Notices. Notice of document availability

23,615 words·~107 min read·/register/2007/09/28/07-4771

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

BILLING CODE 6820-KF-M DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Bonneville Power Administration Availability of the Bonneville Purchasing Instructions

(BPI)and Bonneville Financial Assistance Instructions

(BFAI)AGENCY: Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), DOE ACTION: Notice of document availability. SUMMARY: Copies of the Bonneville Purchasing Instructions (BPI), which contain the policy and establish the procedures that BPA uses in the solicitation, award, and administration of its purchases of goods and services, including construction, are available in printed form for $30, or without charge at the following Internet address: *http://www.bpa.gov/corporate/business/bpi* . Copies of the Bonneville Financial Assistance Instructions (BFAI), which contain the policy and establish the procedures that BPA uses in the solicitation, award, and administration of financial assistance instruments (principally grants and cooperative agreements), are available in printed form for $15 each, or available without charge at the following Internet address: *http://www.bpa.gov/corporate/business/bfai* . ADDRESSES: Unbound copies of the BPI or BFAI may be obtained by sending a check for the proper amount to the Head of the Contracting Activity, Routing GK-7, Bonneville Power Administration, P.O. Box 3621, Portland, Oregon 97208-3621. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Manager, Communications, 1-800-622-4519. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: BPA was established in 1937 as a Federal Power Marketing Agency in the Pacific Northwest. BPA operations are financed from power revenues rather than annual appropriations. BPA's purchasing operations are conducted under 16 U.S.C. 832 *et seq.* and related statutes. Pursuant to these special authorities, the BPI is promulgated as a statement of purchasing policy and as a body of interpretative regulations governing the conduct of BPA purchasing activities. It is significantly different from the Federal Acquisition Regulation, and reflects BPA's private sector approach to purchasing the goods and services that it requires. BPA's financial assistance operations are conducted under 16 U.S.C. 839 *et seq.* and 16 U.S.C. 839 *et seq.* The BFAI express BPA's financial assistance policy. The BFAI also comprise BPA's rules governing implementation of the principles provided in the following OMB circulars: A-21 Cost Principles for Educational Institutions. A-87 Cost Principles for State, Local and Indian Tribal Governments. A-102 Grants and Cooperative Agreements with State and Local Governments. A-110 Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Other Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals and Other Non-Profit Organizations. A-122 Cost Principles for Non-Profit Organizations. A-133 Audits of States, Local Governments and Non-Profit Organizations. BPA's solicitations and contracts include notice of applicability and availability of the BPI and the BFAI, as appropriate, for the information of offerors on particular purchases or financial assistance transactions. Issued in Portland, Oregon, on September 13, 2007. Damian J. Kelly, Manager, Supply Chain Policy and Governance. [FR Doc. E7-19195 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Energy Information Administration Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request AGENCY: Energy Information Administration (EIA), Department of Energy (DOE). ACTION: Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request. SUMMARY: The EIA has submitted the Electric Power Program to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for review and a three-year extension under section 3507(h)(1) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13) (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* , at 3507(h)(1)). DATES: Comments must be filed by October 29, 2007. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments but find it difficult to do so within that period, you should contact the OMB Desk Officer for DOE listed below as soon as possible. ADDRESSES: Send comments to OMB Desk Officer for DOE, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. To ensure receipt of the comments by the due date, submission by FAX at 202-395-7285 or e-mail to *Nathan_J._Frey@omb.eop.gov* is recommended. The mailing address is 726 Jackson Place, NW., Washington, DC 20503. The OMB DOE Desk Officer may be telephoned at

(202)395-7345. (A copy of your comments should also be provided to EIA's Statistics and Methods Group at the address below.) FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information should be directed to Grace Sutherland. To ensure receipt of the comments by the due date, submission by FAX (202-586-5271) or e-mail ( *grace.sutherland@eia.doe.gov* ) is also recommended. The mailing address is Statistics and Methods Group (EI-70), Forrestal Building, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC 20585-0670. Ms. Sutherland may be contacted by telephone at

(202)586-6264. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This section contains the following information about the energy information collection submitted to OMB for review:

(1)The collection numbers and title;

(2)the sponsor ( *i.e.* , the Department of Energy component;

(3)the current OMB docket number (if applicable);

(4)the type of request ( *i.e.* , new, revision, extension, or reinstatement);

(5)response obligation ( *i.e.* , mandatory, voluntary, or required to obtain or retain benefits);

(6)a description of the need for and proposed use of the information;

(7)a categorical description of the likely respondents; and

(8)an estimate of the total annual reporting burden ( *i.e.* , the estimated number of likely respondents times the proposed frequency of response per year times the average hours per response). 1. Forms EIA-411, 860, 860M, 861 and 923, “Electric Power Program.” 2. Energy Information Administration. 3. OMB Number 1905-0129. 4. Three-year extension. 5. Mandatory. 6. The Electric Power Surveys collect electric power information including capacity, generation, fuel consumption, fuel receipts, fuel stocks, and prices, along with financial information. Respondents include both regulated and unregulated entities that comprise the U.S. electric power industry. Electric power data collected are used by the Department of Energy for analysis and forecasting. Data are published in various EIA reports. 7. Business or other for profit, Federal Government, state, local or tribal government. 8. Total burden of 98,722 hours. The information collections submitted for OMB approval have some changes from the proposed information collections made available for the public comment. The materials submitted to OMB are available for your review as noted previously. Please refer to the supporting statement as well as the proposed forms and instructions for more information about the purpose, who must report, when to report, where to submit, the elements to be reported, detailed instructions, provisions for confidentiality, and uses (including possible nonstatistical uses) of the information. For instructions on obtaining materials, see the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Statutory Authority: Section 3507(h)(1) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. No. 104-13) (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* , at 3507(h)(1)). Issued in Washington, DC, September 21, 2007. Jay H. Casselberry, Agency Clearance Officer, Energy Information Administration. [FR Doc. E7-19256 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Project No. 2101-084 (California); Project No. 2155-024 (California) Sacramento Municipal Utility District; Pacific Gas & Electric Company; Notice of Availability of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Upper American River Project and the Chili Bar Project September 21, 2007. In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) regulations, 18 CFR part 380 (Order No. 486, 52 F.R. 47897), the Office of Energy Projects has reviewed the applications for relicense for the Upper American River Project (FERC No. 2101) and the Chili Bar Project (FERC No. 2155), located on the South Fork of the American River near Placerville, California, and has prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (draft EIS) for the projects. The existing 688-megawatt

(MW)Upper American River Project occupies 6,375 acres of federal land administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (Forest Service), in Eldorado National Forest and 42.3 acres of federal land administered by the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM). The Forest Service is reviewing an application for a special use permit for constructing the Iowa Hill development on National Forest System lands. The Forest Service is also a cooperating agency in preparing this draft EIS for the Upper American River Project. Pacific Gas & Electric Company's 7-MW Chili Bar Project is located on the South Fork of the American River immediately downstream of the Upper American River Project. The project occupies 47.81 acres of federal land administered by the BLM. In the draft EIS, staff evaluates the applicant's proposal and alternatives for relicensing the projects. The draft EIS documents the views of governmental agencies, non-governmental organizations, affected Indian tribes, the public, the license applicant, and Commission staff. Comments should be filed with: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC, 20426. All comments must be filed within 45 days of the notice in the **Federal Register** , and should reference either Project No. 2101-084 (Upper American River Project) or Project No. 2155-024 (Chili Bar Project). Comments may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and instructions on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* under the eLibrary link. Anyone may intervene in this proceeding based on this draft EIS (18 CFR 380.10). You may also file your request to intervene electronically. You do not need intervenor status to have the Commission consider your comments. Copies of the draft EIS are available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Branch, Room 2A, located at 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. The draft EIS also may be viewed on the Internet at *http://www.ferc.gov* under the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number (either P-2101or P-2155) to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* or toll-free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,

(202)502-8659. CD versions of the draft EIS have been mailed to everone on the mailing list for the projects. Copies of the CD, as well as a limited number of paper copies, are available from the Public Reference Room identified above. You may also register online at *http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp* to be notified via e-mail of new filings and issuances related to these or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support. For further information, contact James Fargo at

(202)502-6095 or at *james.fargo@ferc.gov* . Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-19188 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP06-459-000] Transwestern Pipeline Company, LLC; Notice of Availability of the Final Environmental Impact Statement and Final General Conformity Determination for the Proposed Phoenix Expansion Project September 21, 2007. The environmental staffs of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or FERC); the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM); the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (FS); the U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS); the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA); and the Navajo Nation, collectively referred to as the Agency Staffs, have prepared the final environmental impact statement

(EIS)to address Transwestern Pipeline Company, LLC's (Transwestern) proposed expansion of its natural gas pipeline system. A Final General Conformity Determination was also prepared by the FERC to assess the potential air quality impacts associated with construction and operation of the proposed Phoenix Expansion Project and is included as Appendix Q of the final EIS. The final EIS was prepared to satisfy the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The Agency Staffs have concluded that if the project is constructed and operated in accordance with applicable laws and regulations, Transwestern's proposed mitigation, and the Agency Staffs' additional mitigation measures, it would have limited adverse environmental impact. The FERC is the lead federal agency and will use the final EIS to consider the environmental impacts that could result if it issues Transwestern a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity under section 7 of the Natural Gas Act. The BLM and the FS are federal land management agencies affected by Transwestern's proposal and have elected to act as cooperating agencies in preparing the final EIS. The BLM will use the document to meet its NEPA responsibilities in considering Transwestern's application for a Right-of-Way Grant and obtain Temporary Use Permits for the portion of the project on federal lands under section 185(f) of the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920. The BLM would issue the Right-of-Way Grant and Temporary Use Permits for the crossing of BLM-managed lands and the Kaibab and Prescott National Forests, which are managed by the FS, and for crossing lands managed by the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (BOR). The BLM would consider the concurrence or non-concurrence of the FS and BOR, as well as FERC approval or denial, in making its decision whether to issue the Right-of-Way Grant and Temporary Use Permits. The BLM's decision would be documented in a Record of Decision. The OPS is participating as a cooperating agency in preparing the final EIS because it is responsible for ensuring the safe, reliable, and environmentally sound operation of the nation's transportation system and for providing oversight for oil and natural gas pipelines. The OPS' authority is found under the Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act of 1968 (49 U.S.C. 1671 *et seq.* ) and the Hazardous Liquids Pipeline Safety Act of 1979 (49 U.S.C. 2001 et seq.). The BIA and the Navajo Nation have also elected to act as cooperating agencies in preparing the final EIS because the proposed project would be near tribal lands in Arizona and would cross two classes of Navajo Nation lands in New Mexico: Tribal lands and allotted lands. Tribal lands are owned in fee by the Navajo Nation, and access to these lands would be acquired through direct negotiation between Transwestern and officials of the Navajo Nation Tribal Headquarters in Window Rock, Arizona. Allotted lands are held in trust by the United States government and managed by the BIA for the benefit of individual allottees. The Phoenix Expansion Project is designed to transport up to 500 million cubic feet per day of natural gas to the Phoenix area, which is one of the fastest-growing regions in the United States. The project would not only help to satisfy the increasing demand for electricity and natural gas, but would also increase competition in the regional energy market, thereby working to stabilize costs to the consumer. The final EIS addresses the potential environmental effects of the construction and operation of the following facilities proposed by Transwestern: • 24.6 miles of new 36-inch-diameter pipeline loop 1 (the San Juan Lateral Loops A and B) extending along the existing San Juan Lateral in San Juan and McKinley Counties, New Mexico; 1 A loop is a segment of pipeline that is usually installed adjacent to an existing pipeline and connected to it at both ends. The loop allows more gas to be moved through the system. • 259.3 miles of new 42- and 36-inch-diameter lateral 2 pipeline (the Phoenix Lateral), consisting of 95.7 miles of 42-inch-diameter pipeline extending from milepost

(MP)0.0 in Yavapai County, Arizona to MP 95.2 in Maricopa County, Arizona, and 163.6 miles of 36-inch-diameter pipeline extending from MP 95.2 in Maricopa County, Arizona to MP 255.1 in Pinal County, Arizona; 2 A lateral pipeline typically takes gas from the main system to deliver it to a customer, local distribution system, or another interstate transmission system. • 1.4 miles of new 24-, 20-, 16-, and 6-inch-diameter lateral pipeline (the customer laterals) connecting the Phoenix Lateral to meter stations that are not located immediately adjacent to the Phoenix Lateral right-of-way; • Minor piping and pressure control modifications at the existing Bloomfield Compressor Station in San Juan County, New Mexico and at the existing Seligman Compressor Station No. 1 in Mohave County, Arizona; • Installation of the Ash Fork Facility at MP 0.0 of the Phoenix Lateral in Yavapai County, Arizona including 2 filter separators, odorant injection facilities, and telecommunications equipment; and • Installation of 4 taps, 31 valves, 11 meter stations, 6 pig 3 launchers, and 3 pig receivers. 3 A pig is an internal tool that can be used to clean and dry a pipeline and/or to inspect it for damage or corrosion. Transwestern would also acquire an undivided interest in the existing East Valley Lateral consisting of 36.7 miles of 24-inch-diameter lateral pipeline in Pinal and Maricopa Counties, Arizona. The final EIS, including the Final General Conformity Determination, has been placed in the public files of the FERC and is available for distribution and public inspection at: Federal Regulatory Energy Commission, Public Reference Room, 888 First St., NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426,

(202)208-1371. A limited number of copies are available from the FERC's Public Reference Room identified above. These copies may be requested in hard copy or as .pdf files on a CD that can be read by a computer with a CD-ROM drive. The final EIS, including the Final General Conformity Determination, is also available for viewing on the FERC Internet Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov.* In addition, copies of the document have been mailed to federal, state, and local government agencies; elected officials; Native American tribes; affected landowners; local libraries and newspapers; intervenors to the FERC's proceeding; and other interested parties. Hard copies of the final EIS, including the Final General Conformity Determination, can be viewed at the following libraries in the project area: Ash Fork Public Library, 518 Lewis Avenue, Ash Fork, AZ 86320 Avondale-Goodyear Public Library, 328 West Western Avenue, Avondale, AZ 85323 Black Canyon City Community Library, 34701 South Old Black Canyon Hwy, Black Canyon, AZ 85324 Buckeye Public Library, 310 North 6th Street, Buckeye, AZ 85032 Casa Grande Public Library, 449 North Dry Lake, Casa Grande, AZ 85222 Chino Valley Public Library, 1020 West Palomino Road, Chino Valley, AZ 86323 Coolidge Public Library, 160 West Central Avenue, Coolidge, AZ 85228 Flagstaff Public Library, 300 West Aspen, Flagstaff, AZ 86001 Fredonia Public Library, 118 North Main Street, Fredonia, AZ 86022 Mayer Public Library, 10004 Wicks Street, Mayer, AZ 86333 Arizona State Library, 1700 West Washington Street, Phoenix, AZ 85007 North Central Regional Library, 17811 North 32nd Street, Phoenix, AZ 85032 Yavapai County Library District, 172 East Merritt Street, Suite E, Prescott, AZ 86301 Prescott Public Library, 215 East Goodwin, Prescott, AZ 86303 Prescott Valley Public Library, 7501 East Civic Circle, Prescott Valley, AZ 86314 Williams Public Library, 113 South First Street, Williams, AZ 86046 Bloomfield Public Library, 333 South First Street, Bloomfield, NM 87413 Farmington Public Library, 2101 Farmington Avenue, Farmington, NM 87401-6420 Octavia Fellin Public Library, 115 West Hill, Gallup, NM 87301 Additional information about the project is available from the Commission's Office of External Affairs at 1-866-208-FERC or on the FERC Internet Web site ( *http://www.ferc.gov* ) using the eLibrary link. Click on the eLibrary link, click on “General Search,” and enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the Docket Number field. Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* or toll free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY, contact

(202)502-8659. The eLibrary link on the FERC Internet Web site also provides access to the texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders, notices, and rulemakings. In addition, the Commission now offers a free service called eSubscription that allows you to keep track of all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to the documents. To register for this service, go to the eSubscription link on the FERC Internet Web site. Information concerning the involvement of the cooperating agencies in the EIS process may be obtained from: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management Mark Mackiewicz,

(435)636-3616 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service Prescott National Forest, Vicki Clay,

(928)443-8013 Kaibab National Forest, Tom Mutz,

(928)635-5661 U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of Pipeline Safety Ross Reineke,

(720)963-3182 U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs Navajo Area Office, Harrilene Yazzi,

(505)863-8286 Phoenix Area Office, Amy Heuslein,

(602)379-6750 Navajo Nation Ron Maldonado,

(928)871-7139 Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-19189 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. RM98-1-000] Records Governing Off-the-Record Communications; Public Notice September 21, 2007. This constitutes notice, in accordance with 18 CFR 385.2201(b), of the receipt of prohibited and exempt off-the-record communications. Order No. 607 (64 FR 51222, September 22, 1999) requires Commission decisional employees, who make or receive a prohibited or exempt off-the-record communication relevant to the merits of a contested proceeding, to deliver to the Secretary of the Commission, a copy of the communication, if written, or a summary of the substance of any oral communication. Prohibited communications are included in a public, non-decisional file associated with, but not a part of, the decisional record of the proceeding. Unless the Commission determines that the prohibited communication and any responses thereto should become a part of the decisional record, the prohibited off-the-record communication will not be considered by the Commission in reaching its decision. Parties to a proceeding may seek the opportunity to respond to any facts or contentions made in a prohibited off-the-record communication, and may request that the Commission place the prohibited communication and responses thereto in the decisional record. The Commission will grant such a request only when it determines that fairness so requires. Any person identified below as having made a prohibited off-the-record communication shall serve the document on all parties listed on the official service list for the applicable proceeding in accordance with Rule 2010, 18 CFR 385.2010. Exempt off-the-record communications are included in the decisional record of the proceeding, unless the communication was with a cooperating agency as described by 40 CFR 1501.6, made under 18 CFR 385.2201(e)(1)(v). The following is a list of off-the-record communications recently received by the Secretary of the Commission. The communications listed are grouped by docket numbers in ascending order. These filings are available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number, excluding the last three digits, in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, please contact FERC, Online Support at *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* or toll free at

(866)208-3676, or for TTY, contact

(202)502-8659. Exempt: Docket number Date received Presenter or requester 1. CP07-8-000 8-30-07 Pat Vaughan. 2 CP07-44-000, *et al.* 9-11-07 Hon. David Vitter. 3 CP07-414-000 9-12-07 David Hanobic. 1 4. ER05-6-000 9-5-07 Hon. Alan R. Schriber, PhD. 5. Project No. 1971-000 9-5-07 Hon. Harry Reid. 6 Project No. 2100-000 8-23-07 Hon. Wally Herger. 7. Project No. 12796-000 8-24-07 David A. Taylor. 2 1 Memorandum to file re: phone call. 2 One of four letters from City of Amherst, Ohio and the Villages of Menden, Monroeville and Sycamore, Ohio. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-19187 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-SFUND-2007-0278; FRL-8474-7] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Continuous Release Reporting Regulations

(CRRR)Under CERCLA 1980 (Renewal); EPA ICR No. 1445.07, OMB Control No. 2050-0086 AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act

(PRA)(44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ), this document announces that EPA is planning to submit a request to renew an existing approved Information Collection Request

(ICR)to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This ICR is scheduled to expire on February 29, 2008. Before submitting the ICR to OMB for review and approval, EPA is soliciting comments on specific aspects of the proposed information collection as described below. DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before November 27, 2007. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-SFUND-2007-0278, by one of the following methods: • *http://www.regulations.gov:* Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. • E-mail: *superfund.docket@epa.gov.* • Fax:

(202)566-9744. • Mail: Superfund Docket, Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: [2822T], 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460]. • Hand Delivery: EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. *Instructions:* Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-SFUND-2007-0278. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at *http://www.regulations.gov,* including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information

(202)564-1965; fax number:

(202)564-2625; e-mail address: *Beasley.lynn@epa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: How Can I Access the Docket and/or Submit Comments? EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-SFUND-2007-0278, which is available for online viewing at *http://www.regulations.gov,* or in person viewing at the Superfund Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room is open from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is 202-566-1744, and the telephone number for the Superfund Docket is 202-566-0276. Use *http://www.regulations.gov* to obtain a copy of the draft collection of information, submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, select “search,” then key in the docket ID number identified in this document. What Information Is EPA Particularly Interested In? Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA specifically solicits comments and information to enable it to:

(i)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;

(ii)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;

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

(CRRR)under CERCLA 1980 (Renewal). *ICR numbers:* EPA ICR No. [1445.06], OMB Control No. 2050-0086. *ICR status:* This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on February 29, 2008. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the **Federal Register** when approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed either by publication in the **Federal Register** or by other appropriate means, such as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9. *Abstract:* Section 103(a) of CERCLA, as amended, requires the person in charge of a vessel or facility to immediately notify the National Response Center

(NRC)of a hazardous substance release into the environment if the amount of the release equals or exceeds the substance's reportable quantity (RQ). The RQ of every hazardous substance can be found in Table 302.4 of 40 CFR 302.4. Section 103(f)(2) of CERCLA provides facilities relief from this per-occurrence notification requirement if the hazardous substance release at or above the RQ is continuous and stable in quantity and rate. Under the Continuous Release Reporting Requirements (CRRR), to report such a release as a continuous release you must make an initial telephone call to the NRC, an initial written report to the EPA Region, and, if the source and chemical composition of the continuous release does not change and the level of the continuous release does not significantly increase, a follow-up written report to the EPA Region one year after submission of the initial written report. If the source or chemical composition of the previously reported continuous release changes, notifying the NRC and EPA Region of a change in the source or composition of the release is required. Further, a significant increase in the level of the previously reported continuous release must be reported immediately to the NRC according to section 103(a) of CERCLA. Finally, any change in information submitted in support of a continuous release notification must be reported to the EPA Region. The reporting of a hazardous substance release that is equal to or above the substance's RQ allows the Federal government to determine whether a Federal response action is required to control or mitigate any potential adverse effects to public health or welfare or the environment. The continuous release of hazardous substance information collected under CERCLA section 103(f)(2) is also available to EPA program offices and other Federal agencies who use the information to evaluate the potential need for additional regulations, new permitting requirements for specific substances or sources, or improved emergency response planning. State and local government authorities and facilities subject to the CRRR use release information for purposes of local emergency response planning. Members of the public, who have access to release information through the Freedom of Information Act, may request release information for purposes of maintaining an awareness of what types of releases are occurring in different localities and what actions, if any, are being taken to protect public health and welfare and the environment. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. The EPA would like to solicit comments to:

(i)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;

(ii)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;

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

(iv)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. *Burden Statement:* The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 10.5 hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. The ICR provides a detailed explanation of the Agency's estimate, which is only briefly summarized here: *Estimated total number of potential respondents:* 3,587. *Frequency of response:* On occasion. *Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent:* 8. *Estimated total annual burden hours:* 301,508 hours. *Estimated total annual costs:* $128,000. This includes an estimated burden cost of $128,000 and an estimated cost of $0 for capital investment or maintenance and operational costs. Are There Changes in the Estimates From the Last Approval? There is an increase of 17,154 hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared with that identified in the ICR currently approved by OMB. This increase reflects EPA's use of data on the actual number of continuous release reports from several regions and applying a growth rate consistent with prior years reporting. The average annual percent increase in facilities in the previous ICR was approximately 7.5%. The same percent increase was assumed for this ICR. The unit burden hours per respondent information collection activity remains the same as the previous ICR. What Is the Next Step in the Process for This ICR? EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. At that time, EPA will issue another **Federal Register** notice pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB. If you have any questions about this ICR or the approval process, please contact the technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . Dated: September 20, 2007. Deborah Y. Dietrich, Director, Office of Emergency Management. [FR Doc. E7-19211 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-8474-8] Proposed Consent Decree, Clean Air Act Citizen Suit AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice of Proposed Consent Decree; request for public comment. SUMMARY: In accordance with section 113(g) of the Clean Air Act, as amended (“Act”), 42 U.S.C. 7413(g), notice is hereby given of a proposed consent decree, to address a lawsuit filed by Sierra Club (“Plaintiff”) in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia: *Sierra Club* v. *Johnson,* No. 1:07-cv-01040

(ESH)(D. D.C.). Plaintiff filed a deadline suit to compel the Administrator to respond to an administrative petition seeking EPA's objection to a CAA Title V operating permit proposed by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources for the Weston Generating Station in Marathon County, Wisconsin. Under the terms of the proposed consent decree, EPA has agreed to respond to Plaintiff's petition by December 19, 2007. If EPA fulfills its obligation, Plaintiff has agreed to dismiss this suit with prejudice. In addition, EPA has agreed to pay Plaintiff a specified amount in settlement for attorneys' fees in this matter. DATES: Written comments on the proposed consent decree must be received by October 29, 2007. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID number EPA-HQ-OGC-2007-0918, online at *http://www.regulations.gov* (EPA's preferred method); by e-mail to *oei.docket@epa.gov;* mailed to EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; or by hand delivery or courier to EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC, between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. Comments on a disk or CD-ROM should be formatted in Word or ASCII file, avoiding the use of special characters and any form of encryption, and may be mailed to the mailing address above. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Howard J. Hoffman, Air and Radiation Law Office (2344A), Office of General Counsel, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone:

(202)564-5582; fax number

(202)564-5603; e-mail address: *hoffman.howard@epa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Additional Information About the Proposed Consent Decree This proposed consent decree would resolve a lawsuit seeking a response to an administrative petition to object to a CAA Title V permit proposed by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources for the Weston Generating Station in Marathon County, Wisconsin. Under the proposed consent decree, EPA has agreed to respond to the Plaintiff's petition by December 19, 2007 and to pay a specified amount in settlement of the Plaintiff's claims for attorneys' fees. The consent decree becomes an order of the Court upon entry, and, consistent with the terms of the consent decree, the case shall be dismissed with prejudice after EPA takes final action on Plaintiffs' petition and pays the specified amount in the consent decree in settlement of the Plaintiff's claims for attorneys' fees. For a period of thirty

(30)days following the date of publication of this notice, the Agency will accept written comments relating to the proposed consent decree from persons who were not named as parties or intervenors to the litigation in question. EPA or the Department of Justice may withdraw or withhold consent to the proposed consent decree if the comments disclose facts or considerations that indicate that such consent is inappropriate, improper, inadequate, or inconsistent with the requirements of the Act. Unless EPA or the Department of Justice determines, based on any comment submitted, that consent to this consent decree should be withdrawn, the terms of the decree will be affirmed. II. Additional Information About Commenting on the Proposed Consent Decree A. How Can I Get a Copy of the Consent Decree? The official public docket for this action (identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OGC-2007-0918) contains a copy of the proposed consent decree. The official public docket is available for public viewing at the Office of Environmental Information

(OEI)Docket in the EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is

(202)566-1744, and the telephone number for the OEI Docket is

(202)566-1752. An electronic version of the public docket is available through *http://www.regulations.gov* . You may use the *http://www.regulations.gov* to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the official public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, select “search,” then key in the appropriate docket identification number. It is important to note that EPA's policy is that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available for public viewing online at *http://www.regulations.gov* without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information claimed as CBI and other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute is not included in the official public docket or in the electronic public docket. EPA's policy is that copyrighted material, including copyrighted material contained in a public comment, will not be placed in EPA's electronic public docket but will be available only in printed, paper form in the official public docket. Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through the EPA Docket Center. B. How and to Whom Do I Submit Comments? You may submit comments as provided in the ADDRESSES section. Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified comment period. Comments received after the close of the comment period will be marked “late.” EPA is not required to consider these late comments. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name, mailing address, and an e-mail address or other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. This ensures that you can be identified as the submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further information on the substance of your comment. Any identifying or contact information provided in the body of a comment will be included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Use of the *http://www.regulations.gov* Web site to submit comments to EPA electronically is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. The electronic public docket system is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity, e-mail address, or other contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. In contrast to EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's electronic mail (e-mail) system is not an “anonymous access” system. If you send an e-mail comment directly to the Docket without going through *http://www.regulations.gov,* your e-mail address is automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket, and made available in EPA's electronic public docket. Dated: September 21, 2007. Richard B. Ossias, Associate General Counsel. [FR Doc. E7-19225 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-6691-5] Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of EPA Comments Availability of EPA comments prepared pursuant to the Environmental Review Process (ERP), under section 309 of the Clean Air Act and section 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental Policy Act as amended. Requests for copies of EPA comments can be directed to the Office of Federal Activities at 202-564-7167. An explanation of the ratings assigned to draft environmental impact statements

(EISs)was published in FR dated April 6, 2007 (92 FR 17156). Draft EISs *EIS No. 20070213, ERP No. D-DOE-A09834-00* , FutureGen Project, Planning, Design, Construction and Operation of a Coal Fueled Electric Power and Hydrogen Gas Production Plant, Four Alternative Sites: Mattoon, IL, Tuscola, IL, Jewett, TX, and Odessa, TX. *Summary:* EPA expressed environmental concerns about impacts to wetlands and the cumulative impacts of water use, and recommended that the DEIS provide more details on how many wetlands may be impacted at each alternative site and that a cumulative impacts evaluation be conducted for at least the 50-year operational life of the project. Rating EC2. *EIS No. 20070231, ERP No. D-UAF-A11078-00* , Common Battlefield Airmen Training

(CBAT)Program, Proposes to Implement the CBAT Program at One of Three Installations: Moody Air Force Base (AFB), near Valosta, GA; Barkdale AFB in Bossier City, LA; and Arnold AFB near Manchester, TN. *Summary:* EPA does not object to the proposed project. Rating LO. *EIS No. 20070312, ERP No. D-USN-K11119-HI* , Hawaii Range Complex

(HRC)Project, To Support and Maintain Navy Pacific Fleet Training, and Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E) Operations, Kauai, Honolulu, Maui and Hawaii Counties, HI. *Summary:* EPA expressed environmental concern about impacts to marine resources from mid-frequency active sonar use and recommended analysis of additional alternatives. Rating EC2. *EIS No. 20070316, ERP No. D-FHW-E40815-00* , Northern Corridor Interstate 73 Project, Proposes Construct from I-95 to Future Interstate 74, Marlboro and Dillion Counties, SC and Richmond County, NC. *Summary:* EPA expressed environmental concerns about wetland, stream, prime farmland, and noise impacts, and requested additional information on these issues be provided and that mitigation measures be developed. Rating EC1. *EIS No. 20070326, ERP No. D-FTA-G59002-TX* , University Corridor Fixed Guideway Project, To Implement Transit Improvements from Hillcroft Transit Center to the Vicinity of the University of Houston (UH)—Central Campus or the Eastwood Transit Center, City of Houston, Harris County, TX. *Summary:* While EPA had no objections to the proposed action, we requested clarification of some air quality issues. Rating LO. Final EISs *EIS No. 20070347, ERP No. F-FRC-G03032-TX* , Calhoun Point Comfort Liquefied Natural Gas

(LNG)Project, (Docket Nos. CP05-91-000 and CP06-380-00) Construction of New Pipeline on 73 acres, Port of Port Lavaca, Calhoun and Jackson Counties, TX. *Summary:* No formal comment letter was sent to the preparing agency. *EIS No. 20070348, ERP No. F-NPS-G65103-NM* , Bandelier National Monument, Ecological Restoration Plan, Reestablish Healthy, Sustainable Vegetative Conditions within the Pinon-Juniper Woodland, Los Alamos and Sandoval Counties, NM. *Summary:* No formal comment letter was sent to the preparing agency. *EIS No. 20070355, ERP No. F-FRC-G03035-00* , Southeast Supply Header Project, Construction and Operation of Natural Gas Pipeline Facilities, Located in various Counties and Parishes in LA, MS and AL. *Summary:* While EPA's previous issues have been resolved, we requested clarification of some EJ and wetlands issues. *EIS No. 20070371, ERP No. F-BLM-J65473-WY* , Eagle Butte West Coal Lease Application, Issuance of Lease for a Tract of Federal Coal, Wyoming Powder River Basin, Campbell County, WY. *Summary:* No formal comment letter was sent to the preparing agency. *EIS No. 20070328, ERP No. FS-BLM-J67026-MT* , Golden Sunlight Mine Pit Reclamation Alternatives, Preferred Alternative Selected is the Underground Sump Alternative, Operating Permit No. 00065 and Plan-of-Operation #MTM 82855, Whitehall, Jefferson County, MT. *Summary:* EPA continues to have environmental concerns about the long-term environmental impacts to water quality. Dated: September 25, 2007. Robert W. Hargrove, Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities. [FR Doc. E7-19229 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-6691-4] Environmental Impacts Statements; Notice of Availability *Responsible Agency:* Office of Federal Activities, General Information

(202)564-7167 or *http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa.* Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 09/17/2007 through 09/21/2007. Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9. *EIS No. 20070396, Draft EIS, AFS, ID,* Cherry Dinner Project, Management of Vegetation, Hazardous Fuels, and Access Plus Watershed Improvements, Amendment to the Forest Plan, Palouse Ranger District, Clearwater National Forest, Latah County, ID, *Comment Period Ends:* 11/13/2007. *Contact:* Kara Chadwick 208-875-1131. *EIS No. 20070397, Final EIS, AFS, WA,* Tripod Fire Salvage Project, Proposal to Salvage Harvest Dead Trees and Fire-Injured Trees Expected to Die Within One Year, Methow Valley and Tonasket Ranger Districts, Okanogan and Wenatchee National Forests, Okanogan County, WA, *Wait Period Ends:* 10/29/2007. *Contact:* Robert Stoehr 509-548-6977. *EIS No. 20070398, Final EIS, BLM, AK,* Kobuk-Seward Peninsula Resource Management Plan, from Point Lay to the North Sound and from the Bering and Chukchi Seas East to the Kobuk River, AK , *Wait Period Ends:* 10/29/2007. *Contact:* Jeanie Cole 907-474-2340. *EIS No. 20070399, Draft EIS, FTA, FL,* Tier 1 Programmatic—Jacksonville Rapid Transit System (RTS), Improvement to Transportation in Four Primary Transit Corridors Radiating from Downtown Jacksonville, Duval County, FL. *Comment Period Ends:* 11/13/2007. *Contact:* Tajsha LaShore 404-562-3507. *EIS No. 20070400, Draft EIS, FRC, CA,* Upper American River Hydroelectric FERC NO. 2101-084, El Dorado and Sacramento Counties, CA and Chili Bar Hydroelectric FERC No. 2155-024, El Dorado County, CA, Issuance of a New License for the Existing and Proposed Hydropower Projects. *Comment Period Ends:* 11/13/2007. *Contact:* Andy Black 1-866-208-3372. *EIS No. 20070401, Draft EIS, GSA, DC,* Department of Homeland Security Headquarters at the St. Elizabeths West Campus, To Consolidate Federal Office Space on a Secure Site, Washington, DC. *Comment Period Ends:* 11/13/2007. *Contact:* Denise Decker 202-538-5643. *EIS No. 20070402, Final EIS, FRC, NM,* Phoenix Expansion Project, Construction and Operation of Existing Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline, Right-of-Way Grant and Temporary Use Permit, San Juan and McKinley Counties, NM and Pinal and Maricopa Counties, AZ. *Wait Period Ends:* 10/29/2007. *Contact:* Andy Black 1-866-208-3372. Amended Notices *EIS No. 20070218, Draft EIS, FHW, CA,* Interstate 405 (San Diego Freeway) Sepulveda Pass Widening Project, From Interstate 10 to US-101 in the City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles County, CA. *Comment Period Ends:* 10/01/2007. *Contact:* Steve Healow 916-498-5849. *Revision of FR Notice Published on 06/01/2007:* Extending Comment Period from 7/16/2007 to 10/01/2007. Dated: September 25, 2007. Robert W. Hargrove, Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities. [FR Doc. E7-19234 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-ORD-2007-0609; FRL-8474-6] Board of Scientific Counselors, Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals

(EDC)Research Program Mid-Cycle Review Meetings—Summer/Fall 2007 AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice of meetings. SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-463, the Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development (ORD), gives notice of two meetings of the Board of Scientific Counselors

(BOSC)EDC Mid-Cycle Subcommittee. DATES: The first meeting (a teleconference call) will be held on Wednesday, October 17, 2007, from 3 p.m. to 5 p.m. The second meeting (a teleconference call) will be held on Tuesday, November 6, 2007, from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. All times noted are eastern time. The meetings may adjourn early if all business is finished. Requests for the draft agenda or for making oral presentations at the meetings will be accepted up to 1 business day before each meeting. ADDRESSES: Participation in the conference calls will be by teleconference only—meeting rooms will not be used. Members of the public may obtain the call-in number and access code for the calls from Heather Drumm, whose contact information is listed under the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this notice. Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2007-0609, by one of the following methods: • *http://www.regulations.gov:* Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. • *E-mail:* Send comments by electronic mail (e-mail) to: *ORD.Docket@epa.gov,* Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2007-0609. • *Fax:* Fax comments to:

(202)566-0224, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2007-0609. • *Mail:* Send comments by mail to: Board of Scientific Counselors, Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals

(EDC)Mid-Cycle Subcommittee Meeting—Summer/Fall 2007 Docket, Mailcode: 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2007-0609. • *Hand Delivery or Courier.* Deliver comments to: EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), Room B102, EPA West Building, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. *Attention:* Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2007-0609. Note: This is not a mailing address. Such deliveries are only accepted during the docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. *Instructions:* Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2007-0609. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at *http://www.regulations.gov,* including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information

(EDC)Mid-Cycle Subcommittee Meeting—Summer/Fall 2007 Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is

(202)566-1744, and the telephone number for the ORD Docket is

(202)566-1752. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Designated Federal Officer via mail at: Heather Drumm, Mail Drop 8104-R, Office of Science Policy, Office of Research and Development, Environmental Protection Agency, 1300 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; via phone/voice mail at:

(202)564-8239; via fax at:

(202)565-2911; or via e-mail at: *drumm.heather@epa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: General Information Any member of the public interested in receiving a draft BOSC agenda or making a presentation at either meeting may contact Heather Drumm, the Designated Federal Officer, via any of the contact methods listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above. In general, each individual making an oral presentation will be limited to a total of three minutes. Proposed agenda items for the meetings include, but are not limited to finalizing the subcommittee's draft report and discussing the rating component for the EDC research program. The meetings are open to the public. *Information on Services for Individuals with Disabilities:* For information on access or services for individuals with disabilities, please contact Heather Drumm at

(202)564-8239 or *drumm.heather@epa.gov.* To request accommodation of a disability, please contact Heather Drumm, preferably at least 10 days prior to the meeting, to give EPA as much time as possible to process your request. Dated: September 24, 2007. Eric Weber, Acting Director, Office of Science Policy. [FR Doc. E7-19220 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0834; FRL-8150-2] Busan 77 Risk Assessment; Notice of Availability and Risk Reduction Options AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of EPA's risk assessment, and related documents for the pesticide Busan 77 and opens a public comment period on these documents (Phase 3 of 4-Phase Process). The public is encouraged to suggest risk management ideas or proposals to address the risks identified. EPA is developing a Reregistration Eligibility Decision

(RED)for Busan 77 through a modified, 4-Phase public participation process that the Agency uses to involve the public in developing pesticide reregistration decisions. Through this program, EPA is ensuring that all pesticides meet current health and safety standards. DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 27, 2007. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification

(ID)number EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0834, by one of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal* : *http://www.regulations.gov* . Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. • *Mail* : Office of Pesticide Programs

(OPP)Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. • *Delivery* : OPP Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays). Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The Docket Facility telephone number is

(703)305-5805. *Instructions* : Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0834. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the docket without change and may be made available on-line at *http://www.regulations.gov* , including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information

(CBI)or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-mail. The regulations.gov website is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. *Docket* : All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index available in regulations.gov. To access the electronic docket, go to *http://www.regulations.gov* , select “Advanced Search,” then “Docket Search.” Insert the docket ID number where indicated and select the “Submit” button. Follow the instructions on the regulations.gov website to view the docket index or access available documents. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either in the electronic docket at *http://www.regulations.gov* , or, if only available in hard copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone number is

(703)305-5805. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: ShaRon Carlisle, Antimicrobials Division (7510P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:

(703)308-6427; fax number:

(703)308-6467; e-mail address: *carlisle.sharon@epa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me? This action is directed to the public in general, and may be of interest to a wide range of stakeholders including environmental, human health, and agricultural advocates; the chemical industry; pesticide users; and members of the public interested in the sale, distribution, or use of pesticides. Since others also may be interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA? 1. * Submitting CBI* . Do not submit this information to EPA through regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. 2. * Tips for preparing your comments* . When submitting comments, remember to: i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying information (subject heading, **Federal Register** date and page number). ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal Regulations

(CFR)part or section number. iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and substitute language for your requested changes. iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information and/or data that you used. v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be reproduced. vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and suggest alternatives. vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of profanity or personal threats. viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline identified. II. Background A. What Action is the Agency Taking? EPA is releasing for public comment its human health and environmental fate and effects risk assessment and related documents for Busan 77 and soliciting public comment on risk management ideas or proposals. Busan 77 is currently registered as an antimicrobial agent for use in the manufacture of a variety of products used in swimming pools, metal working fluids, cooling water towers, paper mill process water, ornamental ponds and various sorts of fabrics. EPA developed the risk assessment and risk characterization for Busan 77 through a modified version of its public process for making pesticide reregistration eligibility and tolerance reassessment decisions. Through these programs, EPA is ensuring that pesticides meet current standards under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), as amended by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA). This active ingredient is found in products that can be used in swimming pools, spas whirlpools, hot tubs, metalworking fluids, fire water protection systems, cooling water towers, petroleum secondary recovery systems, paper mill process water, air washer water systems, ornamental ponds and aquariums. In addition, various fibers can be preserved with Busan 77. EPA is providing an opportunity, through this notice, for interested parties to provide comments and input on the Agency's risk assessment(s) for Busan 77. Such comments and input could address, for example, the availability of additional data to further refine the risk assessments, such as an acute freshwater and marine invertebrate studies, and a textile residue study to evaluate the amount of Busan 77 remaining in textiles after treatment. This information could refine the Agency's risk assessment methodologies and assumptions as applied to this specific pesticide. Through this notice, EPA also is providing an opportunity for interested parties to provide risk management proposals or otherwise comment on risk management for Busan 77. There are risks of concern associated with the use of Busan 77 in * residential settings from treating aquatic areas (dermal and inhalation)* ; occupational exposure for machinist using biocide treated metalworking fluids; and ecological risk to freshwater fish, freshwater invertebrates and marine invertebrates because of the once-through cooling water use. In targeting these risks of concern, the Agency solicits information on effective and practical risk reduction measures. EPA seeks to achieve environmental justice, the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people, regardless of race, color, national origin, or income, in the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. To help address potential environmental justice issues, the Agency seeks information on any groups or segments of the population who, as a result of their location, cultural practices, or other factors, may have atypical, unusually high exposure to Busan 77 compared to the general population. EPA is applying the principles of public participation to all pesticides undergoing reregistration and tolerance reassessment. The Agency's Pesticide Tolerance Reassessment and Reregistration; Public Participation Process, published in the **Federal Register** on May 14, 2004 (69 FR 26819) (FRL-7357-9), explains that in conducting these programs, the Agency is tailoring its public participation process to be commensurate with the level of risk, extent of use, complexity of the issues, and degree of public concern associated with each pesticide. For Busan 77 a modified, 4-Phase process with 1 comment period and ample opportunity for public consultation seems appropriate in view of its refined risk assessment and/or other factors. However, if as a result of comments received during this comment period EPA finds that additional issues warranting further discussion are raised, the Agency may lengthen the process and include a second comment period, as needed. All comments should be submitted using the methods in ADDRESSES , and must be received by EPA on or before the closing date. Comments will become part of the Agency Docket for Busan 77. Comments received after the close of the comment period will be marked “late.” EPA is not required to consider these late comments. B. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action? Section 4(g)(2) of FIFRA, as amended, directs that, after submission of all data concerning a pesticide active ingredient, “the Administrator shall determine whether pesticides containing such active ingredient are eligible for reregistration,” before calling in product-specific data on individual end-use products and either reregistering products or taking other “appropriate regulatory action.” List of Subjects Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests. Dated: September 20, 2007. Frank Sanders, Director, Antimicrobials Division, Office of Pesticide Programs. [FR Doc. E7-19236 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0936; FRL-8147-1] Notice of Filing of Pesticide Petitions for Residues of Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various Commodities AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This notice announces the initial filing of pesticide petitions proposing the establishment or modification of regulations for residues of pesticide chemicals in or on various commodities. DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 29, 2007. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification

(ID)number and the pesticide petition number

(PP)of interest, by one of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal* : *http://www.regulations.gov* . Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. • *Mail* : Office of Pesticide Programs

(703)305-5805. *Instructions* : Direct your comments to the assigned docket ID number and the pesticide petition number of interest. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the docket without change and may be made available on-line at *http://www.regulations.gov* , including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information

(CBI)or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-mail.The regulations.gov Web site is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. *Docket* : All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index available in regulations.gov. To access the electronic docket, go to *http://www.regulations.gov* , select “Advanced Search,” then “Docket Search.” Insert the docket ID number where indicated and select the “Submit” button. Follow the instructions on the regulations.gov website to view the docket index or access available documents. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available electronically at *http://www.regulations.gov* , or, if only available in hard copy, at the OPP Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S-4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of operation of this Docket Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket Facility telephone number is

(703)305-5805. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The person listed at the end of the pesticide petition summary of interest. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me? You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer. Potentially affected entities may include, but are not limited to: • Crop production (NAICS code 111). • Animal production (NAICS code 112). • Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311). • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532). This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining whether this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed at the end of the pesticide petition summary of interest. B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA? 1. *Submitting CBI* . Do not submit this information to EPA through regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. 2. *Tips for preparing your comments* . When submitting comments, remember to: i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying information (subject heading, **Federal Register** date and page number). ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal Regulations

(703)305-5218; e-mail address: *stanton.susan@epa.gov* . 2. *PP 7E7232* . (EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0893). Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4), 500 College Road East, Suite 201W., Princeton, NJ 08540, proposes to establish a tolerance for residues of the herbicide sethoxydim (2-[1-(ethoxyimino)butyl]-5-[2-(ethylthio) propyl]-3-hydroxy-2-cyclohexen-1-one) and its metabolites containing the 2-cyclohexen-1-one moiety (calculated as the herbicide) in or on food commodities cuphea, seed at 35.0 ppm; echium, seed at 35.0 ppm; gold of pleasure, seed at 35.0 ppm; gold of pleasure, meal at 40.0 ppm; hare's ear mustard, seed at 35.0 ppm; lesquerella, seed at 35.0 ppm; lunaria, seed at 35.0 ppm; meadowfoam, seed at 35.0 ppm; milkweed, seed at 35.0 ppm; mustard, seed at 35.0 ppm; oil radish, seed at 35.0 ppm; poppy, seed at 35.0 ppm; sesame, seed at 35.0 ppm; sweet rocket, seed at 35.0 ppm; crambe, seed at 35.0 ppm; crambe, meal at 40.0 ppm. Analytical methods for detecting levels of sethoxydim and its metabolites in or on food with a limit of detection that allows monitoring of food with residues at or above the level in these tolerances were submitted to EPA. The proposed analytical method involves extraction, partition, and cleanup. Samples are then analyzed by gas chromatography with sulfur-specific flame photometric detection. The limit of quantitation

(LOQ)is 0.05 ppm. Contact: Barbara Madden, telephone number:

(703)305-6463; e-mail address: *madden.barbara@epa.gov* . 3. *PP 7E7244* . (EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0872). Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4), 500 College Road East, Suite 201W., Princeton, NJ, 08540, proposes to establish a tolerance for residues of the fungicide cyazofamid, 4-chloro-2-cyano-N,N-dimethyl-5-(4-methylphenyl)-1H-imidazole-1-sulfonamide and its metabolite CCIM (4-chloro-5-(4-methylphenyl)-1H-imidazole-2-carbonitrile) in or on food commodity carrot, roots at 0.06 ppm. Residues of cyazofamid and CCIM were extracted from 20 grams of carrot with acetonitrile. After filtration, the extract was transferred to a separatory funnel, washed with hexane, cleaned up on a Nexus SPE column, and the eluate was concentrated by using a TurboVap LV workstation. After reconstitution in 50:50 acetonitrile: water, quantitation was achieved by liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry/mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS). Contact: Susan Stanton, telephone number:

(703)305-5218; e-mail address: *stanton.susan@epa.gov* . 4. *PP 6F7092* . (EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0781). Valent U.S.A. Corporation, 1600 Riviera Avenue, Suite 200, Walnut Creek, CA 94596, proposes to establish a tolerance for residues of the herbicide flumioxazin, 2-[7-fluoro-3,4-dihydro-3-oxo-4-(2-propynyl)-2H-1,4-benzoxazin-6-yl]-4,5,6,7-tetrahydro-1H-isoindole-1,3(2H)-dione in or on food commodities alfalfa, forage at 1.0 ppm and alfalfa, hay at 2.0 ppm. Practical analytical methods for detecting and measuring levels of flumioxazin have been developed and validated in or on all appropriate agricultural commodities and respective processing fractions. The level of quantitation

(LOQ)of flumioxazin in the methods is 0.02 ppm which will allow monitoring of food with residues at the levels proposed for the tolerances. Contact: James M. Stone, telephone number:

(703)305-7391; e-mail address: *stone.james@epa.gov* . 5. *PP 6F7106* . (EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0416). Syngenta Crop Protection, P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro, NC 27409, proposes to establish a tolerance for residues of the fungicide azoxystrobin, [methyl (E)-2-(2-(6-(2-cyanophenoxy)pyrimidin-4-yloxy)phenyl)-3-methoxyacrylate] and the Z isomer of azoxystrobin, [methyl (Z)-2-(2-(6-(2-cyanophenoxy)pyrimidin-4-yloxy)phenyl)-3-methoxyacrylate] in or on food commodities *PP 6F7106* : Barley, forage at 30 ppm; non-grass animal feeds, forage at 35 ppm; non-grass animal feeds, hay at 100 ppm; sorghum, forage at 25 ppm; sorghum, grain at 9 ppm; sorghum, stover at 40 ppm; wheat, forage at 30 ppm. Syngenta Crop Protection also proposes to establish a tolerance for residues of the fungicide azoxystrobin, [methyl (E)-2-(2-(6-(2-cyanophenoxy)pyrimidin-4-yloxy)phenyl)-3-methoxyacrylate] in or on food commodities *PP 6F7106* : Cattle, fat at 0.13 ppm; cattle, kidney at 1.00 ppm; cattle, liver at 5.10 ppm; cattle, meat at 0.07 ppm; cattle, meat byproducts (except liver and kidney) at 0.07 ppm; goat, fat at 0.13 ppm; goat, kidney at 1.00 ppm; goat, liver at 5.10 ppm; goat, meat at 0.07 ppm; goat, meat byproducts (except liver and kidney) at 0.07 ppm; egg white at 0.01 ppm; egg, yolk at 0.15 ppm; hog, fat at 1.10 ppm; hog, kidney at 0.03 ppm; hog, liver at 0.23 ppm; hog, meat byproducts (except liver and kidney) at 0.01 ppm; horse, kidney at 1.00 ppm; horse, liver at 5.10 ppm; horse, meat at 0.07 ppm; milk at 0.05 ppm; poultry, fat at 0.01 ppm; poultry, liver at 0.12 ppm; poultry, meat at 0.02 ppm; sheep, fat at 0.13 ppm; sheep, kidney at 1.00 ppm; sheep, liver at 5.10 ppm; sheep, meat at 0.07 ppm; sheep, meat byproducts (except liver and kidney) at 0.07 ppm. An adequate analytical method, gas chromatography with nitrogen-phosphorus detection (GC-NPD) or in mobile phase by high performance liquid chromatography with ultra-violet detection (HPLC-UV), is available for enforcement purposes with a limit of detection that allows monitoring of food with residues at or above the levels set in these tolerances. The Analytical Chemistry section of the EPA concluded that the method(s) are adequate for enforcement. Analytical methods are also available for analyzing meat, milk, poultry and eggs which also underwent successful independent laboratory validations. Contact: John Bazuin, telephone number:

(703)305-7381; e-mail address: *bazuin.john@epa.gov* . 6. *PP 7F7242* . (EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0219). E. I. DuPont de Nemours and Company, DuPont Crop Protection, P.O. Box 30, Newark, DE 19714-0030, proposes to establish a tolerance for the sum of the residues of the insecticide oxamyl (methyl N-N-dimethyl-N-[(methylcarbamyl)-oxy]-1-thiooxamimidate) and its oxime metabolite methyl N,N-dimethyl-N-hydroxy-1-thiooxaminimidate in or on food commodities wheat forage, wheat hay, and wheat straw at 0.20 ppm. Adequate methods are available for data collection and tolerance enforcement for plant and animal commodities. The limit of quantitation is approximately 0.02 ppm. The Pesticide Analytical Manual

(PAM)Vol. II, lists a gas liquid chromatography

(GLC)method with flame photometric detection (sulfur mode), Method I, for the enforcement of tolerances for plant and animal commodities. This method involves alkaline hydrolysis to convert oxamyl to the oxime metabolite; therefore, the method determines combined residues of oxamyl and its oxime metabolite. Methods used for data collection are essentially the same as the PAM Vol. II method. The FDA PESTDATA database dated 1/94 (PAM Volume I, Appendix I) indicates that oxamyl is completely recovered (>80%) by multi-residue methods section 302 (Luke Method; Protocol D) and section 401. Contact: Thomas C. Harris, telephone number:

(703)308-9423; e-mail address: *harris.thomas@epa.gov* . 7. *PP 7F7243* . (EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0871). Valent U.S.A. Corporation, 1600 Riviera Avenue, Suite 200, Walnut Creek, CA 94596, proposes to establish a tolerance for residues of the herbicide flumioxazin, 2-[7-fluoro-3,4-dihydro-3-oxo-4-(2-propynyl)-2H-1,4-benzoxazin-6-yl]-4,5,6,7-tetrahydro-1H-isoindole-1,3(2H)-dione in or on food commodities corn, field grain at 0.02 ppm; corn, field forage at 0.02 ppm; and corn, field stover at 0.02 ppm. Practical analytical methods for detecting and measuring levels of flumioxazin have been developed and validated in or on all appropriate agricultural commodities and respective processing fractions. The level of quantitation

(LOQ)of flumioxazin in the methods is 0.02 ppm which will allow monitoring of food with residues at the levels proposed for the tolerances. Contact: James M. Stone, telephone number:

(703)305-7391; e-mail address: *stone.james@epa.gov* . 8. *PP 7F7251* . (EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0880). McLaughlin Gormley King Company (MGK), 8810 Tenth Avenue North, Minneapolis, MN 55427, proposes to establish a tolerance for residues of the insecticide D-phenothrin in or on all food commodities at 0.01 ppm after wide-area mosquito adulticide treatments. Golden Pacific Laboratories developed and validated a liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry/mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) analytical method with a limit of quantitation

(LOQ)of 10 ppb of Sumithrin and a limit of detection

(LOD)of 2 ppb as requested by EPA (see MRID # 46770001, “Magnitude of the Residue of Multicide Mosquito Adulticiding Concentrate 2705 in Grass, Alfalfa, and Leaf Lettuce, Raw Agricultural Commodities Following Mosquito Control Overhead Treatment”). This method was used to analyze a total of 332 field samples, 24 control samples, and 48 lab-fortified samples for Sumithrin after aerial application of an end use concentrate containing 10% Sumithrin (D-phenothrin) and 10% of the synergist piperonyl butoxide. Contact: Ann Sibold, telephone number:

(703)305-6502; e-mail address: *sibold.ann@epa.gov* . Amendment to Existing Tolerances 1. *PP 8E5012* . (EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0119). Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4), 500 College Road East, Suite 201W, Princeton, NJ 08540, proposes to amend the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.532 by extending the expiration date for the existing time-limited tolerances established under the pesticide petition *PP 8E5012* , for an additional 2-year period from December 31, 2007 to December 31, 2009 for residues of the fungicide cyprodinil: 4-cyclopropyl-6-methyl-N-phenyl-2-pyrimidinamine in or on the food commodities onion, dry bulb at 0.60 ppm; onion, green at 4.0 ppm; and strawberry at 5.0 ppm. Syngenta Crop Protection has developed and validated analytical methodology for enforcement purposes. This method (Syngenta Crop Protection Method AG-631B) has passed an Agency petition method validation for several commodities and is currently the enforcement method for cyprodinil. An extensive database of method validation data using this method on various crop commodities is available. Contact: Barbara Madden, telephone number:

(703)305-6463; e-mail address: *madden.barbara@epa.gov* . 2. *PP 6F7106* and *PP 7F7198* . (EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0416). Syngenta Crop Protection, P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro, NC 27409, proposes to amend the tolerances in 40 CFR 180.507 for residues of the fungicide azoxystrobin, (methyl (E)-2-(2-[6-(2-cyanophenoxy)pyrimidin-4-yloxy]phenyl)-3-methoxyacrylate) and the Z isomer of azoxystrobin, (methyl (Z)-2-{2-[6-(2-cyanophenoxy)pyrimidin-4-yloxy]phenyl)-3-methoxyacrylate) in or on the food commodities *PP 6F7106* : Aspirated grain fractions at 112 ppm; and *PP 7F7198* : Cotton, gin byproducts at 35 ppm; cotton, undelinted seed at 0.7 ppm; and rice, wild at 5.0 ppm. An adequate analytical method, gas chromatography with nitrogen-phosphorus detection (GC-NPD) or in mobile phase by high performance liquid chromatography with ultra-violet detection (HPLC-UV), is available for enforcement purposes with a limit of detection that allows monitoring of food with residues at or above the levels set in these tolerances. The Analytical Chemistry section of the EPA concluded that the method(s) are adequate for enforcement. Analytical methods are also available for analyzing meat, milk, poultry and eggs which also underwent successful independent laboratory validations. Contact: John Bazuin, telephone number:

(703)305-7381; e-mail address: *bazuin.john@epa.gov* . New Exemption from Tolerance *PP 7F7225* . (EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0810). Cutting Edge Formulations, Inc., 5106 Bristol Industrial Way, Suite 400, Buford, GA 30518, proposes to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for residues of d-Limonene in or on food commodities tree, vine and berry crops, vegetable crops, alfalfa, rice, cotton, herbs and spices. Because this petition is a request for an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance without numerical limitations, no analytical method is required. Contact: Erik Kraft, telephone number:

(703)308-9358; e-mail address: *kraft.erik@epa.gov* . List of Subjects Environmental protection, Agricultural commodities, Feed additives, Food additives, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: September 19, 2007. Lois Rossi, Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs. [FR Doc. E7-19235 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-8474-5; Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2006-0260] Draft Integrated Science Assessment for Sulfur Oxides Health Criteria AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency. ACTION: Notice of public comment period on Draft Integrated Science Assessment for Sulfur Oxides Health Criteria. SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA)is announcing the public comment period for the draft document titled, “Integrated Science Assessment for Sulfur Oxides Health Criteria; First External Review Draft” (EPA/600/R-07/108). The draft document was prepared by the National Center for Environmental Assessment within EPA's Office of Research and Development as part of the Agency's review of the air quality criteria for sulfur oxides and the primary (health-based) national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for sulfur dioxide (SO <sup>2</sup> ). EPA is releasing this draft document solely for the purpose of seeking comment from the public and the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC). It does not represent and should not be construed to represent any Agency policy, viewpoint, or determination. EPA will consider any public comments submitted in accordance with this notice when revising the document. DATES: The public comment period begins on or about September 28, 2007. Comments must be received on or before November 30, 2007. ADDRESSES: The draft “Integrated Science Assessment for Sulfur Oxides Health Criteria; First External Review Draft” is available primarily via the Internet on the National Center for Environmental Assessment's home page under the Recent Additions and Publications menus at *http://www.epa.gov/ncea.* A limited number of CD-ROM or paper copies will be available. Contact Jee Young Kim by phone: 919-541-4157, fax 919-541-1818, or e-mail ( *kim.jee-young@epa.gov* ) to request either of these, and please provide your name, your mailing address, and the draft document title, “Integrated Science Assessment for Sulfur Oxides Health Criteria; First External Review Draft” (EPA/600/R-07/108) to facilitate processing of your request. Comments may be submitted electronically via *http://www.regulations.gov,* by mail, by facsimile, or by hand delivery/courier. Please follow the detailed instructions provided in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this notice. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jee Young Kim, NCEA; telephone: 919-541-4157, facsimile: 919-541-1818, or e-mail: *kim.jee-young@epa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Information About the Document Section 108(a) of the Clean Air Act directs the Administrator to identify certain pollutants which “may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health and welfare” and to issue air quality criteria for them. These air quality criteria are to “accurately reflect the latest scientific knowledge useful in indicating the kind and extent of all identifiable effects on public health or welfare which may be expected from the presence of [a] pollutant in the ambient air. * * * .” Under section 109 of the Act, EPA is then to establish national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for each pollutant for which EPA has issued criteria. Section 109(d) of the Act subsequently requires periodic review and, if appropriate, revision of existing air quality criteria to reflect advances in scientific knowledge on the effects of the pollutant on public health and welfare. EPA is also to revise the NAAQS, if appropriate, based on the revised air quality criteria. Sulfur oxides are one of six principal (or “criteria”) pollutants for which EPA has established air quality criteria and NAAQS. EPA periodically reviews the scientific basis for these standards by preparing an Integrated Science Assessment

(ISA)(formerly called an Air Quality Criteria Document). The ISA and supplementary annexes, in conjunction with additional technical and policy assessments, provide the scientific basis for EPA decisions on the adequacy of a current NAAQS and the appropriateness of new or revised standards. The Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC), an independent science advisory committee established pursuant to section 109 of the Clean Air Act and part of the EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB), provides independent scientific advice on NAAQS matters, including advice on EPA's draft ISAs. On May 16, 2006 (71 FR 28023), EPA formally initiated its current review of the criteria for Sulfur Oxides, requesting the submission of recent scientific information on specified topics. A draft of EPA's “Integrated Plan for Review of the Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard for Sulfur Dioxide” was made available in February 2007 for public comment and was discussed by the Clean Air Science Advisory Committee (CASAC) via a publicly accessible teleconference consultation on May 11, 2007 (72 FR 20336). The Plan is being finalized and will be made available on EPA's Web site ( *http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/so2/s_so2_cr_pd.html* ). In February 2007 (72 FR 6238), a workshop was held to discuss, with invited scientific experts, initial draft materials prepared in the development of the ISA and supplementary annexes for sulfur oxides. The draft “Integrated Science Assessment for Sulfur Oxides Health Criteria; First External Review Draft” will be discussed by CASAC at a future public meeting; public comments that have been received prior to the public meeting will be provided to the CASAC review panel. A future **Federal Register** notice will inform the public of the exact date and time of that CASAC meeting. II. How To Submit Information to the Docket Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2006-0260 by one of the following methods: • *http://www.regulations.gov:* Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. • *E-mail:* *ORD.Docket@epa.gov.* • *Fax:* 202-566-1753. • *Mail:* Office of Environmental Information

(OEI)Docket (Mail Code: 2822T), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. The phone number is 202-566-1752. • *Hand Delivery:* The OEI Docket is located in the EPA Headquarters Docket Center, EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is 202-566-1744. Such deliveries are only accepted during the docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. If you provide comments by mail or hand delivery, please submit one unbound original with pages numbered consecutively, and three copies of the comments. For attachments, provide an index, number pages consecutively with the comments, and submit an unbound original and three copies. *Instructions:* Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2006-0260. Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified comment period. Comments received after the closing date will be marked “late,” and may only be considered if time permits. It is EPA's policy to include all comments it receives in the public docket without change and to make the comments available online at *http://www.regulations.gov* , including any personal information provided, unless a comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information

(CBI)or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through *http://www.regulations.gov* or e-mail. The *http://www.regulations.gov* Web site is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through *http://www.regulations.gov* , your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at *http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.* *Docket:* All documents in the docket are listed in the *http://www.regulations.gov* index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in *http://www.regulations.gov* or in hard copy at the OEI Docket in the EPA Headquarters Docket Center. Dated: September 21, 2007. Peter W. Preuss, Director, National Center for Environmental Assessment. [FR Doc. E7-19146 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [WT Docket No. 02-55—FCC 07-168] Improving Public Safety Communications in the 800 MHz Band AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: By this Public Notice, the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) announces supplemental procedures and provides guidance for completion of 800 MHz rebanding by National Public Safety Planning Advisory Committee (NPSPAC) licensees. As part of the rebanding process, NPSPAC licensees are being relocated to new frequencies in the 800 MHz band, with all rebanding costs to be paid by Sprint Corporation (Sprint). The Commission's orders provide for the rebanding process to be completed by June 26, 2008. DATES: Effective September 12, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roberto Mussenden, Policy Division, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, at

(202)418-1428 or *Roberto.Mussenden@fcc.gov* ; John Evanoff, Policy Division, Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau, at

(202)418-0848 or *John Evanoff@fcc.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This document summarizes the Public Notice in WT Docket No. 02-55, released on September 12, 2007. The full text of this document is available for public inspection on the Commission's Internet site at *http://www.fcc.gov* . It is also available for inspection and copying during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center (Room CY-A257), 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. The full text of this document also may be purchased from the Commission's duplication contractor, Best Copy and Printing Inc., Portals II, 445 12th St., SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554; telephone

(202)488-5300; fax

(202)488-5563; e-mail *FCC@BCPIWEB.COM* . Background 1. In the 800 MHz Report and Order, 69 FR 67823 (November 22, 2004), the Commission ordered the rebanding of the 800 MHz band to resolve interference between commercial and public safety systems in the band. In that order, the Commission required Sprint Nextel Corporation (Sprint) to pay for relocation of all affected 800 MHz licensee systems to their new channel assignments, including the expense of retuning or replacing the licensee's equipment as required. Sprint must provide each relocating licensee with “comparable facilities” on the new channel(s), and must provide for a seamless transition to enable licensee operations to continue without interruption during the relocation process. In a Public Notice released on September 12, 2007, the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) announced supplemental procedures and provided guidance for completion of 800 MHz rebanding by National Public Safety Planning Advisory Committee (NPSPAC) licensees. 3. The following procedures and guidelines are intended to expedite:

(1)Rebanding planning activities undertaken by NPSPAC licensees;

(2)negotiation of Frequency Reconfiguration Agreements

(FRAs)with Sprint; and

(3)physical implementation of rebanding. This Public Notice also provides guidance to Sprint and the 800 MHz Transition Administrator

(TA)to help expedite cost review and approval, and ultimately to ensure that rebanding is accomplished in a reasonable, prudent, and timely manner. Completion of Planning 4. The following time limits shall apply to planning activities for NPSPAC licensees that have negotiated a Planning Funding Agreement

(PFA)with Sprint or are engaged in planning without a PFA: 1 1 These planning timelines also apply to licensees who are reconfiguring Expansion Band frequencies in Stage 2. ○ All NPSPAC licensees must complete planning (either with or without a PFA) and submit a cost estimate to Sprint in accordance with the following timelines: ▪ NPSPAC licensees with systems of up to 5,000 subscriber units must complete planning and submit a cost estimate within 90 days of TA approval of the PFA. 2 2 For licensees who conduct planning without a PFA, the TA shall designate an equivalent starting date for the planning period. ▪ PSPAC licensees with more than 5,000 units must complete planning and submit a cost estimate as follows: • 5,001-10,000 units: 100 days. • Over 10,000 units: 110 days. 3 3 Wave 4 licensees that are subject to deferred mediation due to pending international border issues will receive updated timelines once the revised band plans are available. Wave 4, Stage 2 licensees in mediation are subject to the timelines in this Public Notice. ○ NPSPAC licensees in Waves 1-3 that are already engaged in planning on the release date of this Public Notice must complete planning and submit a cost estimate to Sprint as follows: 4 4 In instances where these deadlines would result in a licensee having less than 90, 100, or 110 total days to complete planning (based on the size of its system) in accordance with this Public Notice, the 90, 100, and 110-day planning timelines established above will control. For example, a Wave 1 licensee with 1000 units that began planning on August 1, 2007 would have 90 days from that date, *i.e.* , until October 30, 2007, to complete planning. ▪ Wave 1—by October 15, 2007. ▪ Wave 2—by November 15, 2007. ▪ Wave 3—by December 15, 2007. ○ Sprint shall cooperate with and fully support NPSPAC licensee planning efforts in accordance with these time limits. The Commission discourages licensees from requesting extensions of time for planning that assert arguments on behalf of Sprint. Requests for extension based on delay caused by Sprint will not be routinely granted. ○ To facilitate completion of planning within these time limits, the Commission advises NPSPAC licensees to provide in their contracts with equipment vendors and consultants that such vendors and consultants will make sufficient resources available to support licensee planning efforts. Licensee requests for extension of planning time based on claimed unavailability of vendor or consultant resources will not be routinely granted. ○ Subject to the above limitations, a NPSPAC licensee may request that the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau (PSHSB) allow additional time for planning, but any such request must explain why more time is necessary as well as demonstrate that the licensee has exercised diligence in the time already allotted. Factors that will be considered in evaluating a request include system size and complexity, degree of interoperability with other systems, and level of effort required to prepare a reasonable cost estimate. ○ During planning, NPSPAC licensees shall provide the TA with biweekly updates regarding the status of their planning activities in such form as the TA may request. The licensee's cost of preparing such updates shall be a recoverable cost from Sprint. Frequency Reconfiguration Agreement Negotiations 5. The following time limits shall apply to FRA negotiations between NPSPAC licensees and Sprint: ○ Following completion of planning and submission of a cost estimate to Sprint by the licensee, parties have 30 days to negotiate a FRA. Licensees shall complete their cost estimate in accordance with the Cost Estimate guidance provided by the TA. 5 Negotiations shall be subject to monitoring by the TA mediator, who shall confirm the date on which a cost estimate was submitted to Sprint, but the mediator is not required to participate in negotiations. 5 *See* *http://www.800ta.org/content/documents/cost_estimate.asp.* ○ If the parties are unable to negotiate an FRA within 30 days, the parties shall participate in mediation for 20 days. The TA shall refer any remaining disputed issues to PSHSB within 10 days of the close of the mediation period, during which time the parties will complete the briefing of such issues. In referring such disputes, the TA mediator shall provide a record summary to PSHSB, and shall provide a Recommended Resolution unless the Bureau notifies the mediator that a mediator recommendation is not required. Change Notice Process 6. The Change Notice process is designed to address unanticipated changes in cost, scope, or schedule that occur during implementation or in the case of an emergency. 6 Some NPSPAC licensees have expressed concern that uncertainty regarding the Change Notice process has prolonged initial planning and FRA negotiations. The Commission therefore offers the following guidance with respect to the Change Notice process: 6 *See* *http://www.800ta.org/content/documents/change_notice.asp* for TA procedures and recommended Change Notice forms. ○ The Change Notice process is subject to the Commission's Rebanding Cost Clarification Order. 7 Accordingly, the negotiation and approval of Change Notice requests should take into account the overall goals of this proceeding, not just the issue of minimum cost. 8 7 *See* Improving Public Safety Communications in the 800 MHz Band, WT Docket 02-55, *Memorandum Opinion and Order* , 22 FCC Rcd 9818

(2007)( *Rebanding Cost Clarification Order* ). 8 *Id.* at 9821 ¶ 8. ○ Licensees may not use the Change Notice process to recover costs that were reasonably foreseeable during planning or FRA negotiations but were not raised in negotiations, or that were considered and rejected. However, licensees that comply with the planning and FRA time limits discussed above may seek to recover costs incurred that could not reasonably be anticipated within such time limits. ○ Licensees should submit Change Notice requests concurrently to Sprint and the TA. 9 To facilitate Change Notice review and approval, both Sprint and the TA should have requests reviewed by personnel that are already familiar with the licensee's FRA and rebanding requirements wherever possible. 9 Requests should be submitted using the TA's Change Notice Process Fact Sheet, available at: *http://www.800ta.org/content/PDF/forms/Change_Notice_Process_Fact_Sheet.pdf.* ○ Sprint shall respond to all Change Notices requests within 10 working days of receipt. If negotiations are unsuccessful, either party may request mediation from the TA and parties shall participate in mediation for 15 working days, with any remaining disputes referred to PSHSB at that time. If parties agree to an amendment to their FRA, the TA shall review all such amendments within 10 working days from the date submitted by the parties for approval. Rebanding Implementation *7. Rebanding implementation consists of:*

(1)Replacement and retuning of subscriber equipment;

(2)retuning of base stations to the licensee's new channel assignments and commencement of system operations on the new channels (sometimes referred to as the system “cutover”); and

(3)additional post-cutover system modifications ( *e.g.* , disposal of temporary or legacy equipment, removal of pre-rebanding channels from subscriber units). NPSPAC licensees should initiate specific tasks and activities associated with these implementation steps as early in the rebanding process as possible. Some of these tasks can be initiated prior to the conclusion of FRA negotiations, and licensees should be prepared to proceed rapidly with implementation once the FRA is finalized. The Commission encourages NPSPAC licensees to take the following steps: ○ Use the resources offered by the TA to prepare for and expedite system reconfiguration. Guidance on key processes and procedures is available on the TA's Web site at *http://www.800TA.org/org/reconfig_phase/reconfig1.asp.* ○ Provide for early replacement/retuning of equipment. 10 Engage vendors and consultants in reconfiguration implementation and begin to replace or retune equipment as early as possible. 10 Under the TA's Subscriber Early Deployment

(SED)program, licensees may begin retuning/replacement of equipment prior to finalization of the FRA. Alternatively, licensees should initiate retuning/replacement as early as possible after the FRA is finalized. ○ Finalize contracts with vendors and consultants to ensure that equipment will be delivered and implementation work completed in accordance with the FRA rebanding schedule and FCC requirements. ○ Create and distribute lists of key licensee personnel and contacts, as well as contacts for vendors, consultants, Sprint, and the TA. Designate an internal or vendor contact who will respond to requests from the TA for status updates regarding the implementation schedule and progress. ○ Maintain an inventory of all subscriber and infrastructure equipment affected by rebanding, and verify the receipt of all loaner and replacement equipment. ○ Notify Sprint when channels in the new NPSPAC band need to be made available to allow system testing or operation on the licensee's new channel assignments. Coordinate with Sprint regarding filing license modifications needed to add the new frequencies to the licensee's authorizations. ○ For systems that use mutual aid channels, have a plan in place to maintain mutual aid operations during reconfiguration. Coordinate efforts to ensure continuity of mutual aid interoperability arrangements with neighboring licensees. ○ Notify the TA if an issue affecting implementation is identified that vendors, consultants, or Sprint cannot quickly resolve, or that materially affects the implementation schedule. Regional Implementation Planning 8. NPSPAC licensees and Sprint are encouraged to define implementation schedules, including the clearing of necessary frequencies for licensee reconfiguration and filing of license modifications, in the FRA wherever feasible. For licensees in areas with few, if any, other NPSPAC licensees; or licensees without significant interoperability dependencies, this should be a specific goal of the FRA negotiation. This will help reduce the amount of additional planning and planning resources required from all parties for subsequent efforts. 11 11 Licensees in Stage 2 reconfiguring only Expansion Band channels are expected to have implementation timelines included in their FRAs and will only be affected by Regional Implementation Planning if they participate extensively in an interoperability network. 9. As part of implementation preparation in certain (but not all) areas, the TA is conducting a series of NPSPAC rebanding implementation planning sessions for NPSPAC licensees on a regional or state-wide basis. NPSPAC licensees in such areas are expected to participate in these sessions, regardless of whether they have executed an FRA with Sprint. The purpose of the sessions is to develop a comprehensive implementation schedule, including proper identification of issues, risks, dependencies and next steps. The Commission provides the following guidance to NPSPAC licensees attending planning sessions: ○ Licensees should be prepared to discuss their overall timelines and implementation plans for reconfiguration, as well as interoperability, vendor commitments, and other dependencies, key assumptions, and open issues. ○ Licensees are encouraged to proceed with all possible reconfiguration implementation activities for their own systems while the regional planning process is under way. ○ Licensees that have executed an FRA without an implementation schedule that can reconfigure their infrastructure in advance of the regional planning process and independently of other systems (such as a statewide mutual aid network) should notify both Sprint and the TA concurrently of the date by which channels in the new NPSPAC band need to be made available. Sprint shall respond to all such requests with a schedule for making new NPSPAC channels available to the licensee within 15 working days. ○ Multiple licensees that propose to reconfigure as a coordinated group may present a single timeline and plan (even if they have separate FRAs). ○ For licensees in mediation with Sprint, discussions at regional planning sessions will not be treated as part of the official mediation record. Wave 4 Border Area Planning 10. As addressed in prior public notices, the negotiation periods for border area licensees in Wave 4 have been extended pending resolution of ongoing international discussions on US-Canada and US-Mexico border issues. 12 12 *See* Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau Announces Extension of Negotiation Period between Sprint Nextel and Border Area NPSPAC Licensees in Wave 4, Stage 2 of 800 MHz Band Reconfiguration, WT Docket No. 02-55, DA 07-3468 (PSHSB July 31, 2007); Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau Extends Negotiation Period between Sprint Nextel and Border Area Non- NPSPAC Licensees in Wave 4, Stage 1 of 800 MHz Band Reconfiguration, WT Docket No. 02-55, *Public Notice,* 22 FCC Rcd 11658 (PSHSB 2007). ○ During this extended period, Wave 4 border area licensees are not required to engage in planning or negotiation prior to receipt of frequency designations from the TA. ○ However, the Commission encourages licensees to engage in such activities to the extent that they are not frequency-dependent and would not result in unnecessary duplication of costs. For example, border area licensees may conduct system inventories and develop plans for replacement and retuning of equipment. ○ If licensees choose to engage in such activities, Sprint shall pay licensees' reasonable costs in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's orders in this proceeding. 13 13 The Commission clarifies that this requires Sprint to pay all costs incurred by licensees in reasonable anticipation of rebanding. There is a remote possibility that the Commission's final rebanding plan for the border areas could result in some border licensees not needing to reband. However, given the likelihood that most if not all licensees will reband, allowing all licensees to proceed with rebanding planning prior to this contingency being resolved is likely to speed the transition, and therefore is a reasonable cost under the Commission's *Rebanding Cost Clarification Order. See Rebanding Cost Clarification Order,* 22 FCC Rcd at 9822 ¶ 9 (rebanding may proceed more efficiently “if rebanding tasks are initiated early in the process and carried on in stages throughout the process, even though this may be more costly than performing all of the rebanding work at once at a later date”). Public Safety Licensee Requests for Extension of 36-Month Deadline 11. Some public safety licensees have expressed concern that they will be unable to complete their system rebanding by the June 26, 2008 deadline established by the Commission. The Commission offers the following guidance for public safety licensees who anticipate that they may need to file requests to extend the deadline: ○ In general, the Commission discourages public safety licensees from filing extension requests at this time. Requests that are filed may be held in abeyance pending further review of progress in rebanding implementation. ○ Requests for extension will be subject to a high level of scrutiny. Licensees will be expected to demonstrate that they have worked diligently and in good faith to complete rebanding expeditiously, and that the amount of additional time requested is no more than is reasonably necessary to complete the rebanding process. ○ Factors that will be considered in evaluating requests will include system size and complexity, degree of interoperability with other systems, and level of effort required to complete rebanding implementation. ○ The Commission clarifies that public safety licensees do not need to file extension requests in order to be assured of continued funding by Sprint in the event that their rebanding activities extend past the 36-month deadline. Sprint is required to pay all licensee rebanding expenses that are reasonable, prudent, and necessary regardless of when such costs are incurred. 14 The Commission directs the TA to approve FRAs that provide for recovery of rebanding costs incurred after June 26, 2008, provided such costs are otherwise recoverable under the TA's standards. 14 This does not preclude the Bureau or Commission from requiring a licensee to pay its own rebanding costs based on a determination that the licensee has caused unjustified delay or has otherwise failed to meet its obligation to implement rebanding in good faith. Ordering Clauses 12. This document does not contain new or modified information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13. In addition, therefore, it does not contain any new or modified “information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees,” pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4). Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-19210 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION [File No. 062 3190] Ingenix, Inc.; Analysis of Proposed Consent Order to Aid Public Comment AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission. ACTION: Proposed Consent Agreement. SUMMARY: The consent agreement in this matter settles alleged violations of federal law prohibiting unfair or deceptive acts or practices or unfair methods of competition. The attached Analysis to Aid Public Comment describes both the allegations in the draft complaint and the terms of the consent order—embodied in the consent agreement—that would settle these allegations. DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 17, 2007. ADDRESSES: Interested parties are invited to submit written comments. Comments should refer to “Ingenix, File No. 062 3190,” to facilitate the organization of comments. A comment filed in paper form should include this reference both in the text and on the envelope, and should be mailed or delivered to the following address: Federal Trade Commission/Office of the Secretary, Room 135-H, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, D.C. 20580. Comments containing confidential material must be filed in paper form, must be clearly labeled “Confidential,” and must comply with Commission Rule 4.9(c). 16 CFR 4.9(c) (2005). 1 The FTC is requesting that any comment filed in paper form be sent by courier or overnight service, if possible, because U.S. postal mail in the Washington area and at the Commission is subject to delay due to heightened security precautions. Comments that do not contain any nonpublic information may instead be filed in electronic form as part of or as an attachment to email messages directed to the following e-mail box: *consentagreement@ftc.gov* . 1 The comment must be accompanied by an explicit request for confidential treatment, including the factual and legal basis for the request, and must identify the specific portions of the comment to be withheld from the public record. The request will be granted or denied by the Commission’s General Counsel, consistent with applicable law and the public interest. *See* Commission Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR 4.9(c). The FTC Act and other laws the Commission administers permit the collection of public comments to consider and use in this proceeding as appropriate. All timely and responsive public comments, whether filed in paper or electronic form, will be considered by the Commission, and will be available to the public on the FTC Web site, to the extent practicable, at *http://.www.ftc.gov.* As a matter of discretion, the FTC makes every effort to remove home contact information for individuals from the public comments it receives before placing those comments on the FTC website. More information, including routine uses permitted by the Privacy Act, may be found in the FTC's privacy policy, at *http://www.ftc.gov/ftc/privacy.htm* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rebecca E. Kuehn, Bureau of Consumer Protection, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20580,

(201)326-2252. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 6(f) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 38 Stat. 721, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and § 2.34 of the Commission Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 2.34, notice is hereby given that the above-captioned consent agreement containing a consent order to cease and desist, having been filed with and accepted, subject to final approval, by the Commission, has been placed on the public record for a period of thirty

(30)days. The following Analysis to Aid Public Comment describes the terms of the consent agreement, and the allegations in the complaint. An electronic copy of the full text of the consent agreement package can be obtained from the FTC Home Page (for September 17, 2007), on the World Wide Web, at *http://www.ftc.gov/os/2007/09/index.htm* . A paper copy can be obtained from the FTC Public Reference Room, Room 130-H, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20580, either in person or by calling

(202)326-2222. Public comments are invited, and may be filed with the Commission in either paper or electronic form. All comments should be filed as prescribed in the ADDRESSES section above, and must be received on or before the date specified in the DATES section. Analysis of Agreement Containing Consent Order to Aid Public Comment The Federal Trade Commission has accepted, subject to final approval, an agreement containing a consent order from Ingenix, Inc. (“respondent” or “Ingenix”). The proposed consent order has been placed on the public record for thirty

(30)days for receipt of comments by interested persons. Comments received during this period will become part of the public record. After thirty

(30)days, the Commission will again review the agreement and the comments received, and will decide whether it should withdraw from the agreement or make final the agreement’s proposed order. Ingenix markets MedPoint, a data aggregation service that provides individual medical profiles to health and life insurance companies. Insurance companies use MedPoint for underwriting or claims review purposes. The medical profile generated by MedPoint analyzes the individual’s prescription drug history, and provides, based on that analysis, potential medical conditions that may be present and predictive scores for the individual. The Commission’s complaint alleges that the medical profile generated for the MedPoint service is a consumer report and that respondent is a consumer reporting agency, as those terms are defined in Sections 603(d) and

(f)of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681a(d) and (f). The complaint alleges that the respondent’s failure to provide the “Notice To Users of Consumer Reports: Obligations of Users Under the FCRA” (“Notice to Users”), the required content of which is found in 16 CFR 698, Appendix H, is a violation of Section 607(d) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681e(d). The proposed consent order contains provisions designed to prevent respondent from engaging in similar acts and practices in the future. Part I of the proposed order requires respondent to provide the Notice To Users to any user or prospective user of any medical profile generated by MedPoint that constitutes a consumer report, or of any other consumer report. Part II.A. of the proposed order requires respondent to maintain or continue to maintain reasonable procedures to limit the furnishing of consumer reports to those with a permissible purpose, as required by Section 607(a) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681e(a). Part II.B. of the proposed order requires respondent to follow or continue to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information concerning the individuals about whom the reports relates, as required by Section 607(b) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681e(b). Part II.C. of the proposed order requires respondent to maintain or continue to maintain reasonable procedures to ensure compliance with Section 611 of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681i, “Procedure in case of disputed accuracy.” Part II.D. of the proposed order requires respondent to conduct or continue to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation in cases of disputed accuracy, as required by Section 611 of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681i. Part II.E. of the proposed order requires respondent to comply or continue to comply with the Disposal of Consumer Report Information and Records Rule, 16 C.F.R. Part 682. Part III of the proposed order contains a document retention requirement. It requires respondent to maintain and upon request make available to the Commission for inspection and copying documents demonstrating compliance with the requirements of Parts I and II of the proposed order. Part IV of the proposed order requires respondent to distribute copies of the order to various principals, officers, directors, and managers, employees, agents, and representatives having decision-making responsibilities with respect to MedPoint or any other consumer report. Part V of the proposed order requires respondent to notify the Commission of any changes in corporate structure that might affect compliance with the order. Part VI of the proposed order requires respondent to file with the Commission one or more reports detailing its compliance with the order. Part VII of the proposed order is a “sunset” provision, dictating the conditions under which the order will terminate twenty years from the date it is issued or twenty years after a complaint is filed in federal court, by either the United States or the FTC, alleging any violation of the order. The purpose of this analysis is to facilitate public comment on the proposed order. It is not intended to constitute an official interpretation of the proposed order or to modify in any way its terms. By direction of the Commission. Donald S. Clark, Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-19152 Filed 9-27-07: 8:45 am] [Billing Code: 6750-01-S] FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION [File No. 062 3189] Milliman, Inc.; Analysis of Proposed Consent Order to Aid Public Comment AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission. ACTION: Proposed Consent Agreement. SUMMARY: The consent agreement in this matter settles alleged violations of federal law prohibiting unfair or deceptive acts or practices or unfair methods of competition. The attached Analysis to Aid Public Comment describes both the allegations in the draft complaint and the terms of the consent order—embodied in the consent agreement—that would settle these allegations. DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 17, 2007. ADDRESSES: Interested parties are invited to submit written comments. Comments should refer to “Milliman, File No. 062 3189,” to facilitate the organization of comments. A comment filed in paper form should include this reference both in the text and on the envelope, and should be mailed or delivered to the following address: Federal Trade Commission/Office of the Secretary, Room 135-H, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20580. Comments containing confidential material must be filed in paper form, must be clearly labeled “Confidential,” and must comply with Commission Rule 4.9(c). 16 CFR 4.9(c) (2005). 1 The FTC is requesting that any comment filed in paper form be sent by courier or overnight service, if possible, because U.S. postal mail in the Washington area and at the Commission is subject to delay due to heightened security precautions. Comments that do not contain any nonpublic information may instead be filed in electronic form as part of or as an attachment to email messages directed to the following e-mail box: *consentagreement@ftc.gov* . 1 The comment must be accompanied by an explicit request for confidential treatment, including the factual and legal basis for the request, and must identify the specific portions of the comment to be withheld from the public record. The request will be granted or denied by the Commission’s General Counsel, consistent with applicable law and the public interest. *See* Commission Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR 4.9(c). The FTC Act and other laws the Commission administers permit the collection of public comments to consider and use in this proceeding as appropriate. All timely and responsive public comments, whether filed in paper or electronic form, will be considered by the Commission, and will be available to the public on the FTC Web site, to the extent practicable, at *http://www.ftc.gov.* As a matter of discretion, the FTC makes every effort to remove home contact information for individuals from the public comments it receives before placing those comments on the FTC website. More information, including routine uses permitted by the Privacy Act, may be found in the FTC's privacy policy, at *http://www.ftc.gov/ftc/privacy.htm* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rebecca E. Kuehn, Bureau of Consumer Protection, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20580,

(202)326-2222. Public comments are invited, and may be filed with the Commission in either paper or electronic form. All comments should be filed as prescribed in the ADDRESSES section above, and must be received on or before the date specified in the DATES section. Analysis of Agreement Containing Consent Order to Aid Public Comment The Federal Trade Commission has accepted, subject to final approval, an agreement containing a consent order from Milliman, Inc. (“respondent” or “Milliman”). The proposed consent order has been placed on the public record for thirty

(30)days for receipt of comments by interested persons. Comments received during this period will become part of the public record. After thirty

(30)days, the Commission will again review the agreement and the comments received, and will decide whether it should withdraw from the agreement or make final the agreement’s proposed order. Milliman markets IntelliScript, a data aggregation service that provides individual medical profiles, including but not limited to prescription drug purchase histories of insurance applicants, to health and life insurance companies. Insurance companies use IntelliScript for underwriting or claims review purposes. The medical profile generated by IntelliScript analyzes the individual’s prescription drug history, and provides a ‘map’ of the risk levels associated with each drug, based on information provided by the insurer. The Commission’s complaint alleges that the medical profile generated for the IntelliScript service is a consumer report and that respondent is a consumer reporting agency, as those terms are defined in Sections 603(d) and

(HHS)gives notice of a decision to designate a class of employees at the Ames Laboratory, Ames, Iowa, as an addition to the Special Exposure Cohort

(SEC)under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000. On September 12, 2007, the Secretary of HHS designated the following class of employees as an addition to the SEC: Sheet metal workers, physical plant maintenance and associated support staff (including all maintenance shop personnel), and supervisory staff who were monitored or should have been monitored for potential internal radiation exposures associated with the maintenance and renovation activities of the thorium production areas in Wilhelm Hall (a.k.a. the Metallurgy Building or “Old” Metallurgy Building) at the Ames Laboratory from January 1, 1955, through December 31, 1970, for a number of work days aggregating at least 250 work days or in combination with work days within the parameters established for one or more other classes of employees in the Special Exposure Cohort. This designation will become effective on October 12, 2007, unless Congress provides otherwise prior to the effective date. After this effective date, HHS will publish a notice in the **Federal Register** reporting the addition of this class to the SEC or the result of any provision by Congress regarding the decision by HHS to add the class to the SEC. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Elliott, Director, Office of Compensation Analysis and Support, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), 4676 Columbia Parkway, MS C-46, Cincinnati, OH 45226, Telephone 513-533-6800 (this is not a toll-free number). Information requests can also be submitted by e-mail to *OCAS@CDC.GOV* . Dated: September 24, 2007. John Howard, Director, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. [FR Doc. E7-19297 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4160-17-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health; Designation of a Class of Employees for Addition to the Special Exposure Cohort AGENCY: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Department of Health and Human Services

(HHS)gives notice of a decision to designate a class of employees at the Hanford Engineer Works, Richland, Washington, as an addition to the Special Exposure Cohort

(SEC)under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000. On September 12, 2007, the Secretary of HHS designated the following class of employees as an addition to the SEC: Employees of the Department of Energy (DOE), its predecessor agencies, or DOE contractors or subcontractors who were monitored or should have been monitored for internal radiological exposures while working at the Hanford Engineer Works in: the 300 Area fuel fabrication and research facilities from October 1, 1943 through August 31, 1946; the 200 Area plutonium separation facilities from November 1, 1944 through August 31, 1946; or the 100 B, D, and F reactor areas from September 1, 1944 through August 31, 1946; for a number of work days aggregating at least 250 work days or in combination with work days within the parameters established for one or more other classes of employees in the Special Exposure Cohort. This designation will become effective on October 12, 2007, unless Congress provides otherwise prior to the effective date. After this effective date, HHS will publish a notice in the **Federal Register** reporting the addition of this class to the SEC or the result of any provision by Congress regarding the decision by HHS to add the class to the SEC. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Elliott, Director, Office of Compensation Analysis and Support, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), 4676 Columbia Parkway, MS C-46, Cincinnati, OH 45226, Telephone 513-533-6800 (this is not a toll-free number). Information requests can also be submitted by e-mail to *OCAS@CDC.GOV.* Dated: September 24, 2007. John Howard, Director, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. [FR Doc. E7-19243 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4160-17-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality AHRQ Health Care Innovations Exchange AGENCY: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), HHS. ACTION: Notice of Submission of Innovations. SUMMARY: To support its objective of accelerating the diffusion and adoption of innovative health care delivery changes, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality

(AHRQ)recently launched version 1.0 of the AHRQ Health Care Innovations Exchange

(HCIE)Web site, *http://www.innovations.ahrq.gov* . The HCIE is a new initiative designed to support health care professionals in sharing and adopting innovations that improve health care quality. Version 1.0 of the Web site is focused on stimulating creativity and innovation and will serve as a virtual place to which innovators will be encouraged to submit their innovations and experiences from which potential adopters can begin learning about the nuances of implementation. In Spring 2008, AHRQ will deploy version 2.0 of its Health Care Innovations Exchange site making hundreds of profiles of health care service innovations of varying degrees of novelty and scientific rigor accessible to the public. Version 2.0 will also offer expert commentary; stories; tools; lessons learned; “change packages”—sets of innovations implemented simultaneously; expanded content on implementation; and opportunities to learn and network. To build the database of innovations profiles, AHRQ invites submissions of health service innovations to its Health Care Innovations Exchange. The AHRQ Health Care Innovations Exchange database will cover the broad spectrum of health care settings, systems, and providers. Public health priority diseases/conditions, priority populations, and efforts to reduce disparities in quality will be highlighted. The AHRQ Health Care Innovations Exchange is seeking a broad range of novel health care strategies, activities, and tools. AHRQ invites participation in its Health Care Innovations Exchange by submitting descriptions of innovative efforts to improve the delivery of health care services. DATES: There is no deadline for submission. It is a continuous submission and review process. Special Incentive To Submit AHRQ will provide early submitters (those who submit by January 15, 2008) and opportunity to preview and comment on version 2.0 of the Health Care Innovations Exchange Web site via a secure mechanism. In this preview, an opportunity will be given to browse and search the innovations profiled up to that point. ADDRESSES: Submit to *info@innovations.ahrq.gov* . How To Submit To submit a health care innovation for possible posting, send a description of the innovation that would include the health care setting and patient population it is our could be used for and any results that have been documented, to the Health Care Innovations Exchange at *info@innovations.ahrq.gov.* Please use the words “Innovation Submission” in the subject line. If you prefer, you can fax information about your innovation to 301-610-4950. You may also mail information to Mary Nix, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Center for Outcomes and Evidence, 540 Gaither Road, Rockville, MD 20850. Detailed information on submitting can be obtained from the AHRQ Health Care Innovations Exchange Web page titled “Share Your Innovations”, *http://www.innovations.ahrq.gov/share/share.aspx.* Supporting documents may be sent with the submission. Once AHRQ has reviewed your submission and identified it as a priority item for posting, AHRQ will contact the submitter to discuss the details regarding what will be included in standardized postings. Copyright or other intellectual property issues, if any, will be addressed at that time. If the innovation is accepted for inclusion, AHRQ will develop a detailed profile and send it to the submitter to review for accuracy and completeness. The innovation will then be ready for publication in Version 2.0 of the Health Care Innovations Exchange scheduled for public release in Spring 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Explore: *http://www.innovations.ahrq.gov* ; And/Or Contact: Mary P. Nix, MS, MT(ASCP)SBB, Health Scientist Administrator, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 540 Gaither Road, Rockville, MD 20850, phone: 301-427-1624, e-mail: *Mary.Nix@ahrq.hhs.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Inclusion Criteria To be considered for inclusion, health are innovations have to meet six criteria with respect to the nature of the activity, the level of documentation, and the participation of the innovator. These are minimum requirements. The ultimate decision to publish a detailed profile of an innovation (an Innovation Profile) will depend on several factors, including an evaluation by AHRQ, AHRQ's priorities (see below), and the number of similar ideas in the Health Care Innovations Exchange. Innovations that do not qualify for an Innovation Profile may qualify as Innovation Briefs (short descriptions of intriguing activities that either do not meet the minimum requirements or are not regarded as high priority) or Innovation Attempts (descriptions of projects that did not succeed as planned). Criteria to be considered are: The innovation is a patient care services activity The innovation does not have to involve direct patient care or direct contact with health care consumers. However, it must have important implications for the delivery of patient care—whether preventative, emergent, chronic, acute, rehabilitative, long-term, or end-of-life. Innovations that are devices, tools, technology, software, curricula, policies, procedures, and changes to the physical environment will generally be excluded unless they are tied to a specific and associated change in the health care delivery process when implemented. The innovation intends to improve one or more domains of health care quality The innovation must be designed to address one or more specific measurable indicators of quality in one or more of the following domains: effectiveness, efficiency, equity, patient-centeredness, safety, and timeliness. The measurable quality indicators do not have to come from an established measure set, but they must be clearly defined and relevant to the quality issue the innovation addresses. In addition, the innovation must not contradict established standards of evidence-based care. There is reason to believe that the innovation will be effective Evidence that the innovation is likely to achieve its goals must be provided. Ideally, quantitative or qualitative support for a link between the innovation and improved performance on the defined quality indicator should be offered. However, if data are unavailable, limited, or lacking methodological rigor, the design or theoretical foundation of the innovative activity may serve as sufficient support. The activity is truly innovative in a given context For the purposes of the Health Care Innovation Exchange, innovations are activities that are generally perceived as new in a particular context or setting relative to the usual care processes. In addition to brand new ideas, this includes activities adapted from other industries to health care, transferred from one health care setting or market segment to another, drawn from settings in other countries, or applied to a new or different patient population. A description of how the innovation differs from what was regarded as standard practice in the setting in which it was implemented must be supplied. Information about the innovation is publicly available Innovators must be willing to make enough information freely available to enable a user of the Health Care Innovations Exchange to understand the elements of the innovation and, if desired, adopt the innovation. This requirement does not exclude innovations that incorporate commercial products or other materials for which there may be a fee or licensing requirements. It is not necessary for all information about the innovation to be publicly available, but AHRQ will need access to information with sufficient detail to produce a full profile. The innovator (or a representative) is willing and able to participate in the Health Care Innovations Exchange A knowledgeable contact person must be available as a resource for potential adopters of the innovation for at least one year. To minimize the burden on innovators, the Health Care Innovations Exchange staff will facilitate communication among users and developers of innovations. However, the participation of the innovator is essential to the ability of the Health Care Innovations Exchange to foster and promote the diffusion of innovations through social learning, a central goal of this program. The level of participation can vary according to innovator interest and schedules. Innovators will be expected to respond to occasional inquiries and to join a Health Care Innovations Exchange community of practice related to the innovator's particular innovation, so that ideas can be shared in an organized instructional fashion or setting. AHRQ's Priorities • *Specific populations.* AHRQ is interested in identifying innovations that will help to reduce disparities in health care and health status. Populations of interest to AHRQ are low-income groups, minority groups, women, children, the elderly, and individuals with special health care needs. • *Potential for high impact.* The Health Care Innovations Exchange will give publication or dissemination priority to innovations that are likely to have a significant effect on the overall value of health care. Impact may be defined in different ways, e.g., the innovation may affect a broad population, address a critical health issue, or demonstrate large cost savings. • *Innovator interest in participating.* All else being equal, AHRQ will give priority to innovators who express a strong interest in becoming involved in other activities of the Health Care Innovations Exchange, such as participating in learning networks and providing commentaries. • *AHRQ-funded innovations.* The Health Care Innovations Exchange will aim to include effective innovations that are or were funded by the Agency. Dated: September 18, 2007. Carolyn M. Clancy, Director. [FR Doc. 07-4771 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 16

Traces to 16 documents

U.S. Code