Proposed Rules. Notice of Federal Advisory Committee meeting

4,565 words·~21 min read·/register/2007/11/28/07-5861

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

BILLING CODE 4160-01-S 72 228 Wednesday, November 28, 2007 Notices JOINT BOARD FOR THE ENROLLMENT OF ACTUARIES Meeting of the Advisory Committee; Meeting AGENCY: Joint Board for the Enrollment of Actuaries. ACTION: Notice of Federal Advisory Committee meeting. SUMMARY: The Executive Director of the Joint Board for the Enrollment of Actuaries gives notice of a meeting of the Advisory Committee on Actuarial Examinations (portions of which will be open to the public) in Washington, DC at the Office of Professional Responsibility on January 7 and January 8, 2008.

DATES: Monday, January 7, 2008, from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., and Tuesday, January 8, 2008, from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held in Room 6505, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patrick W. McDonough, Executive Director of the Joint Board for the Enrollment of Actuaries, 202-622-8225. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the Advisory Committee on Actuarial Examinations will meet in Room 6505, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC on Monday, January 7, 2008, from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., and Tuesday, January 8, 2008, from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.

The purpose of the meeting is to discuss topics and questions that may be recommended for inclusion on future Joint Board examinations in actuarial mathematics and methodology referred to in 29 U.S.C. 1242(a)(1)(B) and to review the November 2007 Pension (EA-2A) Joint Board Examination in order to make recommendations relative thereto, including the minimum acceptable pass score. Topics for inclusion on the syllabus for the Joint Board's examination program for the May 2008 Basic (EA-1) Examination and the May 2008 Pension (EA-2B) Examination will be discussed.

A determination has been made as required by section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App., that the portions of the meeting dealing with the discussion of questions that may appear on the Joint Board's examinations and the review of the November 2007 Joint Board examination fall within the exceptions to the open meeting requirement set forth in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(9)(B), and that the public interest requires that such portions be closed to public participation.

The portion of the meeting dealing with the discussion of the other topics will commence at 1 p.m. on January 7 and will continue for as long as necessary to complete the discussion, but not beyond 3 p.m. Time permitting, after the close of this discussion by Committee members, interested persons may make statements germane to this subject. Persons wishing to make oral statements should notify the Executive Director in writing prior to the meeting in order to aid in scheduling the time available and should submit the written text, or at a minimum, an outline of comments they propose to make orally.

Such comments will be limited to 10 minutes in length. All persons planning to attend the public session should notify the Executive Director in writing to obtain building entry. Notifications of intent to make an oral statement or to attend must be faxed, no later than December 31, 2007, to 202-622-8300, Attn: Executive Director. Any interested person also may file a written statement for consideration by the Joint Board and the Committee by sending it to the Internal Revenue Service, Joint Board for the Enrollment of Actuaries, Attn:

Executive Director, SE:OPR, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20224. Dated: November 14, 2007. Patrick W. McDonough, Executive Director, Joint Board for the Enrollment of Actuaries. [FR Doc. E7-23102 Filed 11-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service [Docket No. AMS-LS-07-0131; LS-07-16] United States Standards for Livestock and Meat Marketing Claims, Naturally Raised Claim for Livestock and the Meat and Meat Products Derived From Such Livestock AGENCY:

Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice and Request for Comments. SUMMARY: The Agricultural Marketing Service

(AMS)is seeking comments on a proposed voluntary standard for a naturally raised marketing claim. A number of livestock producers make claims associated with production practices in order to distinguish their products in the marketplace. There are a growing number of entities that wish to capture value added opportunities via alternative production methods to meet the demands of consumers seeking meat and meat products from naturally raised livestock. The livestock and meat supply chain along with consumers could benefit from a uniform standard for the marketing of this type of product. The standard for a naturally raised marketing claim, if adopted, will be part of the voluntary U.S. Standards for Livestock and Meat Marketing Claims. If this voluntary standard is established, livestock producers participating in this program would have their naturally raised claim verified through the Department of Agriculture (USDA). Verification of any claim would be accomplished through an audit of the production process in accordance with procedures that are contained in Part 62 of Title 7 of the Code of Federal Regulations (7 CFR part 62). Meat and meat products sold from approved programs can carry a claim verified by USDA. DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 28, 2008 to be assured of consideration. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments concerning this proposal. Comments should be submitted through the Web site at *http://www.regulations.gov.* Send written comments to: Naturally Raised Marketing Claim, Room 2607-S, AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250-0254, or by facsimile to

(202)720-1112. All comments should reference the docket number. Comments received will be posted on the Web site at *http://www.regulations.gov* and will be made available for public inspection at the above physical address during regular business hours. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Martin E. O'Connor, Chief, Standards, Analysis, and Technology Branch, Livestock and Seed Program, AMS, USDA, Room 2607-S, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250-0254; facsimile:

(202)720-1112; telephone:

(202)720-4486; or e-mail: *Martin.OConnor@usda.gov.* Additional information can also be found by accessing the Web site at *http://www.ams.usda.gov/lsg/stand/naturalclaim.htm.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 203(c) of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, as amended (7 U.S.C. 1622), directs and authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture “to develop and improve standards of quality, condition, quantity, grade, and packaging, and recommend and demonstrate such standards in order to encourage uniformity and consistency in commercial practices.” USDA is committed to carrying out this authority in a manner that facilitates the marketing of agricultural products. One way of achieving this objective is through the development and maintenance of voluntary standards by AMS. AMS is seeking comments on a proposed voluntary U.S. Standard for Livestock and Meat Marketing Claims, Naturally Raised Claim for Livestock and the Meat and Meat Products Derived from such Livestock, in accordance with procedures that are contained in Part 36 of Title 7 of the Code of Federal Regulations (7 CFR part 36). Paperwork Reduction Act In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA; 44 U.S.C. 3501, *et seq.* ), the information collection and recordkeeping requirements for the services associated with a proposed naturally raised marketing claim is approved under Office of Management and Budget Control No. 0581-0124. Background Individuals and companies often highlight production and marketing practices in advertisements and promotions to distinguish their products in the marketplace. Since the late 1970s, livestock and meat producers (individuals and companies) have requested the voluntary services of AMS to verify or certify specific practices to increase the value of their products. The Livestock and Seed

(LS)Program of AMS has provided certification through direct product examination for a number of production claims related to livestock and carcass characteristics. The validity of such claims is enhanced since the product is labeled as “USDA Certified.” The LS Program also offers verification services through Quality System Verification Programs (QSVP; *http://www.ams.usda.gov/lsg/arc/audit.htm)* to substantiate claims that cannot be determined by direct examination of livestock, their carcasses, component parts, or the finished product. The QSVP provides suppliers of agricultural products or services the opportunity to distinguish specific activities involved in the production and processing of their agricultural products and to assure customers of their ability to provide consistent quality products or services. This is accomplished by documenting the quality management system and having the manufacturing or service delivery processes verified through independent, third-party audits. One specific QSVP is the USDA Process Verified Program, which allows suppliers to make marketing claims—such as feeding practices or other raising and processing claims—and label and market their products as “USDA Process Verified.” As multiple marketers of specialized claims have begun to seek USDA certification or verification for the same or similar production practices, AMS has determined it would be beneficial to establish standards for common production and marketing claims that would collectively be a part of the voluntary U.S. Standards for Livestock and Meat Marketing Claims, which may be used in conjunction with a certified or verified program recognized by AMS. The livestock and meat marketing claim standards are instrumental in facilitating communication, establishing a common trade language, and enhancing understanding among producers, processors, and consumers. Past experience indicates that standards sort a highly diverse population into more homogeneous groups, and when standards are uniformly applied, they provide a valuable marketing tool. AMS develops and proposes standards for marketing and production claims based on experience with USDA Certified Programs and USDA QSVP, research into standard practices and procedures, and requests from the livestock and meat industries. Naturally raised is an animal production method known in the industry. AMS is proposing that animals that have been naturally raised have been raised without growth promotants and antibiotics and have never been fed mammalian or avian by-products. Accordingly, AMS is seeking comments on a proposed voluntary naturally raised marketing claim standard. AMS has obtained input from a number of individual experts in government, industry, and academia while drafting the proposed standard and has conducted public listening sessions. If adopted, product labels that include the voluntary naturally raised marketing claim must be submitted to the USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS), Labeling Program and Delivery Division (LPDD), for evaluation prior to use. FSIS, LPDD, under the authority of the Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA; 21 U.S.C. 601, 607) and the Poultry Products Inspection Act (PPIA; 21 U.S.C. 451, 457), regulates domestic and imported meat, poultry, and egg product labeling, standards, and ingredients. AMS has worked closely with FSIS, LPDD to develop and propose the voluntary naturally raised marketing claim standard. All products using the naturally raised marketing claim standard would have to be accompanied by a brief statement explaining the claim and attributes. The proposed standard for a naturally raised marketing claim, if adopted, would be part of the voluntary U.S. Standards for Livestock and Meat Marketing Claims which may be used in conjunction with a USDA QSVP, and naturally raised marketing claims may be verified, as provided in 7 CFR Part 62. However, since this would be a voluntary marketing claim, if adopted, FSIS would not establish a new provision limiting the use of the term naturally raised to labels in which participants meet this standard with a USDA QSVP. Any specific labeling issues or questions not related to AMS services would be directed to the FSIS, LPDD. According to FreshLook Marketing Group retail data, the demand for natural and organic products has surged to double-digit growth in recent years (for more information on the National Organic Program visit *http://www.ams.usda.gov/nop/indexIE.htm)* . To meet the growing consumer demand, U.S. meat and poultry companies have developed and marketed “natural” meat and meat products. An AMS naturally raised marketing claim standard, if adopted, would remain independent of the FSIS use of the term “natural” and would separate claims about livestock production practices on product labeling. The majority of claims currently citing naturally raised animal production methods are defined by the individual company selling the product. Depending upon the branded program making the claims, the production activities and associated requirements can vary since there is currently no standard to specify which attributes must be addressed and to what level, other than to be truthful and not misleading. This has led to confusion in the industry and the marketplace as to what requirements must be met in order to have a uniform, explicit claim that can be easily understood. This confusion has caused AMS to develop and propose a standard with explicit attributes that could easily be understood by the public as the basis for a naturally raised marketing claim as it relates to live animal production practices. AMS seeks comment from the public concerning its development and requirements. Proposed Standard To develop and propose a marketing claim standard for naturally raised, AMS conducted three listening sessions in December 2006 and January 2007 in Washington, DC, Denver, CO, and Seattle, WA, to seek oral and written comments regarding the use of a naturally raised marketing claim standard. Public input and comments related to a naturally raised marketing claim are posted on the Web site at *http://www.ams.usda.gov/lsg/stand/naturalclaim.htm.* AMS evaluated the public input and comments and is seeking further comments on a proposed naturally raised marketing claim standard. AMS also reviewed consumer research along with the comments and identified, based upon this information, that production practices such as the prohibited use of antibiotics, growth promotants, and certain animal by-products are the main attributes consumers want for meat and meat products derived from livestock that are naturally raised. These are the attributes that AMS' proposed naturally raised standard contains. Again, the naturally raised labeling claim proposed in this notice remains independent of the FSIS policy on the use of the term “natural” on product labeling and will only pertain to live animal production practices. Accordingly, AMS seeks comments on the following proposed voluntary U.S. Standard for Livestock and Meat Marketing Claims, in this notice. Proposed U.S. Standards for Livestock and Meat Marketing Claims, Naturally Raised Claim for Livestock and the Meat and Meat Products Derived From Such Livestock *Background:* This proposed claim applies to livestock used for meat and meat products that were raised entirely without growth promotants, antibiotics, and mammalian or avian by-products. The administration of growth hormones, including natural hormones, synthetic hormones, estrus suppressants, beta agonists, or other synthetic growth promotants is prohibited from birth to slaughter. Collectively, they are referred to in the naturally raised marketing claim standard as growth promotants. No antibiotics can be administered, whether through feed or water, or by injection, from birth to slaughter. This includes low-level (sub-therapeutic) or therapeutic level doses, sulfonamides, ionophores, coccidiostats, or any other synthetic antimicrobial. If an animal is in need of medical attention, proper treatment should, of course, be administered in an attempt to improve the health of the animal. In the case where antibiotics or the stated prohibited substances are administered, the treated animal must be identified and excluded from the program. Health products that can be used for disease prevention in a naturally raised program are vaccines, parasite control products, antibody preparations, and bloat prevention and treatment products (e.g., feed grade microbials and buffers that help facilitate the animals digestive process). The feeding of mammalian or avian by-products is prohibited. Livestock cannot be fed rations that include components that are mammalian or avian derived. Vitamin and mineral supplementation is permissible. Verification of the proposed claim will be accomplished through an audit of the production process. The producer must be able to verify for AMS that the naturally raised marketing claim standard requirements are being met through a detailed documented quality management system. Claim and Standard *Naturally Raised* —Livestock used for the production of meat and meat products have been raised entirely without growth promotants, antibiotics, and have never been fed mammalian or avian by-products. This information shall be contained on any label claim that an animal has been naturally raised. Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1621-1627. Dated: November 21, 2007. Lloyd C. Day, Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service. [FR Doc. E7-23103 Filed 11-27-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-02-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Forest Service Clearwater National Forest; Idaho; Travel Management Plan AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement. SUMMARY: The Forest Service gives notice of its intent to prepare a Travel Planning Environmental Impact Statement

(EIS)for the Clearwater National Forest (CNF). The proposed action would designate a site-specific transportation system and prohibit indiscriminate cross-country traffic. The EIS will analyze the effects of the proposed action and alternatives. The Clearwater National Forest invites comments and suggestions on the issues to be addressed. The agency gives notice of the National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA)analysis and decision-making process on the proposal so interested and affected members of the public may participate and contribute to the final decision. DATES: Comments concerning the scope of the analysis must be received by December 14, 2007. A 45-day public comment period will follow the release of the draft environmental impact statement that is expected in June 2008. The final environmental impact statement is expected in January 2009. ADDRESSES: Send written or electronic comments to: Lochsa Ranger District, Kamiah Ranger Station; Attn: Lois Foster, Interdisciplinary Team Leader; Rt. 2 Box 191; Kamiah, ID 83536; FAX 208-935-4275; E-mail *comments-northern-clearwater@fs.fed.us.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lois Foster, Interdisciplinary Team leader,

(208)935-4258. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Purpose and Need for Action is to

(1)Implement national OHV Rule direction,

(2)Limit indiscriminate cross-country motorized travel,

(3)Designate selected roads and trails for motorized travel,

(4)Designate appropriate acreas or routes for travel with over-snow vehicles,

(5)Balance travel opportunities with maintenance and management capability including costs,

(6)Provide for a better spectrum of motorized, non-motorized, and non-mechanized travel opportunities across the CNF in recognition of the need to retain the charter of lands recommended for Wilderness designation and the CNF's ability to provide for non-motorized recreation opportunities that are not available on other land ownerships,

(7)Manage impacts to Forest resources,

(8)Improve clarity and consistency of existing travel restrictions, and

(9)Amend the 1987 Forest Plan as necessary to accomplish the actions described above. The need for revision of the Forest Plan is supported by nationwide awareness within the Forest Service of the negative effects of indiscriminate off-road travel by motorized users. These concerns led to publication of the Travel Management final rule on November 9, 2005 in the **Federal Register,** 36 CFR parts 212, 251, 261, 295 “Travel Management:” Designated Routes and Areas for Motor Vehicles Use ( **Federal Register** 2005: 79 FR 68264). The rule requires each National Forest to designate those roads, trails, and areas that are open to motor vehicle use. The rule prohibits use of motor vehicles off the designated system, as well as use of motor vehicles on routes and in areas that are not consistent with the designation. The rule does not require that over-snow vehicles, such as snowmobiles, are limited to a designated system by exempting them under 121.51, but also states in 212.81 that “use by over-snow vehicles * * * on National Forest System lands may allowed, restricted, or prohibit.” The CNF chose to include over-snow vehicles in the analysis. The Proposed Action would designate motorized road and trail routes for summer travel on the Clearwater National Forest. Existing Conditions include roads and trails identified as open to motorized travel in the 2005 Travel Guide, plus any error corrections or project-level NEPA decisions made since then. The Proposed Action would include any changes from existing conditions, such as road to trail conversions, designating some roads previously not thought to be travelable, and not designating some roads that were previously thought to be travelable. The transportation system for snow-free travel would include: • 1,623 miles of roads open yearlong to all highway-legal vehicles (an increase of 8 miles compared to existing conditions); • 509 miles of road open yearlong to small vehicles such as ATV's and motorcycles, but not including UTV's (an increase of 9 miles); • 633 miles of roads open seasonally to all highway-legal vehicles (a decrease of 13 miles); • 151 miles of roads open seasonally to small vehicles (a decrease of 1 mile); • 93 miles of trails open yearlong to small vehicles (a change of 0 miles); • 226 miles of trails open yearlong to motorcycles (a decrease of 178 miles); • 75 miles of trails open seasonally to small vehicles (an increase of 2 miles); and • 93 miles of trails open seasonally to motorcycles (a change of 0 miles). The proposed action would also modify the dates of seasonal restrictions for roads and trails to reduce the variety of restricted periods, and ultimately improve the clarity of the Motor Vehicle Use Map (MVUM). Motorized travel up to 300 fee off of designated routes to access established campsites would be permitted in most areas. In certain areas, off-route travel would be permitted only to access specifically designated campsites. Existing restrictions for bicycles on all but one road would be eliminated. Bicycle restrictions on roads would drop from a total of 10 miles currently to only 1 mile, which would be entirely within the CNF seed orchard. Areas recommended for wilderness by the Forest Plan would become off limits to bicycles. System trails available to bicycles would drop from 811 miles to 730 miles (a reduction of 81 miles). Over-snow vehicle use would be restricted in areas recommended for wilderness by the Forest Plan. Within the areas where over-snow vehicle use would generally be permitted, there would continue to be some specific routes where over-snow vehicles would be restricted. Over-snow vehicle use would be prohibited forest-wide from October 1 to November 4. The transportation system for over-snow vehicles would include: • 364 miles of groomed snowmobile routes (no change from existing conditions); • 1,322,943 acres generally open to over-snow vehicles except for certain restricted routes; • 3,484 acres of roads where over-snow vehicles would be permitted from November 5 until snowmelt in the spring, compared to 3,174 acres available currently (an increase of 310 acres); and • 503,057 acres closed to over-snow vehicles, compared to 302,856 acres available currently (a decrease of 200,201 acres). The numbers above are only approximate at this time. The existing Forest Plan will be amended. When the Forest Plan was completed in 1987, trail vehicles were few and travel planning was focused almost completely on roads and highway vehicles. Motorized use has increased dramatically since then, and modern vehicles such as snowmobiles, ATV's, and motorcycles have capabilities that could not have been envisioned in 1987. The Forest Plan also contains some conflicting information regarding the intent for management of certain areas. Changes may include: • Better coordination between the level of motorized travel and the focus of certain management areas, primarily those in roadless areas; • Additions or changes to Forest Plan standards to permit implementation of the national Travel Management rule; and • Other goals, objectives, and standards affecting travel management. Possible Alternatives the Forest Service will consider include a no-action alternative, which will serve as a baseline for comparison of alternatives. The proposed action will be considered along with additional alternatives that will be developed to meet the purpose and need for action, and to address significant issues identified during scoping. The Responsible Official is Thomas K. Reilly, Clearwater Forest Supervisor, Clearwater National Forest, 12730 Highway 12, Orofino, ID 83544. The Decision to be Made is whether to adopt the proposed action, in whole or in part, or another alternative; and what mitigation measures and management requirements will be implemented. The Scoping Process for the EIS is being initiated with this notice. The scoping process will identify issues to be analyzed in detail and will lead to the development of alternatives to the proposal. The Forest Service is seeking information and comments from other Federal, State, and local agencies; Tribal governments; and organizations and individuals who may be interested in or affected by the proposed action. Comments received in response to this notice, including the names and addresses of those who comment, will be part of the project record and available for public review. Public meetings will be scheduled during the scoping period. Times, dates and locations for the public meetings will be published in the Lewiston, Idaho *Lewiston Morning Tribune.* Early Notice of Importance of Public Participation in Subsequent Environmental Review: A draft environmental impact statement will be prepared for comment. The second major opportunity for public input will be when the Draft EIS is published. The comment period on the draft environmental impact statement will be 45 days from the date the Environmental Protection Agency publishes the notice of availability in the **Federal Register** . The Draft EIS is anticipated to be available for public review in June 2008. The comment period on the Draft EIS will be 45 days from the date the Environmental Protection Agency publishes the notice of availability in the **Federal Register** . The Forest Service believes, at this early stage, it is important to give reviewers notice of several court rulings related to public participation in the environmental review process. First, reviewers of draft environmental impact statements must structure their participation in the environmental review of the proposal so that is it meaningful and alerts an agency to the reviewer's position and contentions ( *Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp.* v. *NRDC* , 435 U.S. 519, 553 (1978)). Also, environmental objections that could be raised at the draft environmental impact statement stage but that are not raised until after completion of the final environmental impact statement may be waived or dismissed by the courts ( *City of Angoon* v. *Ho del* , 803 F.2d 1016, 1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and *Wisconsin Heritages, Inc.* v. *Harris* , 490 F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980)). Because of these court rulings, it is very important that those interested in this proposed action participate by the close of the comment period for the Draft EIS so that substantive comments and objections are made available to the Forest Service at a time when it can meaningfully consider them and respond to them in a final environmental impact statement. To assist the Forest Service in identifying and considering issues and concerns on the proposed action, comments on the draft environmental impact statement should be as specific as possible. It is also helpful if comments refer to specific pages or chapters of the draft statement. Comments may also address the adequacy of the draft environmental impact statement or the merits of the alternatives formulated and discussed in the statement. Reviewers may wish to refer to the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act at 40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points. After the comment period for the Draft EIS ends, the Forest Service will analyze comments received and address them in the Final EIS. The Final EIS is scheduled to be released by January 2009. The Responsible Official (Forest Supervisor Thomas K. Reilly) will document the decision and rationale in a Record of Decision (ROD). The decision will be subject to review under Forest Service appeal regulations at 36 CFR Part 215. Preliminary Issues identified by the Forest Service interdisciplinary team include: Changing motorized and non-motorized recreation opportunities, costs of road and trail management and maintenance, soil issues, effects on aquatic environments and species, effects on wildlife, the spread of noxious weeds, changes in motorized access to roads, trails and areas that are not designated as part of the travel planning analysis, and motorized access for people with disabilities. (Authority: 40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22; Forest Service Handbook 1909.15, Section 21) Dated: November 7, 2007. Thomas K. Reilly, Clearwater Forest Supervisor. [FR Doc. 07-5861 Filed 11-27-07; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 6

Traces to 6 documents

U.S. Code