Notices. Institution of antidumping investigation and scheduling of a preliminary phase investigation

15,722 words·~71 min read·/register/2007/08/28/07-4237

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

BILLING CODE 4310-05-M INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation Nos. 731-TA-1124 and 1125 (Preliminary)] Electrolytic Manganese Dioxide From Australia and China AGENCY: United States International Trade Commission. ACTION: Institution of antidumping investigation and scheduling of a preliminary phase investigation. SUMMARY: The Commission hereby gives notice of the institution of investigations and commencement of preliminary phase antidumping investigation Nos. 731-TA-1124 and 1125 (Preliminary) under section 733(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1673b(a)) (the Act) to determine whether there is a reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is materially injured or threatened with material injury, or the establishment of an industry in the United States is materially retarded, by reason of imports from Australia and China of electrolytic manganese dioxide, provided for in subheading 2820.10.00 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, that are alleged to be sold in the United States at less than fair value.

Unless the Department of Commerce extends the time for initiation pursuant to section 732(c)(1)(B) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673a(c)(1)(B)), the Commission must reach a preliminary determination in antidumping investigations in 45 days, or in this case by October 9, 2007. The Commission's views are due at Commerce within five business days thereafter, or by October 16, 2007. For further information concerning the conduct of these investigations and rules of general application, consult the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, part 201, subparts A through E (19 CFR part 201), and part 207, subparts A and B (19 CFR part 207).

EFFECTIVE DATE: August 22, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cynthia Trainor (202-205-3354), Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436. Hearing-impaired persons can obtain information on this matter by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000.

General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server ( *http://www.usitc.gov* ). The public record for these investigations may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket

(EDIS)at *http://edis.usitc.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Background* . These investigations are being instituted in response to a petition filed on August 22, 2007, by Tronox LLC, Oklahoma City, OK. *Participation in the investigations and public service list* . Persons (other than petitioners) wishing to participate in the investigations as parties must file an entry of appearance with the Secretary to the Commission, as provided in §§ 201.11 and 207.10 of the Commission's rules, not later than seven days after publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** . Industrial users and (if the merchandise under investigation is sold at the retail level) representative consumer organizations have the right to appear as parties in Commission antidumping investigations. The Secretary will prepare a public service list containing the names and addresses of all persons, or their representatives, who are parties to these investigations upon the expiration of the period for filing entries of appearance. *Limited disclosure of business proprietary information

(BPI)under an administrative protective order

(APO)and BPI service list* . Pursuant to § 207.7(a) of the Commission's rules, the Secretary will make BPI gathered in these investigations available to authorized applicants representing interested parties (as defined in 19 U.S.C. 1677(9)) who are parties to the investigations under the APO issued in the investigations, provided that the application is made not later than seven days after the publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** . A separate service list will be maintained by the Secretary for those parties authorized to receive BPI under the APO. *Conference* . The Commission's Director of Operations has scheduled a conference in connection with these investigations for 9:30 a.m. on September 12, 2007, at the U.S. International Trade Commission Building, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC. Parties wishing to participate in the conference should contact Cynthia Trainor (202-205-3354) not later than September 10, 2007, to arrange for their appearance. Parties in support of the imposition of antidumping duties in these investigations and parties in opposition to the imposition of such duties will each be collectively allocated one hour within which to make an oral presentation at the conference. A nonparty who has testimony that may aid the Commission's deliberations may request permission to present a short statement at the conference. *Written submissions* . As provided in §§ 201.8 and 207.15 of the Commission's rules, any person may submit to the Commission on or before September 17, 2007, a written brief containing information and arguments pertinent to the subject matter of the investigations. Parties may file written testimony in connection with their presentation at the conference no later than three days before the conference. If briefs or written testimony contain BPI, they must conform with the requirements of §§ 201.6, 207.3, and 207.7 of the Commission's rules. The Commission's rules do not authorize filing of submissions with the Secretary by facsimile or electronic means, except to the extent permitted by § 201.8 of the Commission's rules, as amended, 67 FR 68036 (November 8, 2002). Even where electronic filing of a document is permitted, certain documents must also be filed in paper form, as specified in II(C) of the Commission's Handbook on Electronic Filing Procedures, 67 FR 68168, 68173 (November 8, 2002). In accordance with §§ 201.16(c) and 207.3 of the rules, each document filed by a party to the investigations must be served on all other parties to the investigations (as identified by either the public or BPI service list), and a certificate of service must be timely filed. The Secretary will not accept a document for filing without a certificate of service. Authority: These investigations are being conducted under authority of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to § 207.12 of the Commission's rules. By order of the Commission. Issued: August 22, 2007. Marilyn R. Abbott, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. E7-16962 Filed 8-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation Nos. 701-TA-449 and 731-TA-1118-1121 (Preliminary)] Light-Walled Rectangular Pipe and Tube From China, Korea, Mexico, and Turkey Determination On the basis of the record 1 developed in the subject investigations, the United States International Trade Commission (Commission) determines, pursuant to sections 703(a) and 733(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1671b(a) and 1673b(a)) (the Act), that there is a reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is materially injured 2 or threatened with material injury 3,4 by reason of imports from China, Korea, Mexico, and Turkey of light-walled rectangular pipe and tube, provided for in subheading 7306.61.50 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, 5 that are alleged to be subsidized by the Government of China and that are alleged to be to be sold in the United States at less than fair value

(LTFV)from China, Korea, Mexico, and Turkey. 6 1 The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR § 207.2(f)). 2 Commissioner Charlotte R. Lane determines that there is a reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of imports of light-walled rectangular pipe and tube from China, Korea, Mexico, and Turkey. 3 Vice Chairman Shara L. Aranoff, Commissioner Deanna Tanner Okun, and Commissioner Irving A. Williamson determine that there is a reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is threatened with material injury by reason of imports of light-walled rectangular pipe and tube from China, Korea, Mexico, and Turkey. 4 Chairman Daniel R. Peason determines that there is a reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is threatened with material injury by reason of imports of light-walled rectangular pipe and tube from China, Korea, and Turkey, but that there is not a reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is materially injured or threatened with material injury by reason of imports of light-walled rectangular pipe and tube from Mexico. 5 Prior to February 3, 2007, the merchandise subject to these investigations was properly classified under subheading 7306.60.50 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States. 6 Commissioner Dean A. Pinkert recused himself to avoid any conflict of interest or appearance of a conflict. Commencement of Final Phase Investigations Pursuant to § 207.18 of the Commission's rules, the Commission also gives notice of the commencement of the final phase of its investigations. The Commission will issue a final phase notice of scheduling, which will be published in the **Federal Register** as provided in § 207.21 of the Commission's rules, upon notice from the Department of Commerce (Commerce) of affirmative preliminary determinations in the investigations under sections 703(b) and 733(b) of the Act, or, if the preliminary determinations are negative, upon notice of affirmative final determinations in those investigations under section 705(a) and 735(a) of the Act. Parties that filed entries of appearance in the preliminary phase of the investigations need not enter a separate appearance for the final phase of the investigations. Industrial users, and, if the merchandise under investigation is sold at the retail level, representative consumer organizations have the right to appear as parties in Commission antidumping and countervailing duty investigations. The Secretary will prepare a public service list containing the names and addresses of all persons, or their representatives, who are parties to the investigations. Background On June 27, 2007, a petition was filed with the Commission and Commerce by twelve U.S. producers, 7 alleging that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of subsidized imports of light-walled rectangular pipe and tube from China and LTFV imports from China, Korea, Mexico, and Turkey. Accordingly, effective June 27, 2007, the Commission instituted countervailing duty investigation No. 701-TA-449 (Preliminary) and antidumping investigation Nos. 731-TA-1118-1121 (Preliminary). 7 Allied Tube and Conduit, Harvey, IL; Atlas Tube, Plymouth, MI; California Steel and Tube, City of Industry, CA; EXLTUBE, Kansas City, MO; Hannibal Industries, Los Angeles, CA; Leavitt Tube Company LLC, Chicago, IL; Maruichi American Corporation, Sante Fe Springs, CA; Searing Industries, Rancho Cucamonga, CA; Southland Tube, Birmingham, AL; Vest Inc., Los Angeles, CA; Welded Tube, Concord, Ontario (Canada); and Western Tube and Conduit, Long Beach, CA. Notice of the institution of the Commission's investigations and of a public conference to be held in connection therewith was given by posting copies of the notice in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, Washington, DC, and by publishing the notice in the **Federal Register** of July 3, 2007 (72 FR 36479). The conference was held in Washington, DC, on July 18, 2007, and all persons who requested the opportunity were permitted to appear in person or by counsel. The Commission transmitted its determinations in these investigations to the Secretary of Commerce on August 13, 2007. The views of the Commission are contained in USITC Publication 3941 (August 2007), entitled *Light-Walled Rectangular Pipe and Tube From China, Korea, Mexico, and Turkey: Investigation Nos. 701-TA-449 and 731-TA-1118-1121 (Preliminary).* By order of the Commission. Issued: August 22, 2007. Marilyn R. Abbott, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. E7-16964 Filed 8-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337-TA-583] In the Matter of Certain Wireless Communication Devices, Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same; Notice of a Commission Determination Not To Review an Initial Determination Terminating the Investigation AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined not to review an initial determination (“ID”) (Order No. 38) of the presiding administrative law judge (“ALJ”) terminating the above-captioned investigation under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337). The Commission has terminated the investigation based on a settlement agreement. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Clint Gerdine, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone

(202)708-2310. Copies of non-confidential documents filed in connection with this investigation are or will be available for inspection during official business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone

(202)205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server at *http://www.usitc.gov.* The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket

(EDIS)at *http://edis.usitc.gov.* Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on

(202)205-1810. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission instituted this investigation on September 6, 2006, based on a complaint filed by Ericsson, Inc., of Plano, Texas, and Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson of Stockholm, Sweden (collectively “Ericsson”). 71 FR 52579-52580. The complaint, as supplemented, alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain wireless communication devices, components thereof, and products containing same by reason of infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,758,295 (“the '295 patent”); U.S. Patent No. 5,783,926 (“the '926 patent”); U.S. Patent No. 5,864,765; U.S. Patent No. 6,009,319; U.S. Patent No. 6,029,052; U.S. Patent No. 6,198,405; U.S. Patent No. 6,387,027 (“the '027 patent”); U.S. Patent No. 6,839,549; and U.S. Patent No. 6,975,686. The complaint further alleges the existence of a domestic industry. The Commission's notice of investigation named Samsung Telecommunications America, LLP of Richardson, Texas; Samsung Electronics America, Inc. of Ridgefield Park, New Jersey; and Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. of Seoul, Korea as respondents (collectively “Samsung”). On December 8, 2006, Respondent Samsung moved to terminate part of the investigation as to certain products. On December 20, 2006, Complainant Ericsson filed an opposition to the motion, and the Commission investigative attorney

(IA)filed a response in partial support of the motion. On February 12, 2007, the ALJ granted the motion insofar as it concerned Samsung's single mode CDMA/WCDMA cellular phones. The Commission determined on March 9, 2007, not to review this ID. On March 14 and March 29, 2007, respectively, complainant Ericsson moved to terminate the investigation as to the ‘926 patent and claim 11 of the ‘295 patent. On May 1, 2007, the ALJ granted both motions in an ID (Order No. 30), and on May 17, 2007, the Commission determined not to review that ID. On May 4, 2007, complainant Ericsson moved to terminate the investigation as to the ‘027 patent. On May 22 and June 7, 2007, respectively, the ALJ granted the motion in an ID (Order No. 36), and the Commission determined not to review that ID. On July 23, 2007, complainant Ericsson and respondent Samsung filed a joint motion to terminate the investigation on the basis of a settlement agreement. The Commission investigative attorney filed a response in support of the motion on July 31, 2007. The ALJ issued the subject ID on August 3, 2007, granting the joint motion for termination. No party petitioned for review of the ID pursuant to 19 CFR 210.43(a), and the Commission found no basis for ordering a review on its own initiative pursuant to 19 CFR 210.44. Accordingly, the Commission has determined not to review the ID. The authority for the Commission's determination is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in §§ 210.21(a)(2),

(b)and 210.42(h)(3) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. By order of the Commission. Issued: August 22, 2007. Marilyn R. Abbott, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. E7-16963 Filed 8-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1122-0008] Office on Violence Against Women; Agency Information Collection Activities; Extension of a Currently Approved Collection; Comments Requested ACTION: 30-Day Notice of Information Collection Under Review: Semi-Annual Progress Report for the Enhanced Training and Services to End Violence and Abuse of Women Later in Life Program. The Department of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women (OVW), will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The proposed information collection is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies. This proposed information collection was previously published in the **Federal Register,** Volume 72, Number 117, page 33772 on June 19, 2007, allowing for a 60-day comment period. The purpose of this notice is to allow for an additional 30 days for public comment until September 27, 2007. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. Written comments and/or suggestions regarding the items contained in this notice, especially the estimated public burden and associated response time, should be directed to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention Department of Justice Desk Officer, Washington, DC 20503. Additionally, comments may be submitted to OMB via facsimile to

(202)395-5806. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points:

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

(2)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;

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

(4)Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. Overview of This Information Collection

(1)Type of Information Collection: Extension of a currently approved collection.

(2)Title of the Form/Collection: Semi-Annual Progress Report for Grantees from the Enhanced Training and Services to End Violence and Abuse of Women Later in Life Program (Training Program).

(3)Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department of Justice sponsoring the collection: Form Number: 1122-0008. U.S. Department of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women.

(4)Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: The affected public includes the approximately 18 grantees of the Training Program. Training Program grants may be used for training programs to assist law enforcement officers, prosecutors, and relevant officers of Federal, State, tribal, and local courts in recognizing, addressing, investigating, and prosecuting instances of elder abuse, neglect, and exploitation and violence against individuals with disabilities, including domestic violence and sexual assault, against older or disabled individuals. Grantees fund projects that focus on providing training for criminal justice professionals to enhance their ability to address elder abuse, neglect and exploitation in their communities.

(5)An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond/reply: It is estimated that it will take the approximately 18 respondents (Training Program grantees) approximately one hour to complete a semi-annual progress report. The semi-annual progress report is divided into sections that pertain to the different types of activities in which grantees may engage. A Training Program grantee will only be required to complete the sections of the form that pertain to its own specific activities.

(6)An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The total annual hour burden to complete the data collection forms is 36 hours, that is 18 grantees completing a form twice a year with an estimated completion time for the form being one hour. If additional information is required contact: Lynn Bryant, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Suite 1600, Patrick Henry Building, 601 D Street, NW., Washington, DC 20530. Dated: August 22, 2007. Lynn Bryant, Department Clearance Officer, PRA, United States Department of Justice. [FR Doc. E7-16938 Filed 8-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-FX-P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1122-0009] Office on Violence Against Women; Agency Information Collection Activities; Extension of a Currently Approved Collection; Comments Requested ACTION: 30-Day Notice of Information Collection Under Review; Semi-Annual Progress Report for the Safe Havens; Supervised Visitation and Safe Exchange Grant Program. The Department of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women

(OVW)will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The proposed information collection is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies. This proposed information collection was previously published in the **Federal Register,** Volume Number 72, Number 117, page 33773 on June 19, 2007, allowing for a 60-day comment period. The purpose of this notice is to allow for an additional 30 days for public comment until September 27, 2007. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. Written comments and/or suggestions regarding the items contained in this notice, especially the estimated public burden and associated response time, should be directed to The Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention Department of Justice Desk Officer, Washington, DC 20503. Additionally, comments may be submitted to OMB via facsimile to

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

(2)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;

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

(1)Type of Information Collection: Extension of a currently approved collection.

(2)Title of the Form/Collection: Semi-Annual Progress Report for Grantees from the Safe Havens: Supervised Visitation and Exchange Grant Program (Supervised Visitation Program).

(3)Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department of Justice sponsoring the collection: Form Number: 1122-0009. U.S. Department of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women.

(4)Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: The affected public includes the approximately 33 grantees of the Supervised Visitation Program who are States, Indian tribal governments, and units of local government. The Supervised Visitation Program provides an opportunity for communities to support the supervised visitation and safe exchange of children, by and between parents, in situations involving domestic violence, child abuse, sexual assault, or stalking.

(5)An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond/reply: It is estimated that it will take the approximately 33 respondents (Supervised Visitation Program grantees) approximately one hour to complete a semi-annual progress report. The semi-annual progress report is divided into sections that pertain to the different types of activities in which grantees may engage. A Supervised Visitation Program grantee will only be required to complete the sections of the form that pertain to its own specific activities.

(6)An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The total annual hour burden to complete the data collection forms is 66 hours, that is 33 grantees completing a form twice a year with an estimated completion time for the form being one hour. If additional information is required contact: Lynn Bryant, Deputy Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Suite 1600, Patrick Henry Building, 601 D Street, NW., Washington, DC 20530. Dated: August 22, 2007. Lynn Bryant, Department Clearance Officer, PRA, United States Department of Justice. [FR Doc. E7-16942 Filed 8-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-FX-P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1122-0010] Office on Violence Against Women; Agency Information Collection Activities; Extension of a Currently Approved Collection; Comments Requested ACTION: 30-Day Notice of Information Collection Under Review: Semi-Annual Progress Report for the Grants to State Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence Coalitions Program. The Department of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women

(OVW)will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The proposed information collection is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies. This proposed information collection was previously published in the **Federal Register** , Volume Number 72, Number 117, page 33773 on June 19, 2007, allowing for a 60-day comment period. The purpose of this notice is to allow for an additional 30 days for public comment until September 27, 2007. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. Written comments and/or suggestions regarding the items contained in this notice, especially the estimated public burden and associated response time, should be directed to The Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention Department of Justice Desk Officer, Washington, DC 20503. Additionally, comments may be submitted to OMB via facsimile to

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

(2)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;

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

(1)Type of Information Collection: Extension of a currently approved collection.

(2)Title of the Form/Collection: Semi-Annual Progress Report for Grantees from the Grants to State Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence Coalitions Program (State Coalitions Program).

(3)Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department of Justice sponsoring the collection: Form Number: 1122-0010. U.S. Department of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women.

(4)Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: The affected public includes the 88 grantees from the State Coalitions Program. The State Coalitions Program provides federal financial assistance to state coalitions to support the coordination of state victim services activities, and collaboration and coordination with federal, state, and local entities engaged in violence against women activities.

(5)An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond/reply: It is estimated that it will take the approximately 88 respondents (State Coalitions Program grantees) approximately one hour to complete a semi-annual progress report. The semi-annual progress report is divided into sections that pertain to the different types of activities in which grantees may engage. A State Coalitions Program grantee will only be required to complete the sections of the form that pertain to its own specific activities.

(6)An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The total annual hour burden to complete the data collection forms is 176 hours, that is 88 grantees completing a form twice a year with an estimated completion time for the form being one hour. If additional information is required contact: Lynn Bryant, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Suite 1600, Patrick Henry Building, 601 D Street, NW., Washington, DC 20530. Dated: August 22, 2007. Lynn Bryant, Department Clearance Officer, PRA, United States Department of Justice. [FR Doc. E7-16943 Filed 8-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-FX-P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1122-0005] Office on Violence Against Women; Agency Information Collection Activities Extension of a Currently Approved Collection; Comments Requested ACTION: 30-Day Notice of Information Collection Under Review: Semi-Annual Progress Report for the Grantees from the Grants to Reduce Violent Crimes Against Women on Campus Program. The Department of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women

(OVW)will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The proposed information collection is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies. This proposed information collection was previously published in the **Federal Register** , Volume Number 72, Number 117, page 33771 on June 19, 2007, allowing for a 60-day comment period. The purpose of this notice is to allow for an additional 30 days for public comment until September 27, 2007. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. Written comments and/or suggestions regarding the items contained in this notice, especially the estimated public burden and associated response time, should be directed to The Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention Department of Justice Desk Officer, Washington, DC 20503. Additionally, comments may be submitted to OMB via facsimile to

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

(2)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;

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

(1)Type of Information Collection: Extension of a currently approved collection

(2)Title of the Form/Collection: Semi-Annual Progress Report for Grantees from the Grants to Reduce Violent Crimes Against Women on Campus Program (Campus Program).

(3)Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department of Justice sponsoring the collection: Form Number: 1122-0005. U.S. Department of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women.

(4)Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: The affected public includes the approximately 100 grantees (institutions of higher education) of the Grants to Reduce Violent Crimes Against Women on Campus Program whose eligibility is determined by statute. Campus Program grants may be used to enhance victim services and develop programs to prevent violent crimes against women on campuses. The Campus Program also enables institutions of higher education to develop and strengthen effective security and investigation strategies to combat violent crimes against women on campuses, including domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking.

(5)An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond/reply: It is estimated that it will take the approximately 100 respondents (Campus Program grantees) approximately one hour to complete a semi-annual progress report. The semi-annual progress report is divided into sections that pertain to the different types of activities in which grantees may engage. A Campus Program grantee will only be required to complete the sections of the form that pertain to its own specific activities.

(6)An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The total annual hour burden to complete the data collection forms is 200 hours, that is 100 grantees completing a form twice a year with an estimated completion time for the form being one hour. If additional information is required contact: Lynn Bryant, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Suite 1600, Patrick Henry Building, 601 D Street, NW., Washington, DC 20530. Dated: August 22, 2007. Lynn Bryant, Department Clearance Officer, PRA, United States Department of Justice. [FR Doc. E7-16944 Filed 8-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-FX-P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives [OMB Number 1140-0090] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comments Requested ACTION: 60-Day Notice of Information Collection Under Review: ATF F 5630.5R, NFA Special Tax Renewal Registration and Return ATF F 5630.5RC, NFA Special Tax Location Registration Listing ATF F 5630.7, NFA Special Tax Registration and Return National Firearms Act. The Department of Justice (DOJ), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The proposed information collection is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies. Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for “sixty days” until October 29, 2007. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. If you have comments especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Kathleen M. Downs, Financial Management Division, Room 4450, 650 Massachusetts Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20226. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points: —Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; —Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies 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 to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. Overview of This Information Collection

(1)Type of Information Collection: Extension of a currently approved collection.

(2)Title of the Form/Collection: ATF F 5630.5R, NFA Special Tax Renewal Registration and Return, ATF F 5630.5RC, NFA Special Tax Location Registration Listing, ATF F 5630.7, NFA Special Tax Registration and Return National Firearms Act.

(3)Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department of Justice sponsoring the collection: Form Number: ATF F 5630.5R, ATF F 5630.5RC, ATF F 5630.7. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

(4)Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Primary: Business or other for-profit. Other: None. ATF F 5630.7, NFA Special Tax Registration and Return National Firearms Act is completed and returned by businesses that are subject to Special Occupation Taxes under the National Firearms Act for either initial tax payment or business information changes. This form serves as both a return and a business registration. ATF F 5630.5R, NFA Special Tax Renewal Registration and Return and ATF F 5630.5RC, NFA Special Tax Location Registration Listing are preprinted forms sent to taxpayers who Special Occupational Taxes under the National Firearms Act. Taxpayers validate/correct the information and send the forms back with payment for the applicable tax year.

(5)An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: It is estimated that 2,800 taxpayers will complete forms ATF F 5630.5R and ATF F 5630.5RC in approximately 20 minutes (10 minutes for each form). It is also estimated that 200 new taxpayers will complete ATF F 5630.7 in its entirety in approximately 15 minutes. The total number of respondents for this information collection is 3,000.

(6)An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: The total burden for ATF F 5630.5R and ATF F 5630.5RC is 933 hours. The total burden for ATF F 5630.7 is 50 hours. The estimated total public burden associated with this information collection is 983 hours. If additional information is required contact: Lynn Bryant, Department Clearance Officer, Policy and Planning Staff, Justice Management Division, Department of Justice, Patrick Henry Building, Suite 1600, 601 D Street, NW., Washington, DC 20530. Dated: August 22, 2007. Lynn Bryant, Department Clearance Officer, PRA, Department of Justice. [FR Doc. E7-16969 Filed 8-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-FY-P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration Manufacturer of Controlled Substances; Notice of Application Pursuant to § 1301.33(a) of Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), this is notice that on July 20, 2007, Cerilliant Corporation, 811 Paloma Drive, Suite A, Round Rock, Texas 78664, made application by renewal to the Drug Enforcement Administration

(DEA)for registration as a bulk manufacturer of the basic classes of controlled substances listed in schedule I and II: Drug Schedule Cathinone

(1235)I Methcathinone

(1237)I N-Ethylamphetamine

(1475)I N,N-Dimethylamphetamine

(1480)I Aminorex

(1585)I 4-Methylaminorex (cis isomer)

(1590)I Gamma Hydroxybutyric acid

(2010)I Methaqualone

(2565)I Alpha-Ethyltryptamine

(7249)I Lysergic acid diethylamide

(7315)I Marihuana

(7360)I Tetrahydrocannabinols

(7370)I Mescaline

(7381)I 3,4,5-Trimethoxyamphetamine

(7390)I 4-Bromo-2,5-dimethoxyamphetamine

(7391)I 4-Bromo-2,5-dimethoxyphenethylamine

(7392)I 4-Methyl-2,5-dimethoxyamphetamine

(7395)I 2,5-Dimethoxyamphetamine

(7396)I 2,5-Dimethoxy-4-ethylamphetamine

(7399)I 3,4-Methylenedioxyamphetamine

(7400)I 5-Methoxy-3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine

(7401)I N-Hydroxy-3,4-methylendioxyamphetamine

(7402)I 3,4-Methylendioxy-N-ethylamphetamine

(7404)I 3,4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine

(7405)I 4-Methoxyamphetamine

(7411)I Alpha-methyltryptamine

(7432)I Bufotenine

(7433)I Diethyltryptamine

(7434)I Dimethyltryptamine

(7435)I Psilocybin

(7437)I Psilocyn

(7438)I Acetyldihydrocodeine

(9051)I Benzylmorphine

(9052)I Codeine-N-oxide

(9053)I Dihydromorphine

(9145)I Heroin

(9200)I Hydromorphinol

(9301)I Methyldihydromorphine

(9304)I Morphine-N-oxide

(9307)I Normorphine

(9313)I Pholcodine

(9314)I Acetylmethadol

(9601)I Allylprodine

(9602)I Alphacetylmethadol except levo-alphacetylmethadol

(9603)I Alphameprodine

(9604)I Alphamethadol

(9605)I Betacetylmethadol

(9607)I Betameprodine

(9608)I Betamethadol

(9609)I Betaprodine

(9611)I Hydroxypethidine

(9627)I Noracymethadol

(9633)I Norlevorphanol

(9634)I Normethadone

(9635)I Trimeperidine

(9646)I Phenomorphan

(9647)I Para-Fluorofentanyl

(9812)I 3-Methylfentanyl

(9813)I Alpha-Methylfentanyl

(9814)I Acetyl-alpha-methylfentanyl

(9815)I Beta-hydroxyfentanyl

(9830)I Beta-hydroxy-3-methylfentanyl

(9831)I Alpha-Methylthiofentanyl

(9832)I 3-Methylthiofentanyl

(9833)I Thiofentanyl

(9835)I Amphetamine

(1100)II Methamphetamine

(1105)II Phenmetrazine

(1631)II Methylphenidate

(1724)II Ambobarbital

(2125)II Pentobarbital

(2270)II Secobarbital

(2315)II Glutethimide

(2550)II Nabilone

(7379)II 1-Phenylcyclohexylamine

(7460)II Phencyclidine

(7471)II 1-Piperidinocyclohexane carbonitrile

(8603)II Alphaprodine

(9010)II Cocaine

(9041)II Codeine

(9050)II Dihydrocodeine

(9120)II Oxycodone

(9143)II Hydromorphone

(9150)II Diphenoxylate

(9170)II Benzoylecgonine

(9180)II Ethylmorphine

(9190)II Hydrocodone

(9193)II Levomethorphan

(9210)II Levorphanol

(9220)II Isomethadone

(9226)II Meperidine

(9230)II Methadone

(9250)II Methadone intermediate

(9254)II Dextropropoxyphene, bulk (non-dosage forms)

(9273)II Morphine

(9300)II Thebaine

(9333)II Levo-alphacetylmethadol

(9648)II Oxymorphone

(9652)II Noroxymorphone

(9668)II Racemethorphan

(9732)II Alfentanil

(9737)II Sufentanil

(9740)II Fentanyl

(9801)II The company plans to manufacture small quantities of the listed controlled substances to make reference standards which will be distributed to their customers. Any other such applicant and any person who is presently registered with DEA to manufacture such substances may file comments or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration pursuant to 21 CFR 1301.33(a). Any such comments or objections being sent via regular mail should be addressed, in quintuplicate, to the Drug Enforcement Administration, Office of Diversion Control, Federal Register Representative (ODL), Washington, DC 20537; or any being sent via express mail should be sent to Drug Enforcement Administration, Office of Diversion Control, Federal Register Representative (ODL), 2401 Jefferson-Davis Highway, Alexandria, Virginia 22301; and must be filed no later than October 29, 2007. Dated: August 16, 2007. Joseph T. Rannazzisi, Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration. [FR Doc. E7-16937 Filed 8-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. 07-36] Spirit Pharmaceuticals, L.L.C., c/o Novelty, Inc; Denial of Request for Hearing On June 22, 2007, I, the Deputy Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration, issued an Order to Suspend Shipment to Spirit Pharmaceuticals, L.L.C., of Fairless Hills, Pennsylvania. *See* 21 U.S.C. 971(c). The Order suspended Spirit's proposed importation of 2,000 kilograms of Ephedrine Hydrochloride to be purchased from Emmellen Biotech Pharmaceuticals, LTD., of Mumbai, India. Order at 1. The factual basis of the Order was that Spirit, a registered importer, had identified AAA Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (AAA), as the customer, on the Import Declaration (DEA Form 486) that it filed. *Id.* at 2. DEA personnel subsequently contacted AAA and determined that the ephedrine was to be used to manufacture tablets that would be sold to Novelty, Inc. *Id.* at 2. The Order related that ephedrine is a list I chemical, which while having a legitimate use as a bronchodilator, is also a precursor chemical which is used in the illicit manufacture of methamphetamine, a schedule II controlled substance. *Id.* The Order also related that DEA has found that non-traditional (or gray-market) retailers, which include such entities as gas stations, convenience stores, mini-marts, and liquor stores, “purchase and sell ephedrine * * * OTC products in quantities that exceed what would be necessary to meet legitimate demand” at these establishments, and that the products “are often sold to persons for use in the illicit manufacture of methamphetamine.” *Id.* Finally, the Order related that “AAA manufactures and Novelty distributes” ephedrine products which are “not widely-advertised and are distributed to `non-traditional' retail outlets * * * such as convenience stores and gas stations.” *Id.* at 3. Based on DEA's experience with similar ephedrine products which were distributed to non-traditional retailers, I found that “the proposed importation of ephedrine may be diverted to the clandestine manufacture of controlled substances.” *Id.* The Order notified Spirit that it could request a hearing by filing a written request within thirty days of its receipt of the Order, and that if it failed to do so, it would be deemed to have waived its right to a hearing. *Id.* Spirit did not, however, request a hearing. Nor did AAA. Instead, on July 5, 2007, Novelty filed a request for a hearing asserting that it is “a regulated person to whom an order applies” under 21 U.S.C. 971(c)(2). ALJ Memorandum at 1; *see also* Ltr. of Novelty's Counsel (June 28, 2007), at 1. Novelty also contended that it “is directly harmed, both in its property and liberty interests,” and that it “has an independent due process right to a hearing under the Fifth Amendment * * * regardless of whether Spirit also requests a hearing on the order of suspension.” Ltr. of Novelty's Counsel at 1. *Id.* Upon receipt of Novelty's letter, the matter was assigned to Administrative Law Judge

(ALJ)Gail Randall, who initiated pre-hearing procedures. Shortly thereafter, the Government filed a motion to deny Novelty a hearing on various grounds including that it is a downstream distributor and thus not entitled to a hearing under the statute. *See* Mot. to Deny Novelty, Inc. an Adjudicatory Hearing Under 21 U.S.C. 971(c)(2) (hereinafter, Mot. to Deny). Upon review of the Government's motion, the ALJ concluded “that the usual manner of handling an administrative hearing is not appropriate here.” ALJ Memorandum at 2. Noting that “[t]he entity asking for a hearing, Novelty, is not the entity addressed in the Order to Suspend Shipment, Spirit Pharmaceuticals,” and that the Government had objected to granting Novelty a hearing on the validity of the suspension order, the ALJ concluded that “the designation of this matter for a hearing is not clear.” *Id.* The ALJ thus transmitted the issue to me for resolution. *Id.* at 2-3. For the reasons set forth below, I conclude that Novelty is not “a regulated person to whom an order applies under [21 U.S.C. 971(c)(1)].” 21 U.S.C. 971(c)(2). Accordingly, I deny Novelty's request for a hearing to challenge the suspension order. I further order that the proceedings currently pending before the ALJ be terminated. Discussion Under 21 U.S.C. 971(a), “[e]ach regulated person *who imports* * * * a listed chemical shall notify the Attorney General of the importation * * * not later than 15 days before the transaction is to take place.” (emphasis added). 1 In addition, in subsection (c)(1), Congress granted the Attorney General the authority to “order the suspension of any importation * * * of a listed chemical * * * on the ground that the chemical may be diverted to the clandestine manufacture of a controlled substance.” *Id.* § 971(c)(1). Subsection (c)(1) further provides that “[f]rom and after the time when the Attorney General provides written notice of the order * * * to the regulated person, the regulated person may not carry out the transaction.” *Id.* 1 In subsection (b), Congress directed that the Attorney General issue regulations “for circumstances in which the requirement of subsection

(a)* * * does not apply to a transaction between a regulated person and a regular customer or to an importation by a regular importer.” 21 U.S.C. 971(b)(1). In the event that the Agency orders the suspension of an importation, Congress provided that “[u]pon written request to the Attorney General, *a regulated person to whom an order applies under paragraph(1)* is entitled to an agency hearing on the record in accordance with” subchapter II of the Administrative Procedure Act. *Id.* § 971(c)(2) (emphasis added). It is this provision which is at issue in this proceeding. Relying on *PDK Labs.* v. *Reno* , 134 F. Supp.2d 24 (D.D.C. 2001), Novelty contends that as a wholesale distributor, it “is a ‘regulated person’ within the meaning of 21 U.S.C. 802(38) and, as such, is entitled to a hearing under” subsection (c)(2). Novelty's Resp. to Mot. to Deny at 7. Novelty also maintains that it “is a party within the `zone of interests' designedly protected by” the hearing provision and thus entitled to a hearing on this alternative ground. *Id.* Relatedly, Novelty contends that to deny it a hearing would violate the rule of law because *PDK Labs.* v. *Reno* “remain[s] the law governing this agency's construction of the hearing provision,” *id.* at 5, and that “DEA possesses no lawful power to act against the holding of the District Court in” that case. *Id.* at 6. In *PDK Labs.* v. *Reno* , the district court addressed the question of whether a manufacturer

(PDK)was entitled to a hearing to challenge this Agency's refusal to issue a Letter of No Objection

(LONO)to Indace, Inc., an importer which had notified the Agency of its intent to import bulk ephedrine on behalf of PDK. 134 F.Supp.2d at 28. When the Agency refused to grant the LONO, PDK filed suit raising various claims including that the Agency had violated the Administrative Procedure Act and had “failed to perform its statutory duties.” 2 *Id.* at 27. 2 At the time PDK filed suit, Indace had indicated that it planned to pursue the matter by having DEA issue a suspension order. 134 F.Supp.2d at 28. The day after PDK filed suit, Indace notified the Agency that it considered the matter as being “solely between” DEA and PDK and that it no longer intended to pursue the matter. *Id.* DEA then notified Indace that it considered the request for importation to have been withdrawn. *Id.* In the course of discussing whether PDK had standing to bring its APA claims, the district court addressed the Government's arguments that PDK was “not an intended beneficiary of § 971's procedures,” and that “the interests underlying [its] claims [were] not within the `zone of interests' protected by” the statute. *Id.* at 29-30. In rejecting these arguments, the court began by noting that under 21 U.S.C. 802(38), “`regulated persons' included manufactures [sic], distributors, importers, and exporters of listed chemicals,” and that “as both a manufacturer and distributor PDK is a regulated person within the meaning of § 802.” *Id.* at 30. Observing that “[s]ection 971 uses both the terms `importers' and `regulated persons,' ” the court reasoned that “Congress easily could have limited the right to a hearing in § 971(c)(2) exclusively to `importers to whom an order applies,' but chose not to do so—instead extending this right to `regulated persons.' ” *Id.* The court then concluded that “[t]he specific use of the term `regulated persons' in § 971(c)(2) at least suggests that Congress intended to permit a regulated entity to whom an order applies— *including a manufacturer like PDK* —to obtain judicial review.” *Id.* (emphasis added) The court buttressed its reasoning asserting that this Agency “itself previously adopted a similar reading in *Yi Heng Enterprises Dev. Co.* , 64 FR 2234, 2235 (1999).” *Id.* While noting that “ *Yi Heng* arose in a different context * * * because it involved the interests of two importers rather than an importer and a manufacture [sic],” the court noted that the “decision recognized that `the statute provides the opportunity for a hearing to “a regulated person to whom an order (suspending shipment) applies,” not necessarily the person to whom the order was issued.' ” *Id.* After discussing the zone of interests test for review under the APA—a separate inquiry from that of who is entitled to an agency hearing under the statute—the court further concluded that “the phrase ‘regulated person to whom any [sic] order applies’ is evidence that a manufacturer affected by a suspension order is protected under § 971's review provision.” *Id.* at 31. The court also noted that because PDK was specifically listed on the DEA Form 486 as “the intended recipient of” the proposed importation and that the suspension order “hinge[d] largely on the identity of the eventual purchaser,” PDK was “entitled to a hearing.” *Id.* Most of the district court's analysis of the hearing provision occurred in the course of its discussion of whether PDK had standing under the APA. The court nonetheless clearly incorporated this reasoning in granting PDK's motions for injunctive and declaratory relief. *See id.* at 36 (“PDK is a ‘regulated person to whom an order applies’ within the meaning of § 971. As such, it is entitled to an expedited hearing of formal suspension orders that apply to it.”). *See also id.* at 38. DEA did not appeal the court's decision, which ordered the Agency to either issue a LONO or a suspension order. *Id.* Instead, the Agency complied with the court's order by issuing orders suspending the importations. *See Indace, Inc., c/o Seegott, Inc.* , 67 FR 77805 (2002). Thereafter, PDK requested a hearing and “DEA complied with the court's ruling” by granting PDK a hearing. *Id.* The Government disagrees with Novelty as to the precedential weight of *PDK Labs.* v. *Reno.* First, the Government argues that *Yi Heng,* upon which the district court relied, does not support granting Novelty a hearing because there, both entities were deemed to be importers and thus the case did not address “the question of whether someone other than an importer could obtain a hearing.” Motion to Deny at 9. The Government further argues that “Novelty is a step further removed from the importation than the plaintiff in *PDK Labs.* ,” and that to grant a hearing “to any downstream regulated person affected by a suspension order is a considerable expansion of the flawed reasoning in *PDK Labs.* v. *Reno.* ” Mot. to Deny at 10. Relatedly, the Government contends that “under Novelty's reasoning, any one of [its] thousands of customers,” which are also “regulated persons” under the statute, “could receive [a hearing] regardless of whether Spirit, AAA, or even Novelty was interested in pursuing the importation.” *Id.* at 11. Having considered the parties' arguments, I agree with the Government that *PDK Labs* v. *Reno* is not controlling authority in this matter. The statutory scheme, reasonably read, grants a hearing only to those who are properly deemed to be importers. While in some circumstances, a manufacturer may also be deemed to be an importer because it is the real party in interest in an import transaction, Novelty is neither an importer nor a manufacturer. Rather, it is the purchaser and distributor of a new and different product combining the ephedrine with guaifenesin, which has been manufactured in the United States. To be sure, a distributor such as Novelty falls within the definition of a “regulated person.” 21 U.S.C. 802(38). In subsection (c)(2), however, Congress did not extend the hearing right to all “regulated persons.” Rather, it limited the right to only “a regulated person to *whom an order applies under paragraph(1).* ” *Id.* § 971(c)(2) (emphasis added). And as paragraph

(1)(subsection (c)(1)) makes plain, the “regulated person to whom an order applies” is the regulated person that is seeking to “ *carry out the transaction* ” of the importation and which is the same regulated person that has previously notified the Agency of the proposed transaction. *Id.* § 971(c)(1) (emphasis added). *See also id.* § 971(a) (“Each regulated person *who imports* * * * a listed chemical shall notify the Attorney General of the importation * * * not later than 15 days before *the transaction* is to take place.”) (emphasis added). As section 971's text and structure demonstrate, an entity's entitlement to a hearing is not based solely on its status as a “regulated person,” but rather, as a “regulated person” seeking to carry out an import transaction. As explained above, the transaction which is the subject of the suspension order is the importation of bulk ephedrine by Spirit Pharmaceuticals from Emmellen Biotech Pharmaceuticals of Mumbai, India. Novelty is not a party to this transaction. My predecessor's decision in *Yi Heng* (which the district court relied on in *PDK* ) provides no comfort to Novelty. In *Yi Heng* , my predecessor apparently adopted the ALJ's interpretation that “the statute does not specify that only one party in a transaction is entitled to a hearing. * * * [T]he statute provides the opportunity for a hearing to ‘a regulated person to whom an order (suspending shipment) applies,’ not necessarily the person to whom the order was issued.” 64 FR at 2235 (int. quotations omitted). In the decision, my predecessor relied on the Agency's regulation which defines a “chemical importer” as “a regulated person who, as *“the principal party in interest in the import transaction”,* has the power and responsibility for determining and controlling the bringing in or introduction of the listed chemical into the United States.” *Id.* (quoting 21 CFR 1300.02(b)(8)). Because title to the chemical had passed to *Yi Heng's* customer “before the chemical entered the United States,” the customer was also “a regulated person to whom the suspension order applies.” *Id.* Unlike *Yi Heng's* customer, Novelty is not “the principal party in interest in the import transaction.” 21 CFR 1300.02(b)(8). Indeed, as explained above, it is not even a party to the import transaction. Novelty thus stands on a different footing than a manufacturer (such as PDK did) which lacks an import registration and which must therefore import by entering into an agency relationship with a registered importer. 3 Novelty does not have “the power and responsibility for determining and controlling the bringing in or introduction of the listed chemical into the United States.” *Id.* As the Government points out, even were Novelty to prevail at a hearing, it cannot “compel Spirit to import the ephedrine.” Mot. to Deny at 8. Nor does Novelty identify any consequence that would attach to it were Spirit to violate the suspension order. *See* 21 U.S.C. 960(d). 3 As our regulation makes clear, a manufacturer is an importer only when the registered importer acts as the manufacturer's agent in importing the chemical and the manufacturer is the principal party in interest in the transaction. When an importer proposes to import a listed chemical for its own account, its future customers are not importers. Furthermore, here, in contrast to the PDK case, not even the manufacturer

(AAA)filed a request for a hearing. Moreover, under Novelty's construction of the statute, any one of a manufacturer's wholesale-distributor customers (and some manufacturers have numerous wholesaler customers) would be entitled to a hearing even if the manufacturer had decided that it no longer desired to pursue the importation and manufacture the product. I will not adopt a construction of the statute that would lead to such an absurd result. 4 *Cf. Griffin v. Oceanic Contractors, Inc.,* 458 U.S. 564, 575 (1982). 4 Novelty also argues that importers “have little interest or incentive to do battle in a hearing with DEA,” and that “the importer has no way of discerning the intricacies of its client's business.” Novelty's Resp. at 8 n.3. Novelty ignores, however, that in an agency relationship, the “principal has the right to control the conduct of the agent with respect to matters entrusted to him.” 1 American Law Institute, *Restatement (Second) of Agency* § 14, at 60 (1958). Presumably, the principal's right to control its agent should be sufficient to induce the agent to request a hearing, at which the manufacturer would intervene and litigate the basis for the order. The text and structure of section 971 thus provide ample evidence that Congress intended to grant a hearing only to those regulated persons who are principal parties to a proposed import transaction. Because Novelty is not such a party but rather the purchaser of a new and different product, which has been manufactured in the United States, it is not “a regulated person to whom an order applies.” 21 U.S.C. 971(c)(2). It is therefore not entitled to a hearing. 5 5 For the same reasons, I also reject Novelty's contention that it is entitled to a hearing because it is within the zone of interests protected by section 971. Novelty further argues that to deny it a hearing would deprive it of liberty and property interests in violation of the Due Process Clause. Novelty's Resp. at 16-17. Relatedly, Novelty argues that under the avoidance doctrine, DEA must construe the statute to provide it with a hearing. Novelty has not established that the suspension order has deprived it of either a liberty or property interest. Novelty maintains that it “has a liberty interest in avoiding damage to its reputation * * * that will result from the stigmatizing suspension DEA creates by its effective import ban.” Novelty Resp. at 17. This contention is easily dismissed because in *Paul* v. *Davis* , 424 U.S. 693, 712 (1976), the Supreme Court held that one's “interest in reputation” is “neither ‘liberty’ nor ‘property’ ” under the Due Process Clause. Novelty further asserts that “the stigmatizing effects” of the suspension order will “preclude[ it] from obtaining 10-15% of its revenue.” Novelty Resp. at 17. The Suspension Order does not, however, prevent Novelty from obtaining product from any one of the numerous other manufacturers of these products and thus does not preclude Novelty “from pursuing its core business.” *PDK Labs.* v. *Reno* , 134 F.Supp.2d at 33. As for Novelty's claimed property interest, the *PDK* court held that “[n]othing in the overall scheme of the [Chemical Diversion and Trafficking Act] justifies the finding that [a manufacturer] has an entitlement to import List I chemicals.” *Id* . at 33. The same is equally true with respect to a distributor. I therefore conclude that construing the statute to deny Novelty a hearing—as Congress intended—does not raise any constitutional question. 6 6 Novelty also argues that “DEA's refusal to grant [it] a hearing violates the DEA Administrator's oath of office to uphold the Constitution and the laws of the United States,” Novelty Resp. at 19, and kindly reminds me that “[v]iolation of the oath is an offense punishable by judicial action.” *Id.* at 20. Novelty can be assured that both I and the Administrator fully appreciate our obligation to faithfully discharge the duties of our offices. Order Pursuant to the authority vested in me by 28 CFR 0.100(b) & 0.104, I hereby order that the request of Novelty, Inc., for a hearing to challenge the Order to Suspend Shipment issued to Spirit Pharmaceuticals, Inc., be, and it hereby is, denied. I further order that the proceedings in this matter be, and they hereby are, terminated. This Order is effectively immediately. Dated: August 17, 2007. Michele M. Leonhart, Deputy Administrator. [FR Doc. E7-16936 Filed 8-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Office of the Secretary Submission for OMB Review: Comment Request August 22, 2007. The Department of Labor has submitted the following public information collection requests

(ICR)to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13, 44 U.S.C. chapter 35). Copies of each ICR, with applicable supporting documentation; including among other things a description of the likely respondents, proposed frequency of response, and estimated total burden may be obtained from the RegInfo.gov Web site at *http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain* or by contacting Darrin King on 202-693-4129 (this is not a toll-free number)/e-mail: *king.darrin@dol.gov.* Comments should be sent to Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: Carolyn Lovett, OMB Desk Officer for the Employment Standards Administration (ESA), Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503, Telephone: 202-395-7316/Fax: 202-395-6974 (these are not a toll-free numbers), E-mail: *OIRA_submission@omb.eop.gov* within 30 days from the date of this publication in the **Federal Register** . In order to ensure the appropriate consideration, comments should reference the OMB Control Number (see below). The OMB is particularly interested in comments which: • Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; • 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 to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. *Agency:* Employment Standards Administration. *Type of Review:* Revision and Extension of currently approved collection. *Title:* Employer's First Report of Injury or Occupational Disease; Physician's Report on Impairment of Vision; and Employer's Supplementary Report of Accident or Occupational Illness. *OMB Control Number:* 1215-0031. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 26,381. *Estimated Total Burden Hours:* 6,595. *Affected Public:* Private Sector: Business or other for-profits. *Description:* The Forms LS-202 and LS-210 are used to report injuries, periods of disability, and medical treatment under the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act. *Agency:* Employment Standards Administration. *Type of Review:* Revision and Extension of currently approved collection. *Title:* Operator Controversion, Operator Response, Operator Response to Schedule for Submission of Additional Evidence, and Operator Response to Notice of Claim. *OMB Control Number:* 1215-0058. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* 8,000. *Estimated Total Burden Hours:* 2,333. *Affected Public:* Private Sector: Business or other for-profits. *Description:* The Forms CM-2790 & CM-2970a are used for claims filed after January 19, 2001 and indicate that the coal mine operator will submit additional evidence or respond to the notice of claim. Darrin A. King, Acting Departmental Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E7-16961 Filed 8-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510-CF-P NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION Renewal of Advisory Committee on Electronic Records Archives This notice is published in accordance with the provisions of section 9(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.) and advises of the renewal of the National Archives and Records Administration's

(NARA)Advisory Committee on Electronic Records Archives. In accordance with Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)Circular A-135, OMB approved the inclusion of the Advisory Committee on Electronic Records Archives in NARA's ceiling of discretionary advisory committees. NARA has determined that the renewal of the Advisory Committee on Electronic Records Archives is in the public interest due to the expertise and valuable advice the Committee members provide on technical, mission, and service issues related to the Electronic Records Archives (ERA). NARA will use the Committee's recommendations on issues related to the development, implementation, and use of the ERA system. NARA's Committee Management Officer is Mary Ann Hadyka. She can be reached at 301-837-1782. Dated: August 21, 2007. Mary Ann Hadyka, Committee Management Officer. [FR Doc. E7-16991 Filed 8-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7515-01-P NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Notice of Permit Applications Received Under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978 (Pub. L. 95-541) AGENCY: National Science Foundation. ACTION: Notice of permit modification received under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978, Public Law 95-541. SUMMARY: The National Science Foundation

(NSF)is required to publish a notice of requests to modify permits issued to conduct activities regulated under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978. NSF has published regulations under the Antarctic Conservation Act at Title 45 Part 670 of the Code of Federal Regulations. This is the required notice of a requested permit modification. DATES: Interested parties are invited to submit written data, comments, or views with respect to this permit application by September 27, 2007. Permit applications may be inspected by interested parties at the Permit Office, address below. ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to Permit Office, Room 755, Office of Polar Programs, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nadene G. Kennedy at the above address or

(703)292-7405. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The National Science Foundation, as directed by the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978 (Pub. L. 95-541), as amended by the Antarctic Science, Tourism and Conservation Act of 1996, has developed regulations for the establishment of a permit system for various activities in Antarctica and designation of certain animals and certain geographic areas requiring special protection. The regulations establish such a permit system to designate Antarctic Specially Protected Areas. *Description of Permit Modification Requested:* The Foundation issued a permit (2007-003) to Dr. Rennie S. Holt on December 26, 2006. The issued permit allows the applicant to census, tag, collect samples and instrument mammals (Antarctic Fur, Leopard, Southern Elephant, Ross, Weddell and Crabeater seals) and seabirds (Chinstrap and Gentoo penguins, Cape Petrels, Giant Petrels, Brown Skuas, South Pole Skuas, Sheathbills, Kelp gulls, and Blue-eyed Shag). The applicant requests a modification to his permit to collect a single whisker from each captured Fur or Leopard seal for measuring stable isotope ratios to infer trophic levels. Collection will occur while the animal is anesthetized for tagging or instrumentation. *Location:* Cape Shirreff, Livingston Island (including San Telmo islands), Seal Island and King George Island. *Dates:* November 1, 2007 to April 30, 2011. Nadene G. Kennedy, Permit Officer, Office of Polar Programs. [FR Doc. E7-16918 Filed 8-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7555-01-P NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Notice of Permit Applications Received Under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978 (Pub. L. 95-541) AGENCY: National Science Foundation. ACTION: Notice of Permit Modification Received under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978, Public Law 95-541. SUMMARY: The National Science Foundation

(NSF)is required to publish a notice of requests to modify permits issued to conduct activities regulated under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978. NSF has published regulations under the Antarctic Conservation Act at Title 45, Part 670 of the Code of Federal Regulations. This is the required notice of a requested permit modification. DATES: Interested parties are invited to submit written data, comments, or views with respect to this permit application by September 27, 2007. Permit applications may be inspected by interested parties at the Permit Office, address below. ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to Permit Office, Room 755, Office of Polar Programs, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nadene G. Kennedy at the above address or

(1)Pre-tag adult females >21 years (non-pregnant, non-lactating) only if they are encountered at a time when they cannot be properly instrumented (bad weather or all instruments already deployed). Pre-tagging would involve up to 2-6 adult females and would allow for easier tracking and location for further instrumentation.

(2)Increase the number of Weddell seals sampled from 48 to 60.

(3)Opportunistically collect and export to the U.S. up to 100 Weddell seal fecal samples for future assessment of the cumulative effect of research activities on Weddell seals, by way of analysis of stress hormone levels (corticosteroids).

(4)Enter the Cape Royds Antarctic Specially Protected Area (ASPA 121) only on a contingency basis should a seal wander into the area and the applicant needs to retrieve an instrument package. *Location:* McMurdo Sound sea ice. *Dates:* October 1, 2007 to February 28, 2008. Nadene G. Kennedy, Permit Officer, Office of Polar Programs. [FR Doc. E7-16932 Filed 8-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7555-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)Review; Comment Request AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). ACTION: Notice of the OMB review of information collection and solicitation of public comment. SUMMARY: The NRC has recently submitted to OMB for review the following proposal for the collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). The NRC hereby informs potential respondents that an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and that a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. 1. Type of submission—new, revision, or extension: Extension. 2. The title of the information collection: 10 CFR Part 19, “Notices, Instructions, and Reports to Workers: Inspection and Investigations.” 3. The form number if applicable: N/A. 4. How often the collection is required: As necessary in order that adequate and timely reports of radiation exposure be made to individuals involved in NRC-licensed activities. 5. Who will be required or asked to report: Licensees authorized to receive, possess, use, or transfer material licensed by the NRC. 6. An estimate of the number of annual responses: 4,906 responses (256 plus 4,650 recordkeepers). 7. The estimated number of annual respondents: 4,650 licensees. 8. An estimate of the total number of hours needed annually to complete the requirement or request: 35,674 hours (4,553 hours for reporting and 31,121 hours for recordkeeping). 9. An indication of whether Section 3507(d), Pub. L. 104-13 applies: N/A. 10. Abstract: Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 19, requires licensees to advise workers on an annual basis of any radiation exposure they may have received as a result of NRC-licensed activities or when certain conditions are met. These conditions apply during termination of the worker's employment, at the request of a worker, former worker, or when the worker's employer (the NRC licensee) must report radiation exposure information on the worker to the NRC. Part 19 also establishes requirements for instructions by licensees to individuals participating in licensed activities and options available to these individuals in connection with Commission inspections of licensees to ascertain compliance with the provisions of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, Title II of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, and regulations, orders and licenses thereunder regarding radiological working conditions. The worker should be informed of the radiation dose he or she receives because:

(a)That information is needed by both a new employer and the individual when the employee changes jobs in the nuclear industry;

(b)the individual needs to know the radiation dose received as a result of an accident or incident (if this dose is in excess of the 10 CFR Part 20 limits) so that he or she can seek counseling about future work involving radiation, medical attention, or both, as desired; and

(c)since long-term exposure to radiation may be an adverse health factor, the individual needs to know whether the accumulated dose is being controlled within NRC limits. The worker also needs to know about health risks from occupational exposure to radioactive materials or radiation, precautions or procedures to minimize exposure, worker responsibilities and options to report any licensee conditions which may lead to or cause a violation of Commission regulations, and individual radiation exposure reports which are available to him. A copy of the final supporting statement may be viewed free of charge at the NRC Public Document Room, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Room O-1 F21, Rockville, Maryland 20852. OMB clearance requests are available at the NRC worldwide Web site: *http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/doc-comment/omb/index.html.* The document will be available on the NRC home page site for 60 days after the signature date of this notice. Comments and questions should be directed to the OMB reviewer listed below by September 27, 2007. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but assurance of consideration cannot be given to comments received after this date. Nathan Frey, Desk Officer, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (3150-0044), NEOB-10202, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503. Comments can also be e-mailed to *Nathan_Frey@omb.eop.gov* or submitted by telephone at

(202)395-4650. The NRC Clearance Officer is Margaret A. Janney, 301-415-7245. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 21st day of August, 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Tremaine Donnell, Acting NRC Clearance Officer, Office of Information Services. [FR Doc. E7-16996 Filed 8-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)Review; Comment Request AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). ACTION: Notice of the OMB review of information collection and solicitation of public comment. SUMMARY: The NRC has recently submitted to OMB for review the following proposal for the collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). The NRC hereby informs potential respondents that an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and that a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. 1. Type of submission, new, revision, or extension: Revision. 2. The title of the information collection: 10 CFR Part 34—Licenses for Radiography and Radiation Safety Requirements for Radiographic Operations. 3. The form number if applicable: N/A. 4. How often the collection is required: Applications for new licenses and amendments may be submitted at any time. Applications for renewal are submitted every 10 years. Reports are submitted as events occur. 5. Who will be required or asked to report: Applicants for and holders of specific licenses authorizing the use of licensed radioactive material for radiography. 6. An estimate of the number of annual responses: 778 (NRC licensees 60 plus 113 recordkeepers and Agreement State licensees 198 plus 407 recordkeepers). 7. The estimated number of annual respondents: 253 (55 NRC Licensees and 198 Agreement State Licensees). 8. An estimate of the total number of hours needed annually to complete the requirement or request: The number of hours needed annually to complete the requirement or request: 199,125 hours. The NRC licensees total burden is 43,397 hours (72 reporting hrs [an average of 1.2 hours per response] plus 43,325 recordkeeping hrs [an average of 383 hours per recordkeeper]). The Agreement State licensees total burden is 155,728 hours (269 reporting hrs [an average of 1.4 hour per response] plus 155,459 recordkeeping hrs [an average of 382 hours per recordkeeper]). 9. An indication of whether Section 3507(d), Pub. L. 104-13 applies: N/A. 10. Abstract: 10 CFR Part 34 establishes radiation safety requirements for the use of radioactive material in industrial radiography. The information in the applications, reports and records is used by the NRC staff to ensure that the health and safety of the public is protected and that licensee possession and use of source and byproduct material is in compliance with license and regulatory requirements. A copy of the final supporting statement may be viewed free of charge at the NRC Public Document Room, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Room O-1 F21, Rockville, Maryland 20852. OMB clearance requests are available at the NRC worldwide Web site: *http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/doc-comment/omb/index.html.* The document will be available on the NRC home page site for 60 days after the signature date of this notice. Comments and questions should be directed to the OMB reviewer listed below by September 27, 2007. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but assurance of consideration cannot be given to comments received after this date. Nathan Frey, Desk Officer, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (3150-0007), NEOB-10202, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503. Comments can also be e-mailed to *Nathan_Frey@omb.eop.gov* or submitted by telephone at

(202)395-4650. The NRC Clearance Officer is Margaret A. Janney, 301-415-7245. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day of August, 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Christopher Colburn, Acting NRC Clearance Officer, Office of Information Services. [FR Doc. E7-16997 Filed 8-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)Review; Comment Request AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). ACTION: Notice of the OMB review of information collection and solicitation of public comment. SUMMARY: The NRC has recently submitted to OMB for review the following proposal for the collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). The NRC hereby informs potential respondents that an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and that a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. 1. Type of submission, new, revision, or extension: Revision. 2. The title of the information collection: 10 CFR part 39—Licenses and Radiation Safety Requirements for Well Logging. 3. The form number if applicable: N/A. 4. How often the collection is required: Applications for new licenses and amendments may be submitted at any time. Applications for renewal are submitted every 10 years. Reports are submitted as events occur. 5. Who will be required or asked to report: Applicants for and holders of specific licenses authorizing the use of licensed radioactive material for radiography. 6. An estimate of the number of annual responses: 1,899 (NRC licensees—376 plus 37 recordkeepers and Agreement State licensees—1,353 plus 133 recordkeepers). 7. The estimated number of annual respondents: 170 (37 NRC Licensees and 133 Agreement State Licensees). 8. An estimate of the total number of hours needed annually to complete the requirement or request: 36,890 hours. The NRC licensees total burden is 8,037 hours (116 reporting hrs plus 7,921 recordkeeping hrs). The Agreement State licensees total burden is 28,853 hours (423 reporting hrs plus 28,430 recordkeeping hrs). The average burden per response for both NRC licensees and Agreement State licensees is 3.2 hours, and the burden per recordkeeper is 214 hours. 9. An indication of whether section 3507(d), Public Law 104-13 applies: N/A. 10. Abstract: 10 CFR part 39 establishes radiation safety requirements for the use of radioactive material in well logging operations. The information in the applications, reports and records is used by the NRC staff to ensure that the health and safety of the public is protected and that licensee possession and use of source and byproduct material is in compliance with license and regulatory requirements. A copy of the final supporting statement may be viewed free of charge at the NRC Public Document Room, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Room O-1 F21, Rockville, MD 20852. OMB clearance requests are available at the NRC worldwide Web site: *http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/doc-comment/omb/index.html.* The document will be available on the NRC home page site for 60 days after the signature date of this notice. Comments and questions should be directed to the OMB reviewer listed below by September 27, 2007. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but assurance of consideration cannot be given to comments received after this date. Nathan Frey, Desk Officer, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (3150-0130), NEOB-10202, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503. Comments can also be e-mailed to *Nathan_Frey@omb.eop.gov* or submitted by telephone at

(202)395-4650. The NRC Clearance Officer is Margaret A. Janney, 301-415-7245. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day of August, 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Christopher Colburn, Acting NRC Clearance Officer, Office of Information Services. [FR Doc. E7-16998 Filed 8-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. 50-424 and 50-425] Southern Nuclear Operating Company Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2 Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement and Conduct Scoping Process Southern Nuclear Operating Company

(SNC)has submitted an application for renewal of Facility Operating Licenses Nos. NPF-68 and NPF-81 for an additional 20 years of operation at the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP), Units 1 and 2. VEGP is located outside of Waynesboro, Georgia. The current operating licenses for the VEGP, Units 1 and 2, expire on January 16, 2027, and February 9, 2029, respectively. The application for renewal, dated June 27, 2007 was submitted pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 54. A notice of receipt and availability of the application, which included SNC's environmental report (ER), was published in the **Federal Register** on August 3, 2007 (72 FR 43296). A notice of acceptance for docketing of the application for renewal of the facility operating license was published in the **Federal Register** on August 21, 2007 (72 FR 46680). The purpose of this notice is to inform the public that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

(NRC)will be preparing an environmental impact statement

(EIS)related to the review of the license renewal application and to provide the public an opportunity to participate in the environmental scoping process, as defined in 10 CFR 51.29. In addition, as outlined in 36 CFR 800.8, “Coordination with the National Environmental Policy Act,” the NRC plans to coordinate compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act in meeting the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). In accordance with 10 CFR 51.53(c) and 10 CFR 54.23, SNC submitted the ER as part of the application. The ER was prepared pursuant to 10 CFR part 51 and is publicly available at the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, or from the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). The ADAMS Public Electronic Reading Room is accessible at *http://adamswebsearch.nrc.gov/dologin.htm.* The Accession Number for the ER is ML071840357. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS, or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC's PDR reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737, or via e-mail at *pdr@nrc.gov* . The ER may also be viewed on the Internet at *http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/applications/vogtle.html.* In addition, the ER is available for public inspection near VEGP at the Burke County Library, 130 Highway 24 South, Waynesboro, Georgia 30830. This notice advises the public that the NRC intends to gather the information necessary to prepare a plant-specific supplement to the Commission's “Generic Environmental Impact Statement

(GEIS)for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants,” (NUREG-1437) related to the review of the application for renewal of the VEGP, Units 1 and 2, operating licenses for an additional 20 years. Possible alternatives to the proposed action (license renewal) include no action and reasonable alternative energy sources. The NRC is required by 10 CFR 51.95 to prepare a supplement to the GEIS in connection with the renewal of an operating license. This notice is being published in accordance with NEPA and the NRC's regulations found in 10 CFR part 51. The NRC will first conduct a scoping process for the supplement to the GEIS and, as soon as practicable thereafter, will prepare a draft supplement to the GEIS for public comment. Participation in the scoping process by members of the public and local, State, Tribal, and Federal government agencies is encouraged. The scoping process for the supplement to the GEIS will be used to accomplish the following: a. Define the proposed action which is to be the subject of the supplement to the GEIS. b. Determine the scope of the supplement to the GEIS and identify the significant issues to be analyzed in depth. c. Identify and eliminate from detailed study those issues that are peripheral or that are not significant. d. Identify any environmental assessments and other EISs that are being or will be prepared that are related to, but are not part of, the scope of the supplement to the GEIS being considered. e. Identify other environmental review and consultation requirements related to the proposed action. f. Indicate the relationship between the timing of the preparation of the environmental analyses and the Commission's tentative planning and decision-making schedule. g. Identify any cooperating agencies and, as appropriate, allocate assignments for preparation and schedules for completing the supplement to the GEIS to the NRC and any cooperating agencies. h. Describe how the supplement to the GEIS will be prepared, and include any contractor assistance to be used. The NRC invites the following entities to participate in scoping: a. The applicant, SNC. b. Any Federal agency that has jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to any environmental impact involved, or that is authorized to develop and enforce relevant environmental standards. c. Affected State and local government agencies, including those authorized to develop and enforce relevant environmental standards. d. Any affected Indian tribe. e. Any person who requests or has requested an opportunity to participate in the scoping process. f. Any person who has petitioned or intends to petition for leave to intervene. In accordance with 10 CFR 51.26, the scoping process for an EIS may include a public scoping meeting to help identify significant issues related to a proposed activity and to determine the scope of issues to be addressed in an EIS. The NRC has decided to hold public scoping meetings for the VEGP, Units 1 and 2, license renewal supplement to the GEIS. The scoping meetings will be held at the Augusta Technical College, Waynesboro Campus Auditorium, 216 Highway 24 South, Waynesboro, Georgia 30830. There will be two sessions to accommodate interested parties on September 27, 2007. The first session will convene at 1:30 p.m. and will continue until 4:30 p.m., as necessary. The second session will convene at 7 p.m. with a repeat of the overview portions of the meeting and will continue until 10 p.m., as necessary. Both meetings will be transcribed and will include:

(1)An overview by the NRC staff of the NEPA environmental review process, the proposed scope of the supplement to the GEIS, and the proposed review schedule; and

(2)the opportunity for interested government agencies, organizations, and individuals to submit comments or suggestions on the environmental issues or the proposed scope of the supplement to the GEIS. Additionally, the NRC staff will host informal discussions one hour before the start of each session at the Augusta Technical College, Waynesboro Campus Auditorium. No formal comments on the proposed scope of the supplement to the GEIS will be accepted during the informal discussions. To be considered, comments must be provided either at the transcribed public meetings or in writing, as discussed below. Persons may register to attend or present oral comments at the meetings on the scope of the NEPA review by contacting NRC Environmental Project Manager, Mr. Justin P. Leous, at 1-800-368-5642, extension 2864, or via e-mail to the NRC at *Vogtle_LR_EIS@nrc.gov* no later than September 20, 2007. Members of the public may also register to speak at the meeting within 15 minutes of the start of each session. Individual oral comments may be limited by the time available, depending on the number of persons who register. Members of the public who have not registered may also have an opportunity to speak, if time permits. Public comments will be considered in the scoping process for the supplement to the GEIS. Mr. Leous will need to be contacted no later than September 17, 2007, if special equipment or accommodations are needed to attend or present information at the public meeting, so that the NRC staff can determine whether the request can be accommodated. Members of the public may send written comments on the environmental scope of the VEGP, Units 1 and 2, license renewal review to: Chief, Rulemaking, Directives and Editing Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, Mailstop T-6D59, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC 20555-0001, and should cite the publication date and page number of this **Federal Register** notice. Comments may also be delivered to the NRC, Room T-6D59, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. during Federal workdays. To be considered in the scoping process, written comments should be postmarked by October 24, 2007. Electronic comments may be sent by e-mail to the NRC at *Vogtle_LR_EIS@nrc.gov* , and should be sent no later than October 24, 2007, to be considered in the scoping process. Comments will be available electronically and accessible through ADAMS at *http://adamswebsearch.nrc.gov/dologin.htm* . Participation in the scoping process for the supplement to the GEIS does not entitle participants to become parties to the proceeding to which the supplement to the GEIS relates. Notice of opportunity for a hearing regarding the renewal application was the subject of the aforementioned **Federal Register** notice (72 FR 46680). Matters related to participation in any hearing are outside the scope of matters to be discussed at this public meeting. At the conclusion of the scoping process, the NRC will prepare a concise summary of the determination and conclusions reached, including the significant issues identified, and will send a copy of the summary to each participant in the scoping process. The summary will also be available for inspection in ADAMS at *http://adamswebsearch.nrc.gov/dologin.htm.* The staff will then prepare and issue for comment the draft supplement to the GEIS, which will be the subject of a separate notice and separate public meeting. Copies will be available for public inspection at the Burke County Library, and one copy per request will be provided free of charge. After receipt and consideration of the comments, the NRC will prepare a final supplement to the GEIS, which will also be available for public inspection. Information about the proposed action, the supplement to the GEIS, and the scoping process may be obtained from Mr. Leous at the aforementioned telephone number or e-mail address. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 21st day of August 2007. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Rani Franovich, Branch Chief, Environmental Branch B, Division of License Renewal, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E7-16995 Filed 8-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Sunshine Act Meeting DATES: Weeks of August 27, September 3, 10, 17, 24, October 1, 2007. PLACE: Commissioners' Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. STATUS: Public and Closed. Matters to be Considered Week of August 27, 2007 Thursday, August 30, 2007 9 a.m. Affirmation Session (Public Meeting) (Tentative). a. *Final Rule:* 10 CFR parts 30, 31, 32, and 150—Exemptions from Licensing, General Licenses, and Distribution of Byproduct. *Material:* Licensing and Reporting Requirements (RIN 3150-AH41) (Tentative). b. Pacific Gas and Electric Co. (Diablo Canyon ISFSI), Docket No. 72-26-ISFSI, San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace's Contentions and Request for Hearing Regarding Diablo Canyon Environmental Assessment Supplement (Tentative). c. Southern Nuclear Operating Co. (Early Site Permit for Vogtle ESP Site—Certified Question Regarding Conduct of Mandatory Hearing (Tentative). Week of September 3, 2007—Tentative Tuesday, September 4, 2007 2:30 p.m. Briefing on Radioactive Materials Security and Licensing (Public Meeting) (Contact: Robert Lewis, 301-415-8722). Week of September 10, 2007—Tentative There are no meetings scheduled for the Week of September 10, 2007. Week of September 17, 2007—Tentative There are no meetings scheduled for the Week of September 17, 2007. Week of September 24, 2007—Tentative There are no meetings scheduled for the Week of September 24, 2007. Week of October 1, 2007—Tentative Tuesday, October 2, 2007 9:30 a.m. Periodic Briefing on Security Issues (Closed—Ex. 1 & 3). Wednesday, October 3, 2007 2 p.m. Briefing on NRC's International Programs, Performance, and Plans (Public Meeting) (Contact: Karen Henderson, 301-415-0202). The schedule for Commission meetings is subject to change on short notice. To verify the status of meetings call (recording)—(301) 415-1291. Contact person for more information: Michelle Schroll,

(301)415-1662. The NRC Commission Meeting Schedule can be found on the Internet at: *www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/policy-making/schedule.html.* The NRC provides reasonable accommodation to individuals with disabilities where appropriate. If you need a reasonable accommodation to participate in theses public meetings, or need this meeting notice or the transcript or other information from the public meetings in another format (e.g., braille, large print), please notify the NRC's Disability Program Coordinator, Rohn Brown, at 301-492-2279, TDD: 301-415-2100, or by e-mail at *REB3@nrc.gov.* Determinations on requests for reasonable accommodation will be made on a case-by-case basis. This notice is distributed by mail to several hundred subscribers; if you no longer wish to receive it, or would like to be added to the distribution, please contact the Office of the Secretary, Washington, DC 20555 (301-415-1969). In addition, distribution of this meeting notice over the Internet system is available. If you are interested in receiving this Commission meeting schedule electronically, please send an electronic message to *dkw@nrc.gov.* Dated: August 23, 2007. R. Michelle Schroll, Office of the Secretary. [FR Doc. 07-4237 Filed 8-24-07; 10:29 am]

Connectionstraces to 20

Traces to 20 documents

U.S. Code