Notices. Notice to add a system of records

22,724 words·~103 min read·/register/2007/04/06/07-1739

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

BILLING CODE 5001-06-M DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Air Force [USAF-2007-0018] Privacy Act of 1974; System of Records AGENCY: Department of the Air Force. ACTION: Notice to add a system of records. SUMMARY: The Department of the Air Force proposes to add a system of records to its inventory of record systems subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended. DATES: The proposed action will be effective on May 7, 2007 unless comments are received that would result in a contrary determination.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to the Air Force Privacy Act Officer, Office of Warfighting Integration and Chief Information Officer, SAF/XCISI, 1800 Air Force Pentagon, Suite 220, Washington, DC 20330-1800. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Novella Hill at

(703)588-7855. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Department of the Air Force's notices for systems of records subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, have been published in the **Federal Register** and are available from the address above. The proposed systems reports, as required by 5 U.S.C. 552a(r) of the Privacy Act, were submitted on March 6, 2007, to the House Committee on Government Reform, the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)pursuant to paragraph 4c of Appendix I to OMB Circular No. A-130, ‘Federal Agency Responsibilities for Maintaining Records About Individuals,’ dated February 8, 1996, (February 20, 1996, 61 FR 6427). Dated: April 2, 2007. C.R. Choate, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense. F011 AF A3 B DoD System name: DoD Foreign Clearance Program Records. System location: Andrew T. McNamara Headquarters Complex, Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC), 8725 John J. Kingman Road, Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-6218. Categories of individuals covered by the system: Military, Department of Defense

(DoD)civilians, and non-DoD personnel traveling under DoD sponsorship (e.g., contractors, foreign nationals and dependents) and includes temporary travelers worldwide as defined by the DoD Foreign Clearance Guide Program. Categories of records in the system: Aircraft diplomatic clearance and personnel travel requests, which may contain the individual's name; rank/pay grade; military branch or department; passport number; office address and telephone number; official and personal email address; detailed information on sites to be visited; visitation dates; and purpose of visit. Authority for maintenance of the system: 10 U.S.C. 3013, Secretary of the Army; 10 U.S.C. 5013, Secretary of the Navy; 10 U.S.C. 8013, Secretary of the Air Force; Public Law 99-399, Omnibus Diplomatic Security and Antiterrorism Act of 1986; 22 U.S.C. 4801, 4802, and 4805, Foreign Relations and Intercourse; DODD 4500.54, Official Temporary Duty Travel Abroad; DOD 4500.54-G, Department of Defense Foreign Clearance Guide; and E.O. 9397 (SSN). Purpose(s): To provide the Department of Defense with a web-based automated system to request, clear, and audit aircraft diplomatic and personnel travel clearances worldwide; to provide individual travelers with intelligence and travel warnings; and to provide the Defense Attache and other DoD authorized officials with information necessary to verify aircraft diplomatic clearances and official travel by DoD personnel. Routine uses of records maintained in the system, including categories of users and the purposes of such uses: In addition to those disclosures generally permitted under 5 U.S.C. 552a(b) of the Privacy Act, these records or information contained therein may specifically be disclosed outside the DoD as a routine use pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(b)(3) as follows: To the Department of State Regional Security Officer, U.S. Embassy officials, and foreign law enforcement and security agencies for the purpose of coordinating mission and security support for DoD travelers. The DoD ‘Blanket Routine Uses’ set forth at the beginning of the Air Force's compilation of systems of records notices also apply to this system. Policies and practices for storing, retiring, accessing, retaining, and disposing of records. Storage: Electronic storage media. Retrievability: Individual's name, Social Security Number (SSN), passport number, dates of travel or mission, and aircraft mission. Safeguards: Electronic records are located in the Aircraft and Personnel Automated Clearance System (APACS) computer database with built in safeguards. Computerized records are maintained in controlled areas accessible only to authorized personnel with an official need-to-know access. In addition, automated files are accessed by individual account with appropriate permissions, are password protected, and are in compliance with the applicable laws and regulations. Retention and disposal: Records are destroyed 1 year after mission/travel is completed. System manager(s) and address: Chief, International Sovereignty Policy, International Treaties and Agreements Division, Headquarters, United States Air Force, 1480 Air Force Pentagon, Washington, DC 20330-1480. Notification procedures: Individuals seeking to determine whether information about themselves is contained in this system of records should address written inquiries to HQ USAF/A3SPI, 1480 Air Force Pentagon, Washington, DC 20330-1480. Requests should contain individual's full name, Social Security Number (SSN), and/or passport number. Record access procedures: Individuals seeking access to information about themselves contained in this system of records should address written inquiries to HQ USAF/A3SPI, 1480 Air Force Pentagon, Washington, DC 20330-1480. Requests should contain individual's full name, Social Security Number, and/or passport number. Contesting record procedures: The Air Force rules for accessing records, and for contesting contents and appealing initial agency determinations are published in Air Force Instruction 37-132; 32 CFR part 806b; or may be obtained from the system manager. Record source categories: From individuals. Exemptions claimed for the system: None. [FR Doc. E7-6457 Filed 4-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request AGENCY: Department of Education SUMMARY: The IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of Management invites comments on the submission for OMB review as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. DATES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before May 7, 2007. ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention: Education Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW., Room 10222, Washington, DC 20503. Commenters are encouraged to submit responses electronically by e-mail to *oira_submission@omb.eop.gov* or via fax to

(202)395-6974. Commenters should include the following subject line in their response “Comment: [insert OMB number], [insert abbreviated collection name, e.g., “Upward Bound Evaluation”]. Persons submitting comments electronically should not submit paper copies. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires that the Office of Management and Budget

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

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

(2)Title;

(3)Summary of the collection;

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

(5)Respondents and frequency of collection; and

(6)Reporting and/or Recordkeeping burden. OMB invites public comment. Dated: April 2, 2007. Angela C. Arrington, IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of Management. Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development *Type of Review:* Revision. *Title:* Study of Education Data Systems and Decision Making. *Frequency:* Annually. *Affected Public:* State, Local, or Tribal Gov't, SEAs or LEAs; Federal Government. *Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour Burden:* *Responses:* 1,494. *Burden Hours:* 1,207. *Abstract:* The purpose of the study is to examine the prevalence, use, and outcomes of education data systems for accountability, assessment, and instructional improvement purposes. Requests for copies of the information collection submission for OMB review may be accessed from *http://edicsweb.ed.gov,* by selecting the “Browse Pending Collections” link and by clicking on link number 3263. When you access the information collection, click on “Download Attachments” to view. Written requests for information should be addressed to U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., Potomac Center, 9th Floor, Washington, DC 20202-4700. Requests may also be electronically mailed to *ICDocketMgr@ed.gov* or faxed to 202-245-6623. Please specify the complete title of the information collection when making your request. Comments regarding burden and/or the collection activity requirements should be electronically mailed to *ICDocketMgr@ed.gov.* Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf

(TDD)may call the Federal Information Relay Service

(FIRS)at 1-800-877-8339. [FR Doc. E7-6448 Filed 4-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request AGENCY: Department of Education SUMMARY: The IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of Management invites comments on the submission for OMB review as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. DATES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before May 7, 2007. ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention: Education Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW., Room 10222, Washington, DC 20503. Commenters are encouraged to submit responses electronically by e-mail to *oira_submission@omb.eop.gov* or via fax to

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

(2)Title;

(3)Summary of the collection;

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

(5)Respondents and frequency of collection; and

(6)Reporting and/or Recordkeeping burden. OMB invites public comment. Dated: April 2, 2007. Angela C. Arrington, IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of Management. Institute of Education Sciences *Type of Review:* Revision of a currently approved collection. *Title:* What Works Clearinghouse Database Forms and Customer Surveys. *Frequency:* On occasion. *Affected Public:* Individuals or household (primary); businesses or other for-profit; not-for-profit institutions; Federal Government; State, Local, or Tribal Gov't, SEAs or LEAs. *Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour Burden:* *Responses:* 7,273. *Burden Hours:* 861. *Abstract:* The What Works Clearinghouse

(WWC)public submission databases will allow members of the public to submit nominations for studies, interventions, and topics that they would like the WWC to review. The evaluator database will enable the WWC to provide the public with a directory of available outcomes evaluators. Data from the customer surveys will be used to create indicators of how successfully the WWC is meeting the needs of various groups of its users. Requests for copies of the information collection submission for OMB review may be accessed from *http://edicsweb.ed.gov* , by selecting the “Browse Pending Collections” link and by clicking on link number 3273. When you access the information collection, click on “Download Attachments” to view. Written requests for information should be addressed to U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., Potomac Center, 9th Floor, Washington, DC 20202-4700. Requests may also be electronically mailed to *ICDocketMgr@ed.gov* or faxed to 202- 245-6623. Please specify the complete title of the information collection when making your request. Comments regarding burden and/or the collection activity requirements should be electronically mailed to *ICDocketMgr@ed.gov* 540-776-7742. Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf

(TDD)may call the Federal Information Relay Service

(FIRS)at 1-800-877-8339. [FR Doc. E7-6449 Filed 4-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools Overview Information; Readiness and Emergency Management for Schools Grant Program; Notice Inviting Applications for New Awards for Fiscal Year

(FY)2007 Note: The title of the Emergency Response and Crisis Management grant program has been revised to Readiness and Emergency Management for Schools to reflect terminology used in the emergency management field. Hereafter, the grant program under CFDA 84.184E will be referred to as the Readiness and Emergency Management for Schools grant program. *Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

(CFDA)Number:* 84.184E *Dates: Applications Available:* April 6, 2007. *Deadline for Transmittal of Applications:* May 21, 2007. *Deadline for Intergovernmental Review:* July 24, 2007. *Eligible Applicants:* Local educational agencies (LEAs). Note: The Secretary is limiting eligibility under the Readiness and Emergency Management for Schools grant competition (CFDA Number 84.184E) to applicants that do not currently have an active grant under this program. For the purpose of this eligibility requirement, a grant is considered active until the end of the grant's project or funding period, including any extensions of those periods that extend the grantee's authority to obligate funds (71 FR 70369). *Estimated Available Funds:* $24,000,000. Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of applications, the Secretary may make additional awards later in FY 2007 and in FY 2008 and subsequent years from the rank-ordered list of unfunded applicants from this competition. *Estimated Range of Awards:* $100,000—$500,000. *Estimated Average Size of Awards:* $100,000 for small districts (1-20 school facilities); $250,000 for medium-sized districts (21-75 school facilities); and $500,000 for large districts (76 or more school facilities). *Estimated Number of Awards:* 73. Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice. *Project Period:* Up to 18 months. Full Text of Announcement I. Funding Opportunity Description *Purpose of Program:* The Readiness and Emergency Management for Schools

(REMS)grant competition supports efforts by LEAs to improve and strengthen their school emergency management plans, including training school personnel and students in emergency response procedures; communicating emergency plans and procedures with parents; and coordinating with local law enforcement, public safety, public health, and mental health agencies. *Priorities:* These priorities are from

(1)the notice of final priorities and other application requirements for this program, published in the **Federal Register** on June 21, 2005 (70 FR 35652) and

(2)the notice of final priorities published in the **Federal Register** on May 11, 2006 (71 FR 27576). *Absolute Priority:* For FY 2007 and any subsequent year in which we make awards based on the list of unfunded applications from this competition, this priority is an absolute priority. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3) we consider only those applications that meet this priority. This priority is: *Improvement and Strengthening of School Emergency Management Plans* This priority supports local educational agency

(LEA)projects to improve and strengthen emergency management plans, at the district and school-building level addressing the four phases of emergency management: Prevention-Mitigation, Preparedness, Response, and Recovery. Plans must include:

(1)Training for school personnel and students in emergency management procedures;

(2)Coordination with local law enforcement, public safety, public health, and mental health agencies; and

(3)A method for communicating school emergency management policies and reunification procedures to parents and guardians. *Competitive Preference Priorities:* For FY 2007, and any subsequent year in which we make awards based on the list of unfunded applicants from this competition, these priorities are competitive preference priorities. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i) we award an additional 10 points to an application that meets Priority 1 and we award an additional 5 points to an application that meets Priority 2. Applications that qualify for Priorities 1 and 2 will receive points only under Priority 1. These priorities are: *Priority 1—Competitive Preference Priority for LEAs That Have Not Previously Received a Grant Under the REMS Program (CFDA 84.184E) and Are Located in an Urban Areas Security Initiative Jurisdiction* Under this priority, we give a competitive preference to applications from local educational agencies

(LEAs)that

(1)have not yet received a grant under this program (CFDA 84.184E) and

(2)are located in whole or in part within Urban Areas Security Initiative

(UASI)jurisdictions, as determined by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS). An applicant must meet both of these criteria in order to receive the competitive preference. Under a consortium application, all members of the LEA consortium need to meet both criteria to be eligible for the preference. Applications submitted by educational service agencies

(ESAs)are eligible under this priority if each LEA to be served by the grant is located within a UASI jurisdiction and has not received funding under this program directly, or as the lead agency or as a partner in a consortium; however the ESA itself may have received a previous grant. Because DHS' determination of UASI jurisdictions may change from year to year, applicants under this priority must refer to the most recent list of UASI jurisdictions published by DHS when submitting their applications. Note: The Governor of each State has designated a State Administrative Agency

(SAA)as the entity responsible for applying for, and administering, funds under the Department of Homeland Security Grant Program (which includes the UASI program). The SAA is also responsible for defining the geographic borders for jurisdictions included in the UASI program. Guidance on jurisdiction definitions can be found at: *http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/odp/grants_hsgp.htm.* *Priority 2—Competitive Preference Priority for LEAs That Have Not Previously Received a Grant Under the REMS Program (CFDA 84.184E)* Under this priority, we give competitive preference to applications from local educational agencies

(LEAs)that have not previously received a grant under this program (CFDA 84.184E). Applicants (other than educational service agencies (ESAs)) that have received funding under this program directly, or as the lead agency or as a partner in a consortium application under this program, will not receive competitive preference under this priority. For applications submitted by ESAs, each LEA to be served by the grant must not have received funding under this program directly, or as the lead agency, or as a partner in a consortium application, in order for the ESA to be eligible under this priority; however the ESA itself may have received a previous grant. *Other Application Requirements:* These requirements are from

(1)the notice of final priorities and other application requirements for this program, published in the **Federal Register** on June 21, 2005 (70 FR 35652) and

(2)the notice of final priorities and application requirements published in the **Federal Register** on May 11, 2006 (71 FR 27576). 1. *Partner Agreements.* To be considered for a grant award, an applicant must include in its application an agreement that details the participation of each of the following five community-based partners: Law enforcement, public safety, public health, mental health, and the head of the applicant's local government (for example, the mayor, city manager, or county executive). The agreement must include a description of each partner's roles and responsibilities in improving and strengthening emergency management plans at the district and school-building level, a description of each partner's commitment to the continuation and continuous improvement of emergency management plans at the district and school-building level, and an authorized signature representing the LEA and each partner acknowledging the agreement. If one or more of the five partners listed is not present in the applicant's community, or cannot feasibly participate, the agreement must explain the absence of each missing partner. To be considered eligible for funding, however, an application must include a signed agreement between the LEA, a law enforcement partner, and at least one of the other required partners (public safety, public health, mental health, or head of local government). Applications that fail to include the required agreement, including information on partners' roles and responsibilities and on their commitment to continuation and continuous improvement (with signatures and explanations for missing signatures as specified above), will not be read. Although this program requires partnerships with other parties, administrative direction and fiscal control for the project must remain with the LEA. 2. *Coordination with State or Local Homeland Security Plan.* All emergency management plans must be coordinated with the Homeland Security Plan of the State or locality in which the LEA is located. All States submitted such a plan to the Department of Homeland Security on January 30, 2004. To ensure that emergency services are coordinated, and to avoid duplication of effort within States and localities, applicants must include in their applications an assurance that the LEA will coordinate with, and follow, the requirements of its State or local Homeland Security Plan for emergency services and initiatives. 3. *Implementation of the National Incident Management System (NIMS).* Applicants must agree to implement their grant in a manner consistent with the implementation of the NIMS in their communities. Applicants must include in their applications an assurance that they have met, or will complete, all current NIMS requirements by the end of the grant period. Because DHS' determination of NIMS requirements may change from year to year, applicants must refer to the most recent list of NIMS requirements published by DHS when submitting their applications. In any notice inviting applications, the Department will provide applicants with information necessary to access the most recent DHS list of NIMS requirements. Information about the FY 2007 NIMS requirements for tribal governments and local jurisdictions, including LEAs, may be found at: *http://www.fema.gov/pdf/emergency/nims/imp_mtrx_tribal.pdf* . Note: An LEA's NIMS compliance must be achieved in close coordination with the local government and with recognition of the first responder capabilities held by the LEA and the local government. As LEAs are not traditional response organizations, first responder services will typically be provided to LEAs by local fire and rescue departments, emergency medical service providers, and law enforcement agencies. This traditional relationship must be acknowledged in achieving NIMS compliance in an integrated NIMS compliance plan for the local government and the LEA. LEA participation in the NIMS preparedness program of the local government is essential to ensure that first responder services are delivered to schools in a timely and effective manner. Additional information about NIMS implementation is available at: *http://www.fema.gov/emergency/nims/nims_compliance.shtm* . 4. *Individuals with Disabilities* . The applicant's plan must demonstrate that the applicant has taken into consideration the communication, transportation, and medical needs of individuals with disabilities within the school district. 5. *Infectious Disease Plan* . To be considered for a grant award, applicants must agree to develop a written plan designed to prepare the LEA for a possible infectious disease outbreak, such as pandemic influenza. Plans must address the four phases of emergency management (Mitigation-Prevention, Preparedness, Response, and Recovery) and include a plan for disease surveillance (systematic collection and analysis of data that lead to action being taken to prevent and control a disease), school closure decision-making, business continuity (processes and procedures established to ensure that essential functions can continue during and after a disaster), and continuation of educational services. Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7131. *Applicable Regulations:*

(a)The Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 79, 80, 81, 82, 84, 85, 97, 98, 99, and 299.

(b)The notice of final priority and other application requirements published in the **Federal Register** on June 21, 2005 (70 FR 35652).

(c)The notice of final priorities and application requirements published in the **Federal Register** on May 11, 2006 (71 FR 27576).

(d)The notice of final eligibility requirement for the Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools discretionary grant programs published in the **Federal Register** on December 4, 2006 (71 FR 70369). Note: The regulations in 34 CFR part 79 apply to all applicants except Federally recognized Indian tribes. II. Award Information *Type of Award:* Discretionary grants. *Estimated Available Funds:* $24,000,000. Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of applications, the Secretary may make additional awards later in FY 2007 and in FY 2008 and subsequent years from the rank-ordered list of unfunded applicants from this competition. *Estimated Range of Awards:* $100,000-$500,000. *Estimated Average Size of Awards:* $100,000 for small districts (1-20 school facilities); $250,000 for medium-sized districts (21-75 school facilities); and $500,000 for large districts (76 or more school facilities). *Estimated Number of Awards:* 73. Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice. *Project Period:* Up to 18 months. III. Eligibility Information 1. *Eligible Applicants:* LEAs. Note: The Secretary is limiting eligibility under the Readiness and Emergency Management for Schools grant competition (CFDA 84.184E) to applicants that do not currently have an active grant under this program. For the purpose of this eligibility requirement, a grant is considered active until the end of the grant's project or funding period, including any extensions of those periods that extend the grantee's authority to obligate funds (71 FR 70369). *2. Cost Sharing or Matching:* This program does not involve cost sharing or matching. *3. Other:*

(a)*Equitable Participation by Private School Children and Teachers.* Section 9501 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA), requires that SEAs, LEAs, or other entities receiving funds under the Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act provide for the equitable participation of private school children, their teachers, and other educational personnel in private schools located in areas served by the grant recipient. In order to ensure that grant program activities address the needs of private school children, LEAs must engage in timely and meaningful consultation with private school officials during the design and development of the program. This consultation must take place before any decision is made that affects the opportunities of eligible private school children, teachers, and other educational personnel to participate. In order to ensure equitable participation of private school children, teachers, and other educational personnel, an LEA must consult with private school officials on issues such as: Hazards/vulnerabilities unique to private schools in the LEA's service area, training needs, and existing emergency management plans and crisis response resources already available at private schools.

(b)*Maintenance of Effort.* Section 9521 of the ESEA requires that LEAs may receive a grant only if the State educational agency finds that the combined fiscal effort per student or the aggregate expenditures of the LEA and the State with respect to the provision of free public education by the LEA for the preceding fiscal year was not less than 90 percent of the combined effort or aggregate expenditures for the second preceding fiscal year. IV. Application and Submission Information 1. *Address To Request Application Package:* Education Publications Center (ED Pubs), P.O. Box 1398, Jessup, MD 20794-1398. Telephone (toll free): 1-877-433-7827. Fax: 1-301-470-1244. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), you may call (toll free): 1-877-576-7734. You may also contact ED Pubs at its Web site: *http://www.ed.gov/pubs/edpubs.html* or you may contact ED Pubs at its e-mail address: *edpubs@inet.ed.gov* If you request an application from ED Pubs, be sure to identify this competition as follows: CFDA number 84.184E. You may also access the electronic version of the application at the following Web sites: *http://www.grants.gov* or *http://www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/grantapps/index.html.* Individuals with disabilities may obtain a copy of the application package in an alternative format ( *e.g.* , Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer diskette) by contacting the program contact person listed in this section. The public can also obtain applications directly from the program office: Sara Strizzi, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., room 3E320, Washington, DC. 20202-6450. Telephone:

(202)708-4850 or by e-mail: *sara.strizzi@ed.gov* . If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), you may call the Federal Relay Service

(FRS)at 1-800-877-8339. 2. *Content and Form of Application Submission:* Requirements concerning the content of an application, together with the forms you must submit, are in the application package for this competition. 3. *Submission Dates and Times:* Applications Available: April 6, 2007. Deadline for Transmittal of Applications: May 21, 2007. Applications for grants under this competition may be submitted electronically using the Grants.gov Apply site (Grants.gov), or in paper format by mail or hand delivery. For information (including dates and times) about how to submit your application electronically, or by mail or hand delivery, please refer to section IV (6). *Other Submission Requirements* in this notice. We do not consider an application that does not comply with the deadline requirements. Individuals with disabilities who need an accommodation or auxiliary aid in connection with the application process should contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in section VII of this notice. Deadline for Intergovernmental Review: July 18, 2007. 4. *Intergovernmental Review:* This competition is subject to Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. Information about Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs under Executive Order 12372 is in the application package for this competition. 5. *Funding Restrictions:* We reference additional regulations outlining funding restrictions in the *Applicable Regulations* section of this notice. 6. *Other Submission Requirements:* Applications for grants under this competition may be submitted electronically or in paper format by mail or hand delivery. a. *Electronic Submission of Applications.* To comply with the President's management Agenda, we are participating as a partner in the Governmentwide Grants.gov Apply site. The Readiness and Emergency Management for Schools grant competition, CFDA Number 84.184E, is included in this project. We request your participation in Grants.gov. If you choose to submit your application electronically, you must use the Governmentwide Grants.gov Apply site at *http://www.grants.gov* . Through this site, you will be able to download a copy of the application package, complete it offline, and then upload and submit your application. You may not e-mail an electronic copy of a grant application to us. You may access the electronic grant application for the Readiness and Emergency Management for Schools grant competition at *http://www.Grants.gov* . You must search for the downloadable application package for this competition by the CFDA number. Do not include the CFDA number's alpha suffix in your search (e.g., search for 84.184, not 84.184E). Please note the following: • Your participation in Grants.gov is voluntary. • When you enter the Grants.gov site, you will find information about submitting an application electronically through the site, as well as the hours of operation. • Applications received by Grants.gov are date and time stamped. You application must be fully uploaded and submitted and must be date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system no later than 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. Except as otherwise noted in this section, we will not consider your application if it is date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system later than 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. When we retrieve your application from Grants.gov, we will notify you if we are rejecting your application because it was date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system after 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date • The amount of time it can take to upload an application will vary depending on a variety of factors, including the size of the application and the speed of your Internet connection. Therefore, we strongly recommend that you do not wait until the application deadline date to begin the submission process through Grants.gov. • You should review and follow the Education Submission Procedures for submitting an application through Grants.gov that are included in the application package for this competition to ensure that you submit your application in a timely manner to the Grants.gov system. You can also find the Education Submission Procedures pertaining to Grants.gov at *http://e-Grants.ed.gov/help/GrantsgovSubmissionProcedures.pdf* . • To submit your application via Grants.gov, you must complete all steps in the Grants.gov registration process (see *http://www.grants.gov/applicants/get_registered.jsp)* . These steps include

(1)registering your organization, a multi-part process that includes registration with the Central Contractor Registry (CCR);

(2)registering yourself as an Authorized Organization Representative (AOR); and

(3)getting authorized as an AOR by your organization. Details on these steps are outlined in the Grants.gov 3-Step Registration Guide (see *http://www.grants.gov/section910/Grants.govRegistrationBrochure.pdf)* . You also must provide on your application the same D-U-N-S Number used with this registration. Please note that the registration process may take five or more business days to complete, and you must have completed all registration steps to allow you to submit successfully an application via Grants.gov. In addition you will need to update your CCR registration on an annual basis. This may take three or more business days to complete. • You will not receive additional point value because you submit your application in electronic format, nor will we penalize you if you submit your application in paper format. • If you submit your application electronically, you must submit all documents electronically, including all information you typically provide on the following forms: Application for Federal Assistance (SF 424), the Department of Education Supplemental Information for SF 424, Budget Information—Non-Construction Programs (ED 524), and all necessary assurances and certifications. Please note that two of these forms—the SF 424 and the Department of Education Supplemental Information for SF 424—have replaced the ED 424 (Application for Federal Education Assistance). • If you submit your application electronically, you must attach any narrative sections of your application as files in a .DOC (document), .RTF (rich text), or .PDF (Portable Document) format. If you upload a file type other than the three file types specified in this paragraph or submit a password-protected file, we will not review that material. • After you electronically submit your application, you will receive from Grants.gov an automatic notification of receipt that contains a Grants.gov tracking number. (This notification indicates receipt by Grants.gov only, not receipt by the Department). The Department then will retrieve your application from Grants.gov and send a second notification to you by e-mail. This second notification indicates that the Department has received your application and has assigned your application a PR/Award number (an ED-specified identifying number unique to your application). • We may request that you provide us original signatures on forms at a later date. *Application Deadline Date Extension in Case of Technical Issues With the Grants.gov System:* If you are experiencing problems submitting your application through Grants.gov, please contact the Grants.gov Support Desk at 1-800-518-4726. You must obtain a Grants.gov Support Desk Case Number and must keep a record of it. If you are prevented from electronically submitting your application on the application deadline date because of technical problems with the Grants.gov system, we will grant you an extension until 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, the following business day to enable you to transmit your application electronically or by hand delivery. You also may mail your application by following the mailing instructions described elsewhere in this notice. If you submit an application after 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date, please contact the person listed elsewhere in this notice under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT and provide an explanation of the technical problems you experienced with Grants.gov, along with the Grants.gov Support Desk Case Number. We will accept your application if we can confirm that a technical problem occurred with the Grants.gov system and that that problem affected your ability to submit your application by 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. The Department will contact you after a determination is made on whether your application will be accepted. Note: The extensions to which we refer in this section apply only to the unavailability of, or technical problems with, the Grants.gov system. We will not grant you an extension if you failed to fully register to submit your application to Grants.gov before the application deadline date and time or if the technical problem you experienced is unrelated to the Grants.gov system. b. *Submission of Paper Applications by Mail.* If you submit your application in paper format by mail (through the U.S. Postal Service or a commercial carrier), you must mail the original and two copies of your application, on or before the application deadline date, to the Department at the applicable following address: *By mail through the U.S. Postal Service:* U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, *Attention:* (CFDA Number 84.184E), 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20202-4260 or *By mail through a commercial carrier:* U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center—Stop 4260, *Attention:* (CFDA Number 84.184E), 7100 Old Landover Road, Landover, MD 20785-1506. Regardless of which address you use, you must show proof of mailing consisting of one of the following:

(1)A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service postmark.

(2)A legible mail receipt with the date of mailing stamped by the U.S. Postal Service.

(3)A dated shipping label, invoice, or receipt from a commercial carrier.

(4)Any other proof of mailing acceptable to the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education. If you mail your application through the U.S. Postal Service, we do not accept either of the following as proof of mailing:

(1)A private metered postmark.

(2)A mail receipt that is not dated by the U.S. Postal Service. If your application is postmarked after the application deadline date, we will not consider your application. Note: The U.S. Postal Service does not uniformly provide a dated postmark. Before relying on this method, you should check with your local post office. c. *Submission of Paper Applications by Hand Delivery.* If you submit your application in paper format by hand delivery, you (or a courier service) must deliver the original and two copies of your application by hand, on or before the application deadline date, to the Department at the following address: U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, *Attention:* (CFDA Number 84.184E), 550 12th Street, SW., Room 7041, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-4260. The Application Control Center accepts hand deliveries daily between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, except Saturdays, Sundays, and Federal holidays. Note for Mail or Hand Delivery of Paper Applications: If you mail or hand deliver your application to the Department—

(1)You must indicate on the envelope and—if not provided by the Department—in Item 11 of the SF 424 the CFDA number, including suffix letter, if any, of the competition under which you are submitting your application; and

(2)The Application Control Center will mail to you a notification of receipt of your grant application. If you do not receive this notification within 15 business days from the application deadline date, you should call the U.S. Department of Education Application Control Center at

(202)245-6288. V. Application Review Information 1. *Selection Criteria:* The selection criteria for this program are from 34 CFR 75.210 and are listed in the application package. VI. Award Administration Information 1. *Award Notices:* If your application is successful, we notify your U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators and send you a Grant Award Notification (GAN). We may also notify you informally. If your application is not evaluated or not selected for funding, we notify you. 2. *Administrative and National Policy Requirements:* We identify administrative and national policy requirements in the application package and reference these and other requirements in the *Applicable Regulations* section of this notice. We reference the regulations outlining the terms and conditions of an award in the *Applicable Regulations* section of this notice and include these and other specific conditions in the GAN. The GAN also incorporates your approved application as part of your binding commitments under the grant. 3. *Reporting:* If funded, you are expected to collect data on the key Government Performance and Results Act

(GPRA)performance measures for this program and report those data to the Department in your interim performance report and final performance report. At the end of your project period, you must submit a final performance report, including financial information, as directed by the Secretary. You must also submit an interim report nine months after the award date. This report should provide the most current performance and financial expenditure information as specified by the Secretary in 34 CFR 75.118. We may also require more frequent performance reports in accordance with 34 CFR 75.720(c). 4. *Performance Measures:* We have identified the following key GPRA performance measures for assessing the effectiveness of the Readiness and Emergency Management for Schools grant program:

(1)The percentage of Emergency Management Grant sites that demonstrate they have increased the number of hazards addressed by the improved school emergency management plan as compared to the baseline plan;

(2)The percentage of Emergency Management Grant sites that demonstrate improved knowledge of school/and or district emergency management policies and procedures by school staff with responsibility for emergency management functions; and

(3)The percentage of Emergency Management Grant sites that have a plan for, and commitment to, the sustainability and continuous improvement of the school emergency management plan by the district and community partners beyond the period of Federal financial assistance. VII. Agency Contact *For Further Information Contact:* Sara Strizzi, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Ave., SW., room 3E320, Washington, DC 20202-6450. Telephone:

(202)708-4850 or by e-mail: *sara.strizzi@ed.gov.* If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), you may call the Federal Relay Service

(FRS)at 1-800-877-8339. Individuals with disabilities may obtain this document in an alternative format ( *e.g.* , Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer diskette) on request to the program contact person listed in this section. VIII. Other Information *Electronic Access to This Document:* You may view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the **Federal Register** , in text or Adobe Portable Document Format

(PDF)on the Internet at the following site: *http://www.ed.gov/news/fedregister.* To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at this site. If you have questions about using PDF, call the U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at 1-888-293-6498; or in the Washington, DC, area at

(202)512-1530. You may also view this document in text or PDF at the following site: *http://www.ed.gov/programs/dvpemergencyresponse/index.html* Note: The official version of this document is the document published in the **Federal Register** . Free Internet access to the official edition of the **Federal Register** and the Code of Federal Regulations is available on GPO Access at: *http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/index.html.* Dated: April 3, 2007. Deborah A. Price, Assistant Deputy Secretary for Safe and Drug-Free Schools. [FR Doc. E7-6503 Filed 4-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Record of Decision, Orlando Gasification Project, Orlando, Orange County, FL AGENCY: Department of Energy. ACTION: Record of Decision. SUMMARY: The Department of Energy

(DOE)has prepared an environmental impact statement

(EIS)(DOE/EIS-0383) to assess the environmental impacts associated with a proposed project that would be cost-shared by DOE and Southern Company (in partnership with the Orlando Utilities Commission)

(OUC)under DOE's Clean Coal Power Initiative

(CCPI)program. The project would demonstrate advanced power generation systems using Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle

(IGCC)technology at OUC's existing Stanton Energy Center near Orlando, Florida. After careful consideration of the potential environmental impacts, along with program goals and objectives, DOE has decided that it will provide, through a cooperative agreement with Southern Company, a total of $235 million in cost-shared funding (about 41% of the total cost of approximately $569 million) to design, construct, and demonstrate the Orlando Gasification Project proposed by Southern Company. ADDRESSES: The final EIS is available on the DOE NEPA Web site at *http://www.eh.doe.gov/nepa/documentspub.html* and on the DOE National Energy Technology Laboratory Web site at *http://www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/coalpower/cctc/EIS/eis_orlando.html,* and the Record of Decision

(ROD)will be available on both Web sites in the near future. Copies of the final EIS and this ROD may be requested by contacting Mr. Richard A. Hargis, Jr., National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA)Document Manager, U.S. Department of Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory, 626 Cochrans Mill Road, P.O. Box 10940, Pittsburgh, PA 15236-0940; telephone: 412-386-6065; or e-mail: *Richard.Hargis@netl.doe.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To obtain additional information about the project or the EIS, contact Mr. Richard A. Hargis, Jr., National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA)Document Manager, U.S. Department of Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory, 626 Cochrans Mill Road, P.O. Box 10940, Pittsburgh, PA 15236-0940; telephone: 412-386-6065; or e-mail: *Richard.Hargis@netl.doe.gov.* For general information on the DOE NEPA process, contact Ms. Carol M. Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance (GC-20), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0103; telephone: 202-586-4600; or leave a toll-free message at 1-800-472-2756. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE has prepared this ROD pursuant to Council on Environmental Quality

(CEQ)regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA [40 Code of Federal Regulations

(CFR)Parts 1500-1508] and DOE NEPA regulations (10 CFR Part 1021). This ROD is based on DOE's final EIS for the Orlando Gasification Project (DOE/EIS-0383, January 2007). Background and Purpose and Need for Agency Action In 2002, the U.S. Congress established the CCPI program to accelerate commercial deployment of advanced coal-based technologies for generating clean, reliable, and affordable electricity in the United States. Congress indicated that projects in the program should be industry enterprises assisted by the government and not government-directed demonstrations. These projects are expected to showcase technologies in which coal-fired power plants can continue to generate low cost electricity with improved efficiency and comply with more stringent environmental standards expected in the future. DOE issued the second-round CCPI solicitation in February 2004 and received 13 proposals in June 2004. The Orlando Gasification Project (“Orlando Project”) was one of four projects selected in October 2004 for further consideration. Evaluation criteria used in the selection process included technical merit of the proposed technology, potential for a successful demonstration of the technology, and potential for the technology to be commercialized. DOE also considered the participant's funding and financial proposal; DOE budget constraints; environmental, health, and safety implications; and program policy factors, such as DOE's preference for projects that represent a diversity of technologies, utilize a broad range of U.S. coals, and represent a broad geographical cross-section of the United States. DOE selected the Orlando Project for further consideration in view of two principal needs. First, the project would meet the Congressional mandate to demonstrate advanced coal-based technologies that can generate clean, reliable, and affordable electricity in the United States. Second, the demonstration would provide a more cost-effective fuel supply for integration with a privately funded combined-cycle unit to generate electricity. More specifically, the Orlando Project could demonstrate advanced coal gasification for power generation applications using IGCC technology at a sufficiently large scale to allow industries and utilities to assess the project's potential for commercial application. A successful demonstration would confirm that the technology could be implemented at the commercial scale. The cost-shared contribution by DOE would help reduce the risk to the Southern Company team in demonstrating the technology at the level of maturity needed for decisions on commercialization. Further, the transport gasifier technology that would be demonstrated offers a simpler method for generating power from coal than other alternatives. It is unique among coal gasification technologies in that it is cost-effective when handling low rank coals and when using coals with high moisture or high ash content. These coals make up half the proven reserves in both the U.S. and the world. Moreover, the transport gasifier is capable of both air- and oxygen-blown operation. This inherent flexibility will allow it to readily adapt to other applications beyond power generation including chemical production and possible future carbon management requirements. EIS Process On August 11, 2005, DOE published in the **Federal Register** (70 FR 46825) a Notice of Intent

(NOI)to prepare the EIS and hold a public scoping meeting. DOE held a public scoping meeting in Orlando, Florida, on August 30, 2005. DOE received 11 oral responses at the public scoping meeting and 11 responses by comment card, mail, e-mail, and telephone from members of the public, interested groups, and Federal, state, and local officials. The responses assisted in establishing additional issues to be analyzed in the EIS and in determining the level of analysis warranted for each issue. On August 24, 2006, DOE published in the **Federal Register** (71 FR 50051) a Notice of Availability for the Orlando Gasification Project draft EIS. The Notice of Availability invited comments on the draft EIS and participation in the NEPA process. As part of the review process, DOE conducted a public hearing on September 13, 2006, in Orlando, Florida. DOE also conducted an informational session prior to the hearing for the public to learn more about the proposed project. The public was encouraged to provide oral comments at the hearings and to submit written comments to DOE during a 45-day public comment period that ended October 10, 2006. DOE received oral comments from two individuals at the public hearing, and written comments from three individuals, one non-governmental organization, two Federal agencies, and one local agency during and after the public hearing. In January 2007, DOE issued the final EIS and the Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA)published a Notice of Availability of the final EIS in the **Federal Register** on January 26, 2007 (72 FR 3846). In the final EIS, DOE considered and, as appropriate, responded to public comments on the draft EIS. Among the issues raised in the comments on the draft EIS were concerns about

(1)Carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions and mitigation options;

(2)vehicle and rail traffic;

(3)mercury deposition and bioaccumulation;

(4)ambient concentrations of ozone;

(5)environmental justice considerations; and

(6)air toxics impacts. Project Location and Description The Orlando Project would be located at OUC's existing 3,280-acre Stanton Energy Center in eastern Orange County, approximately 3 miles east of the eastern city limits of Orlando, Florida, and about 13 miles east-southeast of downtown Orlando. The topography of the area is relatively flat. The new facilities would be constructed on approximately 35 of the 1,100 acres of land that were previously cleared, leveled, and licensed for power plant use. The project equipment would be located between existing coal-fired units and an existing natural gas-fired combined-cycle unit. A short transmission line (approximately 3,200 ft in length), proposed to serve as an electrical interconnection from the proposed facilities to an existing onsite substation, would occupy a small amount of additional land. Land use in the vicinity includes undeveloped areas interspersed with a mixture of residential and commercial buildings, as well as a park, correctional facility, and landfill. Construction would begin in late 2007 and continue until early 2010. An average of about 350 construction workers would be on the site during construction. Approximately 600 to 700 workers would be required during the peak construction period between fall 2008 and spring 2009. After mechanical checkout of the proposed facilities, demonstration (including data analysis and process evaluation) would be conducted over a 4.5-year period from mid 2010 until late 2014. If the demonstration is successful, commercial operation would follow immediately. The combined workforce ( *i.e.* , including the Orlando Gasification Project and the combined-cycle generating unit) would consist of approximately 72 employees added to the existing Stanton Energy Center staff of 204 employees. Of the 72 new employees, 19 workers would provide support only during the startup and demonstration phases of the project, while 53 employees would be needed over the lifetime of the facilities. The facilities would be designed for a lifetime of at least 20 years, including the 4.5-year demonstration period. The new coal gasifier would operate entirely on coal, consuming a total of approximately 1,020,000 tons per year to produce synthesis gas. Two to three trains per week would deliver low-sulfur subbituminous coal from the Powder River Basin in Wyoming. The heating value of the coal would average about 8,760 Btu/lb and the sulfur content would average about 0.26%. Most air emissions would result from combustion of synthesis gas in the gas combustion turbine during normal operations. The exhaust gas would be released to the atmosphere via a 205-ft stack. Alternatives Congress directed DOE to pursue the goals of the CCPI Program by means of partial funding of projects owned and controlled by non-Federal sponsors. This statutory requirement places DOE in a much more limited role than if the Federal government were the owner and operator of the project. In the latter situation, DOE would be responsible for a comprehensive review of reasonable alternatives for siting the project. However, in dealing with an applicant under the CCPI Program, DOE must focus on alternative ways to accomplish CCPI's purpose that reflect both the application before it and the role DOE plays in the decisional process. It is appropriate in such cases for DOE to give substantial weight to the applicant's desires in establishing a project's reasonable alternatives. Based on the foregoing principles, the only reasonable alternative here to the proposed action was the no-action alternative, including one scenario that could reasonably be expected to result as a consequence of the no-action alternative. DOE dismissed from further consideration other alternatives that did not meet the goals and objectives of the CCPI Program or of the applicant. The Stanton Energy Center was the only location identified in Southern's CCPI proposal. It is an existing site at which the private partners have already established a business relationship. Because it is an existing site, DOE concluded that it would be preferable to any undeveloped location. DOE considered alternative technologies but dismissed them as unreasonable. Technologies and approaches that did not involve the use of coal ( *e.g.* , natural gas, wind power, solar energy, and conservation) would not contribute to the CCPI Program goal of accelerating commercial deployment of advanced coal-based technologies. Other alternatives, such as reducing the size of the proposed project, were dismissed as unreasonable. The design size for the proposed project was selected because it is sufficiently large to show potential customers that the gasification technology, once demonstrated at this scale, could be applied commercially without further scale-up. The size of the proposed project is also related to OUC's projected need for power. Proposed Action The proposed action is for DOE to provide Southern Company a total of $235 million in cost-shared funding to design, construct, and demonstrate the Orlando Project. A portion ($13.762 million) of this funding has already been provided for activities in the first budget period, such as project definition, front-end engineering design, environmental permitting activities, and preparation of environmental information for NEPA analysis. Although DOE funding would support only the Orlando Project ( *i.e.* , coal gasifier, synthesis gas cleanup systems, and supporting infrastructure), the Orlando Project would be integrated with a privately funded, combined-cycle unit, which together would constitute the IGCC facilities. The IGCC facilities would convert coal into synthesis gas to drive a gas combustion turbine, and hot exhaust gas from the gas turbine would generate steam from water to drive a steam turbine. Combined, the two turbines would generate 285 MW (megawatts) of electricity. This proven, reliable combined-cycle approach of using a gas turbine and steam turbine in tandem increases the amount of electricity that can be generated from a given amount of fuel. The IGCC facilities are expected to provide a source of electricity that is reliable, low cost, environmentally sound, and efficient. DOE expects that approximately 40% of the energy in the fuel would be converted to electricity compared to about 33% for conventional coal-fired power plants. The IGCC facilities would substantially reduce emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ), oxides of nitrogen (NO X ), and mercury relative to existing, conventional coal-fired power plants. No-Action Alternative Under the no-action alternative, DOE would not provide cost-shared funding for the design, construction, and demonstration of the proposed Orlando Project at OUC's Stanton Energy Center near Orlando, Florida. Based on information from the private partners, without DOE participation, Southern Company and/or OUC could reasonably be expected to pursue at least one option ( *i.e.* , the combined-cycle facilities would be built at the Stanton Energy Center and operated using natural gas as fuel, without the gasifier, synthesis gas cleanup systems, and supporting infrastructure). Accordingly, DOE analyzed a no-action alternative scenario in which combined-cycle facilities would operate using natural gas as fuel without the availability of synthesis gas. Under the no-action alternative, commercialization of the gasification facilities (alone or integrated with the combined-cycle facilities to form IGCC technology) would probably not occur because utilities and industries tend to use known and demonstrated technologies rather than unproven technologies. Potential Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures In making its decision, DOE considered the environmental impacts of the proposed action and the no-action alternative on potentially affected environmental resource areas. These include: land use and aesthetics, atmospheric resources and air quality, geology and soils, water resources, floodplains and wetlands, ecological resources, social and economic resources (including environmental justice and cultural resources), waste management, human health and safety, noise, and transportation. While the proposed project consists of only the gasifier, synthesis gas cleanup systems, and supporting infrastructure, the EIS includes the combined-cycle generating unit in the analysis of environmental impacts because the facilities are operationally interdependent. The EIS considers the impacts from these facilities combined with those from other, existing facilities at the Stanton Energy Center, and also examines potential incremental impacts of the project in combination with other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions *(i.e., cumulative impacts).* The following sections provide key findings for areas of potential concern. Land Use and Aesthetics The Orlando Project would be confined to the existing Stanton Energy Center site and thus would not directly affect offsite land use. The 1,100-acre developed portion of the power plant site is already zoned specifically for power generation through the site certification process under the Florida Electrical Power Plant Siting Act. The tallest new structures would be the 205-ft heat recovery steam generator

(HRSG)stack, the 174-ft structure to house the gasifier, and the 114-ft HRSG. These structures would be shorter than the existing two 550-ft stacks serving two boiler buildings. Aesthetic impacts would be reduced because the facilities would be located between existing facilities, appearing as part of the site. Under the no-action alternative, offsite land use would be the same, but because the 174-ft structure to house the gasifier would not be required, aesthetic impacts would be less than those predicted under the proposed action. Air Resources Modeling results based on emissions from the Orlando Project predicted that maximum concentrations would be less than their corresponding “significant impact levels.” (Under EPA guidelines, if maximum predicted concentrations are less than “significant impact levels,” then no further modeling for regulatory purposes is required.) Modeling results also predicted that, combined with ambient background concentrations, pollutant concentrations from Orlando Project emissions would be less than corresponding ambient air quality standards. Concentrations would be negligible at the nearest Prevention of Significant Deterioration

(PSD)Class I area about 90 miles to the west-northwest. (Class I areas are designated areas in which the degradation of air quality is to be severely restricted.) Annual NO X emissions from the Stanton Energy Center overall would not be expected to increase because, as part of the air permitting process, OUC has agreed to reduce NO X emissions from other units at the Stanton Energy Center so that there would be a net decrease in NO X emissions. Annual emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), a precursor of the criteria pollutant ozone, would be 129 tons. The small percentage increase in VOC emissions (approximately 0.3% of the Orange County 2001 emission inventory) would not be likely to degrade air quality sufficiently to cause violations of the ozone standard, but the magnitude of the degradation cannot be quantified. The maximum ambient 24-hour concentration of mercury from the proposed HRSG stack is predicted to be 0.8% of its corresponding guideline value, and the maximum ambient 24-hour concentration of beryllium from the stack is predicted to be 0.4% of its guideline value. These results indicate that mercury and beryllium emissions from the proposed facilities alone or in combination with other sources would pose no threat to human health in the area. Any potential odors would be limited to the immediate site area and would not affect offsite areas. Increases in CO 2 emissions from the proposed facilities would add 1.8 million tons per year to an estimated global emission of 26,000 million tons per year. The proposed project would significantly reduce additional SO 2 , NO X , mercury, and particulate emissions by removing constituents from the synthesis gas. The removal of approximately 80% of the fuel-bound nitrogen from the synthesis gas prior to combustion in the gas turbine would result in appreciably lower NO X emissions compared to existing, conventional coal-fired power plants. The project is expected to remove up to 95% of sulfur and over 90% of mercury emissions. Over 99.9% of particulate emissions would be removed. During operation, a number of means would be employed to reduce emissions of air pollutants, including:

(1)Application of Best Available Control Technology;

(2)enclosure of coal unloading, transfer, and conveying equipment, plus application of water sprays, as needed, and use of baghouses at key transfer points;

(3)use of high temperature, high pressure filters within the gasification process to collect particulate matter from the synthesis gas;

(4)use of gas cleanup technology to reduce sulfur concentrations in the synthesis gas; and

(5)use of activated carbon to remove mercury from the synthesis gas. Southern would monitor to ensure emissions compliance. DOE expects the proposed facilities to be subject to the Clean Air Interstate Rule, Clean Air Mercury Rule, applicable New Source Performance Standards, and 40 CFR Part 75 (Acid Rain Program). In general, these Federal rules require continuous monitoring and recording of SO 2 , NO X , and mercury emissions. Monitoring would be subject to stringent quality assurance and control requirements to ensure that the monitored emissions data are accurate and complete. Southern would conduct initial and periodic compliance testing pursuant to Florida Department of Environmental Protection requirements. This stack testing, using EPA reference methods, is expected to address the principal air pollutants emitted by the proposed facilities, including carbon monoxide, VOCs, and particulate matter. Approximately 25% less CO 2 would be produced per unit of power generated compared to typical emission rates at existing, conventional coal-fired power plants. However, there would be a net increase in global emissions of CO 2 . For this project, mitigation, such as capture and sequestration, is not feasible because the planned sulfur removal technology would not generate a concentrated CO 2 stream. However, even if the facilities were to generate a concentrated CO 2 stream, the nearest location amenable to CO 2 sequestration options that have been demonstrated at the scale needed ( *i.e.* , enhanced oil recovery) would be hundreds of miles away. The feasibility and effectiveness of other sequestration options, such as injection into saline formations, are not promising for this area and have not been fully characterized. Sequestration options for all regions of the country are still under investigation in DOE's Carbon Sequestration Program. A program goal is to initiate at least one large-scale demonstration, at the scale required for a power plant, in 2009 to demonstrate the appropriateness for CO 2 injectivity and validate storage capacity estimates and permanence. Under the no-action alternative, emissions of air pollutants would be less than those predicted for the new facilities. Also, because the flare would not be required, no occasional emissions from a flare would occur. Water Resources Because construction would occur in developed site areas where surface water runoff is directed to onsite stormwater retention ponds and is used in the facilities, no impacts to natural surface waters would be experienced, except in the unlikely event of a major storm that caused overflow of the site stormwater collection system. Transmission line construction outside the main plant area could result in soil erosion and sediment deposition to streams, but best management practices described below would minimize erosion and sedimentation. Impacts from lowering the water table during dewatering would be inconsequential. Because operation of the facilities would not withdraw surface water or discharge liquid effluent, surface waters would experience no direct impacts. The Stanton Energy Center's use of reclaimed water would increase by an average of 2.1 million gallons per day (from 10.2 million to about 12.3 million gallons per day), thus reducing by a similar amount the water volume discharged to the wetlands downstream from the Eastern Water Reclamation Facility and from those wetlands to the Econlockhatchee River. Because this surface water is not used, reduced flow would not affect water users. Water quality in the river could be affected if reduced streamflow also reduced the river's capacity to dilute contamination discharged from other parts of the watershed, however any such effects would be temporary. Increased groundwater withdrawals would not produce discernible impacts. Facility operation could add localized contamination to shallow groundwater from the possible placement of additional waste in the onsite ash landfill. Because any contamination would be limited to the shallow aquifer and any contaminated groundwater would be designed to discharge to onsite stormwater collection systems, impacts to water users are unlikely. The new coal pile would be lined and leachate collected to prevent the introduction of pollutants into groundwater. Use of treated wastewater effluent and other reclaimed water for cooling water makeup would minimize the withdrawal and consumption of Floridan aquifer groundwater. Measurement programs specified in the Stanton Energy Center Conditions of Certification would ensure continued monitoring of groundwater withdrawal rates from the Upper Floridan aquifer. In the unlikely event of a fuel spill or other release, assessment and recovery would be conducted in accordance with Florida Department of Environmental Protection requirements. Runoff during construction and operation, as well as all effluents from operation, would flow through the existing Stanton Energy Center collection and reuse system. No offsite discharges would occur, except during a major storm event. Site-specific Best Management Practices to prevent the deposition of sediments beyond the construction areas would include silt fences, hay bales, vegetative covers, and diversions, to reduce impacts to surface water. No process wastewater would be directly discharged to any surface waters, but would be reused. Under the no-action alternative, cooling water requirements would be about 20% less than under the proposed action. Releases to wetlands downstream from the Orange County Eastern Water Reclamation Facility and from the wetlands to the Econlockhatchee River would be reduced by 20%, and use of groundwater would be the same as under the proposed action. Floodplains and Wetlands No floodplains would be affected by the Orlando Project because no construction would occur within a floodplain. During construction, wetland and other vegetation communities within the transmission corridor would be altered. Because tall-growing vegetation would be cut and kept at a height low enough to prevent interference with the conductors, forest cover habitats would be reduced and shrub or other low-growing vegetation would eventually dominate the corridor. Construction of the transmission line would require submittal of a joint

(1)Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 dredge-and-fill wetlands application and

(2)Florida Department of Environmental Protection environmental resource permit. This permitting process would also require OUC to commit to a mitigation plan for any unavoidable wetland impacts. The net effect of clearing and maintaining 3.95 acres of wetland habitat for the transmission line would be

(1)Loss of 1.04 acres of wetland due to fill and

(2)modification of vegetation in wetlands in the remainder of the corridor due to right-of-way maintenance. This would shift, to a small extent, the balance of wildlife habitat in the area away from wetland and forest toward shrub and brushland. To mitigate impacts to the wetland area, OUC would purchase credits at a local mitigation bank. The total number of acres required to mitigate the wetlands impacts would be determined after deliberations between the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, the St. John's River Water Management District, and the Army Corps of Engineers. Under the no-action alternative, no floodplains would be affected and, because the new transmission line would still be required, the same alteration of wetland and other vegetation communities within the transmission corridor would be experienced. Ecological Resources The land where the Orlando Project would be constructed is not important habitat for wildlife, and no areas of ecological sensitivity would be affected directly. Wildlife species would be affected by construction activities and resultant loss of habitat in the transmission corridor. Smaller less mobile animals would be at greatest risk, whereas larger more mobile animals would likely move from the disturbed areas and increase surrounding habitat use. No Federally-listed threatened or endangered plant species are known to occur within the immediate vicinity of the main proposed facilities or the transmission corridor. Five plant species protected by the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services are known to occur along or in the vicinity of the transmission corridor. Clearing and maintenance activities on the right-of-way would be expected to destroy some individual plants, but populations would persist in undisturbed areas. Other than transient or incidental use by some wildlife species, no federally-listed threatened or endangered animal species are found within the previously cleared 1,100 acres. Except for the five protected plants, no direct impacts are expected to listed species from proposed construction and operations. The site contains no appreciable natural aquatic resources. Impacts under the no-action alternative would be the same as for the proposed facilities. Social and Economic Resources Construction and operation of the Orlando Project would not result in major impacts to population, housing, local government revenues, or most public services in Orange County. However, because the county's public schools are already above capacity, even the small increase in the number of students as a consequence of the new facilities would contribute to overcrowding. Overall, construction and operation of the proposed facilities would have positive effects on employment and income in the region. The relatively large minority populations in and around the census tract in which the Stanton Energy Center is located (Census Tract 167.22) represent “environmental justice” populations to which adverse impacts could be distributed disproportionately. However, impacts to land use and aesthetics would not be significant for the population as a whole and would not contribute to disproportionately high and adverse impacts. Likewise, with regard to health effects and noise, there would be no significant adverse impacts to the population as a whole, and no disproportionately high and adverse effects would be experienced. Under the no-action alternative, the peak and average construction work force would be reduced, and the construction period would be cut from 28 months to 24 months. Fewer operational workers would be required (21 rather than 72). Positive economic benefits would also be less. Waste Management The Orange County Sanitary Landfill would have ample capacity to receive project construction wastes. Ash generated by the Orlando Project is being evaluated for several possible beneficial uses that could avoid disposal in the onsite landfill. If no beneficial use is found, the 347-acre dedicated landfill would provide more than enough space to dispose of this ash, as well as other coal combustion wastes generated by the Stanton Energy Center. The existing generating units would use the anhydrous ammonia produced by the new facilities to satisfy their requirements, and any excess would be sold commercially. If the elemental sulfur generated by the facilities proves to be as pure as it is projected to be, it would be sold commercially. Otherwise, it would be placed in the onsite landfill. Elemental sulfur would not be a hazardous waste, and the quantity produced would be small in comparison with the total capacity of the landfill. Under the no-action alternative, the quantities of construction wastes would be slightly less. Also, because no ash would be generated, no disposal sites would be needed to accommodate ash. No anhydrous ammonia or elemental sulfur would be produced. Human Health and Safety Minimal adverse impacts to human health would be expected from operational SO 2 , NO X , and particulate matter emissions from the new facilities. With regard to health effects of hazardous air pollutants, the Orlando Project would pose less risk than most existing plants, many of which were built decades ago. A health risk analysis of hazardous air pollutants from the proposed facilities estimated that concentrations of all hazardous air pollutants would be below the threshold concentrations (below harmful levels). A catastrophic accident ( *e.g.* , a significant hazardous material release, fire, or explosion) associated with the facilities, including transportation of anhydrous ammonia off the site, would be unlikely. Southern Company and OUC would add project specific health and safety-related plans to those already in place for existing Stanton Energy Center units to prevent or minimize potential adverse impacts. These measures would include appropriate training and supervision of employees and enforcement of workplace safety policies. Southern Company and OUC would develop and implement a safety program for the chlorine and ammonia systems that would include emergency response measures as well as specify training protocols. Excess ammonia generated at the proposed facilities would be handled and transported according to the Department of Transportation's hazardous materials regulations. Because emissions of air pollutants would be less under the no-action alternative, adverse impacts to human health would be less. Noise During operation of the proposed facilities, the predicted noise level at the nearest residence (about 6,500 ft to the northeast) would be 46.5 dBA. No adverse community reaction would be expected as a result of noise levels below 50 dBA. Noise from infrequent steam blows would attenuate to a level of about 66 dBA at the nearest property boundary and 60 dBA at the nearest residence. A level of 60 dBA would be typical of normal conversation. Noise would be essentially the same under the no-action alternative. Transportation Much of the work on planned road projects could coincide with construction and operation of the new facilities, creating a major cumulative impact to traffic flow on the local road network. This impact would be reduced if the Avalon Park Boulevard extension is completed in mid-2008 before the peak construction period. Also, Southern Company and OUC have committed to a number of measures that would mitigate these potential traffic impacts. A construction traffic impact mitigation program, which is required by the Stanton Energy Center Conditions of Certification, would be developed and implemented. Such a program could include encouraging construction workers to carpool; working with the local mass-transit system to provide workers with a park-and-ride service to the site; using the existing railway access to the Stanton Energy Center site for the delivery of some construction equipment and materials; staggering construction work schedules and shifts to avoid peak traffic hours; and working with the Florida Department of Transportation to provide temporary traffic control devices and alter signal times to assist in maintaining proper traffic flow. If the Avalon Park Boulevard extension project is completed prior to project construction, traffic issues would largely be mitigated and more modest mitigation could be considered. However, DOE acknowledges that these mitigation steps would not completely eliminate traffic impacts. Noise related to transportation would not be expected to be significant. At the nearest residence, noise levels from truck traffic on Alafaya Trail would be at about the same level as that of a quiet subdivision during daylight hours. Noise levels from current rail traffic have not caused any public complaints. Increased rail traffic due to the proposed project would result in more frequent noise from rail traffic, but the noise levels would be the same. Traffic congestion would be less under the no-action alternative. No additional trains would be needed to deliver coal, but trucks would continue to deliver anhydrous ammonia to the site once per week. Noise levels associated with transportation would be the same as for the new facilities but would be less frequent. Environmentally Preferred Alternative The no-action alternative is environmentally preferable because it would result in slightly less impacts than those predicted for the proposed action. Comments Received on the Final EIS The only comments that DOE received on the final EIS were from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 4, NEPA Program Office. EPA stated that the final EIS was responsive to their comments on the draft EIS, but observed that direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts are inherent in projects that generate power. Therefore, EPA stated that verification of the impacts on air quality, wetlands, hazardous waste, and cumulative impacts will need to take place as the project progresses, with appropriate avoidance and mitigation measures implemented. DOE anticipated verifying impacts through an environmental monitoring plan. This plan will be developed as part of the cooperative agreement with Southern Company, and reports on monitoring activities will be included in the reports required under the cooperative agreement. EPA also expressed appreciation of DOE's consideration of diesel retrofit technology to minimize emissions from construction equipment. As stated in the final EIS, specification of the use of diesel retrofit technologies is not warranted since impacts from diesel engines during construction are not expected to be a concern. However, DOE will encourage Southern Company to consider the use of biodiesel and diesel retrofit technologies during construction activities to further reduce impacts. Decision DOE will implement the proposed action, providing, through a cooperative agreement with Southern Company, a total of $235 million in cost-shared funding to design, construct, and demonstrate the Orlando Gasification Project. DOE's decision was made upon careful review of the potential environmental impacts, presented in the EIS, and incorporates all practicable means to avoid or minimize environmental harm. DOE plans to verify the environmental impacts predicted in the EIS and the implementation of appropriate avoidance and mitigation measures. Issued in Washington, DC on this 28th day of March 2007. James A. Slutz, Acting Assistant Secretary for Fossil Energy. [FR Doc. E7-6435 Filed 4-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ER07-528-000] Brookfield Energy Marketing U.S. LLC; Notice of Issuance of Order April 2, 2007. Brookfield Energy Marketing U.S. LLC (Brookfield) filed an application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate tariff. The proposed market-based rate tariff provides for the sale of energy, capacity and ancillary services at market-based rates. Brookfield also requested waivers of various Commission regulations. In particular, Brookfield requested that the Commission grant blanket approval under 18 CFR Part 34 of all future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability by Brookfield. On March 30, 2007, pursuant to delegated authority, the Director, Division of Tariffs and Market Development—West, granted the requests for blanket approval under Part 34. The Director's order also stated that the Commission would publish a separate notice in the **Federal Register** establishing a period of time for the filing of protests. Accordingly, any person desiring to be heard or to protest the blanket approvals of issuances of securities or assumptions of liability by Brookfield should file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. 18 CFR 385.211, 385.214 (2004). Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing motions to intervene or protest is April 30, 2007. Absent a request to be heard in opposition by the deadline above, Brookfield is authorized to issue securities and assume obligations or liabilities as a guarantor, indorser, surety, or otherwise in respect of any security of another person; provided that such issuance or assumption is for some lawful object within the corporate purposes of Brookfield, compatible with the public interest, and is reasonably necessary or appropriate for such purposes. The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by continued approvals of Brookfield's issuance of securities or assumptions of liability. Copies of the full text of the Director's Order are available from the Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. The Order may also be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number filed to access the document. Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. Philis J. Posey, Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-6439 Filed 4-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ER07-589-000] Citigroup Energy Canada ULC; Notice of Issuance of Order April 2, 2007. Citigroup Energy Canada ULC

(CECU)filed an application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate schedule. The proposed market-based rate schedule provides for the sale of energy, capacity and ancillary services at market-based rates. CECU also requested waivers of various Commission regulations. In particular, CECU requested that the Commission grant blanket approval under 18 CFR Part 34 of all future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability by CECU. On March 30, 2007, pursuant to delegated authority, the Director, Division of Tariffs and Market Development—West, granted the requests for blanket approval under Part 34. The Director's order also stated that the Commission would publish a separate notice in the **Federal Register** establishing a period of time for the filing of protests. Accordingly, any person desiring to be heard or to protest the blanket approvals of issuances of securities or assumptions of liability by CECU should file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. 18 CFR 385.211, 385.214 (2004). Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing motions to intervene or protest is April 30, 2007. Absent a request to be heard in opposition by the deadline above, CECU is authorized to issue securities and assume obligations or liabilities as a guarantor, indorser, surety, or otherwise in respect of any security of another person; provided that such issuance or assumption is for some lawful object within the corporate purposes of CECU, compatible with the public interest, and is reasonably necessary or appropriate for such purposes. The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by continued approvals of CECU's issuance of securities or assumptions of liability. Copies of the full text of the Director's Order are available from the Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. The Order may also be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number filed to access the document. Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. Philis J. Posey, Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-6440 Filed 4-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket Nos. ER07-486-000; ER07-486-001] Saguaro Power Company, A Limited Partnership; Notice of Issuance of Order April 2, 2007. Saguaro Power Company, A Limited Partnership (Saguaro Power) filed an application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying tariff. The proposed market-based rate tariff provide for the sale of energy and capacity at market-based rates. Saguaro Power also requested waivers of various Commission regulations. In particular, Saguaro Powerrequested that the Commission grant blanket approval under 18 CFR Part 34 of all future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability by Saguaro Power. On March 30, 2007, pursuant to delegated authority, the Director, Division of Tariffs and Market Development—West, granted the requests for blanket approval under Part 34. The Director's order also stated that the Commission would publish a separate notice in the **Federal Register** establishing a period of time for the filing of protests. Accordingly, any person desiring to be heard or to protest the blanket approvals of issuances of securities or assumptions of liability by Saguaro Power should file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. 18 CFR 385.211, 385.214 (2004). Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing motions to intervene or protest is April 30, 2007. Absent a request to be heard in opposition by the deadline above, Saguaro Power is authorized to issue securities and assume obligations or liabilities as a guarantor, indorser, surety, or otherwise in respect of any security of another person; provided that such issuance or assumption is for some lawful object within the corporate purposes of Saguaro Power, compatible with the public interest, and is reasonably necessary or appropriate for such purposes. The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by continued approvals of Saguaro Power's issuances of securities or assumptions of liability. Copies of the full text of the Director's Order are available from the Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. The Order may also be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number filed to access the document. Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. Philis J. Posey, Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-6438 Filed 4-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings # 1 April 2, 2007. Take notice that the Commission received the following electric corporate filings: *Docket Numbers:* EC07-73-000. *Applicants:* STI Capital Company; Pedricktown Plant Holdings, LLC. *Description:* STI Capital Company and Pedricktown Plant Holdings submit an application for authorization to dispose of jurisdictional facilities. *Filed Date:* 03/28/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070330-0023. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 18, 2007. Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings: *Docket Numbers:* ER97-4281-016; ER99-2161-007; ER99-3000-006; ER02-1572-004; ER02-1571-004; ER99-1115-011; ER99-1116-011; ER00-2810-005; ER99-4359-004; ER99-4358-004; ER99-2168-007; ER98-1127-011; ER07-649-001; ER99-2162-007; ER00-2807-005; ER00-2809-005; ER98-1796-010; ER00-1259-006; ER99-4355-004; ER99-4356-004; ER00-3160-006; ER99-4357-004; ER00-3160-006; ER00-2313-006; ER02-2/-004; ER02-1396-004; ER02-1412-004; ER00-3718-005; ER99-3637-005; ER07-486-002; ER99-1712-007; ER00-2808-006. *Applicants:* NRG Power Marketing, Inc.; Arthur Kill Power LLC; Astoria Gas Turbines Power LLC; Bayou Cove Peaking Power LLC; Big Cajun I Peaking Power LLC; Cabrillo Power I LLC; Cabrillo Power II LLC; Conemaugh Power LLC; Connecticut Jet Power LLC; Devon Power LLC; Dunkirk Power LLC; El Segundo Power, LLC; El Segundo Power II LLC; Huntley Power LLC; Indian River Power LLC; Keystone Power LLC; Long Beach Generation LLC; Louisiana Generating LLC; Middletown Power LLC; Montville Power LLC; NEO Freehold-Gen LLC; Norwalk Power LLC; NRG Energy Center Dover LLC; NRG Energy Center Paxton LLC; NRG New Jersey Energy Sales LLC; NRG Rockford LLC; NRG Rockford II LLC; NRG Sterlington Power LLC; Oswego Harbor Power LLC; Saguaro Power Company, A Limited Partnership; Somerset Power LLC; Vienna Power LLC *Description:* NRG Power Marketing, Inc and thirty-one affiliates most of which own generating facilities submit a triennial market power update and notice of change in status. *Filed Date:* 03/26/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070330-0022. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, April 16, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER99-2342-010. *Applicants:* Tampa Electric Company. *Description:* Tampa Electric Company submits a refund report. *Filed Date:* 03/19/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070319-5044. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, April 09, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER02-488-006. *Applicants:* Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc. *Description:* Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc submits an amendment to its 2/12/07 submittal, proposed revisions to the Operating Protocol for Existing Generators, First Revised Rate Schedule 4. *Filed Date:* 03/29/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070402-0078. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 19, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER06-275-002. *Applicants:* Northeast Utilities Service Company. *Description:* Connecticut Light and Power Company et al. submit a supplemental filing providing back-up data detailing the actual CWIP and AFUDC monthly balances etc. in response to FERC's directives and its

(2006)Order. *Filed Date:* 03/16/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070330-0020. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 06, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-516-001. *Applicants:* Morgan Stanley Capital Group Inc. *Description:* Morgan Stanley Capital Group Inc submits an amended report and declaration regarding a bilateral spot transaction for which MSCG was the seller in the Western Electricity Coordinating Council region. *Filed Date:* 03/29/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070402-0092. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 19, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-529-001. *Applicants:* Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc. *Description:* Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc submits a Substitute Fourth Revised Sheet 7 et al. to FERC Electric Tariff, Third Revised Volume 1 pursuant to section 205 of the FPA. *Filed Date:* 03/29/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070402-0068. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 19, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-656-001. *Applicants:* CMT Fund IX LLC. *Description:* CMT Fund IX LLC submits an amended Original Sheet 1 et al. to its FERC Electric Rate Schedule. *Filed Date:* 03/29/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070402-0077. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, April 9, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-669-000. *Applicants:* New York Independent System Operator, Inc. *Description:* New York Independent System Operator, Inc submits proposed revisions to its Market Administration and Control Area Services Tariff and Open Access Transmission Tariff etc. *Filed Date:* 03/28/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070330-0025. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, April 18, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-673-000. *Applicants:* Reliant Energy Wholesale Generation, LLC. *Description:* Reliant Energy Wholesale Generation, LLC submits a proposed FERC Electric Tariff, Original Volume 7 and supporting cost data etc. *Filed Date:* 03/29/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070330-0125. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 19, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-674-000. *Applicants:* Wisconsin Electric Power Company. *Description:* Wisconsin Electric Power Company submits a Notice of Cancellation of its Master Close-Out Netting Agreement with Southern Company Energy Marketing, Rate Schedule No. 95. *Filed Date:* 03/30/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070402-0037. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 20, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-675-000. *Applicants:* PJM Interconnection, LLC. *Description:* PJM Interconnection LLC submits an executed interconnection service agreement with Allegheny Ridge Wind Farm LLC et al. and a notice of cancellation for an interconnection service agreement etc. *Filed Date:* 03/29/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070402-0038. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 19, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-676-000. *Applicants:* Tampa Electric Company. *Description:* Tampa Electric Company submits a Third Revised Sheet 121 for inclusion in its open access transmission tariff pursuant to section 205 of the FPA etc. *Filed Date:* 03/29/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070402-0039. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 19, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-677-000. *Applicants:* Sierra Pacific Power Company. *Description:* Sierra Pacific Power Company submits an amendment to a Power Purchase Agreement w/ Nevada Power Company pursuant to sections 205

(c)&

(d)of the FPA etc. *Filed Date:* 03/29/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070402-0131. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 19, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-678-000. *Applicants:* Nevada Power Company. *Description:* Nevada Power Company submits its amendments to two Power Purchase Agreements with Sierra Power Company. *Filed Date:* 03/29/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070402-0051. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 19, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-679-000. *Applicants:* Public Service Company of New Mexico. *Description:* Public Service Company of New Mexico submits Substitute Sheet 207 et al. to FERC Electric Tariff, Original Volume 6. *Filed Date:* 03/30/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070402-0070. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 20, 2007. Take notice that the Commission received the following foreign utility company status filings: Docket Numbers: FC07-21-000. *Applicants:* CMS (India) Operations and Maintenance Company Private Limited. *Description:* CMS (India) Operations and Maintenance Company Private Limited submits a notification of Self-Certification of Foreign Utility Company Status. *Filed Date:* 03/30/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070330-5017. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 20, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* FC07-22-000. *Applicants:* CMS International Operating Company. *Description:* CMS International Operating Company submits a notice of Self-Certification of Foreign Utility Company Status. *Filed Date:* 03/30/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070330-5018. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 20, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* FC07-23-000. *Applicants:* ST-CMS Electric Company Private Limited. *Description:* ST-CMS Electric Company Private Limited submits a Notice of Self-Certification of Foreign Utility. *Filed Date:* 03/30/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070330-5022. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 20, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* FC07-24-000. *Applicants:* Jorf Lasfar Energy Company SCA. *Description:* Jorf Lasfar Energy Co SCA submits a notice of Self-Certification of Foreign Utility Company Status. *Filed Date:* 03/30/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070330-5025. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 20, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* FC07-25-000. *Applicants:* Shuweihat O&M Limited Partnership. *Description:* Shuweihat O&M Limited Partnership submits a notice of Self-Certification of Foreign Utility Company Status. *Filed Date:* 03/30/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070330-5027. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 20, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* FC07-26-000. *Applicants:* Jubail Energy Company. *Description:* Jubail Energy Company submits a notice of Self-Certification of Foreign Utility Company Status. *Filed Date:* 03/30/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070330-5031. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 20, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* FC07-27-000. *Applicants:* CMS Morocco Operating Company SCA. *Description:* CMS Morocco Operating Co SCA submits a notice of Self-Certification of Foreign Utility Company Status. *Filed Date:* 03/30/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070330-5034. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 20, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* FC07-28-000. *Applicants:* Shuweihat CMS International Power Company. *Description:* Shuweihat CMS International Power Company submits a notice of Self-Certification Foreign Utility Company Status. *Filed Date:* 03/30/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070330-5037. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 20, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* FC07-29-000. *Applicants:* Takoradi International Company. *Description:* Takoradi International Company submits a notice of Self-Certification of Foreign Utility Company Status. *Filed Date:* 03/30/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070330-5040. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 20, 2007. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding, interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline need not be served on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at *http://www.ferc.gov.* To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First St. NE., Washington, DC 20426. The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov.* or call

(866)208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. Philis J. Posey, Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-6432 Filed 4-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. AD07-3-007] Review of Cost Submittals by Other Federal Agencies for Administering Part I of the Federal Power Act; Notice Requesting Questions and Comments on Fiscal Year 2006 Other Federal Agency Cost Submissions April 2, 2007. In its Order On Rehearing Consolidating Administrative Annual Charges Bill Appeals And Modifying Annual Charges Billing Procedures (109 FERC ¶ 61,040), the Commission set forth an annual deadline for Other Federal Agencies

(OFAs)to submit their costs related to Administering Part I of the Federal Power Act. The Commission required the OFAs to submit their costs by December 31st of each fiscal year

(FY)using the OFA Cost Submission Form. The order also announced that a technical conference would be held for the purpose of reviewing the submitted cost forms and detailed supporting documentation. On March 29, 2007, the Commission held a technical conference to review the FY 2006 OFA cost submissions, which was attended by OFAs and licensees. Within two weeks of the date of this notice, interested parties may file their specific questions and comments on the FY 2006 OFA cost submissions with the Commission under Docket No. AD07-3-007. Once filed, the Commission will forward the questions and comments to the OFAs for response. Anyone with questions pertaining to the technical conference or this notice should contact Fannie Kingsberry at

(202)502-6108 (via e-mail at *fannie.kingsberry@ferc.gov* ), or Norman Richardson at

(202)502-6219 (via e-mail at *norman.richardson@ferc.gov* ). Philis J. Posey, Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-6436 Filed 4-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 1494-300—OK] Grand River Dam Authority (GRDA); Notice of Availability of Draft Environmental Assessment April 2, 2007. In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's regulations, 18 CFR Part 380 (Order No. 486, 52 FR 47879), the Office of Energy Projects reviewed the application for non-project use of project lands and waters for the Pensacola Hydroelectric Project, located on the Grand (Neosho) River in Craig, Delaware, Mayes, and Ottawa Counties, Oklahoma, and has prepared a Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA). A copy of the DEA is on file with the Commission and is available for public inspection. The DEA may also be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number (P-1494) excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* or toll-free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,

(202)502-8659. Any comments should be filed by May 1, 2007, and should be addressed to the Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Room 1-A, Washington, DC 20426. Please reference the project name and project number (P-1494) on all comments. Comments may be filed electronically via Internet in lieu of paper. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “eFiling” link. For further information, contact Lesley Kordella at

(202)502-6406. Philis J. Posey, Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-6442 Filed 4-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. PF07-1-000] Boardwalk Pipeline Partners, LP; Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Gulf Crossing Project, Request for Comments on Environmental Issues, and Notice of Public Scoping Meetings April 2, 2007. The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) will prepare an environmental impact statement

(EIS)that will identify and address the environmental impacts that could result from the construction and operation of the Gulf Crossing Project proposed by Gulf Crossing Pipeline Company, LLC (Gulf Crossing) and Gulf South Pipeline Company, L.P. (Gulf South). In order to assist staff with the identification of environmental issues and to comply with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), a thirty-day scoping period has been opened to receive comments on the proposed project. Please note that the scoping period for this project will close on May 4, 2007. Additionally, as part of the scoping process, we will also hold four public meetings, as described below, to receive comments on the proposed project. Date and time Location April 23, 2007, 7 p.m Delhi High School Auditorium, 413 Main Street, Delhi, LA 71232. April 24, 2007, 7 p.m Serepta High School Auditorium, 6041 Highway 2, Serepta, LA 71071. April 25, 2007, 7 p.m Mt. Pleasant Civic Center, 1800 N. Jefferson, Mt. Pleasant, TX 75455. April 26, 2007, 7 p.m Bryan County Free Fair, 1901 South 9th Street, Durant, OK 74702. This notice is being sent to affected landowners; Federal, State, and local government agencies; elected officials; environmental and public interest groups; Native American tribes; other interested parties; and local libraries and newspapers; all of which are encouraged to submit comments on the proposed project. Details on how to submit comments are provided in the Public Participation section of this notice. If you are a landowner receiving this notice, you may be contacted by a Boardwalk, Gulf Crossing or Gulf South representative about the acquisition of an easement to construct, operate, and maintain the proposed project facilities. The pipeline company would seek to negotiate a mutually acceptable agreement. However, if the project is approved by the FERC, that approval conveys with it the right of eminent domain. Therefore, if easement negotiations fail to produce an agreement, the pipeline company could initiate condemnation proceedings in accordance with state law. A fact sheet prepared by the FERC entitled “An Interstate Natural Gas Facility on My Land? What Do I Need To Know?” is available for viewing on the FERC Internet Web site ( *http://www.ferc.gov* ). This fact sheet addresses a number of typically asked questions, including the use of eminent domain and how to participate in the FERC's proceedings. Summary of the Proposed Project Boardwalk, through its subsidiary Gulf Crossing, proposes to construct, own and operate approximately 351 miles of new 42-inch-diameter natural gas transmission pipeline, four

(4)new compressor stations, four

(4)new metering and regulating (M&R) stations and associated facilities in Grayson, Fannin, Lamar, Red River, Franklin, Titus, Morris, and Cass Counties, Texas; Bryan County, Oklahoma; and Caddo, Bossier, Webster, Claiborne, Lincoln, Union, Ouchida, Morehouse, Richland, and Madison Parishes, Louisiana. In addition, as part of the Gulf Crossing Project, Boardwalk, through its subsidiary Gulf South, proposed to construct, own and operate a 4.5-mile-long 42-inch-diamter pipeline loop (Loop A) in Madison Parish, Louisiana; and 11.2-mile-long 42-inch-diameter pipeline loop (Loop B) in Hinds, Copiah, and Simpson Counties, Mississippi; as well as installing an additional 30,000 horsepower

(hp)of compression at the proposed Harrisville Compressor Station (Docket Number CP07-32-000). The general location of the proposed pipeline is shown in the figure included as Appendix 1. 1 1 The appendices referenced in this notice are not being printed in the **Federal Register** . Specifically, Boardwalk proposes to construct and operate the following facilities: • Approximately 351 miles of 42-inch-diameter pipeline beginning in Sherman, Texas; northeast through Bennington, Oklahoma; and southeast to the proposed Gulf South Tallulah Compressor Station near Tallulah, Louisiana; • Approximately 4.5-mile-long, 42-inch-diameter pipeline loop line west of the Mississippi River in Madison Parish, Louisiana; • An approximately 11.2-mile-long, 42-inch-diamter pipeline loop line in Hinds, Copiah, and Simpson Counties, Mississippi that terminates at the Gulf South Harrisville Compressor Station (Proposed in Docket number CP07-32-000); • A new 35,641 hp compressor station at Milepost

(MP)0.0 near Sherman, Texas; • A new 18,940 hp compressor station at MP 72.7 near Paris, Texas; • A new 20,604 hp compressor station at MP 183 near Mira, Louisiana; • A new 25,339 hp compressor station at MP 293 near Sterlington, LA; • An additional 30,000 hp of compression at Gulf South's proposed Harrisville Compressor Station (docket CP07-32-000) • Four

(4)meter and regulation (M&R) stations to interconnect with Enterprise Texas Pipeline L.P. at MP 0.0 in Grayson County, TX, Enogex intrastate pipeline at MP 34.2 in Bryan County, Oklahoma, Crosstex North Texas Pipeline at MP 72.7 in Lamar County, Texas, and Gulf South at MP 350.7 in Madison Parish, Louisiana; • 4 pig launching/receiving sites, 3 launching only facilities, 3 receiving only facilities and 17 mainline valves. Boardwalk proposes to have the project constructed and operational by October 1, 2008. Land Requirements for Construction As proposed, the typical construction right-of-way for the project pipeline would be 100-feet wide. Following construction, Gulf Crossing has proposed to retain a 60-foot-wide permanent right-of-way for operation of the project. Additional, temporary extra workspaces beyond the typical construction right-of-way limits may also be required at certain feature crossings (e.g., roads, railroads, wetlands, or waterbodies), in areas with steep side slopes, or in association with special construction techniques. In residential areas, wetlands, and other sensitive areas, the construction right-of-way width would be reduced as necessary to protect homeowners and environmental resources. Based on preliminary information, construction and operation of the proposed project facilities would affect about 5,650 acres of land. Following construction, about 2,709 acres would be maintained as permanent right-of-way, and about 44.5 acres of land would be maintained as new aboveground facility sites. The remaining 2,896.5 acres of temporary workspace (including all temporary construction rights-of-way, extra workspaces, and pipe storage and contractor yards) would be restored and allowed to revert to its former use. The EIS Process The National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA)requires the Commission to take into account the environmental impacts that could result from the approval of an interstate natural gas pipeline. The FERC will use the EIS to consider the environmental impact that could result if the Gulf Crossing project is authorized under section 7 of the Natural Gas Act. NEPA also requires us to discover and address concerns the public may have about proposals to be considered by the Commission. This process is referred to as “scoping.” The main goal of the scoping process is to focus the analysis in the EIS on the important environmental issues. With this Notice of Intent, the Commission staff is requesting public comments on the scope of the issues to be addressed in the EIS. All comments received will be considered during preparation of the EIS. In the EIS we will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of the construction and operation of the proposed project under these general headings: • Geology and soils; • Water resources; • Wetlands and vegetation; • Fish and wildlife; • Threatened and endangered species; • Land use, recreation, and visual resources; • Air quality and noise; • Cultural resources; • Socioeconomics; • Reliability and safety; and • Cumulative environmental impacts. In the EIS, we will also evaluate possible alternatives to the proposed project or portions of the project, and make recommendations on how to lessen or avoid impacts on affected resources. Our independent analysis of the issues will be included in a draft EIS. The draft EIS will be mailed to Federal, State, and local government agencies; elected officials; environmental and public interest groups; Native American tribes; affected landowners; commentors; other interested parties; local libraries and newspapers; and the FERC's official service list for this proceeding. A 45-day comment period will be allotted for review of the draft EIS. We will consider all comments on the draft EIS and revise the document, as necessary, before issuing a final EIS. We will consider all comments on the final EIS before we make our recommendations to the Commission. To ensure that your comments are considered, please follow the instructions in the Public Participation section of this notice. Although no formal application has been filed, the FERC staff has already initiated its NEPA review under the Commission's Pre-filing Process. The purpose of the Pre-filing Process is to encourage the early involvement of interested stakeholders and to identify and resolve issues before an application is filed with the FERC. With this notice, we are asking Federal, State, and local governmental agencies with jurisdiction and/or special expertise with respect to environmental issues, especially those identified in Appendix 2, to express their interest in becoming cooperating agencies for the preparation of the EIS. These agencies may choose to participate once they have evaluated the proposal relative to their responsibilities. Agencies that would like to request cooperating status should follow the instructions for filing comments provided in Appendix 2. Currently Identified Environmental Issues The EIS will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of the construction and operation of the proposed project. We have already identified several issues that we think deserve attention based on a preliminary review of the project site and the facility information provided by Boardwalk. This preliminary list of issues may be changed based on your comments and our analysis. • Potential effects on prime farmland and erodable soils. • Potential impacts to perennial and intermittent waterbodies, including waterbodies with federal and/or state designations/protections. • Evaluation of temporary and permanent impacts on wetlands and development of appropriate mitigation. • Potential impacts to fish and wildlife habitat, including potential impacts to federally and state-listed threatened and endangered species. • Potential visual effects of the aboveground facilities on surrounding areas. • Potential impacts and potential benefits of construction workforce on local housing, infrastructure, public services, and economy. • Impacts to air quality and noise associated with construction and operation. • Public safety and hazards associated with the transport of natural gas. • Alternative alignments for the pipeline route and alternative sites for the compressor stations. • Potential impacts to Native American lands and cultural resources. • Land use impacts from pipeline easements. Public Participation You can make a difference by providing us with your specific comments or concerns about the proposed project. By becoming a commentor, your concerns will be addressed in the EIS and considered by the Commission. Your comments should focus on the potential environmental effects, reasonable alternatives (including alternative facility sites and pipeline routes), and measures to avoid or lessen environmental impact. The more specific your comments, the more useful they will be. To ensure that your comments are timely and properly recorded, please carefully follow these instructions: • Send an original and two copies of your letter to: Philis J. Posey, Acting Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426. • Label one copy of your comments for the attention of Gas Branch 3, DG2E. • Reference Docket No. PF07-1-000 on the original and both copies. • Mail your comments so that they will be received in Washington, DC on or before May 4, 2007. Please note that we are continuing to experience delays in mail deliveries from the U.S. Postal Service. As a result, we will include all comments that we receive within a reasonable time frame in our environmental analysis of this project. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing of any comments in response to this Notice of Intent. For information on electronically filing comments, please see the instructions on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* . The public scoping meetings are designed to provide another opportunity to offer comments on the proposed project. Interested groups and individuals are encouraged to attend the meetings and to present comments on the environmental issues they believe should be addressed in the EIS. A transcript of each meeting will be generated so that your comments will be accurately recorded. Once Broadwater formally files its application with the Commission, you may want to become an official party to the proceeding known as an “intervenor.” Intervenors play a more formal role in the process and are able to file briefs, appear at hearings, and be heard by the courts if they choose to appeal the Commission's final ruling. An intervenor formally participates in a Commission proceeding by filing a request to intervene. Instructions for becoming an intervenor are included in the User's Guide under the “e-filing” link on the Commission's Web site. Please note that you may not request intervenor status at this time. You must wait until a formal application is filed with the Commission. Environmental Mailing List An effort is being made to send this notice to all individuals, organizations, and government entities interested in and/or potentially affected by the proposed project. This includes all landowners who are potential right-of-way grantors, whose property may be used temporarily for project purposes, or who own homes within distances defined in the Commission's regulations of certain aboveground facilities. If you received this notice, you are on the environmental mailing list for this project. If you do not want to send comments at this time, but still want to remain on our mailing list, please return the Information Request (Appendix 3). If you do not return the Information Request, you will be removed from the Commission's environmental mailing list. Availability of Additional Information Additional information about the project is available from the Commission's Office of External Affairs, at *1-866-208-FERC* (3372). Additional information can also be found on the Internet at *http://www.ferc.gov* . The “eLibrary link” on the FERC Web site provides access to documents submitted to and issued by the Commission, such as comments, orders, notices and rulemakings. Once on the FERC Web site, click on the “eLibrary link,” select “General Search” and in the “Docket Number” field enter the project docket number excluding the last three digits (PF07-1). When researching information be sure to select an appropriate date range. In addition, the FERC now offers a free e-mail service called eSubscription that allows you to keep track of all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with notification of these filings, document summaries and direct links to the documents. To register for this service, go to *http://www.ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm* . Public meetings or site visits will be posted on the Commission's calendar located at *http://www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/EventsList.aspx* along with other related information. For assistance with the FERC Web site or with eSubscription, please contact FERC Online Support at *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* or toll free at 1-866-208-3676, or TTY, contact 1-202-502-8659. Finally, Boardwalk has established an Internet Web site for this project at *http://www.gulfcrossing.com* . The website includes a description of the project, a map of the proposed pipeline route, and answers to frequently asked questions. You can also request additional information or provide comments directly to Boardwalk at 1-713-544-5420. Philis J. Posey, Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-6443 Filed 4-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Notice of Request for Extension of Time To Commence and Complete Project Construction and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests April 2, 2007. Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection: a. *Application Type:* Request for Extension of Time. b. *Project No:* 11480-004. c. *Date Filed:* March 19, 2007. d. *Applicant:* Haida Corporation. e. *Name of Project:* Upper Reynolds Creek Hydroelectric Project. f. *Location:* On Reynolds Creek, near the town of Hydaburg, Copper River Meridian, Prince of Wales, in the Ketchikan County recording district, Alaska. g. *Pursuant to:* Pub. L. 109-297, 120 STAT. 1471. h. *Applicant Contact:* Donald H. Clarke, Law Offices of GKRSE, 1500 K Street, NW., Suite 330, Washington, DC 20005;

(202)408-5400. i. *FERC Contact:* Diane M. Murray, Telephone:

(202)502-8838 and e-mail: diane.murray@ferc.gov. j. *Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and protests:* May 10, 2007. *All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with:* Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Please include the project number (P-11480-004) on any comments. The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person whose name appears on the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy of any motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application. k. *Description of Request:* The licensee requests that the Commission grant two, two-year extensions of time from the existing deadlines to commence and complete project construction of the Jordan Dam Hydroelectric Project. This will be the first and second 2-year extensions of three authorized by Public Law 109-297. The requested new deadlines would be October 24, 2008, and October 24, 2010, to commence and complete construction, respectively. l. *Locations of the Application:* A copy of the application is available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public Reference Room, located at 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426, or by calling

(202)502-8371. This filing may also be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. You may also register online at *http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp* to be notified via e-mail of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3676 or e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov.* For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item h. above. m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission. n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene—Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application. o. Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “PROTEST”, or “MOTION TO INTERVENE”, as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing refers. p. Agency Comments—Federal, state, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described application. A copy of the application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives. q. Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* under the “e-Filing” link. Philis J. Posey, Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-6441 Filed 4-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP07-52-000] Downeast LNG, Inc.; Notice of Technical Conference April 2, 2007. On Wednesday, April 25, 2007, at 9 a.m. (EDT), staff of the Office of Energy Projects will convene a cryogenic design and technical conference regarding the proposed Downeast LNG import terminal. The cryogenic conference will be held at the Calais Motor Inn at 663 Main Street, Calais, Maine 04619. For Calais Motor Inn details call 1-800-439-5531. The conference will review the design of the LNG storage tanks and facility, instrumentation and controls, hazard detection and controls, spill containment, geotechnical topics, and other issues related to the operation of the proposed facility. Issues related to environmental impacts and LNG vessel transit are outside the scope of the conference. In view of the nature of critical energy infrastructure information and security issues to be explored, the cryogenic conference will not be open to the public. Attendance at this conference will be limited to existing parties to the proceeding (anyone who has specifically requested to intervene as a party) and to representatives of interested federal, state, and local agencies. Any person planning to attend the April 25th cryogenic conference must register by close of business on Thursday, April 19, 2007. Registrations may be submitted either online at *http://www.ferc.gov/whats-new/registration/cryo-conf-form.asp* or by faxing a copy of the form (found at the referenced online link) to 202-208-0353. All attendees must sign a non-disclosure statement prior to entering the conference. For additional information regarding the cryogenic conference, please contact Tejal Patel at 202-502-6037. Philis J. Posey, Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-6437 Filed 4-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-6685-7] Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of EPA Comments Availability of EPA comments prepared pursuant to the Environmental Review Process (ERP), under section 309 of the Clean Air Act and Section 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental Policy Act as amended. Requests for copies of EPA comments can be directed to the Office of Federal Activities at 202-564-7167. Summary of Rating Definitions Environmental Impact of the Action LO—Lack of Objections The EPA review has not identified any potential environmental impacts requiring substantive changes to the proposal. The review may have disclosed opportunities for application of mitigation measures that could be accomplished with no more than minor changes to the proposal. EC—Environmental Concerns The EPA review has identified environmental impacts that should be avoided in order to fully protect the environment. Corrective measures may require changes to the preferred alternative or application of mitigation measures that can reduce the environmental impact. EPA would like to work with the lead agency to reduce these impacts. EO—Environmental Objections The EPA review has identified significant environmental impacts that must be avoided in order to provide adequate protection for the environment. Corrective measures may require substantial changes to the preferred alternative or consideration of some other project alternative (including the no action alternative or a new alternative). EPA intends to work with the lead agency to reduce these impacts. EU—Environmentally Unsatisfactory The EPA review has identified adverse environmental impacts that are of sufficient magnitude that they are unsatisfactory from the standpoint of public health or welfare or environmental quality. EPA intends to work with the lead agency to reduce these impacts. If the potentially unsatisfactory impacts are not corrected at the final EIS stage, this proposal will be recommended for referral to the CEQ. Adequacy of the Impact Statement Category 1—Adequate EPA believes the draft EIS adequately sets forth the environmental impact(s) of the preferred alternative and those of the alternatives reasonably available to the project or action. No further analysis or data collection is necessary, but the reviewer may suggest the addition of clarifying language or information. Category 2—Insufficient Information The draft EIS does not contain sufficient information for EPA to fully assess environmental impacts that should be avoided in order to fully protect the environment, or the EPA reviewer has identified new reasonably available alternatives that are within the spectrum of alternatives analyzed in the draft EIS, which could reduce the environmental impacts of the action. The identified additional information, data, analyses, or discussion should be included in the final EIS. Category 3—Inadequate EPA does not believe that the draft EIS adequately assesses potentially significant environmental impacts of the action, or the EPA reviewer has identified new, reasonably available alternatives that are outside of the spectrum of alternatives analyzed in the draft EIS, which should be analyzed in order to reduce the potentially significant environmental impacts. EPA believes that the identified additional information, data, analyses, or discussions are of such a magnitude that they should have full public review at a draft stage. EPA does not believe that the draft EIS is adequate for the purposes of the NEPA and/or Section 309 review, and thus should be formally revised and made available for public comment in a supplemental or revised draft EIS. On the basis of the potential significant impacts involved, this proposal could be a candidate for referral to the CEQ. Final EISs EIS No. 20060488, ERP No. F-BLM-J02049-WY, Atlantic Rim Natural Gas Field Development Project, Proposed Natural Gas Development to 2000 Wells, 1800 to Coal Beds and 200 to Other Formations, Carbon County, WY. *Summary:* EPA continues to have environmental concerns about adverse impacts to water quality, wildlife habitat and native vegetation, and suggests that the ROD include additional BMPs that avoid or reduce impacts to these resources. EIS No. 20070023, ERP No. F-AFS-L65521-WA, Buckhorn Access Project, To Utilize the Marias Creek Route to Construct and Reconstruct Roads, Funding, NPDES Permit and U.S. Army COE Section 404 Permit, Okanogan and Wenatchee National Forests, Tonasket Ranger District, Okanogan County, WA. *Summary:* The Final EIS addressed EPA's comments on the NPDES permit and surface water quality; however, EPA continues to have environmental concerns about impacts to wetlands. EPA requests that the ROD include detailed information on the performance bond and implementation of the monitoring plan based on the most recent modeling and analysis of water resources. Additionally, the ROD should outline how the monitoring activities of 3 agencies will be coordinated. EIS No. 20070062, ERP No. F-NPS-H65025-NE, Niobrara National Scenic River General Management Plan, Implementation, Brown, Cherry, Keya Paha and Rock Counties, NE. *Summary:* EPA does not object to the proposed action. EIS No. 20070066, ERP No. F-BLM-K65294-AZ, Arizona Strip Field Office Resource Management Plan, which includes: Vermilion Cliffs National Monument, Grand-Canyon-Parashant National Monument (Parashant) BLM Portion, General Management Plan for the Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument NPS Portion of Parashant, Implementation, AZ. *Summary:* No formal comment letter was sent to the preparing agency. Dated: April 3, 2007. Robert W. Hargrove, Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities. [FR Doc. E7-6456 Filed 4-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-6685-6] Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability *Responsible Agency:* Office of Federal Activities, General Information

(202)564-7167 or *http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/.* Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 03/26/2007 Through 03/30/2007 Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9. *EIS No. 20070126, Final Supplement, AFS, CA,* Watdog Project, Preferred Alternative is B, Feather River Ranger District, Plumas National Forest, Butte and Plumas Counties, CA, *Wait Period Ends:* 05/07/2007, *Contact:* John Zarlengo 530-534-6500. *EIS No. 20070127, Final EIS, NPS, 00,* Ellis Island and Statue of Liberty National Monument Development Concept Plan, Long-Term Rehabilitation and Reuse for Historic Buildings, Implementation, New York Harbor, NY and NJ, *Wait Period Ends:* 05/07/2007, *Contact:* Cynthia Garrett 212-363-3206 Ext 100. *EIS No. 20070128, Final EIS, AFS, ID,* Myrtle Creek Healthy Forest Restoration Act Project, Proposes Aquatic and Vegetation Improvement Treatments, Panhandle National Forests, Bonners Ferry Ranger District, City of Bonners Ferry, Boundary County, ID, *Wait Period Ends:* 05/07/2007, *Contact:* Doug Nishek 208-267-5561. *EIS No. 20070129, Draft Supplement, NOA, 00,* Atlantic Mackerel, Squid and Butterfish, Fishery Management Plan, Amendment #9, Implementation, Essential Fish Habitat (EFH), Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), *Comment Period Ends:* 05/21/2007, *Contact:* Patricia A. Kurkul 978-281-9250. *EIS No. 20070130, Draft EIS, NOA, 00,* Phase I—Essential Fish Habitat Omnibus Amendment #2, Designations for 27 Species, Amendment #14 to the Northeast Multispecies FMP, Amendment #14 to the Atlantic Scallop FMP, Amendment #3 to the Atlantic Herring FMP, Amendment 4 to the Monkfish FMP, Amendment 1 to the Deep-Sea Red Crab FMP, Amendment 2 to the Skates FMP and Amendment 3 to the Atlantic Salmon FMP, Maine to North Carolina, *Comment Period Ends:* 05/21/2007, *Contact:* Peter Colosi 978-281-9332. *EIS No. 20070131, Draft EIS, IBR, NM,* Navajo-Gallup Water Supply Project, To Provide a Long-Term (Year 2040) Water Supply, Treatment and Transmission of Municipal and Industrial (M&I) Water to Navajo National and Jicarilla Apache Nation, City of Gallup, New Mexico, *Comment Period Ends:* 06/28/2007, *Contact:* Rege Leach 970-385-6553. *EIS No. 20070132, Draft EIS, AFS, 00,* Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks and the John D. Rockefeller, Jr. Memorial Parkway, Winter Use Plan, To Provide a Framework for Managing Winter Use Activities, Implementation, Fremont County, ID, Gallatin and Park Counties, MT Park and Teton Counties, WY, *Comment Period Ends:* 05/31/2007, *Contact:* Debbie VanDePolder 307-344-2019. *EIS No. 20070133, Draft EIS, FRC, GA,* Elba III Project, Construct, Operate and Acquire Facilities to move Re-Vaporized Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG), U.S. Army COE Section 10 and 404 Permits and U.S. Coast Guard Permit, Elba Island, Chatham County, GA, *Comment Period Ends:* 05/21/2007, *Contact:* Andy Black 1-866-208-3372. *EIS No. 20070134, Final EIS, FHW, VA,* I-81 Corridor Improvement Study in Virginia, Transportation Improvements from the Tennessee Border to the West Virginia Border, (Tier 1), Several Counties, VA and WV, *Wait Period Ends:* 05/07/2007, *Contact:* John Simkins 804-775-3342. Dated: April 3, 2007. Robert W. Hargrove, Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities. [FR Doc. E7-6452 Filed 4-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-8295-8] National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice of meeting. SUMMARY: Under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, P.L. 92463, EPA gives notice of a meeting of the National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology (NACEPT). NACEPT provides advice to the EPA Administrator on a broad range of environmental policy, technology, and management issues. The Council is a panel of individuals who represent diverse interests from academia, industry, non-governmental organizations, and local, State, and tribal governments. The purpose of this meeting is to discuss the NACEPT agenda, including sustainable water infrastructure, environmental stewardship, cooperative conservation, energy and the environment, environmental technology, and environmental indicators. The Council will also review and approve the NACEPT Environmental Technology Subcommittee's Second Report. A copy of the agenda for the meeting will be posted at *http://www.epa.gov/ocem/nacept/cal-nacept.htm.* DATES: NACEPT will hold a two day open meeting on Thursday, April 26, 2007, from 8:30 a.m. to 6 p.m. and Friday, April 27, 2007, from 8 a.m. to 2 p.m. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Four Points by Sheraton Hotel, 1201 K Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005. The meeting is open to the public, with limited seating on a first-come, first-served basis. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sonia Altieri, Designated Federal Officer, *altieri.sonia@epa.gov* ,

(202)233-0061, U.S. EPA, Office of Cooperative Environmental Management (1601E), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Requests to make oral comments or to provide written comments to the Council should be sent to Sonia Altieri, Designated Federal Officer, at the contact information above. The public is welcome to attend all portions of the meeting. *Meeting Access:* For information on access or services for individuals with disabilities, please contact Sonia Altieri at 202-233-0061 or *altieri.sonia@epa.gov* . To request accommodation of a disability, please contact Sonia Altieri, preferably at least 10 days prior to the meeting, to give EPA as much time as possible to process your request. Dated: March 29, 2007. Sonia Altieri, Designated Federal Officer. [FR Doc. E7-6458 Filed 4-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-8295-7] Science Advisory Board Staff Office; Notification of a Public Meeting of the Science Advisory Board Hypoxia Advisory Panel AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The EPA's Science Advisory Board

(SAB)Staff Office is announcing a public meeting of the SAB Hypoxia Advisory Panel to discuss and develop its preliminary draft advisory report concerning the hypoxic zone in the Gulf of Mexico. DATES: The meeting will be held on June 13, 2007 from 9 a.m.-5 p.m., June 14, 2007 from 9 a.m.—5 p.m., and on June 15, 2007 from 9 a.m.—12 p.m. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held in New Orleans, Louisiana at the Astor Crowne Plaza located at 739 Canal Street (Canal and Bourbon Street). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Any member of the public wishing further information regarding the public meeting may contact Dr. Holly Stallworth, Designated Federal Officer (DFO), U.S. EPA Science Advisory Board Staff Office by telephone/voice mail at

(202)343-9867, or via e-mail at *stallworth.holly@epa.gov* . The SAB mailing address is: U.S. EPA Science Advisory Board (1400F), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460. General information about the SAB, as well as any updates concerning the meeting announced in this notice, may be found in the SAB Web site at: *http://www.epa.gov/sab* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-463, notice is hereby given that the SAB Hypoxia Advisory Panel will hold a public meeting to develop a report that details advances in the state of the science regarding hypoxia in the Northern Gulf of Mexico. The SAB was established by 42 U.S.C. 4365 to provide independent scientific and technical advice to the EPA Administrator on the technical basis for Agency positions and regulations. The SAB is a Federal Advisory Committee chartered under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), as amended, 5 U.S.C., App. The SAB will comply with the provisions of FACA and all appropriate SAB Staff Office procedural policies. *Background:* EPA participates with other Federal agencies, states and tribes in the Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task Force. In 2001, the Task Force released the Action Plan for Reducing, Mitigating and Controlling Hypoxia in the Northern Gulf of Mexico (or Action Plan available at *http://www.epa.gov/msbasin/taskforce/actionplan.htm* ). The Action Plan was informed by the science described in 2000 in An Integrated Assessment of Hypoxia in the Northern Gulf of Mexico (or Integrated Assessment available at *http://www.noaa.gov/products/hypox_finalfront.pdf* ) developed by the National Science and Technology Council, Committee on Environment and Natural Resources. Six technical reports provided the scientific foundation for the Integrated Assessment and are available at * http:// www.nos.noaa.gov/products/pub_hypox.html * . Given the passage of 6 years, EPA's Office of Water has requested that the SAB develop a report that evaluates the updated science regarding the causes and extent of hypoxia in the Gulf of Mexico, as well as the scientific basis of possible management options in the Mississippi River Basin. In response to EPA's request, the SAB Staff Office formed the SAB Hypoxia Advisory Panel. Background on the Panel formation process was provided in a **Federal Register** notice published on February 17, 2006 (71 FR 8578-8580). The SAB Hypoxia Advisory Panel met on September 6-7, 2006 (71 FR 45543-45544), again on December 6-8, 2006 (71 FR 66329-66330) and again on February 28-March 2, 2007 ( 72 FR 5968-5969). Teleconferences of the full Hypoxia Advisory Panel and its three subgroups have also been published in **Federal Register** Notices (71 FR 55786-55787, 71 FR 59107, 71 FR 77743-77744 and 72 FR 11359-11360). Information about the SAB Hypoxia Advisory Panel is available on the SAB Web site at: *http://www.epa.gov/sab* . *Availability of Meeting Materials:* Materials in support of this meeting will be placed on the SAB Web site *http://www.epa.gov/sab/* in advance of the meeting. *Procedures for Providing Public Input:* Interested members of the public may submit relevant written or oral information for the SAB to consider during the advisory process. *Oral Statements:* In general, individuals or groups requesting an oral presentation at a public meeting will be limited to five minutes per speaker, with no more than a total of one hour for all speakers. Interested parties should contact Dr. Stallworth, DFO, at the contact information noted above, no later than June 4, 2007, to be placed on the public speaker list for the June 13-15, 2007 meeting. *Written Statements:* Written statements should be received in the SAB Staff Office no later than June 4, 2007 so that the information may be made available to the SAB for their consideration prior to this meeting. Written statements should be supplied to the DFO in the following formats: one hard copy with original signature, and one electronic copy via e-mail to *stallworth.holly@epa.gov* (acceptable file format: Adobe Acrobat PDF, WordPerfect, MS Word, MS PowerPoint, or Rich Text files in IBM-PC/Windows 98/2000/XP format). *Meeting Access:* For information on access or services for individuals with disabilities, please contact Dr. Stallworth at

(202)343-9867 or *stallworth.holly@epa.gov* . To request accommodation of a disability, please contact Dr. Stallworth, preferably at least 10 days prior to the meeting to give EPA as much time as possible to process your request. Dated: April 2, 2007. Anthony F. Maciorowski, Deputy Director, EPA Science Advisory Board Staff Office. [FR Doc. E7-6459 Filed 4-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE BOARD Sunshine Act Meeting Notice; Announcing a Partially Open Meeting of the Board of Directors Time and Date: The open meeting of the Board of Directors is scheduled to begin at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, April 11, 2007. The closed portion of the meeting will follow immediately the open portion of the meeting. Place: Board Room, First Floor, Federal Housing Finance Board, 1625 Eye Street, NW., Washington, DC 20006. Status: The first portion of the meeting will be open to the public. The final portion of the meeting will be closed to the public. Matters to be Considered at the Open Portion: Appointment to the Office of Finance Board of Directors. Waivers Concerning Preparation of Combined Financial Reports. Matter to be Considered at the Closed Portion: Periodic Update of Examination Program Development and Supervisory Findings. Contact Person for More Information: Shelia Willis, Paralegal Specialist, Office of General Counsel, at 202-408-2876 or *williss@fhfb.gov.* Dated: April 3, 2007. By the Federal Housing Finance Board. Neil R. Crowley, Acting General Counsel. [FR Doc. 07-1739 Filed 4-4-07; 12:53 pm]

Connectionstraces to 14

Traces to 14 documents

U.S. Code