will not be considered for inclusion. Please note, however, that the information provided regarding the “additional information” questions is not used to disqualify a site, but will be used to provide helpful information to those seeking information about alternatives to AJB. Information must be submitted at the *www.ajbtransition.org* web site no later than close of business February 26, 2007. State workforce agencies need not respond to this notice to be included in the job bank listing. States have already submitted information to ETA and the State's AJB transition coordinator can provide updated information at any time. Solicitation for Information About Internet Gateway or Portal Sites Organizations that operate portal or gateway Web sites that provide information about Job Banks (Public, Private, National, Regional, Niche); Recruiting Services and Directories; and Recruiters are invited to provide information about the services they provide. 1. Mandatory Requirements. To be considered for inclusion on the ‘list of Web links', a portal site must: • Be available via the Internet; • Be national in scope; • Have been in business providing job bank portal information services over the Internet for at least the past 18 months; • Not require a registration fee or membership fee for job seekers to search for job search assistance; • Have a state or federal employer identification number; and 2. Additional Information. To help job seekers and employers navigate the many portal sites included in the ‘list of Web links', portal sites must provide additional information including, but not limited to, the following: • Machine language translation services for Spanish speakers; • Compliance with section 508 of the Americans with Disabilities Act; • Specialized service to: ○ Veterans, transitioning military service members and military spouses; ○ Youth; ○ Mature workers; ○ Migrant and seasonal farmworkers; ○ Business/Trade Associations or organizations; and ○ Other (please specify). In order to be considered for inclusion on the ‘list of Web links', an organization operating a portal or gateway site must meet all mandatory requirements and must respond to all of the “additional information” questions. Submittals that do not address the mandatory requirements and the additional information functionality questions will not be considered for inclusion. Please note, however, that the information provided to the “additional information” questions is not used to disqualify a site, but will be used to provide helpful information to those seeking information about alternatives to AJB. Information must be submitted at the *www.ajbtransition.org* Web site no later than close of business February 26, 2007. Each submittal from either a job board or portal site organization must include an attestation that the information provided is true and accurate. This attestation must be from an organizational representative who has the authority to represent the organization. The attestation must clearly identify the name, title, e-mail address, and phone number of the attester. Failure to include a complete attestation statement will result in the submittal not being considered for inclusion. At this time ETA anticipates listing all organizations offering job banks/bulletin boards or portal/gateway sites that meet the standards set forth in this notice. However, if the response to this notice is greater that anticipated, ETA reserves the right to limit the list to a manageable size. Signed at Washington, DC, this 17th day of January, 2006. Emily Stover DeRocco, Assistant Secretary for Employment and Training. [FR Doc. E7-1106 Filed 1-24-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-30-P NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION [Notice (07-003)] Notice of Intent To Grant Exclusive License AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration. ACTION: Notice of intent to grant exclusive license. SUMMARY: This notice is issued in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 209(c)(1) and 37 CFR 404.7(a)(1)(i). NASA hereby gives notice of its intent to grant an exclusive license in the United States to practice the inventions described in ARC-15205-1, entitled “Biochemical Sensors Using Carbon Nanotube Arrays”, to Early Warning, Inc., having its principal place of business in Newark, Delaware. This license may be field of use restricted. The patent rights in this invention have been assigned to the United States of America as represented by the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The prospective exclusive license will comply with the terms and conditions of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. DATES: The prospective exclusive license may be granted unless, within fifteen

(15)days from the date of this published notice, NASA receives written objections including evidence and argument that establish that the grant of the license would not be consistent with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. Competing applications completed and received by NASA within fifteen

(15)days of the date of this published notice will also be treated as objections to the grant of the contemplated exclusive license. Objections submitted in response to this notice will not be made available to the public for inspection and, to the extent permitted by law, will not be released under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552. ADDRESSES: Objections relating to the prospective license may be submitted to Patent Counsel, Office of Chief Counsel, NASA Ames Research Center, Mail Stop 202A-4, Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000.

(650)604-5104; Fax

(650)604-2767. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert M. Padilla, Chief Patent Counsel, Office of Chief Counsel, NASA Ames Research Center, Mail Stop 202A-4, Moffett Field, CA 94035-1000.

(650)604-5104; Fax

(650)604-2767. Information about other NASA inventions available for licensing can be found online at *http://techtracs.nasa.gov/.* Dated: January 19, 2007. Keith T. Sefton, Deputy General Counsel, Administration and Management [FR Doc. E7-1055 Filed 1-24-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7510-13-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 50-272] PSEG Nuclear Llc, Exelon Generation Company, LLC; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the Commission) is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. DPR-70 issued to PSEG Nuclear LLC (the licensee) for operation of the Salem Nuclear Generating Station (Salem), Unit No. 1, located in Salem County, New Jersey. The amendment request proposes a one-time change to the Technical Specifications

(TSs)regarding the steam generator

(SG)tube inspection and repair required for the portion of the SG tubes passing through the tubesheet region. Specifically, for Salem Unit No. 1 refueling outage 18 (planned for spring 2007) and the subsequent operating cycle, the proposed TS changes would limit the required inspection (and repair if degradation is found) to the portions of the SG tubes passing through the upper 17 inches of the approximate 21-inch tubesheet region. Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Commission will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's regulations. The Commission has made a proposed determination that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the Commission's regulations in Title 10 of the *Code of Federal Regulations* (10 CFR), Section 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not

(1)involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated;

(2)create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or

(3)involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below: 1. Does the change involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated? Of the accidents previously evaluated, the proposed changes only affect the steam generator tube rupture

(SGTR)event evaluation and the postulated steam line break

(SLB)accident evaluation. Loss-of-coolant accident

(LOCA)conditions cause a compressive axial load to act on the tube. Therefore, since the LOCA tends to force the tube into the tubesheet rather than pull it out, it is not a factor in this amendment request. Another faulted load consideration is a safe shutdown earthquake (SSE); however, the seismic analysis of Model F steam generators has shown that axial loading of the tubes is negligible during an SSE. At normal operating pressures, leakage from primary water stress corrosion cracking (PWSCC) below 17 inches from the top of the tubesheet is limited by both the tube-to-tubesheet crevice and the limited crack opening permitted by the tubesheet constraint. Consequently, negligible normal operating leakage is expected from cracks within the tubesheet region. For the SGTR event, the required structural margins of the steam generator tubes will be maintained by the presence of the tubesheet. Tube rupture is precluded for cracks in the hydraulic expansion region due to the constraint provided by the tubesheet. Therefore, the performance criteria of NEI [Nuclear Energy Institute] 97-06, Rev. 2, “Steam Generator Program Guidelines” and the Regulatory Guide

(RG)1.121, “Bases for Plugging Degraded PWR [pressurized-water reactor] Steam Generator Tubes,” margins against burst are maintained during normal and postulated accident conditions. The limited inspection length of 17 inches supplies the necessary resistive force to preclude pullout loads under both normal operating and accident conditions. The contact pressure results from the hydraulic expansion process, thermal expansion mismatch between the tube and tubesheet and from the differential pressure between the primary and secondary side. Therefore, the proposed change does not result in a significant increase in the probability or consequence of a[n] SGTR. The probability of a[n] SLB is unaffected by the potential failure of a SG tube as the failure of a tube is not an initiator for a[n] SLB event. SLB leakage is limited by leakage flow restrictions resulting from the crack and tube-to-tubesheet contact pressures that provide a restricted leakage path above the indications and also limit the degree of crack face opening compared to free span indications. The leak rate during postulated accident conditions would be expected to be less than twice that during normal operation for indications near the bottom of the tubesheet (including indications in the tube end welds) based on the observation that while the driving pressure increases by about a factor of two, the flow resistance increases with an increase in the tube-to-tubesheet contact pressure. While such a decrease is rationally expected, the postulated accident leak rate is bounded by twice the normal operating leak rate if the increase in contact pressure is ignored. Since normal operating leakage is limited to 0.10 gpm [gallons per minute] (150 gpd [gallons per day]), the attendant accident condition leak rate, assuming all leakage to be from indications below 17 inches from the top of the tubesheet would be bounded by 0.187 gpm. This value is bounded by the 0.35 gpm leak rate assumed in Section 15.4.2, “Major Secondary System Pipe Rupture” of the Salem Unit 1 Updated FSAR [Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR)]. Based on the above, the performance criteria of NEI-97-06, Rev. 2 and draft RG 1.121 continue to be met and the proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. 2. Does the change create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated? The proposed change does not introduce any changes or mechanisms that create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident. Tube bundle integrity is expected to be maintained for all plant conditions upon implementation of the limited tubesheet inspection depth methodology. The proposed changes do not introduce any new equipment or any change to existing equipment. No new effects on existing equipment are created nor are any new malfunctions introduced. Therefore, based on the above evaluation, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. 3. Does the change involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety? The proposed change maintains the required structural margins of the steam generator tubes for both normal and accident conditions. NEI 97-06, Rev. 2 and RG 1.121 are used as the basis in the development of the limited tubesheet inspection depth methodology for determining that steam generator tube integrity considerations are maintained within acceptable limits. RG 1.121 describes a method acceptable to the NRC staff for meeting General Design Criteria 14, 15, 31, and 32 by reducing the probability and consequences of an SGTR. RG 1.121 concludes that by determining the limiting safe conditions of tube wall degradation beyond which tubes with unacceptable cracking, as established by inservice inspection, should be removed from service or repaired, the probability and consequences of a[n] SGTR are reduced. This RG uses safety factors on loads for tube burst that are consistent with the requirements of Section III of the ASME [American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel] Code. For axially oriented cracking located within the tubesheet, tube burst is precluded due to the presence of the tubesheet. For circumferentially oriented cracking, Reference 1 [Westinghouse Report WCAP-16640-P, “Steam Generator Alternate Repair Criteria for Tube Portion Within the Tubesheet at Salem Unit 1,” August 2006] defines a length of non-degraded expanded tube in the tubesheet that provides the necessary resistance to tube pullout due to the pressure induced forces (with applicable safety factors applied). Application of the limited tubesheet inspection depth criteria will not result in unacceptable primary-to-secondary leakage during all plant conditions. Plugging of the steam generator tubes reduces the reactor coolant flow margin for core cooling. Implementation of the 17[-]inch inspection length at Salem Unit 1 will result in maintaining the margin of flow that may have otherwise been reduced by tube plugging. Based on the above, it is concluded that the proposed changes do not result in any reduction of margin with respect to plant safety as defined in the [UFSAR] or bases of the plant Technical Specifications. The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice will be considered in making any final determination. Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the expiration of 60 days after the date of publication of this notice. The Commission may issue the license amendment before expiration of the 60-day period provided that its final determination is that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. In addition, the Commission may issue the amendment prior to the expiration of the 30-day comment period should circumstances change during the 30-day comment period such that failure to act in a timely way would result, for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility. Should the Commission take action prior to the expiration of either the comment period or the notice period, it will publish in the **Federal Register** a notice of issuance. Should the Commission make a final No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, any hearing will take place after issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will occur very infrequently. Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Chief, Rulemaking, Directives and Editing Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and should cite the publication date and page number of this **Federal Register** notice. Written comments may also be delivered to Room 6D59, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to intervene is discussed below. Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, the licensee may file a request for a hearing with respect to issuance of the amendment to the subject facility operating license and any person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding and who wishes to participate as a party in the proceeding must file a written request for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene. Requests for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's “Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedings” in 10 CFR Part 2. Interested persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is available at the Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly-available records will be accessible from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, *http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/.* If a request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the Commission or a presiding officer designated by the Commission or by the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will issue a notice of a hearing or an appropriate order. As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding. The petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following general requirements:

(1)The name, address and telephone number of the requestor or petitioner;

(2)the nature of the requestor's/petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding;

(3)the nature and extent of the requestor's/petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and

(4)the possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the proceeding on the requestor's/petitioner's interest. The petition must also identify the specific contentions which the petitioner/requestor seeks to have litigated at the proceeding. Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the petitioner/requestor shall provide a brief explanation of the bases for the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The petitioner/requestor must also provide references to those specific sources and documents of which the petitioner is aware and on which the petitioner intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opinion. The petition must include sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact. Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of the amendment under consideration. The contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A petitioner/requestor who fails to satisfy these requirements with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party. Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing. If a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance of the amendment. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place before the issuance of any amendment. Nontimely requests and/or petitions and contentions will not be entertained absent a determination by the Commission or the presiding officer of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the petition, request and/or the contentions should be granted based on a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i) through (viii). A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must be filed by:

(1)First class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff;

(2)courier, express mail, and expedited delivery services: Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff;

(3)e-mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, *HEARINGDOCKET@NRC.GOV;* or

(4)facsimile transmission addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff at

(301)415-1101, verification number is

(301)415-1966. A copy of the request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene should also be sent to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, and it is requested that copies be transmitted either by means of facsimile transmission to 301-415-3725 or by e-mail to *OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov.* A copy of the request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene should also be sent to Jeffrie J. Keenan, Esquire, Nuclear Business Unit—N21, P.O. Box 236, Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038, attorney for the licensee. For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment dated January 18, 2007, which is available for public inspection at the Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint North, File Public Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly-available records will be accessible from the ADAMS Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, *http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.* Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to *pdr@nrc.gov.* Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day of January, 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Richard B. Ennis, Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch I-2, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E7-1087 Filed 1-24-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION NRC Enforcement Policy; Proposed Plan for Major Revision AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Notice of proposed revision; solicitation of written comments. SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission

(NRC)is examining its Enforcement Policy (Enforcement Policy or Policy) and plans a major revision to clarify use of enforcement terminology and address enforcement issues in areas currently not covered in the Policy, including, for example, the agency's use of Alternative Dispute Resolution

(ADR)in enforcement cases. The NRC requests comments on

(1)what specific topics, if any, should be added or removed from the Policy; and

(2)what topics currently addressed in the Policy, if any, require additional guidance. The NRC is soliciting written comments from interested parties including public interest groups, states, members of the public and the regulated industry, i.e., both reactor and materials licensees, vendors, and contractors. This request is intended to assist the NRC in its review of the Enforcement Policy; NRC does not intend to modify its emphasis on compliance with NRC requirements. DATES: The comment period expires March 26, 2007. This time period allows for the public to respond to the specific questions posed above in this notice as well as the opportunity to provide general comments on the revision of the Policy. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the Commission is able to assure consideration only for comments received on or before this date. ADDRESSES: Comments on this proposed revision submitted in writing or in electronic form will be made available for public inspection. Because your comments will not be edited to remove any identifying or contact information, the NRC cautions you against including information such as social security numbers or other sensitive personal information in your submission. You may submit comments by any one of the following methods: *Mail comments to:* Michael T. Lesar, Chief, Rulemaking, Directives, and Editing Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, Mail Stop: T6D59, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. *E-mail comments to: nrcrep@nrc.gov.* *Hand deliver comments to:* 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852, between the hours of 7:45 am and 4:15 pm, Federal workdays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maria E. Schwartz, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555; *mes@nrc.gov,*

(301)415-1888. SUPPLEMENTARY BACKGROUND: I. Background The NRC Enforcement Policy contains the enforcement policy and procedures that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

(NRC)uses to initiate and review enforcement actions in response to violations of NRC requirements. The primary purpose of the Enforcement Policy is to support the NRC's overall safety mission, i.e., to protect the public health and safety and the environment, and to assure the common defense and security. Because it is a policy statement and not a regulation, the Commission may deviate from this statement of policy as appropriate under the circumstances of a particular case. The Enforcement Policy was first published in the **Federal Register** on October 7, 1980 (46 FR 66754), as an interim policy. The Commission published a final version of the Policy on March 9, 1982 (47 FR 9987). The Enforcement Policy has been modified on a number of occasions to address changing requirements and additional experience and on June 30, 1995 (60 FR 34381), a major revision of the Policy was published. The NRC maintains the Enforcement Policy on its Web site at *http://www.nrc.gov;* select What We Do, Enforcement, then Enforcement Policy. The goal of the Policy is to support the NRC's safety mission by emphasizing the importance of compliance with regulatory requirements, and encouraging prompt identification, and prompt, comprehensive correction of violations. Revisions to the Policy have consistently reflected this commitment: For example, in 1998, the NRC changed its inspection procedures to address the Reactor Oversight Process

(ROP)initiative. This has been reflected in the Policy's use of risk insights to assess the significance of violations whenever possible. While this may result in fewer Notices of Violation being issued (because of a greater emphasis on the use of non-cited violations), it has not reduced the agency's emphasis on the importance of compliance with NRC requirements. Another example involves the NRC's development of a pilot program in 2005 which focuses on the use of Alternative Dispute Resolution

(ADR)for certain kinds of enforcement cases. The NRC enforcement staff has used ADR to resolve reactor, fuel facility, and materials enforcement cases. While the use of ADR in enforcement raises unique issues, it emphasizes creative, cooperative approaches to handling conflicts in lieu of adversarial procedures. The NRC is again considering a major revision of its Enforcement Policy. As discussed above, since it was first published in 1980, sections of the Policy have been updated and additional sections have been included. Terms used under conventional enforcement are now associated with the significance determination process

(SDP)performed under the ROP as well; therefore, the use of these terms must be clarified. In addition, there are areas that are not directly addressed in the Supplements of the Enforcement Policy, such as the enforcement issues associated with combined licenses for the proposed new reactors and the construction phase of proposed fuel facilities as well as recently promulgated requirements in the safeguards and security area. These areas must be addressed either by adding them to the text of the existing Policy and Supplements or by revising the Policy and developing new Supplements. Finally, the format of the Enforcement Policy may need to be reorganized to reflect the changes that have been made to it. II. Proposed Plan The NRC envisions revising the Enforcement Policy so that the policy statement and Supplements addressing conventional enforcement would be followed by sections addressing the enforcement processes that differ in some way from conventional enforcement. For example, currently the discussion in the Policy addressing Predecisional Enforcement Conferences

(PECs)contains information regarding attendance by a whistle blower. In fact, third party (whistle blower) invitations are unique to discrimination cases and could reasonably be addressed, along with all of the other unique discrimination issues, in a self-contained section addressing discrimination enforcement cases. Providing self-contained sections would make it easier to add (and potentially delete) them in the future, if necessary. Under this approach, the ROP would be the first “variation” on conventional enforcement. If the agency takes this approach, Sections IV through VII or VIII of the current Enforcement Policy could be combined in the conventional enforcement process which would be followed by the NRC's policy regarding the use of the ROP in enforcement, etc. *The following draft Table of Contents would be consistent with the approach outlined above:* Preface Background and Definitions I. Introduction and Purpose. II. Statutory Authority and Procedural Framework. III. Responsibilities. IV. The Enforcement Process. A. Assigning Severity Level (Remove section IV.5 which discusses ROP). B. Severity Level vis-a-vis Activity Areas. C. Predecisional Enforcement Conferences (Remove discussion involving discrimination cases). D. Disposition of Violations (Remove section VI.A.1 and combine reactor non-cited violations

(NCVs)with all other NCVs such that there is one discussion of NCVs. Put the reactor cases associated with ROP in the ROP section.) 1. Wrongdoing. 2. Inaccurate and Incomplete Information. E. Formal Enforcement Sanctions. 1. Notices of Violation. 2. Civil Penalties. 3. Orders. F. Administrative Enforcement Sanctions. 1. Demands for Information. 2. Confirmatory Action Letters. 3. Letters of Reprimand. G. Exercise of Enforcement Discretion. 1. Escalation of Enforcement Sanctions. 2. Mitigation of Enforcement Sanctions. 3. Notices of Enforcement Discretion (NOEDs) for Power Reactors and Gaseous Diffusion Plants. 4. The Use of Discretion During the Adoption of New Requirements. H. Public Disclosure of Enforcement Actions (existing Sections XII). I. Reopening Closed Enforcement Actions, (existing Section XIII). V. Enforcement and the Reactor Oversight Process (ROP): Operating Reactors. VI. Enforcement Actions Involving Individuals (Incorporate existing Section XI, “Referrals to the Department of Justice” into this Section.) VII. Discrimination. VIII. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). IX. Follow up with any additional subject areas that may warrant a few paragraphs segregated from the main policy discussion, e.g., security/safeguards, the lost source policy, interim enforcement regarding certain fire protection issues. X. Supplements. A. Health Physics. B. Reactors. 1. Operating reactors. 2. Part 50 Facility Construction. 3. Part 52 Combined Licenses. 4. Fitness for Duty. C. Facility Security and Safeguards— 1. Physical Protection of Plants and Materials. 2. Facility Security Clearance and Safeguarding of National Security Information and Restricted Data. D. Fuel Cycle and Materials Operations. 1. Gaseous Diffusion Plants. 2. Gas Centrifuge Uranium Recovery Facilities. 3. Mixed Oxide

(MOX)Fuel Fabrication Facility. E. Materials Safeguards. F. Emergency Preparedness. G. Transportation. H. Waste Disposal. I. Miscellaneous Matters. The Commission is aware that enforcement actions deliver regulatory messages. Based on this tenet, the goals of this revision are to ensure that the Enforcement Policy

(1)continues to reflect the Commission's focus on safety, i.e., the need for licensees to identify and correct violations, to address root causes, and to be responsive to initial opportunities to identify and prevent violations;

(2)appropriately addresses the various subject areas that the NRC regulates; and

(3)provides a framework that supports consistent implementation, recognizing that each enforcement action is dependent on the specific circumstances of the case. Dated at Rockville, MD this 17th day of January, 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Cynthia A. Carpenter, Director, Office of Enforcement. [FR Doc. E7-1088 Filed 1-24-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste; Meeting on Planning and Procedures; Notice of Meeting The Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste

(ACNW)will hold a Planning and Procedures meeting on February 15, 2007, Room T-2B1, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The entire meeting will be open to public attendance, with the exception of a portion that may be closed pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(2) and

(6)to discuss organizational and personnel matters that relate solely to internal personnel rules and practices of ACNW, and information the release of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: *Thursday, February 15, 2007—8:30 a.m.-9:30 a.m.* The Committee will discuss proposed ACNW activities and related matters. The purpose of this meeting is to gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee. Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official, Mr. Antonio F. Dias (Telephone: 301/415-6805) between 8:15 a.m. and 5 p.m.

(ET)five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Electronic recordings will be permitted only during those portions of the meeting that are open to the public. Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by contacting the Designated Federal Official between 8:15 a.m. and 5 p.m. (ET). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact the above named individual at least two working days prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes in the agenda. Dated: January 18, 2007. Antonio F. Dias, Acting Branch Chief, ACRS/ACNW. [FR Doc. E7-1086 Filed 1-24-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Sunshine Act Federal Register Notice AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETINGS: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. DATE: Week of January 29, 2007. PLACE: Commissioners' Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. STATUS: Public and closed. ADDITIONAL MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED Week of January 29, 2007 Tuesday, January 30, 2007 1:30 p.m. Discussion of Security Issues (Closed—Ex. 1). * The schedule for Commission meetings is subject to change on short notice. To verify the status of meetings call (recording)—(301) 415-1292. Contact person for more information: Michelle Schroll,

(301)415-1662. The NRC Commission Meeting Schedule can be found on the Internet at: *http://www.nrc.gov/what-we-do/policy-making/schedule.html.* The NRC provides reasonable accommodation to individuals with disabilities where appropriate. If you need a reasonable accommodation to participate in these public meetings, or need this meeting notice or the transcript or other information from the public meetings in another format ( *e.g.,* braille, large print), please notify the NRC's Disability Program Coordinator, Deborah Chan, at 301-415-7041, TDD: 301-415-2100, or by e-mail at *DLC@nrc.gov.* Determinations on requests for reasonable accommodation will be made on a case-by-case basis. This notice is distributed by mail to several hundred subscribers; if you no longer wish to receive it, or would like to be added to the distribution, please contact the Office of the Secretary, Washington, DC 20555 (301-415-1969). In addition, distribution of this meeting notice over the Internet system is available. If you are interested in receiving this Commission meeting schedule electronically, please send an electronic message to *dkw@nrc.gov.* Dated: January 22, 2007. R. Michelle Schroll, Office of the Secretary. [FR Doc. 07-337 Filed 1-23-07; 12:53 pm]

Connectionstraces to 17

Traces to 17 documents

CFR