Notices. Proposed information collection; comment request

20,368 words·~93 min read·/register/2007/05/30/07-2637

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

BILLING CODE 3510-DT-M DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Request for Duty-Free Entry of Scientific Instrument or Apparatus ACTION: Proposed information collection; comment request. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burdens, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)).

DATES: Written comments must be submitted on or before July 30, 2007. ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments to Diana Hynek, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, Department of Commerce, Room 6625, 14th & Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230 or via internet at *dHynek@doc.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Request for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument and instructions should be directed to: Faye Robinson, Statutory Import Programs Staff, Room 2104, U.S.

Department of Commerce, Washington, DC 20230; phone number

(202)482-1660, fax number

(202)482-0949 or via the Internet at *Faye_Robinson@ita.doc.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Abstract The Departments of Commerce and Homeland Security (“DHS”) are required to determine whether nonprofit institutions established for scientific or educational purposes are entitled to duty-free entry for scientific instruments the institutions import under the Florence Agreement. Form ITA-338P enables:

(1)DHS to determine whether the statutory eligibility requirements for the institution and the instrument are fulfilled, and

(2)Commerce to make a comparison and finding as to the scientific equivalency of comparable instruments being manufactured in the United States. Without the collection of the information, DHS and Commerce would not have the necessary information to carry out the responsibilities of determining eligibility for duty-free entry assigned by law. II. Method of Collection A copy of Form ITA-338P is provided on and downloadable from a Web site at *http://ia.ita.doc.gov/sips/sipsfap* or the potential applicant may request a copy from the Department. The applicant completes the form and then forwards it via mail to DHS. Upon acceptance by DHS as a valid application, the application is transmitted to Commerce for further processing. III. Data *OMB Number:* 0625-0037. *Form Number:* ITA-338P. *Type of Review:* Regular submission. *Affected Public:* State or local government; Federal agencies; not for-profit institutions. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 65. *Estimated Time Per Response:* 2 hours. *Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:* 130. *Estimated Total Annual Costs:* $2,860. IV. Request for Comments Comments are invited on

(a)Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility;

(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden (including hours and costs) of the proposed collection of information;

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

(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or forms of information technology. Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection; they also will become a matter of public record. Dated: May 23, 2007. Gwellnar Banks, Management Analyst, Office of the Chief Information Officer. [FR Doc. E7-10340 Filed 5-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation in Part AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce has received requests to conduct administrative reviews of various antidumping and countervailing duty orders and findings with April anniversary dates. In accordance with the Department's regulations, we are initiating those administrative reviews. The Department of Commerce also received a request to revoke one antidumping duty order in part. EFFECTIVE DATE: May 30, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sheila E. Forbes, Office of AD/CVD Operations, Customs Unit, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230, telephone:

(202)482-4697. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The Department has received timely requests, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b)(2002), for administrative reviews of various antidumping and countervailing duty orders and findings with April anniversary dates. The Department also received timely requests to revoke in part the antidumping duty order on Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from Turkey with respect to four exporters. Initiation of Reviews: In accordance with section 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i), we are initiating administrative reviews of the following antidumping and countervailing duty orders and findings. We intend to issue the final results of these reviews not later than April 30, 2008. Antidumping Duty Proceedings Period to be Reviewed RUSSIA: Magnesium Metal A-821-819 4/1/06 - 3/31/07 PSC VSMPO-AVISMA Corporation Solikamsk Magnesium Works THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Automotive Replacement Glass Windshields 1 A-570-867 4/1/06 - 3/31/07 Shenzhen CSG Automotive Glass Co., Ltd. THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Brake Rotors 2 A-570-846 4/1/06 - 3/31/07 National Automotive Industry Import & Export Corporation or China National Automotive Industry Import & Export Corporation, and manufactured by any company other than Shandong Laizhou Capco Industry (“Laizhou CAPCO”) Laizhou CAPCO, and manufactured by any company other than Laizhou CAPCO Laizhou Luyuan Automobile Fittings Co., and manufactured by any company other than Laizhou Luyuan Automobile Fittings Co., or Shenyang Honbase Machinery Co., Ltd. Shenyang Honbase Machinery Co., Ltd., and manufactured by any company other than Laizhou Luyuan Automobile Fittings Co., or Shenayang Honbase Machinery Co., Ltd. China National Industrial Machinery Import & Export Corp. Laizhou Auto Brake Equipment Co., Ltd. Longkou Haimeng Machinery Co., Ltd. Qingdao Gren Co., aka Qingdao Gren (Group) Co. Yantai Winhere Auto-Part Manufacturing Co., Ltd. Zibo Luzhou Automobile Parts Co., Ltd. Laizhou Hongda Auto Replacement Parts Co., Ltd. Qingdao Meita Automotive Industry Co., Ltd. Longkou TLC Machinery Co., Ltd. Zibo Golden Harvest Machinery Limited Company Xianghe Xumingyuan Auto Parts Co. Laizhou City Luqi Machinery Co., Ltd., aka Laizhou Luqi Machinery Co., Ltd. Shenyang Yinghao Machinery Co., aka Shenyang Yinghao Machinery Co., Ltd. Longkou Jinzheng Machinery Co., Ltd. Dixion Brake System (Longkou) Ltd. Laizhou Wally Automobile Co., Ltd. Shanxi Zhongding Auto Parts Co., Ltd. Shangdong Huanri Group Company, successor-in-interest to Shangdong Huanri (Group) General Company Qingdao Golrich Autoparts Co., aka Qingdao Golrich Autoparts Co., Ltd. Longkou Qizheng Auto Parts Co., Ltd. THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Bars and Wedges 3 A-570-803 2/1/06 - 1/31/07 Truper Herramientas S.A. de C.V. THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Magnesium Metal 4 A-570-896 4/1/06 - 3/31/07 Tianjin Magnesium International Co., Ltd. THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA: Wooden Bedroom Furniture A-570-890 1/1/06 - 12/31/06 Country Roots Furniture Inc. 5 TURKEY: Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars A-489-807 4/1/06 - 3/31/07 Colakoglu Metalurji A.S. and Colokaglu Dis Ticaret A.S. Diler Demir Celik Endustri ve Ticaret A.S., Yazici Demir Celik Sanayi ve Turizm Ticaret A.S. and Diler Dis Ticaret A.S. Ege Celik Endustrisi Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S./Ege Dis Ticaret A.S. Ekinciler Dis Ticaret A.S. and Ekinciler Demir ve Celik Sanayi A.S. Izmir Demir Celik Sanayi A.S. Habas Sinai ve Tibbi Gazlar Istihsal Endustrisi A.S. Kaptan Demir Celik Endustrisi ve Ticaret A.S.and Kaptan Metal Dis Ticaret ve Nakliyat A.S. Kroman Celik Sanayii A.S. Nursan Celik Sanayi ve Haddecilik A.S. *Countervailing Duty Proceeding* None. *Suspension Agreements* None. 2 If one of the named companies does not qualify for a separate rate, all other exporters of brake rotors from the People's Republic of China who have not qualified for a separate rate are deemed to be covered by this review as part of the single PRC entity of which the named exporters are a part. 3 In the initiation notice that published on March 28, 2007 (72 FR 14517), the review period for the above referenced case was incorrect. The period listed above is the correct period of review for this case. 4 If one of the named companies does not qualify for a separate rate, all other exporters of magnesium metal from the People's Republic of China who have not qualified for a separate rate are deemed to be covered by this review as part of the single PRC entity of which the named exporters are a part. 5 The company listed for the above referenced case was inadvertently omitted from the initiation notice that published on March 7, 2007 (72 FR 10159). During any administrative review covering all or part of a period falling between the first and second or third and fourth anniversary of the publication of an antidumping duty order under section 351.211 or a determination under section 351.218(f)(4) to continue an order or suspended investigation (after sunset review), the Secretary, if requested by a domestic interested party within 30 days of the date of publication of the notice of initiation of the review, will determine, consistent with *FAG Italia v.United States* , 291 F.3d 806 (Fed. Cir. 2002), as appropriate, whether antidumping duties have been absorbed by an exporter or producer subject to the review if the subject merchandise is sold in the United States through an importer that is affiliated with such exporter or producer. The request must include the name(s) of the exporter or producer for which the inquiry is requested. Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under administrative protective orders in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. These initiations and this notice are in accordance with section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)), and 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i). Dated: May 23, 2007. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E7-10369 Filed 5-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-867] Certain Automotive Replacement Glass Windshields from The People's Republic of China: Notice of Decision of the Court of International Trade Not in Harmony AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On May 10, 2007, the United States Court of International Trade (“Court”) entered a final judgment sustaining the third remand results made by the Department of Commerce (“the Department”) pursuant to the Court's remand of the antidumping duty order on Certain Automotive Replacement Glass Windshields from the People's Republic of China (“PRC”) in Slip Op. 06-21 (CIT February 15, 2006). *See Fuyao Glass Industry Group Co. v. United States* , Ct. No. 02-00282, Slip Op. 06-21 (Ct. Int'l Trade May 10, 2007) (“ *Fuyao Glass* ”). This case arises out of the Department's *Antidumping Duty Order on Certain Automotive Replacement Glass Windshields from the People's Republic of China* , 67 FR 16087 (April 4, 2002) (“Order”). The final judgment in this case was not in harmony with the Department's *Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Automotive Replacement Glass Windshields From the People's Republic of China* , 67 FR 6482 (February 12, 2002) (“ *Final Determination* ”), and accompanying Issues and Decisions Memorandum (“ *Decision Memo* ”), as amended at 67 FR 11670 (March 15, 2002), covering the period of investigation (“POI”), July 1, 2000 through December 31, 2000. EFFECTIVE DATE: May 30, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Stolz, AD/CVD Operations, Office 8, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington DC 20230; telephone

(202)482-4474. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Plaintiffs, Fuyao Glass Industry Group Co., Ltd. (“Fuyao”) and Xinyi Automotive Glass Co., Ltd. (“Xinyi”), contested several aspects of the *Final Determination* , including the Department's decision to disregard certain market economy inputs. On February 15, 2006, the court remanded the Department's decision regarding certain market economy inputs to the Department. *See Fuyao Glass Industry Group Co., Ltd. v. United States* , Consol. Court No. 02-00282, 2006 Ct. Int'l Trade Lexis 21, Slip Op. 2006-21 (CIT February 15, 2006) (“ *Fuyao Glass III* ”). In its remand to the Department, the Court concluded with respect to the standard applied in the Department's analysis, that the Department must conduct its analysis “in accordance with the court's finding with respect to the use of the word 'are' rather than 'may be' when applying its subsidized price methodology.” *Fuyao Glass III* , Slip Op. P. 9. The Court further directed the Department to either

(1)“concur with the court's conclusions with respect to substantial evidence, or

(2)re-open the record . . .” *Fuyao Glass III* , Slip Op. p. 7. The Court concluded that it does not find the Department's determination, that prices from Korea and Indonesia are subsidized, is supported by substantial record evidence. *See Fuyao Glass III* , Slip Op. p. 16. Pursuant to the Court's ruling, and under respectful protest, the Department concurred that the record evidence does not contain substantial evidence to support a conclusion that prices from Korea and Indonesia are subsidized. *See Viraj Group v. United States* , 343 F.3d 1371, 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2003). Because the Court found that the evidence on the record does not support the Department's determination to disregard prices from Korea and Indonesia, in the remand results, the Department determined to calculate the dumping margin for Fuyao and Xinyi based upon prices the plaintiffs actually paid to suppliers located in Korea and Indonesia. Timken Notice In its decision in *Timken Co., v. United States* , 893 F.2d 337, 341 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (“ *Timken* ”), the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that, pursuant to section 516A(e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”), the Department must publish a notice of a court decision that is not “in harmony” with a Department determination. The Court's decision in *Fuyao Glass III* on May 10, 2007, constitutes a final decision of that court that is not in harmony with the Department's *Final Determination* . This notice is published in fulfillment of the publication requirements of *Timken* . Accordingly, the Department will issue revised instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection if the Court's decision is not appealed or if it is affirmed on appeal. This notice is issued and published in accordance with section 516A(c)(1) of the Act. Dated: May 21, 2007. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E7-10380 Filed 5-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-848] Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat from the People's Republic of China; Notice of Extension of Time Limit for the Preliminary Results of the 2005-2006 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and New Shipper Reviews AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: May 30, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melissa Blackledge or Jeff Pedersen, AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone:

(202)482-3518 and

(202)482-2769, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On October 30, 2006, the Department of Commerce (“Department”) published a notice of initiation of four new shipper reviews of the antidumping duty order on freshwater crawfish tail meat from the People's Republic of China (“PRC”). *See Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat From the People's Republic of China: Initiation of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Reviews* , 71 FR 63284 (October 30, 2006). On October 31, 2006, the Department published a notice of initiation of administrative review of the antidumping duty order on freshwater crawfish tail meat from the PRC. See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews, 71 FR 63752 (October 31, 2006). On March 23, 2007, the Department aligned the time limits in the new shipper reviews with the time limits in the administrative review. *See Freshwater Crawfish Tail Meat From the People's Republic of China: Notice of Postponement of Time Limits for New Shipper Antidumping Duty Reviews in Conjunction With Administrative Review* , 72 FR 13744 (March 23, 2007). The period of review is September 1, 2005, through August 31, 2006. The preliminary results of the administrative review and the new shipper reviews are currently due no later than June 2, 2007. Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results Pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“Act”), the Department shall make a preliminary determination in an administrative review of an antidumping order within 245 days after the last day of the anniversary month of the date of publication of the order. Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act further provides, however, that the Department may extend the 245-day period to 365 days if it determines it is not practicable to complete the review within the foregoing time period. The Department has determined that it is not practicable to complete the instant administrative review and the new shipper reviews within the time limits mandated by section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act because it requires additional time to analyze several complex sales reporting issues. Therefore, in accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act, the Department is extending the time period for completing the preliminary results of the instant administrative review and new shipper reviews until October 1, 2007, the first business day after the fully extended due date of September 30, 2007. The deadline for the final results of these reviews continues to be 120 days after the publication of the preliminary results. This extension notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(3)(A) and 777(i) of the Act. Dated: May 22, 2007. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E7-10365 Filed 5-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-428-830] Stainless Steel Bar from Germany; Preliminary Results of the Sunset Review of Antidumping Duty Order AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On February 1, 2007, the Department of Commerce (“the Department”) initiated a sunset review of the antidumping duty order on stainless steel bar from Germany. On the basis of the notice of intent to participate by domestic interested parties and adequate responses filed on behalf of the domestic and respondent interested parties, the Department is conducting a full sunset review of the antidumping duty order pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”) and section 351.218(e)(2)(i) of the Department's regulations. As a result of this sunset review, the Department preliminarily finds that revocation of the antidumping duty order would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping at the levels listed below in the section entitled “Preliminary Results of Review.” EFFECTIVE DATE: May 30, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Audrey R. Twyman or Brandon Farlander AD/CVD Operations, Office 1, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14 th Street & Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC, 20230; telephone: 202-482-3534 and 202-482-0182, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On February 1, 2007, the Department published its notice of initiation of the sunset review of the antidumping duty order on stainless steel bar (“SSB”) from Germany, in accordance with section 751(c) of the Act. *See Initiation of Five-year (“Sunset”) Reviews* , 72 FR 4689 (February 1, 2007). The Department received the Notice of Intent to Participate from Carpenter Technology Corp.; North American Stainless; Crucible Specialty Metals Division of Crucible Materials Corp.; Electralloy; Outokumpu Stainless Bar, Inc.; Universal Stainless & Alloy Products, Inc.; and Valbruna Slater Stainless, Inc. (collectively “the domestic interested parties”), within the deadline specified in section 351.218(d)(1)(i) of the Department's regulations. The domestic interested parties claimed interested party status under section 771(9)(C) of the Act, as manufacturers of a domestic-like product in the United States. We received a complete substantive response from the domestic interested parties within the 30-day deadline specified in 19 CFR 351.218(d)(3)(i). We received a response from respondent interested parties in Germany; BGH Edelstahl Freital GmbH, BGH Edelstahl Lippendorf GmbH, BGH Edelstahl Lugau GmbH, and BGH Edelstahl Siegen GmbH (collectively “BGH” or “the respondent interested parties”). We found this response to be adequate because BGH accounted for more than 50 percent of the exports of subject merchandise from Germany to the United States during the sunset review period (January 1, 2002 through December 31, 2006). *See* Memorandum to Susan H. Kuhbach entitled, “Adequacy Determination in Antidumping Duty Sunset Review of Stainless Steel Bar from Germany,” (March 23, 2007). Therefore, we are conducting a full sunset review of the antidumping duty order on SSB from Germany as provided for at section 751(c)(5)(A) of the Act, and at 19 CFR 351.218(e)(2)(i). Scope of the Order For the purposes of this order, the term “stainless steel bar” includes articles of stainless steel in straight lengths that have been either hot-rolled, forged, turned, cold-drawn, cold-rolled or otherwise cold-finished, or ground, having a uniform solid cross section along their whole length in the shape of circles, segments of circles, ovals, rectangles (including squares), triangles, hexagons, octagons, or other convex polygons. Stainless steel bar includes cold-finished stainless steel bars that are turned or ground in straight lengths, whether produced from hot-rolled bar or from straightened and cut rod or wire, and reinforcing bars that have indentations, ribs, grooves, or other deformations produced during the rolling process. Except as specified above, the term does not include stainless steel semi-finished products, cut length flat-rolled products ( *i.e.* , cut length rolled products which if less than 4.75 mm in thickness have a width measuring at least 10 times the thickness, or if 4.75 mm or more in thickness having a width which exceeds 150 mm and measures at least twice the thickness), products that have been cut from stainless steel sheet, strip or plate, wire ( *i.e.* , cold-formed products in coils, of any uniform solid cross section along their whole length, which do not conform to the definition of flat-rolled products), and angles, shapes and sections. The stainless steel bar subject to this review is currently classifiable under subheadings 7222.11.00.05, 7222.11.00.50, 7222.19.00.05, 7222.19.00.50, 7222.20.00.05, 7222.20.00.45, 7222.20.00.75, and 7222.30.00.00 of the *Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States* (“HTSUS”). Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope of the order is dispositive. Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in this sunset review are addressed in the “Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Sunset Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Stainless Steel Bar from Germany; Preliminary Results” (“Decision Memo”) from Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, to David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, dated May 22, 2007, which is hereby adopted by this notice. The issues discussed in the Decision Memo include the likelihood of continuation or recurrence of dumping and the magnitude of the margin likely to prevail if the antidumping duty order was revoked. Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in this sunset review and the corresponding recommendations in this public memo, which is on file in room B-099 of the main Commerce Department Building. In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memo can be accessed directly on the Web at *http://ia.ita.doc.gov/frn* , under the heading “May 2007.” The paper copy and electronic version of the Decision Memo are identical in content. Preliminary Results of Review The Department preliminarily determines that revocation of the antidumping duty order on SSB from Germany is likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping at the following weighted-average margins: Manufacturers/Producers/Exporters Weighted-Average Margin (Percent) BGH Edelstahl Seigen GmbH / BGH Edelstahl Freital GmbH 0.73 Edelstahl Witten-Krefeld GmbH 10.82, as amended Krupp Edelstahlprofile 31.25, as amended All Others 15.16, as amended Any interested party may request a hearing within 30 days of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR 351.310(c). Interested parties may submit case briefs no later than 30 days after the date of publication of this notice, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.309(c)(1)(i). Rebuttal briefs, which must be limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may be filed no later than 5 days after the case briefs, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.309(d)(1). Any hearing, if requested, will be held two days after rebuttal briefs are due, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.310(d)(1). The Department will issue a notice of final results of this sunset review, which will include the results of its analysis of issues raised in any such briefs, no later than September 29, 2007. This five-year (“sunset”) review and notice are in accordance with sections 751(c), 752,and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: May 22, 2007. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E7-10367 Filed 5-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration U.S. Electronic Education Fairs for China and India AGENCY: International Trade Administration. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: U.S. accredited colleges and universities are invited to sponsor the U.S. Electronic Education Fairs for China and India by purchasing space on the corresponding internet landing pages. DATES: Applications will be accepted from May 31, 2007 until 3 p.m. EDT August 27, 2007. The initiative is scheduled to commence on or around September 15, 2007. ADDRESSES: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Moll, U.S. Department of Commerce. Tel:

(248)508 8404; Keith Roth, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 1104. Tel:

(202)482 5012; David Long, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 1104. Tel:

(202)482 3575. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The U.S. Electronic Education Fairs for China and India are part of a joint initiative between the U.S. Department of Commerce and the U.S. Department of State. The purpose of the initiative is to inform Chinese and Indian students who are interested in studying outside of their home countries about the breadth and depth of the higher education opportunities available in the United States. The initiative utilizes a three-pronged multimedia approach through the Internet, on-ground activities, and television, including two, twenty-three minute TV programs and a series of short, 1-2 minute programs airing on local cable and national satellite TV stations throughout China and India. All programming directs viewers to the corresponding Internet landing page. DVDs distributed through education trade fairs and EducationUSA advising centers throughout China and India will further this message. Accredited U.S. educational institutions are invited to sponsor the China and India Internet landing pages. Sponsorships for China OR India will be available in Gold and Silver categories. Institutions that purchase Gold Sponsorship, priced at $8,000, will receive a banner-sized ad with their school's logo and name which will link to their institution's Web site. Institutions that purchase Silver Sponsorship, priced at $3,000, will have their name listed on the site with a link to their institution's Web site. If an institution would like to sponsor and purchase space on both the China and India Internet landing pages, they will receive a 50 percent discount for the second sponsorship, for a total of $12,000 for Gold and $4,500 for Silver. Applications by qualifying institutions will be selected on a rolling basis, capacity permitting. Dated: May 24, 2007. David F. Long, Director, Office of Service Industries. [FR Doc. E7-10396 Filed 5-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DR-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Article 1904 Binational Panel Reviews: Notice of Consent Motion To Terminate Panel Review AGENCY: NAFTA Secretariat, United States Section, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. ACTION: Notice of Consent Motion to Terminate Panel Review of the Final Results of the 2nd Antidumping Duty Administrative Review made by the International Trade Administration, respecting Certain Softwood Lumber from Canada (Secretariat File No. USA-CDA-2006-1904-01). SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Notice of Consent Motion to Terminate the Panel Review by the case participants, the panel review is terminated as of May 22, 2007. Pursuant to Rule 71(2) of the *Rules of Procedure for Article 1904 Binational Panel Review,* this panel review is terminated. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Caratina L. Alston, United States Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat, Suite 2061, 14th and Constitution Avenue, Washington, DC 20230,

(202)482-5438. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Chapter 19 of the North American Free -Trade Agreement (“Agreement”) establishes a mechanism to replace domestic judicial review of final determinations in antidumping and countervailing duty cases involving imports from a NAFTA country with review by independent binational panels. When a Request for Panel Review is filed, a panel is established to act in place of national courts to review expeditiously the final determination to determine whether it conforms with the antidumping or countervailing duty law of the country that made the determination. Under Article 1904 of the Agreement, which came into force on January 1, 1994, the Government of the United States, the Government of Canada and the Government of Mexico established *Rules of Procedure for Article 1904 Binational Panel Reviews* (“Rules”). These Rules were published in the **Federal Register** on February 23, 1994 (59 FR 8686). The panel review in this matter was requested and terminated pursuant to these Rules. Dated: May 23, 2007. Caratina L. Alston, United States Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat. [FR Doc. E7-10285 Filed 5-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-GT-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [Docket No. 070516104-7104-01; I.D. 042607C] Endangered and Threatened Species; 90-Day Finding for a Petition To List the Global Populations of Right Whales as a Single Species AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition finding. SUMMARY: We, NMFS, announce a 90-day finding regarding a petition to list the global populations of right whales with the common name Black Whale as a single species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA). This action is required by section 4(b)(3)(A) of the ESA. After review, we find the petition does not present substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted. DATES: This finding is effective immediately. ADDRESSES: Copies of the petition are available upon request from the Division Chief, NMFS, Office of Protected Resources, Endangered Species Division, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910-3226. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marta Nammack, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910-3226, telephone (301)713-1401. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On March 8, 2007, we received a petition from GreenWorld to list the global populations of right whales as a single species with the common name Black Whale under the ESA. Copies of this petition are available from NMFS (see ADDRESSES , above). GreenWorld filed the petition following two proposed rules published by NMFS on December 27, 2006, to list the North Pacific Right Whale (71 FR 77694; December 27, 2006) and the North Atlantic Right Whale (71 FR 77704; December 27, 2006) as separate endangered species. ESA Statutory Provisions Pursuant to section 4(b)(3)(A) of the ESA, we are required to make a finding on whether a petition to list, delist, or reclassify a species presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted. To the maximum extent practicable, this finding must be made within 90 days of receipt of the petition. Our ESA implementing regulations define “substantial information” as the amount of information that would lead a reasonable person to believe that the measure proposed in the petition may be warranted. In determining whether a petition contains substantial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted, we consider only information that is submitted with or referenced in the petition or readily available in our files. We do not conduct additional research. In making a finding, we consider whether the petition:

(i)clearly indicates the administrative measure recommended and gives the scientific and any common name of the species involved;

(ii)contains detailed narrative justification for the recommended measure, describing, based on available information, past and present numbers and distribution of the species involved and any threats faced by the species;

(iii)provides information regarding the status of the species throughout all or a significant portion of its range; and

(iv)is accompanied by the appropriate supporting documentation in the form of bibliographic references, reprints of pertinent publications, copies of reports or letters from authorities, and maps (50 CFR 424.14(b)(2)). Analysis of Petition For the reasons set forth below, the petition fails to present substantial scientific and commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted. First, the petitioner fails to identify the scientific name of the species and provides no documentation or bibliographic references supporting the assertion that the global populations of right whales should be listed as a single species. The petitioner claims there is no scientific basis for listing the northern right whale as two species and that NMFS has offered no analysis of this listing in the **Federal Register** . However, information readily available in our files indicates that the best available science supports distinguishing the North Atlantic right whale ( *Eubalaena glacialis* ), North Pacific right whale ( *Eubalaena japonica* ), and southern right whale ( *Eubalaena australis* ) as three separate species (Rosenbaum *et al.* , 2000; Malik *et al.* , 2000; Schaeff *et al.* , 1997; Gaines *et al.* , 2005). Further, in 2000 the International Whaling Commission's Scientific Committee recommended the North Atlantic, North Pacific, and southern populations be considered separate species based on the prevailing right whale taxonomy. Lastly, in 2006 we completed a comprehensive status review of the northern right whale and concluded the northern right whale exists as two separate species, the North Atlantic right whale ( *E. glacialis* ) and the North Pacific right whale ( *E. japonica* ) (NMFS, 2006). We cited this report in the **Federal Register** in our proposed rules to list the North Pacific right whale (71 FR 77694; December 27, 2006) and North Atlantic right whale (71 FR 77704; December 27, 2006) as endangered under the ESA. A copy of the status review is also available at *http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/mammals/cetaceans/rightwhale_northern.htm* . Second, the petitioner provides no information regarding the past and present abundance, distribution, and threats faced by the species in support of the assertion that the global populations of right whales should be listed as a single species. Information readily available in our files regarding the past and present abundance, distribution, and threats faced by the right whales supports the listing of three separate species. Our comprehensive review of the information regarding the past and present abundance, distribution, and threats in the 2006 northern right whale review (NMFS, 2006) also supports the listing of three separate species. Third, the petitioner provides no information regarding the status of the species throughout all or a significant portion of its range to indicate the global populations of right whales should be listed as a single species. Information readily available in our files regarding the status of right whales supports the listing of three separate species as endangered. Our comprehensive review of the information regarding the status of right whales in the 2006 northern right whale review (NMFS, 2006) also supports the listing of three separate species. Petition Finding Based on our review, we find the petition does not present substantial scientific or commercial information indicating the listing of the global populations of right whales as a single species may be warranted. As a result, we will not initiate a status review to determine whether the petitioned action is warranted. We will continue to fulfill our statutory obligations with regard to the conservation of all listed species of right whales, and we encourage the public to submit new information that will assist with these conservation efforts. References Cited A complete list of all references is available upon request from the Office of Protected Resources (see ADDRESSES ). Authority: The authority for this action is the ESA, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 *et seq.* ). Dated: May 22, 2007. Samuel D. Rauch III, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E7-10274 Filed 5-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [I.D. 021607A] Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental to Conducting Air-to-Surface Gunnery Missions in the Gulf of Mexico AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice of proposed issuance of an incidental take authorization; request for comments and information. SUMMARY: NMFS has received a request from Eglin Air Force Base (Eglin AFB), for renewal of an authorization to harass marine mammals, incidental to conducting air-to-surface (A-S) gunnery missions in the Gulf of Mexico (GOM). As a result of this request, NMFS is proposing to reissue a 1-year authorization to take marine mammals by Level B harassment incidental to this activity. Under the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is requesting comments on its proposal to issue an authorization to Eglin AFB to incidentally take, by harassment, several species of cetaceans for a period of 1 year. DATES: Comments and information must be postmarked no later than June 29, 2007. ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to Michael Payne, Chief, Permits, Conservation and Education Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910-3226. The mailbox address for providing email comments on this action is *PR1.021607A@noaa.gov* . Comments sent via email, including all attachments, must not exceed a 10-megabyte file size. A copy of Eglin's original 2003 application and its December, 2006 letter updating its request may be obtained by writing to this address, by telephoning the contact listed here (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT ) and is also available at: *http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/prot_res/PR2/Small_Take/* *smalltake_info.htm#applications* . A copy of the Final Programmatic Environmental Assessment (Final PEA) is available by writing to the Department of the Air Force, AAC/EMSN, Natural Resources Branch, 501 DeLeon St., Suite 101, Eglin AFB, FL 32542-5133. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kenneth R. Hollingshead, NMFS, 301-713-2289, ext 128. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and 101(a)(5)(D) of the Marine Mammal Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 1361 *et seq.* )(MMPA) direct the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) to allow, upon request, the incidental, but not intentional taking of marine mammals by U.S. citizens who engage in a specified activity (other than commercial fishing) within a specified geographical region if certain findings are made and regulations are issued or, if the taking is limited to harassment, a notice of a proposed authorization is provided to the public for review. Permission may be granted if NMFS finds that the taking will have a negligible impact on the species or stock(s), will not (where relevant) have an unmitigable adverse impact on the availability of the species or stock(s) for subsistence uses, and if the permissible methods of taking and requirements pertaining to the mitigation, monitoring and reporting of such takings are set forth. NMFS has defined “negligible impact” in 50 CFR 216.103 as ”...an impact resulting from the specified activity that cannot be reasonably expected to, and is not reasonably likely to, adversely affect the species or stock through effects on annual rates of recruitment or survival.” Subsection 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA established an expedited process by which citizens of the United States can apply for an authorization to incidentally take marine mammals by harassment. For the purposes of “military readiness activities” harassment is defined as:

(i)any act that injures or has the significant potential to injure a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild [Level A harassment]; or

(ii)any act that disturbs or is likely to disturb a marine mammal or marine mammal stock in the wild by causing disruption of natural behavioral patterns, including, but not limited to, migration, surfacing, nursing, breeding, feeding, or sheltering, to a point where such behavioral patterns are abandoned or significantly altered [Level B harassment]. Summary of Request Eglin AFB originally petitioned NMFS on February 13, 2003, as a precautionary measure, for an authorization under section 101(a)(5) of the MMPA for the taking, by harassment, of marine mammals incidental to programmatic mission activities within the Eglin Gulf Test and Training Range (EGTTR). The EGTTR is described as the airspace over the GOM that is controlled by Eglin AFB. A notice of receipt of Eglin's application and proposed IHA and request for 30-day public comment was published on January 23, 2006 (71 FR 3474). A 1-year IHA was subsequently issued to Eglin AFB for this activity on May 3, 2006 (71 FR 27695, May 12, 2006). A description of Eglin AFB's A-S gunnery activity follows. Description of Activities A-S gunnery missions, a “military readiness activity,” involve surface impacts of projectiles and small underwater detonations with the potential to affect cetaceans that may occur within the EGTTR. These missions typically involve the use of 25-mm (0.98 in), 40-mm (1.57 in), and 105-mm (4.13 in) gunnery rounds containing, 0.0662 lb (1.1 oz 30 g), 0.865 lb (13.8 oz, 392 g), and 4.7 lbs (2.1 kg) of explosive, respectively. Live rounds must be used to produce a visible surface splash that must be used to “score” the round; the impact of inert rounds on the sea surface would not be detected. The Air Force has developed a 105-mm training round

(TR)that contains less than 10 percent of the amount of explosive material (0.35 lb; 0.16 kg) as compared to the “Full-Up”

(FU)105-mm (4.13 in) round. The TR was developed as one method to mitigate effects on marine life during night-time A/S gunnery exercises when visibility at the water surface would be poor. However, the TR cannot be used in daytime since the amount of explosive material is insufficient to be detected from the aircraft. Water ranges within the EGTTR that are typically used for the gunnery operations are located in the GOM offshore from the Florida Panhandle (areas W-151A, W-151B, W-151C, and W-151D as shown in Figure 1 in Eglin's 2003 application). Data indicate that W-151A is the most frequently used water range due to its proximity to Hurlburt Field, but activities may occur anywhere within the EGTTR. The AC-130 gunship aircraft normally transit from Hurlburt Field, FL to the water range at a minimum of 4,000 ft (1.2 km) above surface level. The AC-130 conducts at least two complete orbits at a minimum safe airspeed around a prospective target area at a maximum altitude of 1,500 ft (457 m), with a NMFS recommended to an operational altitude of approximately 4,500 to 10,000 ft (1372-3048 m). Ascent occurs over a 10-15 minute period. Eglin AFB has noted that the search area for these orbits ensures that no vessels (or protected species) are within an area of 5 nm (9.3 km) of the target. The AC-130 continues orbiting the selected target point as it climbs to the mission-testing altitude. During the low altitude orbits and the climb to testing altitude, aircraft crew visually scan the sea surface within the aircraft's orbit circle for the presence of vessels and protected species. Primary responsibility for the surface scan is on the flight crew in the cockpit and personnel stationed in the tail observer bubble and starboard viewing window. The AC-130's optical and electronic sensors are also employed for target clearance. If any marine mammals are detected within the AC-130's orbit circle, either during initial clearance or after commencement of live firing, the aircraft will relocate to another target area and repeat the clearance procedures. A typical distance from the coast for this activity is at least 15 mi (24 km). When offshore, the crews can scan a 5-nm (9.3-km) radius around the potential impact area to ensure it is clear of surface craft, marine mammals, and sea turtles. Scanning is accomplished using radar, all-light television (TV), infrared sensors (IR), and visual means. An alternative area would be selected if any cetaceans or vessels were detected within a 5-nm (9.3 km) search area. Once the scan is completed, Mk-25 flares are dropped and the firing sequence is initiated. A typical gunship mission lasts approximately 5 hours without refueling and 6 hours when air-to-air refueling is accomplished. A typical mission includes:

(1)30 minutes for take off and to perform airborne sensor alignment, align electro-optical sensors (IR and TV) to heads-up display;

(2)1.5 to 2 hours of dry fire (no ordnance expended), and includes transition time;

(3)1.5 to 2 hours of live fire, and includes clearing the area and transiting to and from the range (actual firing activities typically do not exceed 30 minutes);

(4)1 hour air-to-air refueling, if and when performed; and

(5)30 minutes of transition work (take-offs, approaches, and landings-pattern work). The guns are fired during the live-fire phase of the mission. The actual firing can last from 30 minutes to 1.5 hours but is typically completed in 30 minutes. The number and type of A-S gunnery munitions deployed during a mission varies with each type of mission flown. In addition to the 25-, 40-, and 105-mm rounds, marking flares are also deployed as targets. All guns are fired at a specific target in the water, usually an Mk-25 flare, starting with the lowest caliber ordnance or action with the least impact and proceeding to greater caliber sizes. To establish the test target area, two Mk-25 flares are deployed into the center of the 5-nm (9.3-km) radius cleared area (visually clear of aircraft, ships, and surface marine species) on the water's surface. The flare's burn time normally lasts 10 to 20 minutes but could be much less if actually hit with one of the ordnance projectiles; however, some flares have burned as long as 40 minutes. Live fires are a continuous event with pauses during the firing usually well under a minute and rarely from 2 to 5 minutes. Firing pauses would only exceed 10 minutes if surface boat traffic or marine protected species caused the mission to relocate; if aircraft, gun, or targeting system problems existed; or if more flares needed to be deployed. The Eglin Safety Office has described the gunnery missions as having 95-percent containment with a 99-percent confidence level within a 5-m (16.4-ft) area around the established flare target test area. Live-fire Event: 25-mm Round The 25-mm (0.98-in) firing event in a typical mission includes approximately 500 to 1000 rounds. These rounds are first in short bursts. These bursts last approximately 2-3 seconds with approximately 100 rounds per burst. Based on the very tight target area and extremely small miss distance, these bursts of rounds all enter the water within a 5-m (16.4-ft) area. Therefore, when calculations of the marine mammal Zone of Impact

(ZOI)and take estimates are made later in this document for the 25-mm rounds, calculations will be based on the total number of rounds fired per year divided by 100. Live-fire Event: 40-mm Round The 40-mm (1.57 in) firing event of a typical mission includes approximately 10 seconds with approximately 20 rounds per burst. Based on the very tight target area and extremely small “miss” distance, these bursts of rounds all enter the water within a 5-m (16.4 ft) area. Therefore, when calculations of the marine mammal ZOI and take estimates are made later in this document for the 40-mm rounds, calculations will be based on the total number of rounds fired per year divided by 20. Live-fire Event: 105-mm Round The 105-mm firing event of a typical mission includes approximately 20 rounds. These rounds are not fired in bursts, but as single shots. The 105-mm firing event lasts approximately 5 minutes with approximately two rounds per minute. Due to the single firing event of the 105-mm round, the peak pressure of each single 105-mm round is measured at a given distance (90 m (295 ft)) for the 105mm TR and 216 m (709 ft) for the 105mm FU). As described in Eglin's 2003 application, gunnery testing in this request includes historical baseline yearly amounts in addition to proposed nighttime gunnery missions. Daytime gunnery testing uses the 105-mm FU round and nighttime gunnery training is proposed using the 105-mm TR. The number of 105-mm rounds including nighttime operations would amount to 1,742. As shown in detail in Tables 1 and 2 (see 71 FR 27695, May 12, 2006), Eglin proposes to conduct a total of 28 daytime missions and 263 nighttime missions annually, expending 3,832 rounds in daytime and 30,802 rounds nighttime (242 105-mm FU and 1,500 rounds would be the 105-mm TR). Description of Marine Mammals Affected by the Activity There are 29 species of marine mammals documented as occurring in Federal waters of the GOM. General information on these species can be found in Wursig et al.

(2000)and in the NMFS Stock Assessment Reports (Waring et al., 2007). This latter document is available at: *http://www.nefsc.noaa.gov/nefsc/publications/tm/tm201/* Of these 29 species of marine mammals, approximately 21 may be found within the EGTTR. These species are the Bryde's whale, sperm whale, dwarf sperm whale, pygmy sperm whale, Atlantic bottlenose dolphin, Atlantic spotted dolphin, pan-tropical spotted dolphin, Blainville's beaked whale, Cuvier's beaked whale, Gervais' beaked whale, Clymene dolphin, spinner dolphin, striped dolphin, killer whale, false killer whale, pygmy killer whales, Risso's dolphin, Fraser's dolphin, melon-headed whale, rough-toothed dolphin, and pilot whale. Supplementary information on those species that may be impacted by the A/S gunnery exercises are discussed in the Eglin application (Eglin AFB, 2003) and the Eglin's Final PEA. Potential Impacts to Marine Mammals A/S gunnery operations may potentially impact marine mammals at the water surface. Marine mammals could potentially be harassed, injured or killed by exploding and non-exploding projectiles, and falling debris (Eglin, 2002 (Final PEA)). However, based on analyses provided in the Eglin Final PEA and in Eglin's Supplemental Information Request (2003)), NMFS concurs with Eglin that gunnery exercises are not likely to result in any injury or mortality to marine mammals. Explosive criteria and thresholds for assessing impacts of explosions on marine mammals were discussed by NMFS in detail in its issuance of an IHA for Eglin's Precision Strike Weapon testing activity (70 FR 48675, August 19, 2005) and are not repeated here. Please refer to that document for this background information. Estimation of Take and Impact Direct Physical Impacts

(DPI)Potential impacts resulting from air-to-surface test operations include DPI resulting from ordnance. DPI could result from inert bombs, gunnery ammunition, and shrapnel from live missiles falling into the water. Marine mammals and sea turtles swimming at the surface could potentially be injured or killed by projectiles and falling debris if not sighted and firing discontinued. Small arms gunnery operations may offer a worst case scenario for evaluating DPI of EGTTR operations, mainly due to the comparatively large number of rounds expended. Some contain small amounts of explosives, but the majority do not. The assumptions made by Eglin for DPI calculations can be found in Eglin's Final PEA under Alternative 1 for this action. Approximately 606 small-arms gunnery firing events comprise the estimated level of potential DPI events, as shown in Table 4 in the **Federal Register** notice for the previous IHA on this action (71 FR 27695, May 12, 2006). DPI impacts are anticipated to affect only marine species at or very near the ocean surface. As a result, to calculate impacts, Eglin used corrected species densities (Table 4-23 in Eglin's Final PEA) to reflect the surface interval population, which is approximately 10 percent of densities calculated for distribution in the total water column. As shown in Table 5 in the **Federal Register** notice for the previous IHA on this action (71 FR 27695, May 12, 2006) and correcting PEA Table 4-23), the impacts to marine mammals and sea turtles at the surface that could potentially be injured or killed by projectiles and falling debris was determined to be very low, and mitigation measures that Eglin will employ under this action would reduce even these low levels. In addition to small arms, Eglin calculated the potential for other non-explosive items (inert bombs, missiles, and drones) to impact marine mammals and sea turtles. The number of annual events expected are 551 bombs, 1183 missiles, and 99 drones (Table 6). As shown in Eglin's Final PEA and Table 7 in the **Federal Register** notice for the previous IHA on this action (71 FR 27695, May 12, 2006), the potential for any DPI to marine mammals and sea turtles is extremely remote and can, therefore, be discounted. Similar to non-gunnery/non-small arms DPI impacts, DPI impacts from gunnery activities may also affect marine mammals and sea turtles in the surface zone. Again, DPI impacts are anticipated to affect only marine species at or near the ocean surface. Tables 8 and 9 in the **Federal Register** notice for the previous IHA on this action (71 FR 27695, May 12, 2006) demonstrate that the potential for any DPI from gunnery activities are extremely remote and can be discounted. Marine Mammal Take Estimates from Gunnery Activities Estimating the impacts to marine mammals from underwater detonations is difficult due to complexities of the physics of explosive sound under water and the limited understanding with respect to hearing in marine mammals. Detailed assessments were made in the notice for the previous IHA on this action (71 FR 27695, May 12, 2006) and in this **Federal Register** notice. These assessments used, and improved upon, the criteria and thresholds for marine mammal impacts that were developed for the shock trials of the *USS SEAWOLF* submarine and the destroyer *USS Winston S. Churchill* (DDG-81) (Navy, 1998; 2001). The criteria and thresholds used in those actions were adopted by NMFS for use in calculating incidental takes from explosives. Criteria for assessing impacts include:

(1)Mortality, as determined by exposure to a certain level of positive impulse pressure (expressed as pounds per square inch per millisecond or psi-msec);

(2)injury, both hearing-related and non-hearing related; and

(3)harassment, as determined by a temporary loss of some hearing ability and behavioral reactions. Due to the small amounts of net explosive weight for each of the rounds fired in the EGTTR and the mitigation measures, mortality resulting from sounds generated in the water column was determined to be highly unlikely and was not considered further by Eglin AFB or NMFS. Criteria and methods for calculation for permanent and temporary threshold shift and Level B harassment (behavioral response) to noise from the air-to-surface gunnery exercises was provided by NMFS in detail in its **Federal Register** notices on the previous IHA for this action (71 FR 3474 (January 23, 2006), 71 FR 27695 (May 12, 2006). Criteria for assessing impacts include:

(1)mortality, as determined by exposure to a certain level of positive impulse pressure (expressed as pounds per square inch per millisecond or psi-msec);

(2)injury, both hearing-related and non-hearing related; and

(3)harassment, as determined by a temporary loss of some hearing ability and behavioral reactions. Due to the small amounts of net explosive weight

(NEW)for each of the rounds fired in the EGTTR and the mitigation measures, mortality resulting from sounds generated in the water column was determined to be highly unlikely and is not considered further. Permanent hearing loss is considered an injury and is termed permanent threshold shift (PTS). NMFS, therefore, categorizes PTS as Level A harassment. Temporary loss of hearing ability is termed a temporary threshold shift (TTS), meaning a temporary reduction of hearing sensitivity which abates following noise exposure. TTS is considered non-injurious and is categorized as a Level B type of harassment. NMFS recognizes dual criteria for TTS, one based on peak pressure and one based on the greatest 1/3 octave sound exposure level

(SEL)or energy flux density level (EFDL), with the more conservative (i.e., larger) of the two criteria being selected for impacts analysis (note: SEL and EFDL are used interchangeably, but with increasing scientific preference for SEL). The peak pressure metric used in the shock trials to represent TTS was 12 pounds per square inch

(psi)which, for the NEW used, resulted in a zone of possible Level B harassment approximately equal to that obtained by using a 182 decibel

(dB)re 1 microPa 2 -s, total EFDL/SEL metric. The 12-psi metric is largely based on anatomical studies and extrapolations from terrestrial mammal data (see Ketten, 1995; Navy, 1999 (Appendix E, *Churchill* FEIS; and 70 FR 48675 (August 19, 2005)) for background information). However, the results of a more recent investigation involving marine mammals suggest that, for charges considerably smaller than those used in the Navy shock trials, the 12-psi metric is not an adequate predictor of the onset of TTS. Finneran *et al* .

(2002)measured TTS in a bottlenose dolphin and a beluga whale exposed to single underwater impulses produced by a seismic water gun in San Diego Bay. The water gun was chosen over other seismic sources, such as air guns, because the impulses contain more energy at high frequencies where odontocete hearing thresholds are relatively low (i.e., more sensitive). Hearing thresholds were measured at 0.4, 4, and 30 kilohertz (kHz). A relatively small and short-term level of masked TTS (MTTS)(7 dB at 0.4 kHz and 6 dB at 30 kHz) occurred in the beluga whale at a peak pressure of 160 kilopascals (kPa), which is equivalent to 23 psi, 226 dB re 1 micro Pa peak-peak pressure, and 186 dB re 1 microPa 2 -s. The maximum experimental peak pressure exposure of 207 kPa (30 psi, 228 dB re 1 microPa peak-peak pressure, 188 dB re 1 microPa 2 -s) did not cause any measurable masked TTS in the bottlenose dolphin. The results of these field experiments represent the most current science available for the relationship between peak pressure and TTS in marine mammals. It is also considered precautionary for this project since the bottlenose dolphin did not incur an MTTS at the higher level of 30 psi. Therefore, until additional information becomes available, 23 psi is considered an appropriate and conservative metric for predicting the onset of pressure-related TTS from small explosive charges. Documented behavioral reactions occur at noise levels below those considered to cause TTS in marine mammals (Finneran *et al* ., 2002; Schlundt *et al* ., 2000; Finneran and Schlundt, 2004). In controlled experimental situations, behavioral effects are typically defined as alterations of trained behaviors. Behavioral effects in wild animals are more difficult to define but may include decreased ability to feed, communicate, migrate, or reproduce. Abandonment of an area due to repeated noise exposure is also considered a behavioral effect. Analyses in subsequent sections of this document refer to such behavioral effects as “sub-TTS Level B harassment.” Schlundt *et al* .

(2000)exposed bottlenose dolphins and beluga whales to various pure-tone sound frequencies and intensities in order to measure underwater hearing thresholds. Masking is considered to have occurred because of ambient noise environment in which the experiments took place. Sound levels were progressively increased until behavioral alterations were noted (at which point the onset of TTS was presumed). It was found that decreasing the sound intensity by 4 to 6 dB greatly decreased the occurrence of anomalous behaviors. The lowest sound pressure levels, over all frequencies, at which altered behaviors were observed, ranged from 178 to 193 dB re 1 micro Pa for the bottlenose dolphins and from 180 to 196 dB re 1 micro Pa for the beluga whales. Thus, it is reasonable to consider that sub-TTS (behavioral) effects occur at approximately 6 dB below the TTS-inducing sound level, or at approximately 176 dB in the greatest 1/3 octave band EFDL/SEL. Table 10 in the **Federal Register** notice for the previous IHA on this action (71 FR 27695, May 12, 2006) summarizes the relevant thresholds for levels of noise that may result in injury, TTS or behavioral harassment to marine mammals. Mortality and injury thresholds are designed to be conservative by considering the impacts that would occur to the most sensitive life stage (e.g., a dolphin calf). Table 11 published in the **Federal Register** notice for the previous IHA on this action (71 FR 27695, May 12, 2006) provides the estimated ZOI radii for the EGTTR ordnance. At this time, there is no empirical data or information that would allow NMFS to establish a peak pressure criterion for sub-TTS behavioral disruption. As mentioned previously, the EGTTR live fire events are continuous events with pauses during the firing usually well under a minute and rarely from 2 to 5 minutes. Live fire typically occurs within a 30 minute time frame, including all ordnance fired: 25-mm (Phase I), 40-mm (Phase II), and 105-mm (Phase III), and where the 105-mm ordnance are fired as separate rounds with up to 30-second intervals, the 25-mm and the 40-mm are often fired in multiple bursts. These burst include multiple rounds (25 to 100) within a 10- to 20-second time frame. Eglin notes that even if animal avoidance once firing commences is not considered, an average swim speed (1.5 m/s) of animals would not allow sufficient time for new animals to re-enter the Level B harassment ZOI (23 psi) within the time frame of a single burst. As such, only the peak pressure of a single round is measured per burst and experienced at a given distance (49 m (161 ft; Phase I), 122 m (400 ft; Phase II)). For daytime firing it is assumed that the average swim speed per cetacean is approximately 3 knots or 1.5 m/sec. As a conservative scenario, Eglin assumes that there is one animal present within or near the 216-m ZOI (FU 105-mm round ZOI) which may be potentially ensonified within the 23-psi TTS exposure at the time that the 105-mm live firing begins. Density distributions have assumed an even distribution of approximately 4.38 animals/km2 or approximately 500 m (1640 ft) apart (all species) for the analyses for take estimates. At this density distribution and typical swim speed, the next available cetacean would approach the perimeter of the 216-m (709 ft) ZOI (23-psi TTS ZOI) in approximately 5.5 minutes, assuming a straight line path. With live fire events of the 105-mm occurring at a rate of approximately 2 rounds per minute, nearly one half (or 10 rounds) of the total 105-mm rounds (20 rounds) would potentially be expended within this 5.5 minute time frame. If the concept of marine mammal avoidance of an area once firing commences is not considered, an average swim speed of 1.5 m/s (4.9 f/s) would allow sufficient time for new animals to re-enter the 23-psi TTS impact area. Allowing for a potential 2 minute break in firing after 10 rounds are expended, it is, therefore, conservative and reasonable to assume that nearly 3 to 4 individual animals could be exposed to the 23-psi TTS sound level during a typical 20 round firing event. Therefore, the ZOI and Level B harassment take estimate calculations are based on the total number of rounds fired per year divided by 5, or approximately 20 percent. This approach assumes that although single animals may be ensonified more than once due to the time required to exit the 23 psi TTS ZOI, animals are not considered to be “taken” more than once for the purposes of estimating take levels. Similarly, as a conservative approach for nighttime firing, Eglin assumes that there is one animal present within or near the 90-m (295-ft) ZOI (105-mm TR ZOI) which may be potentially ensonified within the 23-psi TTS exposure zone at the time that the 105-mm round live firing phase begins. Density distributions have assumed an even distribution of approximately 4.38 animals/km 2 (all species) for the approach of impact analyses for estimation of take. At this density distribution and typical swim speed, the next available cetacean would approach the perimeter of the 90-m (295-ft) ZOI (23-psi TTS ZOI) in approximately 5.5 minutes or the same time as with the 216-m ZOI (used for the 105-mm FU). The difference is the amount of time it takes the animal to exit the ZOI or in other words, how long the animals resides within the ZOI on a straight line path. With live fire events of the 105-mm round occurring at a rate of approximately 2 rounds per minute, nearly one half (or 10 rounds) of the total 105-mm rounds (20 rounds) would potentially be expended within this 5.5-minute time frame. If the concept of marine mammal avoidance of an area once firing commences is not considered, an average swim speed (1.5 m/s) of animals would allow sufficient time for new animals to re-enter the 23-psi TTS impact area. Allowing for a potential 2-min break in firing after 10 rounds are expended, it is conservative and reasonable to assume that nearly 3 to 4 individual animals may be potentially exposed to the 23-psi TTS sound level during a typical 20 round firing event. Therefore, the ZOI and take estimate calculations are based on the total number of rounds fired per year divided by 5, or approximately 20 percent. This approach assumes that, although single animals may be ensonified more than once due to the time required to exit the 23-psi TTS ZOI, individual animals are not considered to be “taken” more than once for the purposes of estimating take levels. Based on this discussion, Table 1 in this **Federal Register** document provides Eglin AFB's estimates of the annual number of marine mammals, by species, potentially taken by Level B harassment, by the gunnery mission noise. It should be noted that these estimates are derived without consideration of the effectiveness of Eglin AFB's proposed mitigation measures (except use of the training round (TR)), which are discussed in the next section. Table 1. Yearly Estimated Number of Marine Mammals Affected by the Gunnery Mission Noise Species Adjusted Density (#/km 2 ) Level A Harassment Injurious 205 dB* EFD For Ear Rupture Level B Harassment Non-injurious 182 dB* EFD for TTS Level B Harassment Non-Injurious 23 psi For TTS Level B Harassment Non-Injurious 176 dB* EFD For Behavior Bryde′s whale 0.007 <0.001 0.010 0.4 0.041 Sperm whale 0.011 <0.001 0.016 0.0 0.064 Dwarf/pygmy sperm whale 0.024 <0.001 0.035 1.5 0.139 Cuvier's beaked whale 0.10 <0.001 0.015 0.6 0.058 Mesoplodon spp. 0.019 <0.001 0.028 1.2 0.110 Pygmy killer whale 0.030 <0.001 0.044 1.9 0.174 False killer whale 0.026 <0.001 0.038 1.6 0.151 Short-finned pilot whale 0.027 <0.001 0.039 1.7 0.157 Rough-toothed dolphin 0.028 <0.001 0.041 1.7 0.163 Bottlenose dolphin 0.810 0.006 1.177 50.1 4.706 Risso's dolphin 0.113 0.001 0.164 7.0 0.657 Atlantic spotted dolphin 0.677 0.005 0.984 41.9 3.934 Pantropical spotted dolphin 1.077 0.008 1.565 66.7 6.258 Striped dolphin 0.237 0.002 0.344 14.7 1.377 Spinner dolphin 0.915 0.007 1.330 56.6 5.316 Clymene dolphin 0.253 0.002 0.368 15.7 1.470 Unidentified dolphin** 0.053 <0.001 0.077 3.3 0.308 Unidentified whale 0.008 <0.001 0.012 0.5 0.046 All marine mammals 4.325 0.032 6.29 271.1 25.13 km 2 =square kilometers; NA=not applicable dB-dB re 1 μPa 2 -s **Bottlenose dolphin/Atlantic spotted dolphin Proposed Mitigation Measures Under its recent IHA, Eglin AFB employed a number of mitigation measures in an effort to substantially decrease the number of animals potentially affected. The proposed mitigation for this proposed IHA is substantially similar with a few modifications. Eglin AFB states that it is committed to assessing the mission activity for opportunities to provide operational mitigation (i.e., ramping up and using nighttime training rounds), while potentially sacrificing some mission flexibility. Visual Mitigation Areas to be used in gunnery missions are visually monitored for marine mammal presence from the AC-130 aircraft prior to commencement of the mission. If the presence of one or more marine mammals is detected, the target area will be avoided. In addition, monitoring will continue during the mission. If marine mammals are detected at any time, the mission will be either immediately halted and/or relocated as necessary or suspended until the marine mammal has left the area. Daytime and nighttime visual monitoring will be supplemented with IR and TV monitoring. As nighttime visual monitoring is generally considered to be ineffective at any height, the EGTTR missions will incorporate the TR. Development of the TR The largest type of ammunition used during typical gunnery missions is the 105-mm (4.13-in) round containing 4.7 lbs (2.1 kg) of high explosive (HE). This is several times more HE than that found in the next largest round (40 mm/1.57 in). As a mitigation technique, the Air Force developed a 105-mm TR that contains only 0.35 lb (0.16 kg) of HE. The TR was developed to significantly reduce the effects of nighttime operations, when visual surveying for marine mammals is of limited effectiveness. Use of the TR at night dramatically reduces the risk of harassment, and Eglin AFB anticipates a 96 percent reduction in impact by using the 105-mm TR. Ramp-Up Eglin incorporated a ramp-up procedure by beginning with the smallest round (or the round having least impact) and proceeding to subsequently larger size rounds (in this case the lowest caliber of munition up to the 105-mm FU round). Theoretically, this allows animals to perceive steadily increasing sounds and to react, if necessary. Alerting animals in advance of injurious sound waves by transmitting low-power “warning” signals a short time before the action provides a safeguard where there is a potential for the risk of injury. Other Mitigation Under the previous IHA, NMFS required additional mitigation measures to protect marine life. These requirements are:

(1)Test firing will be conducted only when sea surface conditions are sea state 3.5 or less on the Beaufort scale.

(2)Prior to each firing event, the aircraft crew will conduct a visual survey of the 5-nm (9.3-km) wide prospective target area to attempt to sight any protected species that may be present (e.g., marine mammals, sea turtles, and Sargassum rafts). The AC-130 gunship will conduct at least two complete orbits at a minimum safe airspeed around a prospective target area at a maximum altitude of 1,500 ft (457 m), with a recommended altitude of 1,000 ft (305 m). Provided protected species are not detected, the AC-130 can then continue orbiting the selected target point as it climbs to the mission testing altitude. During the low altitude orbits and the climb to testing altitude, the aircraft crew will visually scan the sea surface within the aircraft's orbit circle for the presence of listed and non-listed marine mammals and sea turtles. Primary emphasis for the surface scan will be upon the flight crew in the cockpit and personnel stationed in the tail observer bubble and starboard viewing window. The AC-130's optical and electronic sensors will also be employed for target clearance. If any marine mammals are detected within the AC-130's orbit circle, either during initial clearance or after commencement of live firing, the aircraft will relocate to another target and repeat the clearance procedures. If multiple firing events occur within the same flight, these clearance procedures will precede each event.

(3)The aircrews of the air-to-ground gunnery missions will initiate location and surveillance of a suitable firing site immediately after exiting U.S. territorial waters (> 12 nm, 22 km). This would potentially restrict most gunnery activities to the shallower continental shelf waters of the GOM where marine mammal densities are typically lower, and thus potentially avoid the slope waters where the more sensitive species (e.g., endangered sperm whales) typically reside.

(4)Observations will be accomplished using all-light TV, IR sensors, and visual means for at least 60 minutes prior to each exercise.

(5)Aircrews will utilize visual, night vision goggles (NVGs), and other onboard sensors to search for marine mammals while performing area clearance procedures during night-time pre-mission activities.

(6)If any marine mammals are sighted during pre-mission surveys or during the mission, activities will be immediately halted until the area is clear of all marine mammals for 60 minutes or the mission location relocated and resurveyed. Monitoring and Reporting The NMFS Biological Opinion on this action recommended certain monitoring measures to protect marine life. As a result, NMFS imposed these same requirements under the previous IHA:

(1)Eglin will develop and implement a marine species observer-training program in coordination with NMFS. This program will primarily provide expertise to Eglin's testing and training community in the identification of protected marine species during surface and aerial mission activities in the GOM. Additionally, the A-S gunnery mission aircrews will participate in the species observation training. As a result, designated crew members will be selected to receive training as protected species observers. Observers will receive training in protected species survey and identification techniques through a NMFS-approved training program.

(2)Aircrews will initiate the post-mission clearance procedures beginning at the operational altitude of approximately 15,000 to 20,000 ft (4572 to 6096 m) elevation, and initiating a spiraling descent down to an observation altitude of approximately 1,500 ft. (457 m) elevation. Rates of descent will occur over a 3 to 5 minute time frame.

(3)Eglin will track their use of the EGTR for test firing missions and protected species observations, through the use of mission reporting forms.

(4)A-S gunnery missions will coordinate with next-day flight activities to provide supplemental post-mission observations for marine mammals in the operations area of the previous day.

(5)A summary annual report of marine mammal observations and A-S activities will be submitted to the NMFS Southeast Regional Office

(SERO)and the Office of Protected Resources either at the time of a request for renewal of an IHA or 90 days after expiration of the current IHA if a new IHA is not requested.

(6)If any dead or injured marine mammals are observed or detected prior to testing, or injured or killed during live fire, a report must be made to the NMFS by the following business day.

(7)Any unauthorized takes of marine mammals (i.e., injury or mortality) must be immediately reported to the NMFS represent-ative and to the respective stranding network representative. Proposed Modifications to the Mitigation and Monitoring Requirements Eglin AFB has requested several modifications to its IHA to be incorporated into the new IHA. As of October 27, 2006, two A-S gunnery missions have been attempted (one of the missions was ultimately aborted due to sea state). As a result of flying live missions over the ocean, aircrews have requested a modification to three components of the 2006 IHA requirements. These components are:

(1)protected species surveys,

(2)ramp-up procedures, and

(3)sea state restrictions. Protected Species Surveys-Altitude and Equipment Currently, pre-mission surveys for marine mammals and other protected species must be commenced at a maximum altitude of 1,500 ft (457 m)(with 1,000 ft (305 m) recommended) during the day and at 2,000 ft (610 m)(1,500 ft (457 m) recommended) at night. Visual scans, as well as all applicable instruments, are to be used to survey for protected species at the water surface. Aircrews have reported that these altitudes are not safe, and that the onboard instrumentation used for surveys actually performs better at a higher altitude. The propeller-driven AC-130 aircraft, which is used for all A-S gunnery missions, is among the largest and heaviest in the Air Force, weighing up to approximately 150,000 lbs (68040 kg) depending on equipment configuration. If an emergency situation, such as a malfunction of one or more engines, occurred during the protected species surveys, the aircraft would likely lose altitude initially. The AC-130 does not perform well with less than a full compliment of engines. At 1,000 to 2,000 ft (305 to 610 m), the pilots would have little time to recover before striking the water surface, which would result in potential human fatalities and certain loss of the aircraft. The AC-130 is typically flown at a minimum altitude of 4,500 ft (1372 m). Eglin AFB notes that the 2004 National Defense Authorization Act amendments to the MMPA explicitly require consideration of personnel safety during military readiness activities. AC-130 gunships are equipped with low-light TV cameras and ANIAAQ-26 Infrared Detection Sets (IDS). The TV cameras operate in a range of electromagnetic radiation of 532 to 980 nanometers (visible and near-visible light), and the IDS system operates in the IR portion of 7.5 to 11.7 micrometers. IR systems are capable of detecting differences in temperature from thermal energy

(heat)radiated from living bodies, or from reflected and scattered thermal energy. In contrast to typical night-vision devices, visible light is not necessary for object detection. IR systems are equally effective during day or night use. The ANIAAQ-26 IDS system produces a composite video signal which is displayed on an onboard television monitor. The IDS provides imagery and accurate line-of-sight information for an operator to detect, acquire, identify, and track targets. Additional capabilities include providing imagery suitable for reconnaissance and low-level navigation. The IDS is capable of detecting very small thermal differences (the exact thermal sensitivity is classified). Three fields-of-view

(FOV)are available for the IDS. All are typically used during a mission to survey the area and acquire targets. These are: • Wide FOV (1.80 magnification) aides in low altitude flight, navigation, and area search, and also provides sufficient resolution to recognize typical terrain features such as roads, rivers, and bridges. • Medium FOV (10.8 magnification) provides for immediate target area orientation and target detection. • Narrow FOV (42.9 magnification) provides small target identification, target recognition, and precise line-of-sight angular adjustments. A 2X FOV (85.80 magnification) provides electronic magnification of the Narrow FOV. The IDS provides pointing information regarding its optical line-of-sight, and features a continuous 360-degree azimuth Field of Regard

(FOR)and +60 degree up-look to -105 degree down-look elevation FOR. The line-of-sight is inertial-stabilized with regard to airplane angular motions and is directed to pointing angles via programmed commands, operator commands, or position commands from the avionics systems. IR and low-light TV systems are used during both daytime and nighttime missions (ambient light is sufficient for the TV system at night). The IDS is the primary detection system and is used during all gunship missions. Low-light TV and visual surveys are used to supplement the IDS system as appropriate. The magnification of the TV system is comparable to that of the IDS. Although the IDS is capable of detecting infrared emissions at altitudes in excess of 12,500 ft (3810 m), an altitude range of 6,000 to 9,000 ft (1829 to 2743 m) affords the optimal slant range for overall sensor performance and target orientation. The sensor suite is considered superior to the human eye for detecting targets on the water surface, even at altitudes as low as 1,000 ft (305 m). This is particularly true for night observations. IR systems havc been used to detect whales and dolphins (Baldacci et al., 2005). Although the central portion of cetacean bodies are insulated with blubber, peripheral areas such as the flukes and fins are relatively poorly insulated. These areas may be detected thermally. Also, the movement of a cetacean's body at the surface causes heat to be radiated at different angles, resulting in an apparent temperature difference that can be detected by IR sensors. Additional areas of thermal discrimination include the blowhole, the blow, and areas of water disturbance where water of different temperatures is mixed. However, high humidity, rain, fog, high waves, and whitecap conditions can decrease the effectiveness of IR detection. Figure 1 in Eglin's January 22, 2007 renewal request shows examples of all FOVs for the IDS system, as an operator would see them on a monitor. All examples represent a 7.8-ft (2.4 m) dolphin at 6,000 ft (1829 m) altitude (above ground level, or AGL) and at a slant range of 8,000 ft (2438 m). All four FOVs would be used during protected species surveys. Based on the above discussion, the AC-130 aircrews recommend a protected species survey altitude of 6,000 ft (1829 m), using all sensors, for both day and night missions. The gunship sensor suite provides the best daytime and nighttime performance in normal weather and sea conditions at this altitude range. At lower altitudes, the sensors' area of coverage is smaller for any given field of view. In addition, the sensors' effectiveness is diminished due to magnification factors. For example, at an altitude of 1,000 ft (305 m), the 2X and Narrow FOV settings would cause over-magnification, resulting in decreased ability to discriminate targets. In addition to considerations of sensor performance, a 6,000-ft (1829-m) survey altitude would be significantly safer than the current 1,000- to 2,000-ft (305- to 610-m)range. Eglin AFB therefore proposes a revised protocol for protected species surveys. The AC-130 gunship would travel to a potential mission location at an altitude of 6,000 ft (1829 m). After arriving at the site, the aircrew would initiate a surface vessel and protected species survey at a 6,000 ft (1829 m) altitude. The aircraft would circle the target site and continue the survey for 15 minutes. During the survey, aircrews would use the ANIAAQ-26 IDS to search the water surface for vessels and marine species. The low-light TV system would be used to supplement the IDS system. For missions conducted during daylight hours, the aircrew would visually scan the water surface as well. The live fire phase of the mission would not begin until the site is determined to be clear of vessels and protected species during the 15-minute survey. If a marine mammal, sea turtle or Sargassum bed is identified during the pre-mission survey or during the mission, or if any object besides the target is detected but cannot conclusively be identified, the mission would be paused or relocated as appropriate. Aircrews would conduct a post-mission survey for 5 minutes at an altitude of 6,000 ft (1829 m) using the IDS and low-light television systems and, for daytime missions, visual scans. Eglin AFB considers that the protocol described here would provide effective mitigation to the risks posed to protected species during A-S gunnery missions. In summary, Eglin AFB believes that sensor-based observation effectiveness at 6,000 ft (1829 m) altitude is superior to visual survey effectiveness at 1,000 ft (305 m) altitude and should replace the previous mitigation measure. Ramp-up Procedures The 2006-2007 IHA stipulates that ramp-up procedures are to be used during A-S gunnery missions. This process involves beginning with the smallest gunnery round, which has the least impact, and proceeding to subsequently larger size rounds. The rationale is that this process may allow animals to perceive steadily increasing noise levels and to react, if necessary, before the noise reaches a threshold of significance. The gunships' weapons are used in two activity phases. First, the guns are checked for functionality and calibrated. This step requires an abbreviated period of live fire. After the guns are determined to be ready for use, the mission proceeds under various test and training scenarios. This second phase involves a more extended period of live fire and can incorporate use of one or any combination of the munitions available (25-, 40-, and 105-millimeter rounds). Eglin AFB believes the 2006-2007 IHA is somewhat ambiguous regarding whether the ramp-up procedure is required only for the first (calibrating) phase or throughout the entire mission. Eglin AFB proposes that the ramp-up procedure be required for the initial gun calibration, and that after this phase the guns may be fired in any order. Eglin believes this process complies with the intent of the ramp-up requirement. Marine species will have opportunity to respond to increasing noise levels. If an animal leaves the area during ramp-up, it is unlikely to return while the live-fire mission is proceeding. This protocol would allow a more realistic training experience. In combat situations, gunship crews would not likely fire the complete ammunition load of a given caliber gun before proceeding to another gun. Rather, a combination of guns would likely be used as required by an evolving situation. An additional benefit of this protocol is that mechanical or ammunition problems on an individual gun can be resolved while live fire continues with functioning weapons. This diminishes the possibility of a lengthy pause in live fire which, if greater than 10 minutes, would necessitate re-initiation of protected species surveys. Sea State Restrictions The 2006-2007 IHA states that air-to-surface gunnery missions are to be conducted only in sea states of 3 or less on the Beaufort scale. A sea state of 3 or less, with a maximum wind speed of 10 knots (11.5 mph, 18.5 km/hr) which is considered a gentle breeze, is fairly common off the Gulf coast of Florida; however, a large portion of time can be categorized as a sea state of 4 (1-16 knots (13-18 mph, 21-29 km/hr) which is considered a moderate breeze). Therefore, the availability of the EGTTR for gunship use is limited during anything over sea state 3, especially during the winter. Eglin AFB proposes gunship missions be allowed in sea states up to 4 on the Beaufort scale. This sea state encompasses wind speed up to a maximum of 16 knots (18 mph, 29 km/hr). Under these conditions, whitecaps are fairly frequent on the sea surface, but sea spray does not occur. Sea spray, whitecaps, and large waves can decrease the effectiveness of LR detection. However, missions are not conducted if such conditions make observation of the gunnery target problematic. It is expected that marine species can be observed in weather conditions that allow observation of the gunnery target flare. Wave height is difficult to determine from the air, particularly at night. Therefore, Eglin proposes that wind speed, as provided by accepted forecasting outlets such as the National Weather Service, be considered the determining factor for weather restrictions. Preliminary Conclusions For reasons described in this **Federal Register** document, NMFS has preliminarily determined that Esglin AFB's A-S Gunnery activity will not result in the mortality or serious injury of marine mammals and, would result in, at worst, a temporary elevation in hearing sensitivity (known as temporary threshold shift or TTS). As indicated in Table 1, Eglin AFB and NMFS estimated in 2006 that up to 271 marine mammals may incur this form of Level B harassment annually. Also, these gunnery exercises have the potential to result in a temporary modification in behavior by marine mammals. In 2006, NMFS estimated that up 25 marine mammals may experience a behavioral response to these exercises during the time-frame of an IHA (see Table 1). These air-to-surface gunnery activities are expected to have a negligible impact on the affected species or stocks. In addition, the potential for TTS is very low and will be mitigated to the lowest level practicable through the incorporation of the mitigation measures mentioned in this document. NMFS believes that the proposed modifications to the current mitigation requirements will not result in an increase in Level B harassment levels estimated in 2006. the previously discussed modifications (protected species survey altitude, ramp-up procedures and sea state conditions) to the mitigation measures in Eglin's existing IHA for the A-S gunnery exercises in the EGTTR, is unlikely to change NMFS' 2006 determination. Endangered Species Act

(ESA)Consultation under section 7 of the ESA on Eglin AFB's A-S Gunnery Missions in the EGTTR was completed on December 18, 1998. Consultation was reinitiated by Eglin AFB with NMFS on February 13, 2003, and concluded on October 20, 2004. A NMFS Biological Opinion issued on October 20, 2004, concluded that the A-S gunnery exercises in the EGTTR are unlikely to jeopardize the continued existence of species listed under the ESA that are within the jurisdiction of NMFS or destroy or adversely modify critical habitat. NMFS has preliminary determined that this action, including the modifications to the mitigation and monitoring measures, does not have effects beyond that which was analyzed in that previous consultation, it is within the scope of that action and reinitiation of consultation is not necessary. However, prior to issuance of this IHA, NMFS will make a final determination whether additional consultation is necessary. National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA)The U.S. Air Force

(USAF)made a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) determination on August 18, 2003, based on information contained within its November, 2002 Final PEA, that implementation of the subject action is not a major Federal action having significant effects on the environment within the meaning of NEPA. The USAF determined, therefore, that an environmental impact statement

(EIS)would not be prepared. NMFS noted that Eglin AFB had prepared a Final PEA for the EGTTR activity and made this Final PEA available upon request on January 23, 2006 (71 FR 3474). In accordance with NOAA Administrative Order 216-6 (Environmental Review Procedures for Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act, May 20, 1999), NMFS reviewed the information contained in Eglin AFB's Final PEA and determined that Eglin AFB's Final PEA accurately and completely describes the proposed action, the alternatives to the proposed action, and the potential impacts on marine mammals, endangered species, and other marine life that could be impacted by the preferred alternative and the other alternatives. Accordingly, NMFS adopted Eglin AFB's Final PEA under 40 CFR 1506.3 and made its own FONSI. The NMFS FONSI also took into consideration updated data and information contained in the NMFS' **Federal Register** document noting issuance of an IHA to Eglin AFB for this activity (71 FR 27695, May 12, 2006), and previous notices (71 FR 3474 (January 23, 2006); 70 FR 48675 (August 19, 2005)). NMFS has preliminarily determined that the current proposed action will not result in a significant modification in the previously reviewed activity and, therefore, a new EA, supplemental EA or an EIS for the issuance of an IHA to Eglin AFB for this activity is not necessary. Proposed Authorization NMFS proposes to reissue an IHA to Eglin AFB for conducting A-S gunnery exercises within the EGTTR in the northern GOM provided the mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements described in this **Federal Register** notice are incorporated. NMFS has preliminarily determined that the proposed activity is unlikely to result in injury or mortality to marine mammals, and would have a negligible impact on the affected marine mammal species or stocks. The MMPA provision relating to impacts on subsistence are not relevant. Information Solicited NMFS requests interested persons to submit comments and information concerning this proposed IHA (see ADDRESSES ). Dated: May 24, 2007. James H. Lecky, Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E7-10372 Filed 5-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XA39 Taking and Importing of Marine Mammals AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice; affirmative finding renewal. SUMMARY: The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NMFS, (Assistant Administrator) has renewed the affirmative finding for the Republic of Ecuador under the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). This affirmative finding will allow yellowfin tuna harvested in the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean

(ETP)in compliance with the International Dolphin Conservation Program

(IDCP)by Ecuadorian-flag purse seine vessels or purse seine vessels operating under Ecuadorian jurisdiction to be imported into the United States. The affirmative finding was based on review of documentary evidence submitted by the Republic of Ecuador and obtained from the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC) and the U.S. Department of State. DATES: The renewal is effective from April 1, 2007, through March 31, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Regional Administrator, Southwest Region, NMFS, 501 West Ocean Boulevard, Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802-4213; phone 562-980-4000; fax 562-980-4018. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The MMPA, 16 U.S.C. 1361 *et seq.* , allows the entry into the United States of yellowfin tuna harvested by purse seine vessels in the ETP under certain conditions. If requested by the harvesting nation, the Assistant Administrator will determine whether to make an affirmative finding based upon documentary evidence provided by the government of the harvesting nation, the IATTC, or the Department of State. The affirmative finding process requires that the harvesting nation is meeting its obligations under the IDCP and obligations of membership in the IATTC. Every 5 years, the government of the harvesting nation must request an affirmative finding and submit the required documentary evidence directly to the Assistant Administrator. On an annual basis, NMFS will review the affirmative finding and determine whether the harvesting nation continues to meet the requirements. A nation may provide information related to compliance with IDCP and IATTC measures directly to NMFS on an annual basis or may authorize the IATTC to release the information to NMFS to annually renew an affirmative finding determination without an application from the harvesting nation. An affirmative finding will be terminated, in consultation with the Secretary of State, if the Assistant Administrator determines that the requirements of 50 CFR 216.24(f) are no longer being met or that a nation is consistently failing to take enforcement actions on violations, thereby diminishing the effectiveness of the IDCP. As a part of the affirmative finding process set forth in 50 CFR 216.24(f), the Assistant Administrator considered documentary evidence submitted by the Republic of Ecuador or obtained from the IATTC and the Department of State and has determined that Ecuador has met the MMPA's requirements to receive an annual affirmative finding renewal. After consultation with the Department of State, the Assistant Administrator issued the Republic of Ecuador's annual affirmative finding renewal, allowing the continued importation into the United States of yellowfin tuna and products derived from yellowfin tuna harvested in the ETP by Ecuadorian-flag purse seine vessels or purse seine vessels operating under Ecuadorian jurisdiction. Ecuador's affirmative finding will remain valid through March 31, 2010, subject to subsequent annual reviews by NMFS. Dated: May 23, 2007. Samuel D. Rauch III Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E7-10373 Filed 5-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Telecommunications and Information Administration Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request; NTIA/FCC Web-Coordination Collection ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. DATES: Written comments must be submitted on or before July 30, 2007. ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments to Diana Hynek, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 6625, 14th and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet at *dHynek@doc.gov* ). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information or copies of the information collection instrument and instructions should be directed to: Steve Litts, Technology Speciality, Systems Development Branch, Office of Spectrum Management, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 4096, 14th and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington DC 20230 (or via the Internet at *Slitts@ntia.doc.gov* ). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Abstract The National Telecommunications and Information Administration

(NTIA)developed a web-based system that collects specific identification information (e.g., company name, location and projected range of the operation) from applicants seeking to operate in existing and planned radio frequency

(RF)bands that are shared on a co-primary basis by federal and non-federal users. The web-based system provides a means for non-federal applicants to rapidly determine the availability of RF spectrum in a specific location, or the need for detailed frequency coordination of a specific newly proposed assignment within the shared portions of the radio spectrum. The website allows the non-federal applicant's proposed radio site information to be analyzed, and a real-time determination to be made as to whether there is a potential for interference to, or from, existing Federal government radio operations in the vicinity of the proposed site. This web-based coordination system helps expedite the coordination process for non-federal applicants while assuring protection of government data relating to national security. The information provided by non-federal applicants also assures the protection of the applicant's station from radio frequency interference from future government operations. The non-federal applicants are required to submit information regarding the physical characteristics of the proposed radio station and the proposed location of the operation. This information is necessary for a determination of electromagnetic compatibility among radio stations in the frequency band. The name and address of the proposed licensee is also required, as currently required by the Federal Communications Commission. All data requested on the website is currently required for the coordination of non-federal radio stations in RF spectrum that is shared with the federal government. II. Method of Collection The application and instructions are on the NTIA website. Non-federal applicants submit applications electronically through the Web site. III. Data *OMB Number:* 0660-0018. *Form Number:* None. *Type of Review:* Regular submission. *Affected Public:* Business or other for-profit organizations, state or local government. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 3,000. *Estimated Time Per Response:* 15 minutes. *Estimated Total Annual Respondent Burden Hours:* 750. *Estimated Total Annual Respondent Cost Burden:* $0. *Legal Authority:* 47 U.S.C. 902(b)(2)(L)(ii). IV. Request for Comments Comments are invited on:

(a)Whether the information will have practical utility;

(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection;

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

(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized or included in the request for OMB approval of this information collection; they also will become a matter of public record. Dated: May 23, 2007. Gwellnar Banks, Management Analyst, Office of the Chief Information Officer. [FR Doc. E7-10344 Filed 5-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-60-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Telecommunications and Information Administration RIN 0660-AA16 Docket Number: 0612242667—7150—02 Instructions to Assist Manufacturers Submitting Digital-to-Analog Converter Box Test Results and Sample Equipment for Certification. AGENCY: National Telecommunications and Information Administration. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This notice provides guidance for manufacturers that intend to submit digital-to-analog converter boxes to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration

(NTIA)for certification as part of the Digital-to-Analog Converter Box Coupon Program. This notice also provides address and contact information regarding the required submission of test results and sample equipment. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Art Wall, Technology Advisor, DTV Converter Coupon Program, awall@ntia.doc.gov,

(410)643-1649. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 15, 2007, NTIA published regulations to implement and administer a coupon program for digital-to-analog converter boxes. Under this program, U.S. households will be eligible to request up to two $40 coupons to be used toward the purchase of up to two digital-to-analog converter boxes. 1 Converter boxes are necessary for consumers who may wish to continue receiving broadcast programming over the air using analog-only televisions not connected to cable, satellite, or other pay television service after February 17, 2009 - - the date that full power television broadcasters are required to cease analog broadcasting. 2 1 *See* Rules to Implement and Administer a Coupon Program For Digital-to-Analog Converter Boxes (Final Rule), 72 FR 12097 (March 15, 2009). 2 *See* Title III of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, Pub. L. 109-171, 120 Stat. 4, 21 (Feb. 8, 2006). Section 3002(a) of the Act amends Section 309(j)(14)(A) of the Communications Act of 1934 so that analog full-power television licenses will terminate on February 17, 2009. Section 3002(b) of the Act directs the FCC to terminate analog television licenses for full-power stations by February 18, 2009. Among other purposes, the Final Rule specifies that manufacturers interested in participating in the coupon program must submit a Notice of Intent

(NOI)to NTIA. The regulations provide the necessary information to include in the NOI and also provide technical specifications and features required for a converter box to qualify for the coupon program. The regulations also include specific instructions for manufacturers to submit test results along with a sample of the tested equipment to NTIA. 3 The preamble to the regulations notes that NTIA has entered into an agreement with the Federal Communications Commission

(FCC)whereby the FCC may review the manufacturers' test results and converter boxes if necessary. 4 The preamble also notes that a subsequent Public Notice will provide manufacturers with specific address and contact information regarding the required submission of test results and sample equipment. 5 Moreover, section 301.5(e) of the Final Rule states that NTIA may issue other guidance and test-bed conditions. Accordingly, this Notice provides the following information:

(1)the Notice of Intent

(NOI)submission;

(2)testing guidance;

(3)test report (format and content) guidance;

(4)shipping of samples; and

(5)NTIA processing. 3 47 C.F.R. § 301.5. 4 *See* Final Rule at ¶ 101; *see also* 47 C.F.R. § 301.5(f). 5 Final Rule at ¶ 101. The guidance information provided in this notice is not binding. Compliance with the requirements contained in the regulations may be demonstrated by following the suggestions contained in this document or by alternative means. Manufacturers intending to participate in the converter box coupon program should submit test results and sample equipment to NTIA in accordance with the guidelines specified below: 1. Notice of Intent a. The NOI shall be submitted to NTIA at least three months prior to submission of the test report and samples pursuant to section 301.5(a) of the Final Rule. Accordingly, the NOI shall contain the following information: name, title, email and mailing address, and the phone number of an individual responsible for the manufacturer's submission; a brief description of the converter box, including permitted as well as required features; and the date on which the samples and test report for the proposed converter(s) may be ready for submission for review. The NOI shall be faxed to NTIA at

(202)482-4626 or delivered to: DTV Converter Coupon Program, Room 4809, NTIA/OTIA, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C. 20230. The NOI will be kept business confidential pursuant to section 301.5(b) of the Final Rule. A NOI form is available on NTIA's web site at *www.ntia.doc.gov* . b. Pursuant to section 301.5(c), NTIA will provide the manufacturer with shipping information in a letter of acknowledgement after NTIA receives the NOI. Subsequent to receipt of the acknowledgement, a written authorization for submitting the samples and test report will be electronically sent to the contact person listed in the NOI. See item 3(a), below, for electronically submitting the test report, and item 4, below, for shipping the samples. 2. Testing Guidance a. Source Material: For the performance specifications in items 8 through 13 and item 15 of Technical Appendix 1 to the Final Rule, it is recommended that the tests be performed with a High Definition data stream (i.e., resolution of 720p or higher) with motion. b. Field Ensembles (#14): NTIA encourages manufacturers to specify which 30 of the 50 field ensembles identified in ATSC A/74 were tested successfully. c. Single Static Echo (#15): NTIA encourages manufacturers to specify whether the model was tested against Criteria A or Criteria B as defined in Technical Appendix 1. If Criteria B is chosen, manufacturers should identify which 37 of the 50 field ensembles were tested successfully. d. Manufacturers submitting converters intended to comply with the EPA Energy Star Program — which is a permitted but not required specification for Coupon-Eligible Converter Boxes (CECBs) — should seek certification from EPA that the CECB meets all requirements for certification under the EPA program. The EPA requirements can be found at *http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm* . 3. Test Report Guidance a. When a manufacturer receives an authorization to submit the test report and samples pursuant to section 301.5(c), the test report is to be sent to Art Wall, Technical Advisor, at *awall@ntia.doc.gov* . To expedite processing, NTIA encourages applicants to submit the test report in an electronic format using Microsoft Word, pdf or jpg type files. Files larger than 5 Mbs should be divided into separate files of 2 Mbs or less, if possible. If a manufacturer is not able to provide test results electronically in the formats prescribed, the manufacturer should contact Art Wall, Technical Advisor at *awall@ntia.doc.gov* to make alternate arrangements. b. NTIA encourages manufacturers to submit test reports that demonstrate that each model proposed to be a CECB meets all the performance specifications and features set forth in Technical Appendix 1 of the Final Rule as well as applicable FCC Rules. c. Each model proposed may include “permitted” features but shall not include “disqualifying” features set forth in Technical Appendix 2 of the Final Rule, pursuant to section 301.5(d). If the proposed CECB includes permitted features, it would assist NTIA's evaluation if the test results or certificates document how those features operate or have been implemented. d. To assist in NTIA's evaluation of the proposed CECB, NTIA encourages applicants to include in the test report information such as: 1. An operational description of each proposed CECB. 2. A final copy of the proposed manual that will be provided to the end user. 3. A list of equipment (complete with calibration data) used by the manufacturer when performing each of the required tests. 4. A block diagram showing all the major elements of each proposed CECB. 5. A block diagram depicting the equipment used and the measurement setup for each test. 6. Internal and external photographs of each proposed CECB. The photographs should be of sufficient clarity to show the make and model number on the label, the front panel controls, connection points on the back panel, internal components and circuit board layouts. e. Pursuant to section 301.5(f), reports of test conditions and test results must be clear and comprehensive so that they can be easily interpreted by NTIA and others reviewing them. Moreover, in accordance with section 301.5(g), each test report shall include a certification of the testing supervisor as to its authenticity, completeness and accuracy based on personal knowledge. The manufacturer/applicant should also sign the report certifying that the sample tested is representative of production units. 4. Guidance for Shipping Proposed Coupon-Eligible Converter Box Samples Manufacturers are to supply two production sample converter boxes pursuant to section 301.5(c) of the Final Rule. They are to be shipped as follows: *Test samples should NOT be shipped until the applicant receives a specific authorization from NTIA to ship. A copy of NTIA's shipping authorization identifying each model to be shipped shall accompany the samples.* Shipping Address: (Courier Service, Freight, or Air Service) DTV Converter Coupon Program FCC Laboratory 7435 Oakland Mills Road, Gate A Columbia, MD 21046 Attention: Bill Hurst Telephone:

(301)362-3000 *Special note to foreign applicants* — Foreign applicants with United States subsidiaries or agents should ship equipment to those facilities for forwarding to the Laboratory. If no American subsidiary is available, arrangements must be made for clearance of shipment through U. S. Customs and delivery to the FCC Laboratory. The U.S. Government will not make delivery arrangements or pay any related charges associated with shipments. If the applicant requires notification that the samples have been received at the FCC Laboratory, the applicant should contact its shipper for delivery date confirmation. Pursuant to the regulations, the samples for each proposed CECB shall be production line samples. Some characteristics that may assist NTIA in confirming production line samples are: a permanently attached label showing the make (manufacturer's name or trade name), serial number and model number. The label information (except for serial number) should agree with the information shown on the test report. Also, NTIA encourages applicants to include any accessory that would facilitate testing and any permitted accessory features proposed by the manufacturer, such as a 300 ohm connector, a cable with 3 female RCA connectors, etc. NTIA does not intend to return the samples to the manufacturer/applicant. 5. NTIA Processing The manufacturer's report of each proposed CECB will be reviewed for accuracy and completeness and to determine:

(1)if the proposed model meets the performance specifications in Technical Appendix 1;

(2)if the proposed CECB includes permitted features listed in Technical Appendix 2, that those features function properly; and

(3)that the proposed CECB does not contain a disqualifying feature. NTIA/FCC testing will be performed on some or all of the models. The level of testing will be based on engineering judgments during the review of the test report. Request for additional information, if necessary, may cause delays in completing an evaluation of a proposed CECB. Reasonable attempts will be made to expedite review of each proposed CECB, but the applicant should not contact the Technical Advisor unless the applicant has a valid technical question. Pursuant to section 301.5(h) of the Final Rule, NTIA will provide prompt notification to each manufacturer as to whether the model has met technical approval. NTIA will maintain a list of approved CECBs to distribute to consumers and participating retailers. These procedures are intended to assist in managing the review and evaluation of each proposed CECB. Additional guidance on testing or submission procedures may be provided on NTIA web page under Frequently Asked Questions, pursuant to Section 301.5(e), *www.ntia.doc.gov* . Questions about the procedure for submitting samples and test reports for review and approval may be submitted to: Art Wall, Technical Advisor DTV Converter Coupon Program NTIA/OTIA Room 4809 U.S. Department of Commerce Washington, D.C. 20230 Tel:

(410)643-1649 Fax:

(202)482-4626 Email: *awall@ntia.doc.gov* Dated: May 23, 2007. Kathy D. Smith, Chief Counsel, National Telecommunications and Information Administration. [FR Doc. E7-10282 Filed 5-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-60-S CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request AGENCY: Corporation for National and Community Service. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Corporation for National and Community Service (hereinafter the “Corporation”), as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, conducts a pre-clearance consultation program to provide the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing collections of information in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA95) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program helps to ensure that requested data can be provided in the desired format, reporting burden (time and financial resources) is minimized, collection instruments are clearly understood, and the impact of collection requirement on respondents can be properly assessed. Currently, the Corporation is soliciting comments concerning the AmeriCorps Alumni Profile Cards (OMB Control Number 3045-0048). The collections was granted a 3 year approval until October 31, 2007, by OMB. The Corporation is now seeking approval to continue this collection for 3 more years. Copies of the information collection requests can be obtained by contacting the office listed in the address section of this notice. DATES: Written comments must be submitted to the individual and office listed in the ADDRESSES section by July 30, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by the title of the information collection activity, by any of the following methods:

(1)*By mail sent to:* Corporation for National and Community Service; *Attention:* David Premo, Corporation Relations Associate; Office of Corporate Relations, Room 10302E; 1201 New York Avenue, NW., Washington, DC, 20525.

(2)By hand delivery or by courier to the Corporation's mailroom at Room 8102C at the mail address given in paragraph

(1)above, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m. Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

(3)*By fax to:*

(202)606-3460, *Attention:* David Premo, Corporate Relations Associate, Office of Corporate Relations.

(4)*Electronically through the Corporation's e-mail address system: dpremo@cns.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Premo,

(202)606-6717, or by e-mail at *dpremo@cns.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Corporation is particularly interested in comments that: • Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Corporation, including whether the information will have practical utility; • Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; • Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and • Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are expected to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology (e.g., permitting electronic submissions of responses). Background The Corporation sends out AmeriCorps Alumni Profile Cards to former AmeriCorps and VISTA members' home addresses requesting that they complete the card and return it to the Corporation. The purpose of the card is to enhance communications between the Corporation and former AmeriCorps members to provide them with information on Corporation activities, and to seek their assistance in volunteer recruitment activities. Current Action The Corporation is soliciting public comments so it can obtain renewed approval from OMB for a three year time period of the distribution and collection of AmeriCorps Alumni Profile Cards. The goal is to continue to help the Corporation to more accurately and effectively gear communication to former members and to provide additional resources to these former members. Submission is entirely voluntary. *Type of Review:* Renewal. *Agency:* Corporation for National and Community Service. *Title:* AmeriCorps Alumni Profile Card. *OMB Number:* 3045-0048. *Agency Number:* None. *Affected Public:* Individuals. *Total Respondents:* 12,000. *Frequency:* Continuous. *Average Time Per Response:* 4 minutes. *Estimated Total Burden Hours:* 800 hours. *Total Burden Cost (capital/startup):* None. *Total Burden Cost (operating/maintenance):* None. Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for Office of Management and Budget approval of the information collection request; they will also become a matter of public record. Dated: May 22, 2007. Jonathan Williams, Director, Corporate Relations. [FR Doc. E7-10272 Filed 5-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6050-$$-P CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE Proposed Information Collection; Comment Request AGENCY: Corporation for National and Community Service. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Corporation for National and Community Service (hereinafter the “Corporation”), as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, conducts a pre-clearance consultation program to provide the general public and federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing collections of information in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA95) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program helps to ensure that requested data can be provided in the desired format, reporting burden (time and financial resources) is minimized, collection instruments are clearly understood, and the impact of collection requirement on respondents can be properly assessed. Currently, the Corporation is soliciting comments concerning the Spirit of Service Award nomination Guidelines for Senior Corps, AmeriCorps, and Learn and Serve America. On October 1, 2004, these collections were granted a 3 year approval until September 30, 2007, by OMB. The Corporation is now seeking approval to continue this collection for 3 more years. Copies of the information collection requests can be obtained by contacting the office listed in the address section of this notice. DATES: Written comments must be submitted to the individual and office listed in the ADDRESSES section by July 30, 2007. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by the title of the information collection activity, by any of the following methods:

(2)By hand delivery or by courier to the Corporation's mailroom at Room 8102C at the mail address given in paragraph

(1)above, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m. Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

(3)*By fax to:*

(202)606-3460, *Attention:* David Premo, Corporate Relations Associate, Office of Corporate Relations.

(4)Electronically through the Corporation's e-mail address system: *dpremo@cns.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Premo,

(202)606-6717, or by e-mail at *dpremo@cns.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Corporation is particularly interested in comments that: • Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Corporation, including whether the information will have practical utility; • Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; • Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and • Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are expected to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology (e.g., permitting electronic submissions of responses). Background The Spirit of Service Awards enable the Corporation to recognize exceptional organizations and program participants from each of the Corporation's three programs, Senior Corps, AmeriCorps, and Learn and Service America. The Corporation plans to continue to utilize specific nomination guidelines for each of the programs and follow a formal nomination process, which involves voluntary information collection from non-government individuals. Since its 2004 the Corporation has honored distinguished individuals and organizations with the Spirit of Service Awards. Prior to 2003, AmeriCorps recognized its outstanding it outstanding members annually through the All-AmeriCorps Awards, which were initiated 1999 and presented by President Clinton as part of the 5th anniversary celebration of the program. Senior corps had recognized its outstanding projects and volunteers at its own national conference, and Learn and Serve America recognized exemplary programs and participants through its Leaders School selection and the President's Student Service Awards. Current Action The Corporation is soliciting public comments so it can obtain renewed approval from OMB for a three year time period of the Spirit of Service Awards nomination for its three programs. The goal is to continue the nomination process in order to select the annual Spirit of Service Award winners in time to receive their awards during the Corporation's Annual National Conference on Community Volunteering and National Service. Part I *Type of Review:* Continued collection. *Agency:* Corporation for National and Community Service. *Title:* Spirit of Service Awards Nomination Guidelines and Application—Senior Corps. *OMB Number:* 3045-0091. *Agency Number:* None. *Affected Public:* Individuals, not-for-profit institutions, and State, Local or Tribal Government. *Total Respondents:* 200. *Frequency:* One time. *Average Time Per Response:* Averages 3 hours. *Estimated Total Burden Hours:* 600 hours. *Total Burden Cost (capital/startup):* None. *Total Burden Cost (operating/maintenance):* None. Part II *Type of Review:* Continued collection. *Agency:* Corporation for National and Community Service. *Title:* Spirit of Service Awards Nomination Guidelines and Application—AmeriCorps. *OMB Number:* 3045-0092. *Agency Number:* None. *Affected Public:* Individuals, not-for-profit institutions, and State, Local or Tribal Government. *Total Respondents:* 200. *Frequency:* One time. *Average Time per Response:* Averages 3 hours. *Estimated Total Burden Hours:* 600 hours. *Total Burden Cost (capital/startup):* None. *Total Burden Cost (operating/maintenance):* None. Part III *Type of Review:* Continued collection. *Agency:* Corporation for National and Community Service. *Title:* Spirit of Service Awards Nomination Guidelines and Application—Learn and Serve America. *OMB Number:* 3045-0093. *Agency Number:* None. *Affected Public:* Individuals, not-for-profit institutions, and State, Local or Tribal Government. *Total Respondents:* 200. *Frequency:* One time. *Average Time Per Response:* Averages 3 hours. *Estimated Total Burden Hours:* 600 hours. *Total Burden Cost (capital/startup):* None. *Total Burden Cost (operating/maintenance):* None. Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for Office of Management and Budget approval of the information collection request; they will also become a matter of public record. Dated: May 22, 2007. Jonathan Williams, Director, Corporate Relations. [FR Doc. E7-10273 Filed 5-29-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6050-$$-P DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary [Transmittal No. 07-30] 36(b)(1) Arms Sales Notification AGENCY: Department of Defense, Defense Security Cooperation Agency. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text of a section 36(b)( 1) arms sales notification. This is published to fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated 21 July 1996. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. B. English, DSCA/DBO/CFM,

(703)601-3740. The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Transmittal 07-30 with attached transmittal and policy justification. Dated: May 22, 2007. L.M. Bynum, OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense. BILLING CODE 5001-06-C EN30MY07.004 EN30MY07.005 EN30MY07.006 EN30MY07.007 EN30MY07.008 [FR Doc. 07-2637 Filed 5-25-07; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 11

Traces to 11 documents

U.S. Code

CFR