Unknown. Final rule

86,174 words·~392 min read·/register/2008/01/15/08-107

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

--- schema: federal-register doc_type: fedreg source_file: FR-2008-01-15.xml --- 73 10 Tuesday, January 15, 2008 Contents Agriculture Agriculture Department See Food Safety and Inspection Service Arts Arts and Humanities, National Foundation See National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities Centers Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services RULES Medicare Program: Payment for Part B Medical and Other Health Services— Revisions to Payment Policies Under Physician Fee Schedule and Policies for CY 2008;

Delay of Applicability date, etc.; Correction, 2433-2434 E8-561 Revisions to Physician Fee Schedule and Part B Payment Policies, Ambulance Services; CY 2008 Correction, 2431-2433 E8-576 Physician fee schedule and other Part B payment policies for CY 2008; payment policy revisions; correction, 2568-2710 07-6308 Children Children and Families Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 2498-2500 08-95 08-96 Commerce Commerce Department See Foreign-Trade Zones Board See Industry and Security Bureau See International Trade Administration See National Institute of Standards and Technology See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities;

Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 2442 E8-488 Corporation Corporation for National and Community Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 2461 E8-532 Defense Defense Department See Navy Department Denali Denali Commission NOTICES Fiscal Year 2008 Draft Work Plan, 2461-2466 E8-519 Education Education Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 2466 E8-548 Employment Employment and Training Administration NOTICES Application for Reconsideration;

Negative Determination: Newburgh Hardware Co., Inc., 2543-2544 E8-593 Availability of Funds and Solicitation for Grant Applications: Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Opportunities in the Workforce System Initiative, 2529-2543 E8-473 Eligibility to Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance: Atrium Brighton, 2543 E8-592 Energy Energy Department See Energy Information Administration See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Energy Energy Information Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities;

Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 2466-2467 E8-523 EPA Environmental Protection Agency RULES Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans: Indiana, 2428-2431 E8-440 PROPOSED RULES Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans: Indiana, 2436-2437 E8-441 NOTICES Administrative Cost Recovery Settlement: Columbia American Plating Co. Site, 2487 E8-599 Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 2487-2490 E8-570 Meetings:

Policy-Relevant Science to Inform EPA's Integrated Plan for the Review of the Primary Carbon Monoxide National Ambient Air Quality Standards, 2490-2491 E8-543 Executive Executive Office of the President See Management and Budget Office FCC Federal Communications Commission PROPOSED RULES Operation of Wireless Communications Services Operation in the 2.3 GHz Band: Digital Audio Radio Satellite Service in the 2310-2360 MHz Frequency Band, 2437-2440 E8-598 Federal Emergency Federal Emergency Management Agency NOTICES Major Disaster and Related Determinations:

Iowa, 2516-2517 E8-471 Missouri, 2517 E8-472 Major Disaster Declaration: California; Amendment No. 2, 2517-2518 E8-475 Oklahoma; Amendment No. 1, 2518 E8-476 Washington; Amendment No. 5, 2518 E8-477 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Application: Dominion Transmission, Inc., 2473-2474 E8-505 Tarpon Whitetail Gas Storage, LLC, 2486-2487 E8-506 Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions to Intervene, and Protests: Town of Edgartown, 2467-2468 E8-499 Application for Amendment of License and Soliciting Comments, Motions to Intervene, and Protests:

South Carolina Electric & Gas Co., 2481-2482 E8-500 Application Ready for Environmental Analysis and Soliciting Comments, etc.: Southern California Edison Co., 2483-2486 E8-507 E8-508 Southern California Edison Co.:, 2482-2483 E8-503 Combined Notice of Filings, 2468-2473 E8-482 E8-485 E8-538 Filing: Mulva, James J., 2479 E8-501 Orlando Utilities Commission, 2474-2475 E8-497 Filings: Acushnet Co. et al., 2479 E8-515 Intent to File License Applications, etc. Hydrodynamics Inc., 2475 E8-498 Issuance of Order:

Energy Algorithms, LLC, 2474 E8-512 Starwood Power-Midway, LLC, 2486 E8-511 Meetings: AES Sparrows Point LNG, L.C.C. et al.; Amendment to Previous Technical Conference, 2476 E8-509 Electric Quarterly Reports Technical Conference; Revised Public Utility Filing, 2477 E8-510 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 2477-2478 E8-625 Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Kentucky Energy Hub Project: Orbit Gas Storage, Inc.; Request for Comments on Environmental Issues, and Notice of Public Scoping Meeting, 2479-2481 E8-513 Petition for Rate Approval:

Jefferson Island Storage & Hub, L.L.C., 2481 E8-496 Procedures and Agenda for Technical Conference: Composition of Proxy Groups for Determining Gas and Oil Pipeline Return on Equity, 2476-2477 E8-514 Request Under Blanket Authorization: Kinder Morgan Interstate Gas Transmission LLC, 2476 E8-504 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 2491-2496 E8-531 Federal Open Market Committee; Domestic Policy Directive of December 11, 2007, 2496-2497 08-107 Fish Fish and Wildlife Service NOTICES Meetings:

Sporting Conservation Council, 2518-2519 08-110 Food Food and Drug Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 2500-2507 E8-542 E8-569 E8-571 E8-573 Meetings: Advisory Committees Tentative Schedule for 2008, 2507-2509 E8-567 Drug Safety and Risk Management Advisory Committee, 2509 E8-490 Food Food Safety and Inspection Service NOTICES Meetings: Codex Alimentarius Commission— Ad Hoc Codex Intergovernmental Task Force on the Processing and Handling of Quick Frozen Foods, 2441-2442 E8-533 MISSING FOR:

Foreign-Trade Zones Board Foreign-Trade Zones Board NOTICES Expansion of Foreign-Trade Zone 221; Mesa, AZ, 2442 E8-555 Foreign-Trade Zone 22 — Chicago, Illinois: Application for Subzone Euromarket Designs, Inc. d/b/a/ Crate & Barrel (Home Furnishings), 2442-2443 E8-552 Geological Geological Survey NOTICES Meetings: Climate Change Science Program Committee, 2519 08-102 Health Health and Human Services Department See Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services See Children and Families Administration See Food and Drug Administration See Health Resources and Services Administration See National Institutes of Health NOTICES Meetings:

National Vaccine Advisory Committee, 2497 E8-565 Secretary's Advisory Committee on National Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Objectives for 2020, 2497-2498 E8-572 Health Health Resources and Services Administration NOTICES Exception to Competition, 2509-2510 E8-582 Meetings: National Advisory Council on Migrant Health, 2510 E8-526 National Advisory Council on the National Health Service Corps, 2510 E8-581 Rural Health Grant Program; State Offices, 2512 E8-551 Small Rural Hospital Improvement Grant Program, 2510-2511 E8-525 Homeland Homeland Security Department See Federal Emergency Management Agency Indian Indian Affairs Bureau NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities;

Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 2519-2520 E8-518 Industry Industry and Security Bureau NOTICES Meetings: Sensors and Instrumentation Technical Advisory Committee, 2443 E8-549 Interior Interior Department See Fish and Wildlife Service See Geological Survey See Indian Affairs Bureau See Land Management Bureau See Minerals Management Service See National Park Service IRS Internal Revenue Service RULES Miscellaneous Operating Rules for Successor Persons: Guidance Under Section 1502;

Succession to Items of Liquidating Corp., 2416-2420 E8-575 PROPOSED RULES Reduction of Foreign Tax Credit Limitation Categories Under Section 904(d) Correction, 2436 E8-578 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 2564 E8-580 International International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping Duty Administrative Review; Extension of Time Limits for Preliminary Results: Polyester Staple Fiber from Taiwan, 2443-2444 E8-550 Antidumping Duty Investigations;

Postponement of Preliminary Determinations: Electrolytic Manganese Dioxide from Australia and the People's Republic of China, 2445 E8-544 Countervailing Duty Administrative Review; Final Results: Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from the Republic of Korea, 2444-2445 E8-564 Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from the Republic of Korea, 2456-2458 E8-558 Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination: Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe from the People's Republic of China, 2445-2456 E8-494 Justice Justice Department See Parole Commission NOTICES Pollution control; consent judgments:

Merck & Co., Inc.; correction, 2565 C7-6243 Perma-Fix of Dayton, Inc.; correction, 2565 C7-6242 Labor Labor Department See Employment and Training Administration See Mine Safety and Health Administration NOTICES Meetings: Labor Advisory Committee for Trade Negotiations and Trade Policy, 2528-2529 E8-502 Land Land Management Bureau NOTICES Meetings: Central Montana Resource Advisory Council, 2521-2522 E8-481 Resource Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement: Baker Resource Area of the Vale District, 2520-2521 E8-520 Management Management and Budget Office NOTICES Green products and services acquisition, 2557-2558 E8-521 Minerals Minerals Management Service NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities;

Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 2522-2523 E8-616 Mine Mine Safety and Health Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 2544 E8-534 National Archives National Archives and Records Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 2545 E8-524 National Foundation National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 2545 08-116 National Highway National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities;

Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 2563-2564 E8-487 National National Institute for Literacy NOTICES Meetings: National Institute for Literacy Advisory Board, 2545-2546 E8-530 National Institute National Institute of Standards and Technology NOTICES Meetings: Visiting Committee on Advanced Technology, 2458-2459 E8-537 NIH National Institutes of Health NOTICES Meetings: Fogarty International Center Advisory Board, 2513 08-99 National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, 2513 08-97 Scientific Review Center, 2513-2516 08-98 NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOTICES Endangered and Threatened Species;

Take of Anadromous Fish, 2459 E8-553 Marine Mammals, 2459-2460 E8-556 Meetings: South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 2460 E8-541 National Park National Park Service PROPOSED RULES Cape Hatteras National Seashore Off-Road Vehicle Management Rulemaking Advisory Committee; Correction, 2436 E8-529 NOTICES Inventory Completion: City of Larsen Bay, Larsen Bay, AK and Alutiiq Museum and Archaeological Repository, Kodiak, AK, 2524 E8-622 Paul H. Karshner Memorial Museum, Puyallup, WA, 2524-2526 E8-557 E8-563 Slater Museum of Natural History, University of Puget Sound, Tacoma, WA, E8-559 2526-2528 E8-560 E8-562 National Register of Historic Places:

Notification of Pending Nominations and Related Actions, 2528 08-101 National Transportation National Transportation Safety Board NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 2546 08-120 Navy Navy Department NOTICES Intent To Grant Partially Exclusive Patent License: Soil Information Systems, Inc., 2461 E8-517 Nuclear Nuclear Regulatory Commission PROPOSED RULES Training and Qualification of Security Personnel at Nuclear Power Reactor Facilities; Issuance of Draft Regulatory Guide, 2435-2436 E8-535 NOTICES Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses;

Biweekly Notice, 2546-2557 E8-421 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 2557 08-114 Office Office of Management and Budget See Management and Budget Office Overseas Overseas Private Investment Corporation NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 08-117 08-118 2558-2559 08-119 Parole Parole Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 08-128 2528 08-129 Pension Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation RULES Benefits Payable in Terminated Single-Employer Plans: Allocation of Assets in Single-Employer Plans;

Interest Assumptions for Valuing and Paying Benefits, 2420-2421 E8-600 NOTICES Interest Rates and Assumptions; Availability, 2559 E8-568 SEC Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES Consolidated Tape Association: Order Approving the Eleventh Substantive Amendment to the Second Restatement of the Consolidated Tape Association Plan, 2560 E8-528 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 2560 E8-641 SBA Small Business Administration NOTICES Disaster Declaration: Indiana Disaster, 2561 E8-596 Meetings:

Veterans Business Affairs Advisory Committee, 2561 E8-484 Presidential Declaration of a Major Disaster: Nevada, 2560-2561 E8-623 Presidential Declaration of a Major Disaster for Public Assistance: Iowa, 2561-2562 E8-554 Public Federal Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Hearing, 2562 E8-483 Social Social Security Administration RULES Federal Reviewing Official Review Level; Suspension of New Claims, 2411-2416 E8-148 State State Department NOTICES Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition:

Portrait of a Man, 2562 E8-605 Meetings: Persons with Disabilities Advisory Committee, 2562-2563 E8-566 Transportation Transportation Department See National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NOTICES Application for Commuter Air Carrier Authorization: Multi-Aero, Inc., 2563 E8-527 Treasury Treasury Department See Internal Revenue Service Veterans Veterans Affairs Department RULES Acquisition regulations: Plain language rewrite, 2712-2792 E7-25380 Veterans Education: Incorporation of Miscellaneous Statutory Provisions, 2421-2428 E8-330 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Health and Human Services Department, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, 2568-2710 07-6308 Part III Veterans Affairs Department, 2712-2792 E7-25380 Reader Aids Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, reminders, and notice of recently enacted public laws.

To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents LISTSERV electronic mailing list, go to http://listserv.access.gpo.gov and select Online mailing list archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list (or change settings); then follow the instructions. 73 10 Tuesday, January 15, 2008 Rules and Regulations SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION 20 CFR Parts 404, 405 and 416 [Docket No. SSA-2007-0045] RIN 0960-AG53 Suspension of New Claims to the Federal Reviewing Official Review Level AGENCY:

Social Security Administration. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: We are modifying our disability administrative adjudication processes to suspend new claims to the Federal reviewing official (FedRO) level, now operating in the Boston region. Claims already transferred to the Office of the Federal Reviewing Official (OFedRO) for FedRO review will continue to be processed by the OFedRO and a related component of the disability determination process, the Medical and Vocational Expert System (MVES), commonly known as the Office of Medical and Vocational Expertise (OMVE).

We are making these changes to ensure that we continually improve our disability adjudication process. DATES: This final rule is effective on March 15, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean S. Landis, Social Security Administration, 6401 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, MD 21235-6401,

(410)965-0520 for information about this notice. For information on eligibility or filing for benefits, call our national toll-free number, 1-800-772-1213 or TTY 1-800-325-0778, or visit our Internet site, Social Security Online, at *http://www.socialsecurity.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Electronic Version The electronic file of this document is available on the date of publication in the **Federal Register** at *http://www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html* . Introduction We are dedicated to providing high-quality service to the American public. In March 2006, we announced changes to our administrative review process for initial disability claims. We explained that the changes were expected to improve disability service. Our commitment to continuous improvement in the way we process disability claims did not end with the publication of those rules as we continually explore ways to improve service to some of the most vulnerable in our society. We face, now and in the foreseeable future, significant challenges to our ability to provide the level of service that disability benefit claimants deserve because of the increased complexity of and growth in claims for those benefits. Consequently, we are making modifications to our administrative review process that will further help us evaluate changes put in place in March 2006 and help us provide accurate and timely service to claimants for Social Security disability benefits and supplemental security income payments based on disability or blindness. The importance of these disability benefits to the lives and subsistence of many Americans cannot be underestimated. Nearly 15 million disabled Social Security beneficiaries and supplemental security income recipients receive over $10 billion in Federal monthly payments. The adjudication of disability claims requires evaluating complex medical and vocational evidence. The number of claims and requests for hearings that we receive has continued to expand. In 2004-2006, we received an annual average of 2.6 million disability claims that required decisions based on medical evidence, the most time- and labor-intensive basis for deciding such claims. Along with the large number of claims, there has been a concomitant increase in the number of hearing requests. Our hearing offices have received an average of over 564,000 titles II and XVI disability hearing requests each year from 2002 through 2006, a significant increase from the annual average of almost 472,000 hearing requests in 1997-2001. As these figures show, over the 5-year period from 2002 through 2006, we received each year over 90,000 more requests for titles II and XVI hearings than we annually received during the period from 1997 through 2001. The vast number of disability claims now filed each year, as well as other factors such as the expected increase in disability claims as the baby boomers move into their disability-prone years, probable limitations on our resources to process these claims, and the projected impending increase in filings for retirement and survivor benefits as baby boomers retire, will continue to place an even greater strain on our adjudicatory system. We expected that the spring 2006 changes to the administrative review process for initial disability claims would “improve the accuracy, consistency, and timeliness of decision-making throughout the disability determination process.” 71 FR 16424 (March 31, 2006). We planned a gradual roll-out of the changes so that we could determine their effect on the disability process overall. As we explained then, “[g]radual implementation will allow us to monitor the effects that our changes are having on the entire disability determination process. . . . We will carefully monitor the implementation process in the Boston region and quickly address any problems that may arise.” 71 FR at 16440-41. Based on initial reviews of the quick disability determination

(QDD)and FedRO elements of that process, and mindful of the workload challenges that we now face, especially at the hearing level, we need to modify some of the changes made last spring. As we explain in our recently published final rule on the QDD process, 72 FR 51173 (September 6, 2007), we are extending the QDD process to all of the State disability determination services. In the current rule, we are suspending new claims going through the OFedRO and the MVES, organizationally known as the OMVE. However, claims already transferred to the OFedRO for FedRO review will continue through the OFedRO and MVES so we can continue to evaluate their effectiveness. These changes are based on our commitment to outstanding service and to continuously improving our service as we realign our resources to ensure that we are capable of processing the current and anticipated number of disability claims and reducing the number of pending hearings. Suspending the OFedRO and MVES/OMVE Allows Reallocation of Resources to the Backlog at the Hearings Level In the March 2006 final rule, we replaced the State agency reconsideration level with a Federal adjudicative level, called the FedRO. Attorneys staff the FedRO positions, and they, along with the managerial, support, and administrative staff, make up the OFedRO. The OFedRO uses the MVES/OMVE to develop the medical and vocational evidence in the claims. The goal of the OFedRO and OMVE is to ensure more accurate and consistent decision-making earlier in the process. We are continuing to evaluate the effect of these new components on our program and administrative functions. Our experience over the last year in the Boston region demonstrates that the administrative costs associated with the OFedRO and its use of the MVES/OMVE to develop medical and vocational evidence is greater over the foreseeable future than originally anticipated. We do not yet have sufficient results to fully evaluate the potential improvements in program efficacy that are the goals of the OFedRO and OMVE. Therefore, we are suspending new claims going through the OFedRO and OMVE, so that we can reallocate resources to reduce the backlog at the hearing level, while we evaluate the OFedRO and OMVE through the processing of claims already received. As part of this review, we will evaluate the merits of the FedRO process separately from the OMVE process and consider whether alternative approaches to the OMVE are warranted or should be tested. Once this evaluation is completed and alternative approaches analyzed, we will make a decision whether to reinstate the processing of new claims at the OFedRO or to pursue an alternative approach to improving the disability determination process. We are amending part 405 with provisions that will suspend new claims to the OFedRO and MVES/OMVE. This change will allow us to continue to evaluate the OFedRO and OMVE through the processing of claims already received. We expect to have approximately 20,000 cases pending FedRO review when this rule becomes effective. We will complete the processing of those pending cases, but will not transfer to the OFedRO any more cases originally filed under the new process in the Boston region that otherwise would have been slated for FedRO review. Instead, if cases are at the initial level in the Boston region or not transferred to the OFedRO on the effective date of this rule, those cases will be assigned to State agencies for reconsidered determinations or to administrative law judges for hearing, whichever is applicable in that particular New England State. In other words, States in the Boston region, where the OFedRO and MVES/OMVE are currently functioning, will return to the same process they were following before August 2006, whether that process was reconsideration under 20 CFR 404.907 and 416.1407 or the testing procedures under 20 CFR 404.906 and 416.1406. Public Comments In the notice of proposed rulemaking we published at 72 FR 45701 (August 15, 2007), we provided the public with a 30-day period in which to comment on the proposed suspension of new claims to the OFedRO and MVES/OMVE. That comment period ended on September 14, 2007. We received timely comments from 10 individuals and organizations. We carefully considered all the comments. Because some of the comments were lengthy, we have summarized their content. Other comments were received that did not relate to the suspension of new claims to the OFedRO and MVES/OMVE. We have provided responses to each significant issue raised by commenters that was within the scope of this rule. In the notice of proposed rulemaking published on August 15, 2007, we also provided the public with a 90-day period in which to comment on using the MVES/OMVE in a more limited role to develop and manage a national registry of medical, psychological, and vocational experts to assist disability adjudicators in developing and/or clarifying information within the record. That comment period remains open through November 13, 2007. We will not respond to comments on this more limited role for the MVES/OMVE until such time as we may publish a notice of proposed rulemaking setting out more detailed plans for such a registry. *Comment:* All but one of the commenters specifically expressed support for the suspension of new claims to the FedRO and MVES/OMVE. Several of these commenters discussed concerns over the processing time for claims and the claimant's or the representative's ability to contact the FedRO. One commenter also discussed concerns over FedRO case development and the quality of FedRO decisions. *Response:* The primary reason for the processing time and service issues raised in the comments is the staffing levels of the OFedRO and MVES/OMVE. The staffing levels for these organizations have been approximately 50% of the levels we believed would be needed to handle the Boston region workload. With the reduced staffing at the MVES/OMVE, OFedRO has experienced delays in getting required medical evidence, consultative exams, and medical expert input. Budget constraints precluded us from hiring a full staff. When we published the March 2006 final rule, we expected the changes it implemented to be budget neutral. However, as we implemented the changes, we found that the cost to the agency was much greater than expected. The agency does not have the resources to both fully staff the new OFedRO and MVES/OMVE and also resolve the growing disability hearing backlog. Accordingly, we staffed the OFedRO and MVES/OMVE to the greatest extent possible while also focusing our scarce resources on the backlog of disability hearings. With respect to case development and quality of decisions, our Office of Quality Performance

(OQP)evaluated 100% of all FedRO decisions through about April 2007, and it continues to evaluate a statistically valid sample of FedRO decisions after that date. This evaluation reviews both the manner in which the case was developed and the decision itself. OQP's cumulative agreement rate with OFedRO has been 97%, which is significantly better than its overall agreement rate with State agency reconsidered determinations in the Boston region. We will consider these factors as we evaluate the OFedRO and MVES/OMVE through the processing of claims already transferred to the OFedRO. *Comment:* Several commenters expressed concern over the continued use of the FedRO and MVES/OMVE for claims already assigned to FedRO on the effective date of this rule. Their concern also related to the processing time for claims, the claimant's or representative's ability to contact individual FedROs, and case development. One commenter suggested placing a 90-day time limit for FedRO review once this final rule becomes effective. This commenter suggested that any cases still pending FedRO review after 90 days be redirected to the State agency for reconsideration. Another commenter indicated support for the outright elimination of the FedRO and return of pending cases to the State agencies. *Response:* We are not adopting the suggestions for returning cases now pending at OFedRO to the State agencies. We believe continued FedRO review for pending cases is appropriate. As we explained in the notice of proposed rulemaking, we do not yet have sufficient results to fully evaluate the potential improvements in program efficacy that are the goals of the OFedRO and MVES/OMVE. By including the roughly 20,000 cases we expect to have pending FedRO review when this final rule becomes effective, we significantly increase the pool of cases available to assist in such evaluation. Additionally, it will be more efficient to keep the pending cases with OFedRO than to transfer them to the State agencies. It would take considerable time for the State agency examiners to familiarize themselves with the cases, and the actual transfer would present significant challenges because the OFedRO processing system would have to communicate with six different State agency processing systems. With respect to the processing time, we expect that once requests for FedRO review are suspended, OFedRO will be able to process the pending workload relatively quickly. Once the flow of cases is suspended, OFedRO will no longer need to review, develop, and monitor new cases. Accordingly, FedROs will have more time to devote to finalizing and writing decisions for the pending cases. Additionally, the FedROs are increasingly attaining the experience needed to process cases more quickly. With respect to contacting individual FedROs, we have recently taken steps to address this issue. We now have additional staff assisting in handling telephone calls to OFedRO. In the event that a call goes to voice mail, updated voice mail messages ask callers to leave specific information that will facilitate the FedRO's ability to contact the caller. We also recently began sending compact disks

(CDs)of the electronic folder with the copy of the acknowledgement letter to representatives in the Boston region who handle large numbers of claimants. This improvement eliminates the need for the representative to call to request the CD of the electronic folder. Once the flow of cases is suspended, support staff will no longer need to send acknowledgement letters and initial requests for evidence from the MVES/OMVE. Accordingly, we expect support staff to be able to devote more time to handling telephone calls. In light of the comments, we are making one substantive change to proposed § 405.240 that will reduce slightly the number of cases that will continue to be processed through the OFedRO and MVES/OMVE. Proposed § 405.240 used the date an individual files a request for FedRO review to determine whether the claim would receive FedRO review. We are amending § 405.240 to use instead the date that we transfer such a request to the OFedRO. Some requests for FedRO review are transferred to the OFedRO on the same day that the request is filed, but others are not. Currently, the average time to transfer claims to OFedRO after a request is filed is over 14 days. Using the date we transfer a request to OFedRO will reduce somewhat the number of pending cases that will receive FedRO review but still provide us a significant pool of cases to help us evaluate the OFedRO and MVES/OMVE. *Comment:* Several commenters supported careful evaluation of the FedRO and MVES/OMVE through the claims already received in conjunction with considering alternatives. Two commenters emphasized the importance of evaluating the ability of the OFedRO or its alternatives to achieve the underlying goal of getting the right decision earlier in the disability process. *Response:* We are dedicated to providing high-quality service to the American public, and we are committed to continuously improving the way we process disability claims. Our goal is to improve the accuracy, consistency, and timeliness of decision-making throughout the disability determination process. We will keep this goal at the forefront of our efforts as we evaluate the OFedRO and MVES/OMVE and consider any possible alternatives. We plan to continue evaluating case development, the effect of the MVES/OMVE involvement on the FedRO decision, and the FedRO decision itself. *Comment:* One commenter addressed the clarity of the proposed rule by suggesting that we include a Definitions section in this rule. *Response:* We have not adopted this suggestion because part 405 of our rules, which this final rule amends, already contains a Definitions section. In addition to the changes discussed above, we are making the following clarifying changes. We are making changes to §§ 405.10(d) and 405.240(d) to clarify what types of notices we intend to publish if we take further action pursuant to those provisions. We are also making changes to the appendix to subpart A of part 405. We are revising the language to clarify that if a claimant files a disability claim in one State but then moves to another State, adjudicators at subsequent levels of review will apply the regulations applicable at the time of such subsequent review in the State where the claimant filed the disability claim. We have removed the examples because we believe they could result in misunderstanding. We are making a change to § 405.240(a) to specify the date on which this final rule is effective and a change to § 405.240(b) to correct a typographical error. Finally, we are making a change to § 405.240(b), and conforming changes to subpart J of part 404, subpart D of part 405, and subpart N of part 416 of our rules, to clarify that we will follow the procedures in part 405 of our rules to process hearings before an administrative law judge and any subsequent administrative review in claims affected by suspension of the FedRO level. Regulatory Procedures Executive Order 12866, as Amended, and the Congressional Review Act We have consulted with the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)and determined that this final rule meets the criteria for an economically significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866, as amended, and thus meets the criteria for a major rule under the Congressional Review Act. Accordingly, this final rule was reviewed by OMB, and it will be effective 60 days after publication. We have also determined that these final rules meet the plain language requirement of Executive Order 12866, as amended. The Office of the Chief Actuary (OCACT) estimates that this rule will result in program savings of roughly $1.0 billion in OASDI benefit payments and cost of $0.1 billion in Federal SSI payments over the next 10 years, as shown below (in millions of dollars): Table 1.—Estimated Effect on OASDI and Federal SSI Benefit Payments of a Regulation Suspending New Claims to the Federal Reviewing Official and Modifying the Role of the Medical and Vocational Expert System, Fiscal Years 2008-17 [In millions] Fiscal year OASDI SSI Total 2008 −$14 −$3 −$18 2009 −42 −9 −51 2010 −51 −8 −60 2011 −57 −15 −72 2012 −45 −6 −51 2013 −53 9 −44 2014 −122 22 −100 2015 −192 29 −163 2016 −248 40 −208 2017 −219 82 −137 Totals: 2008-12 −209 −41 −251 2008-17 −1,042 140 −902 Notes: 1. The estimates are based on the assumptions underlying the President's FY 2008 Budget. 2. Federal SSI payments due on October 1st in fiscal years 2012, 2017 and 2018 are included with payments for the prior fiscal year. 3. Totals may not equal sum of components due to rounding. Table 1 above presents the estimated short-range effects on OASDI benefit payments and Federal SSI payments that will result from implementation of this final rule, measured relative to the baseline used for the President's Fiscal Year 2008 Budget and assuming that the final rule will become effective for initial determinations made on or after April 1, 2008. The FY 2008 Budget assumed that DSI would be gradually implemented at the pace of one region per year and be fully implemented for new claims in all regions by the beginning of FY 2016. For the 10 States where the Prototype determination process has been or is being tested, the effect of this final rule will be to retain or restore the Prototype process so that the first level of appeal of an initial disability decision will be to an administrative law judge. As required by OMB Circular A-4 (available at *http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/a004/a0-4.pdf* ), in Table 2, we have prepared an accounting statement showing the annualized economic impact of suspending new claims to the FedRO level. All estimated impacts are classified as transfers. Table 2.—Accounting Statement: Estimated Economic Impact of Suspending New Claims to the FedRO Level From 2008-2017 in 2007 Dollars Category Transfers Annualized Monetized Transfers $70.4 million (7% discount rate). $74.3 million (3% discount rate). From Whom To Whom? From SSA beneficiaries to the Social Security trust fund and the general fund. Suspending new claims going through the FedRO and OMVE will allow us to reallocate resources to reduce the backlog at the hearing level by holding more hearings and making system improvements to increase the efficiency of our hearings process. We will also continue to evaluate the FedRO and OMVE through the processing of claims already received. This evaluation will include an assessment of DSI, as the pilot is currently implemented in the Boston region, with existing claims. In the analysis we will analyze DSI's impact on the timeliness of disability determinations, on overall program costs, as well as its impact on the administrative costs required to implement this new process. Once this evaluation is complete and alternative approaches analyzed, we will make a decision whether to reinstate the processing of new claims into the FedRO or pursue an alternative approach to improving the disability determination process. Regulatory Flexibility Act We certify that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities as it affects only States and individuals. Therefore, a regulatory flexibility analysis as provided in the Regulatory Flexibility Act, as amended, is not required. Paperwork Reduction Act These rules impose no new reporting or recordkeeping requirements requiring OMB clearance. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 96.001, Social Security—Disability Insurance; 96.002, Social Security—Retirement Insurance; 96.004, Social Security—Survivors Insurance; 96.006, Supplemental Security Income.) List of Subjects 20 CFR Part 404 Administrative practice and procedure; Blind; Disability benefits; Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance; Reporting and recordkeeping requirements; Social Security. 20 CFR Part 405 Administrative practice and procedure; Blind, Disability benefits; Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance; Public assistance programs, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements; Social Security; Supplemental Security Income (SSI). 20 CFR Part 416 Administrative practice and procedure; Aged, Blind, Disability benefits, Public Assistance programs; Reporting and recordkeeping requirements; Supplemental Security Income (SSI). Dated: October 31, 2007. Michael J. Astrue, Commissioner of Social Security. For the reasons set out in the preamble, we are amending subpart J of part 404, subparts A, C and D of part 405, and subpart N of part 416 as set forth below: PART 404—FEDERAL OLD-AGE, SURVIVORS AND DISABILITY INSURANCE (1950- ) Subpart J—[Amended] 1. The authority citation for subpart J of part 404 continues to read as follows: Authority: Secs. 201(j), 204(f), 205(a), (b), (d)-(h), and (j), 221, 223(i), 225, and 702(a)(5) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 401(j), 404(f), 405(a), (b), (d)-(h), and (j), 421, 423(i), 425, and 902(a)(5)); sec. 5, Pub. L. 97-455, 96 Stat. 2500 (42 U.S.C. 405 note); secs. 5, 6(c)-(e), and 15, Pub. L. 98-460, 98 Stat. 1802 (42 U.S.C. 421 note); sec. 202, Pub. L. 108-203, 118 Stat. 509 (42 U.S.C. 902 note). 2. Amend § 404.906 by adding a fourth sentence to paragraph (b)(4) to read as follows: § 404.906 Testing modifications to the disability determination procedures.

(b)* * *

(4)* * * If you requested review by a Federal reviewing official under part 405 of this chapter and we considered that request a request for review by an administrative law judge as a result of § 405.240(b) of this chapter, we will apply the procedures contained in subpart D of part 405 of this chapter. 3. Amend § 404.930 by adding paragraph

(c)to read as follows: § 404.930 Availability of a hearing before an administrative law judge.

(d)to read as follows: § 405.10 Medical and Vocational Expert System.

(d)This section will no longer be effective on the same date as described in § 405.240(c) of this part unless the Commissioner decides that the Medical and Vocational Expert System should be continued and extends the sunset date as described in § 405.240(d) of this part by publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking and a final rule in the **Federal Register** before that date. 6. Revise the appendix to subpart A of part 405 to read as follows: Appendix to Subpart A of Part 405—Claims That Will Be Handled Under the Procedures in This Part

(a)We will apply the procedures in this part to disability claims (as defined in § 405.5) filed in Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, or Connecticut.

(b)If you move from one State to another after your disability claim has been filed, adjudicators at subsequent levels of review will apply the regulations applicable at the time of such subsequent review in the State where you filed the disability claim. Subpart C—[Amended] 7. Add § 405.240 to read as follows: § 405.240 Sunset of this Subpart.

(a)If you filed a request for review by a Federal reviewing official and we transferred your claim to the Office of the Federal Reviewing Official on or before March 17, 2008, the Federal reviewing official will review and issue a decision on your claim.

(b)If you have received an initial determination under subpart B of this part, we will process any request for additional administrative review not described in paragraph

(a)of this section as either a request for reconsideration by the State agency or a request for hearing before an administrative law judge if your State uses the testing procedures under §§ 404.906 and 416.1406 of this chapter. In any hearing before an administrative law judge on your claim, and in any further review of your claim, we will follow the procedures in this part.

(c)This subpart will no longer be effective the day after a Federal reviewing official issues a decision on the last of the claims accepted for review under paragraph

(a)of this section.

(d)If compelling evidence shows that the Federal reviewing official process is efficient, effective, and sustainable given available Agency resources, the Commissioner may reinstate the Federal reviewing official process by publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking and final rule in the **Federal Register** . Subpart D—[Amended] 8. Amend § 405.301 by revising the first sentence of paragraph

(a)and the first sentence of paragraph

(c)to read as follows: § 405.301 Hearing before an administrative law judge—general.

(a)This subpart explains what to do if you are dissatisfied with a decision by a Federal reviewing official, a reconsidered determination you received as a result of § 405.240 of this part, or an initial determination subject to a hearing by an administrative law judge under the procedures in this part as a result of § 404.906(b)(4) or § 416.1406(b)(4) of this chapter. * * *

(b)* * *

(c)You may examine the evidence used in making the decision or determination under review, submit evidence, appear at the hearing, and present and question witnesses. * * * 9. Revise § 405.305 to read as follows: § 405.305 Availability of a hearing before an administrative law judge. You may request a hearing before an administrative law judge if you are dissatisfied with the Federal reviewing official's decision on your disability claim, the reconsidered determination you received as a result of § 405.240 of this part, or an initial determination subject to a hearing by an administrative law judge under the procedures in this part as a result of § 404.906(b)(4) or § 416.1406(b)(4) of this chapter. 10. Amend § 405.310 by revising the first sentence of paragraph

(b)to read as follows: § 405.310 How to request a hearing before an administrative law judge.

(b)* * * An administrative law judge will conduct a hearing if you request one in writing no later than 60 days after the date you receive notice of the Federal reviewing official's decision, the reconsidered determination you received as a result of § 405.240 of this part, or the initial determination subject to a hearing by an administrative law judge under the procedures in this part as a result of § 404.906(b)(4) or § 416.1406(b)(4) of this chapter (or within the extended time period if we extend the time as provided in paragraph

(d)of this section). * * * PART 416—SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME FOR THE AGED, BLIND, AND DISABLED Subpart N—[Amended] 11. The authority citation for subpart N of part 416 continues to read as follows: Authority: Secs. 702(a)(5), 1631, and 1633 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 902(a)(5), 1383, and 1383b); sec. 202, Pub. L. 108-203, 118 Stat. 509 (42 U.S.C. 902 note). 12. Amend § 416.1406 by adding a fourth sentence to paragraph (b)(4) to read as follows: § 416.1406 Testing modifications to the disability determination procedures.

(b)* * *

(c)to read as follows: § 416.1430 Availability of a hearing before an administrative law judge.

(c)If you received a reconsidered determination instead of a decision by a Federal reviewing official as a result of § 405.240 of this chapter, we will apply the procedures contained in subpart D of part 405 of this chapter to your request for a hearing before an administrative law judge. [FR Doc. E8-148 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4191-02-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service 26 CFR Part 1 [TD 9376] RIN 1545-BD54 Guidance Under Section 1502; Miscellaneous Operating Rules for Successor Persons; Succession to Items of the Liquidating Corporation AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Final regulations. SUMMARY: This document contains final regulations under section 1502 of the Internal Revenue Code that provide guidance regarding the manner in which the items (including items described in section 381(c) but excluding intercompany items under § 1.1502-13) of a liquidating corporation are succeeded to and taken into account in cases in which multiple members acquire the assets of the liquidating corporation in a complete liquidation to which section 332 applies. These final regulations affect corporations filing consolidated returns. DATES: *Effective Date:* These regulations are effective January 15, 2008. *Applicability Date:* For the date of applicability, see § 1.1502-80(g)(7). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amber C. Vogel or Marie C. Milnes-Vasquez,

(202)622-7530 (not a toll-free number). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On February 22, 2005, the IRS and Treasury Department published in the **Federal Register** (70 FR 8552) a notice of proposed rulemaking (REG-131128-04) under section 1502 proposing guidance as to how multiple consolidated group members (distributee members) that acquire assets in a liquidation to which section 332 applies succeed to and take into account the items of the liquidating corporation. The proposed regulations apply single-entity principles and allocate the items of the liquidating corporation that could be used to offset the income or tax liability of the group or any member to each distributee member to the extent that such items would have been reflected in investment adjustments to the stock of the liquidating corporation owned by such distributee member under the principles of § 1.1502-32(c) if, immediately before the liquidation, any stock of the liquidating corporation owned by nonmembers had been redeemed, and then such items had been taken into account. The proposed regulations also provide allocation rules for the credits and earnings and profits of the liquidating corporation. Under the proposed regulations, each distributee member succeeds to the credits of the liquidating corporation to the extent that the items of income, gain, loss, or deduction attributable to the activities that gave rise to the credit would have been reflected in investment adjustments to the stock of the liquidating corporation owned by such distributee member under the principles of § 1.1502-32(c) if, immediately before the liquidation, any stock of the liquidating corporation owned by nonmembers had been redeemed, and then such items had been taken into account. The proposed regulations provide similar rules for allocating the liquidating corporation's earnings and profits to the distributee members. Under the proposed regulations, a distributee member generally succeeds to any other items of the liquidating corporation if, immediately before the liquidation, such distributee owns stock in the liquidating corporation meeting the requirements of section 1504(a)(2) without regard to the application of § 1.1502-34. In contrast, a distributee member that does not meet the ownership requirements of section 1504(a)(2) without regard to the application of § 1.1502-34 (a non-80-percent distributee) succeeds to any remaining items of the liquidating corporation only to the extent that it would have succeeded to those items if it had purchased, in a taxable transaction, the assets or businesses of the liquidating corporation that it received in the liquidation and had assumed the liabilities that it assumed in the liquidation. In addition, the proposed regulations also provide guidance regarding the method for allocating the intercompany items of a liquidating subsidiary in cases in which multiple members acquire the assets of a liquidating subsidiary in a complete liquidation to which section 332 applies. The IRS and Treasury Department continue to study those rules. Accordingly, that portion of the notice of proposed rulemaking is withdrawn, and the final regulations do not apply to the intercompany items of the liquidating corporation. For rules applicable to the treatment of those items, see § 1.1502-13(j)(2)(ii). No public hearing was requested or held. Written and electronic comments responding to the notice of proposed rulemaking were received. After consideration of all the comments, the proposed regulations are adopted as amended by this Treasury decision. The revisions are discussed in this preamble. Explanation and Summary of Comments The Complete Liquidation Rules Section 332(a) provides that no gain or loss shall be recognized on the receipt by a corporation of property distributed in complete liquidation of another corporation. Section 332(b) provides, in part, that a distribution shall be considered to be in complete liquidation only if the corporation receiving such property was, on the date of the adoption of the plan of liquidation and at all times thereafter until the receipt of the property, the owner of stock meeting the requirements of section 1504(a)(2) and the distribution is made in complete cancellation or redemption of all of the stock of the liquidating corporation. Section 1.1502-34 provides that in determining the stock ownership of a member in another corporation (the issuing corporation) for purposes of determining the application of section 332(b)(1) there shall be included the stock of the issuing corporation owned by all other members of the group. Section 337(a) provides that the liquidating corporation shall not recognize gain or loss on the distribution to the 80-percent distributee of any property in a complete liquidation to which section 332 applies. Section 337(c) provides that, for purposes of section 337, the term “80-percent distributee” means only the corporation that meets the 80-percent stock ownership requirements of section 332(b) without regard to the application of any consolidated return regulation. If section 337(a) does not apply, under section 336, the liquidating corporation will generally recognize gain or loss on the distribution of property in complete liquidation as if such property were sold to the distributee at its fair market value. Therefore, a complete liquidation to which section 332 applies may be taxable in whole or in part to the liquidating corporation but tax-free to the distributee members. Deferred Income Items of the Liquidating Corporation Section 1.451-5 generally allows accrual method taxpayers to defer the inclusion in gross income of advance payments for goods until the taxable year in which properly accruable under the taxpayer's method of accounting for tax purposes if such method results in gross income inclusion no later than when such items are included in gross income under the taxpayer's method of accounting for financial reporting purposes. However, if in a taxable year the taxpayer ceases to exist in a transaction other than one to which section 381(a) applies, or the liability under the agreement otherwise ends, then deferred income amounts are includable in the taxpayer's gross income for such taxable year. Rev. Proc. 2004-34 (2004-1 CB 991) (see § 601.601(d)(2)(ii) *(b)* of this chapter) allows taxpayers a limited deferral beyond the taxable year of receipt for certain advance payments. However, inclusion of deferred income is accelerated to the taxable year of receipt if, in such taxable year, the taxpayer ceases to exist in a transaction other than a transaction to which section 381(a) applies or the taxpayer's obligation with respect to the advance payment is satisfied or otherwise ends other than in certain types of section 351(a) transfers or in a transaction to which section 381(a) applies. Section 455 provides accrual method taxpayers with an election to include prepaid subscription income in gross income in the taxable year in which the liability exists to furnish or deliver a newspaper, magazine, or other periodical. However, if the liability to furnish or deliver the periodical ends or the taxpayer ceases to exist, then the amount of prepaid subscription income not previously included in the taxpayer's gross income is included in the taxpayer's gross income for the taxable year in which the liability ends. If the taxpayer's liability to furnish or deliver the periodical ends as a result of a transaction to which section 381(a) applies, the prepaid subscription income will generally not be included in the taxpayer's gross income, and the acquiring corporation must continue to defer the prepaid subscription income under section 455. Treas. Reg. § 1.455-4 (citing section 381(c)(4) and the regulations under that section). Section 381(a) applies to a distribution to which section 332 applies. As described in this preamble, a complete liquidation to which section 332 applies is taxable to the liquidating corporation to the extent that it distributes property to a non-80-percent distributee. In particular, the liquidating corporation is treated as if it had sold the property distributed to the non-80-percent distributee at its fair market value. If the liquidating corporation had sold a business with regard to which income items had been deferred (for example, deferred prepaid subscription income under section 455) and the purchaser had assumed the liquidating corporation's obligation or liability to perform the services or provide the goods relating to the deferred income, then the liquidating corporation would have recognized the deferred income. However, the liquidating corporation would also have been entitled to a deduction under section 162 for any amount paid (or deemed paid) to the purchaser for its assumption of the obligation or liability related to the deferred income. See Rev. Rul. 68-112 (1968-1 CB 62) (see § 601.601(d)(2)(ii) *(b)* of this chapter). The amount paid (or deemed paid) by the liquidating corporation to the purchaser for its liability assumption would have been includible in the purchaser's gross income. See Rev. Rul. 71-450 (1971-2 CB 78) (see § 601.601(d)(2)(ii) *(b)* of this chapter). The IRS and Treasury Department believe that it is appropriate for any deferred income items of a liquidating corporation attributable to assets and/or liabilities transferred to a non-80-percent distributee to be taken into account under applicable principles of law as a result of the liquidation despite the fact that the transaction is described in section 381(a). Likewise, section 332(a) does not apply in determining the recognition or nonrecognition of any income realized by the non-80-percent distributee attributable to its assumption of an obligation or liability related to the deferred income because such income is not gain or loss recognized with respect to the stock of the liquidating corporation. These final regulations include such rules. Allocation of Items Specific to Property or a Business The IRS and Treasury Department also believe that it is appropriate to allocate the full amount of deferred income items or deferred deductions of the liquidating corporation that are attributable to specific property or a specific business to the distributee member that receives such property or business in the liquidation. These final regulations include such a rule. Succession to Credits of the Liquidating Corporation As described in this preamble, the proposed regulations allocate credits to distributee members based on the items of income, gain, loss, or deduction attributable to the activities that gave rise to the credits. Comments were received indicating that it was unclear how to allocate credits that are not clearly associated with items of income, gain, loss, or deduction (for example, the section 53 minimum tax credit). The IRS and Treasury Department agree with those comments. Accordingly, these final regulations revise the credit allocation rule and provide that credits will be allocated proportionally based on the value of the stock of the liquidating corporation owned by each distributee member. The IRS and Treasury Department believe that this rule represents a reasonable and administrable approach to allocating credits. Special Analyses It has been determined that this Treasury decision is not a significant regulatory action as defined in Executive Order 12866. Therefore, a regulatory assessment is not required. Further, it is hereby certified that these regulations will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This certification is based on the fact that these regulations will primarily affect affiliated groups of corporations that have elected to file a consolidated return, which tend to be larger businesses. Accordingly, a regulatory flexibility analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 6) is not required. Pursuant to section 7805(f) of the Internal Revenue Code, the notice of proposed rulemaking preceding this regulation was submitted to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration for comment on its impact on small business. Drafting Information The principal author of these regulations is Amber C. Vogel of the Office of Associate Chief Counsel (Corporate). However, other personnel from the IRS and Treasury Department participated in their development. Partial Withdrawal of Proposed Regulations Accordingly, we are not adopting the amendments to § 1.1502-13 as proposed in the notice of proposed rulemaking (REG-131128-04) that was published in the **Federal Register** on Tuesday, February 22, 2005 (70 FR 8552). List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 1 Income taxes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Adoption of Amendments to the Regulations Accordingly, 26 CFR part 1 is amended as follows: PART 1—INCOME TAXES **Paragraph 1.** The authority citation for part 1 continues to read in part as follows: Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805. * * * Section 1.1502-80 also issued under 26 U.S.C. 1502. * * * **Par. 2.** Section 1.1502-80 is amended by: 1. Removing the second sentence from paragraph (a). 2. Revising the third sentence of paragraph (a). 3. Adding paragraph (g). The revision and addition read as follows: § 1.1502-80 Applicability of other provisions of law.

(a)* * * For example, sections 269 and 482 apply for any consolidated year. * * *

(g)*Special rules for liquidations to which section 332 applies.* Notwithstanding the general rule of section 381, if multiple members (distributee members) acquire assets of a corporation in a liquidation to which section 332 applies (regardless of whether any single member owns stock in the liquidating corporation meeting the requirements of section 1504(a)(2)), such members succeed to and take into account the items of the liquidating corporation (including items described in section 381(c), but excluding intercompany items under § 1.1502-13) as provided in this paragraph

(g)to the extent not otherwise prohibited by any applicable provision of law. This paragraph

(g)does not apply to the intercompany items of the liquidating corporation. See § 1.1502-13(j)(2)(ii).

(1)*Income offset items and deferred income.* Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph (g)(1), each distributee member succeeds to and takes into account the items of the liquidating corporation that could be used to offset the income of the group or any member (including deferred deductions, net operating loss carryovers, and capital loss carryovers) (income offset items) to the extent that such items would have been reflected in investment adjustments to the stock of the liquidating corporation owned by such distributee member under § 1.1502-32(c) if, immediately prior to the liquidation, any stock of the liquidating corporation owned by nonmembers had been redeemed and then such items had been taken into account. However, each distributee member succeeds to the full amount of any deferred deduction or deferred income item attributable to the particular property or business operations distributed to such distributee in the liquidation to the extent that such item is not taken into account in the determination of the income or loss of the liquidating corporation with regard to the liquidation under chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code (Code). If the liquidating corporation is not a member of the group at the time of the liquidation, the rules of this paragraph (g)(1) are applied as if the liquidating corporation had been a member of the group.

(2)*Accounting for deferred income items.* Solely for the purpose of determining whether deferred income items of a liquidating corporation are taken into account under applicable principles of law as a result of a liquidation to which section 332 applies, the transfer of property to, and the assumption of liabilities by, a distributee member that does not own stock in the liquidating corporation meeting the requirements of section 1504(a)(2) without regard to the application of § 1.1502-34 immediately prior to the liquidation is not treated as part of a transaction to which section 381(a) applies. In addition, section 332(a) does not apply in determining the recognition or nonrecognition of any income realized by the distributee member under applicable principles of law on account of consideration received (or deemed received) on the assumption of the liquidating corporation's obligation or liability attributable to any deferred income item.

(3)*Credits and earnings and profits.* Each distributee member succeeds to and takes into account a percentage of each credit of the liquidating corporation equal to the value of the stock of the liquidating corporation owned by such distributee at the time of the liquidation divided by the total value of all the stock of the liquidating corporation owned by members of the group at the time of the liquidation. Except to the extent that the distributee member's earnings and profits already reflect the liquidating corporation's earnings and profits, each distributee member succeeds to and takes into account under the principles of § 1.1502-32(c) the earnings and profits, or deficit in earnings and profits, of the liquidating corporation (determined after taking into account the amount of earnings and profits properly applicable to distributions to non-member shareholders under § 1.381(c)(2)-1(c)(2)). If the liquidating corporation is not a member of the group at the time of the liquidation, the rules of this paragraph (g)(3) are applied as if the liquidating corporation had been a member of the group.

(4)*Other items.* With regard to items to which neither paragraph (g)(1) nor (g)(3) of this section applies, a distributee member that, immediately prior to the liquidation, owns stock in the liquidating corporation meeting the requirements of section 1504(a)(2) without regard to the application of § 1.1502-34 succeeds to the items of the liquidating corporation in accordance with section 381 and other applicable principles. A distributee member that, immediately prior to the liquidation, does not own stock in the liquidating corporation meeting the requirements of section 1504(a)(2) without regard to the application of § 1.1502-34 succeeds to the items of the liquidating corporation to the extent that it would have succeeded to those items if it had purchased, in a taxable transaction, the assets or businesses of the liquidating corporation that it received in the liquidation and had assumed the liabilities that it assumed in the liquidation.

(5)*Determination of the items of a liquidating subsidiary.* For purposes of this section, the items of a liquidating subsidiary include the amount of any consolidated tax attribute attributable to the liquidating subsidiary that is determined pursuant to the principles of § 1.1502-21(b)(2)(iv). In addition, if the liquidating subsidiary is a member of a separate return limitation year subgroup, the amount of a tax attribute that arose in a separate return limitation year that is attributable to that member shall also be determined pursuant to the principles of § 1.1502-21(b)(2)(iv).

(6)*Examples.* The following examples illustrate the application of this paragraph (g): Example 1. *Liquidation—80 percent distributee.*

(i)*Facts.* X has only common stock outstanding. On January 1 of year 1, X acquired equipment with a 10-year recovery period and elected to depreciate the equipment using the straight-line method of depreciation. On January 1 of year 7, M1 and M2 own 80 percent and 20 percent, respectively, of X's stock. X is a domestic corporation but is not a member of the group that includes M1 and M2. On that date, X distributes all of its assets to M1 and M2 in complete liquidation. The equipment is distributed to M1. Under section 334(b), M1's basis in the equipment is the same as it would be in X's hands. After computing its tax liability for the taxable year that includes the liquidation, X has net operating losses of $100, business credits of $40, and earnings and profits of $80.

(ii)*Succession to items described in section 381(c).*

(A)*Losses.* Under paragraph (g)(1) of this section, each distributee member succeeds to X's items that could be used to offset the income of the group or any member to the extent that such items would have been reflected in investment adjustments to the stock of X it owned under § 1.1502-32(c) if, immediately prior to the liquidation, such items had been taken into account. Accordingly, M1 and M2 succeed to $80 and $20, respectively, of X's net operating loss.

(B)*Credits and earnings and profits.* Under paragraph (g)(3) of this section, because, immediately prior to the liquidation, M1 and M2 hold 80 percent and 20 percent, respectively, of the value of the stock of X, M1 and M2 succeed to $32 and $8, respectively, of X's $40 of business credits. In addition, because M1's and M2's earnings and profits do not reflect X's earnings and profits, X's earnings and profits are allocated to M1 and M2 under the principles of § 1.1502-32(c). Therefore, M1 and M2 succeed to $64 and $16, respectively, of X's earnings and profits.

(C)*Depreciation of equipment's basis.* Under paragraph (g)(4) of this section, because M1 owns stock in X meeting the requirements of section 1504(a)(2) without regard to the application of § 1.1502-34, M1 is required to continue to depreciate the equipment using the straight-line method of depreciation over the remaining recovery period of 4.5 years (assuming X used a half-year convention). Example 2. *Liquidation-no 80 percent distributee.*

(i)*Facts.* The facts are the same as in *Example 1* except that M1 and M2 own 60 percent and 40 percent, respectively, of X's stock. In addition, on January 1 of year 6, X entered into a long-term contract with Y, an unrelated party. The total contract price is $1000, and X estimates the total allocable contract costs to be $500. At the time of the liquidation, X had received $250 in progress payments under the contract and incurred costs of $125. X accounted for the contract under the percentage of completion method described in section 460(b). In the liquidation, M1 assumes X's contract obligations and rights.

(ii)*Succession to items described in section 381(c).*

(A)*Losses.* Under paragraph (g)(1) of this section, each distributee member succeeds to X's items that could be used to offset the income of the group or any member to the extent that such items would have been reflected in investment adjustments to the stock of X it owned under § 1.1502-32(c) if, immediately prior to the liquidation, such items had been taken into account. Accordingly, M1 and M2 succeed to $60 and $40, respectively, of X's net operating loss.

(B)*Credits and earnings and profits.* Under paragraph (g)(3) of this section, because, immediately prior to the liquidation, M1 and M2 hold 60 percent and 40 percent, respectively, of the value of the stock of X, M1 and M2 succeed to $24 and $16, respectively, of X's $40 of business credits. In addition, because M1's and M2's earnings and profits do not reflect X's earnings and profits, X's earnings and profits are allocated to M1 and M2 under the principles of § 1.1502-32(c). Therefore, M1 and M2 succeed to $48 and $32, respectively, of X's earnings and profits.

(C)*Depreciation of equipment's basis.* Under section 334(a), M1's basis in the equipment is its fair market value at the time of the distribution. Pursuant to section 168(i)(7), to the extent that M1's basis in the equipment does not exceed X's adjusted basis in the equipment at the time of the transfer, M1 is required to continue to depreciate the equipment using the straight-line method of depreciation over the remaining recovery period of 4.5 years (assuming X used a half-year convention). Any portion of M1's basis in the equipment that exceeds X's adjusted basis in the equipment at the time of the transfer is treated as being placed in service by M1 in the year of the transfer. Thus, M1 may choose any applicable depreciation method, recovery period, and convention under section 168 for such excess basis.

(D)*Method of accounting for long-term contract.* Under paragraph (g)(4) of this section, M1 does not succeed to X's method of accounting for the contract. Rather, under § 1.460-4(k)(2), M1 is treated as having entered into a new contract on the date of the liquidation. Under § 1.460-4(k)(2)(iii), M1 must evaluate whether the new contract should be classified as a long-term contract within the meaning of § 1.460-1(b) and account for the contract under a permissible method of accounting. Example 3. *Liquidation—deferred items.*

(i)*Facts.* X has only common stock outstanding, and M1 and M2 (who are members of the same group) own 80 percent and 20 percent, respectively, of X's stock. X operates two divisions, each of which defers prepaid subscription income pursuant to an election under section 455. X distributes all of its assets in complete liquidation. M1 receives all of the assets of Division 1, including prepaid subscription income, and assumes X's liability to furnish or deliver the newspaper, magazine, or other periodical to which the prepaid subscription income received by M1 relates. M2 receives all of the assets of Division 2, including prepaid subscription income, and assumes X's liability to furnish or deliver the newspaper, magazine, or other periodical to which the prepaid subscription income received by M2 relates.

(ii)*Acceleration of deferred income items and succession to other deferred items.* Under paragraph (g)(1) of this section, M1 succeeds to the full amount of the deferred prepaid subscription income of X attributable to Division 1. Under applicable law, X does not recognize the deferred prepaid subscription income attributable to Division 1 because X's liability to furnish or deliver the newspaper, magazine, or other periodical ends as a result of a transaction to which section 381(a) applies. Under paragraph (g)(2) of this section, solely for purposes of determining whether the deferred income items of X attributable to Division 2 are taken into account as a result of the liquidation, the distribution of property to M2 is not treated as a transaction to which section 381(a) applies. Therefore, under applicable law, X's deferred prepaid subscription income attributable to Division 2 is taken into account in the determination of X's income or loss with regard to the liquidation. Further, under paragraph (g)(2) of this section, section 332(a) does not apply in determining the recognition or nonrecognition of any income that M2 realizes on account of consideration received (or deemed received) on its assumption of X's liability to furnish or deliver the newspaper, magazine, or other periodical to which the prepaid subscription income relates.

(7)*Effective/applicability date.* This paragraph

(g)applies to transactions occurring after April 14, 2008. Linda E. Stiff, Deputy Commissioner for Services and Enforcement. Approved: January 8, 2008. Eric Solomon, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury (Tax Policy). [FR Doc. E8-575 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY CORPORATION 29 CFR Parts 4022 and 4044 Benefits Payable in Terminated Single-Employer Plans; Allocation of Assets in Single-Employer Plans; Interest Assumptions for Valuing and Paying Benefits AGENCY: Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation's regulations on Benefits Payable in Terminated Single-Employer Plans and Allocation of Assets in Single-Employer Plans prescribe interest assumptions for valuing and paying benefits under terminating single-employer plans. This final rule amends the regulations to adopt interest assumptions for plans with valuation dates in February 2008. Interest assumptions are also published on the PBGC's Web site ( *http://www.pbgc.gov* ). DATES: Effective February 1, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Catherine B. Klion, Manager, Regulatory and Policy Division, Legislative and Regulatory Department, Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, 1200 K Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005, 202-326-4024. (TTY/TDD users may call the Federal relay service toll-free at 1-800-877-8339 and ask to be connected to 202-326-4024.) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The PBGC's regulations prescribe actuarial assumptions—including interest assumptions—for valuing and paying plan benefits of terminating single-employer plans covered by title IV of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. The interest assumptions are intended to reflect current conditions in the financial and annuity markets. Three sets of interest assumptions are prescribed:

(1)A set for the valuation of benefits for allocation purposes under section 4044 (found in Appendix B to Part 4044),

(2)a set for the PBGC to use to determine whether a benefit is payable as a lump sum and to determine lump-sum amounts to be paid by the PBGC (found in Appendix B to Part 4022), and

(3)a set for private-sector pension practitioners to refer to if they wish to use lump-sum interest rates determined using the PBGC's historical methodology (found in Appendix C to Part 4022). This amendment

(1)adds to Appendix B to Part 4044 the interest assumptions for valuing benefits for allocation purposes in plans with valuation dates during February 2008,

(2)adds to Appendix B to Part 4022 the interest assumptions for the PBGC to use for its own lump-sum payments in plans with valuation dates during February 2008, and

(3)adds to Appendix C to Part 4022 the interest assumptions for private-sector pension practitioners to refer to if they wish to use lump-sum interest rates determined using the PBGC's historical methodology for valuation dates during February 2008. For valuation of benefits for allocation purposes, the interest assumptions that the PBGC will use (set forth in Appendix B to part 4044) will be 5.50 percent for the first 20 years following the valuation date and 4.57 percent thereafter. These interest assumptions represent an increase (from those in effect for January 2008) of 0.08 percent for the first 20 years following the valuation date and 0.08 percent for all years thereafter. The interest assumptions that the PBGC will use for its own lump-sum payments (set forth in Appendix B to part 4022) will be 3.25 percent for the period during which a benefit is in pay status and 4.00 percent during any years preceding the benefit's placement in pay status. These interest assumptions represent an increase (from those in effect for January 2008) of 0.25% in the immediate rate and are otherwise unchanged. For private-sector payments, the interest assumptions (set forth in Appendix C to part 4022) will be the same as those used by the PBGC for determining and paying lump sums (set forth in Appendix B to part 4022). The PBGC has determined that notice and public comment on this amendment are impracticable and contrary to the public interest. This finding is based on the need to determine and issue new interest assumptions promptly so that the assumptions can reflect current market conditions as accurately as possible. Because of the need to provide immediate guidance for the valuation and payment of benefits in plans with valuation dates during February 2008, the PBGC finds that good cause exists for making the assumptions set forth in this amendment effective less than 30 days after publication. The PBGC has determined that this action is not a “significant regulatory action” under the criteria set forth in Executive Order 12866. Because no general notice of proposed rulemaking is required for this amendment, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 does not apply. See 5 U.S.C. 601(2). List of Subjects 29 CFR Part 4022 Employee benefit plans, Pension insurance, Pensions, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 29 CFR Part 4044 Employee benefit plans, Pension insurance, Pensions. In consideration of the foregoing, 29 CFR parts 4022 and 4044 are amended as follows: PART 4022—BENEFITS PAYABLE IN TERMINATED SINGLE-EMPLOYER PLANS 1. The authority citation for part 4022 continues to read as follows: Authority: 29 U.S.C. 1302, 1322, 1322b, 1341(c)(3)(D), and 1344. 2. In appendix B to part 4022, Rate Set 172, as set forth below, is added to the table. Appendix B to Part 4022—Lump Sum Interest Rates for PBGC Payments Rate set For plans with a valuation date On or after Before Immediate annuity rate (percent) Deferred annuities (percent) i 1 i 2 i 3 n 1 n 2 * * * * * * * 172 02-1-08 03-1-08 3.25 4.00 4.00 4.00 7 8 3. In appendix C to part 4022, Rate Set 172, as set forth below, is added to the table. Appendix C to Part 4022—Lump Sum Interest Rates for Private-Sector Payments Rate set For plans with a valuation date On or after Before Immediate annuity rate (percent) Deferred annuities (percent) i 1 i 2 i 3 n 1 n 2 * * * * * * * 172 02-1-08 03-1-08 3.25 4.00 4.00 4.00 7 8 PART 4044—ALLOCATION OF ASSETS IN SINGLE-EMPLOYER PLANS 4. The authority citation for part 4044 continues to read as follows: Authority: 29 U.S.C. 1301(a), 1302(b)(3), 1341, 1344, 1362. 5. In appendix B to part 4044, a new entry for February 2008, as set forth below, is added to the table. Appendix B to Part 4044—Interest Rates Used to Value Benefits For valuation dates occurring in the month— The values of i t are: i t for t = i t for t = i t for t = * * * * * * * February 2008 .0550 1-20 .0457 >20 N/A N/A Issued in Washington, DC, on this 9th day of January 2008. Vincent K. Snowbarger, Deputy Director, Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. [FR Doc. E8-600 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7709-01-P DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS 38 CFR Part 21 RIN 2900-AL28 Veterans Education: Incorporation of Miscellaneous Statutory Provisions AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This document amends regulations governing various aspects of the education programs administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs. These amendments reflect some of the provisions of the Veterans Education and Benefits Expansion Act of 2001, the Veterans Benefits Act of 2003, and the Veterans Benefits, Health Care, and Information Technology Act of 2006. The changes include: Restoration of certain education benefits for individuals being ordered to active duty; restoration of Survivors' and Dependents' Educational Assistance to certain full-time National Guard members; an opportunity for certain Vietnam-era veterans to qualify for Montgomery GI Bill education benefits; an increase in the maximum amount an individual can receive under the Senior Reserve Officer Training Corps educational assistance program and still qualify for the Montgomery GI Bill—Active Duty program; establishment of an ending date of the eligibility period for spouses under the Survivors' and Dependents' Educational Assistance program; expansion of special restorative training benefits to certain disabled spouses or disabled surviving spouses; and providing educational benefits for an independent study course that leads to a certificate reflecting educational attainment offered by an institution of higher learning. The document also amends the education regulations by making changes to reflect current agency organization and nonsubstantive changes for the purpose of readability or clarity. DATES: *Effective Date:* This final rule is effective January 15, 2008. *Applicability Dates.* Amendments in this final rule are applied retroactively to conform to the effective date of statutory provisions. For more information concerning the dates of applicability, see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lynn M. Nelson, Assistant Director, Policy and Program Administration (225), Education Service, Veterans Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20420,

(202)461-9827. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Veterans Education and Benefits Expansion Act of 2001 (Pub. L. 107-103) (“Act”) provides eligibility under the Montgomery GI Bill—Active Duty

(MGIB)program to some additional Vietnam-era veterans. Previously, only certain Vietnam-era veterans who were eligible for benefits under the Vietnam-era GI Bill (38 U.S.C. chapter 34) on December 31, 1989, and who met specific active-duty requirements were eligible to convert to the MGIB program. The Act extends an opportunity to gain MGIB eligibility to additional veterans by modifying certain active-duty requirements. The eligibility period for veterans who became eligible under Public Law 107-103 began December 27, 2001. We are amending the regulations to reflect the changes in eligibility requirements. The Act raised the maximum amount individuals entitled to educational assistance under the Senior Reserve Officer Training Corps (SROTC) program may receive and still remain eligible to elect the MGIB program. Before January 1, 2002, officers commissioned directly from a SROTC program who entered on active duty after September 30, 1996, and who received more than $2,000 in SROTC scholarship funds for each year of the program, were not eligible for the MGIB program. Under the Act, individuals who entered active duty after September 30, 1996, may become eligible for the MGIB program beginning January 1, 2002, if they received $3,400 or less in any year they participated in the SROTC scholarship program. We are amending the pertinent regulation to reflect the statutory change. Section 103 of Public Law 107-103 restored education benefits under 38 U.S.C. chapters 30, 32, and 35 to certain individuals ordered to active duty. This provision applies to individuals ordered, by orders dated on or after September 11, 2001, to active duty under 10 U.S.C. 688, 12301(a), 12301(d), 12301(g), 12302, or 12304. In addition, the Veterans Benefits, Health Care, and Information Technology Act of 2006 (Pub. L. 109-461) permitted restoration of Survivors' and Dependents' Educational Assistance

(DEA)entitlement under 38 U.S.C. chapter 35 to certain full-time National Guard members who were involuntarily ordered to full-time duty on or after September 11, 2001. Generally, most individuals are eligible for 36 months of full-time benefits (45 months under the DEA program). We refer to the 36 months of benefits as 36 months of “entitlement”. For each day of full-time benefits that we pay, we deduct 1 day of entitlement. If an individual is ordered to duty as indicated above, and has to withdraw from his or her course(s), VA will pay benefits up to the date of withdrawal. Although under these circumstances we pay benefits, the individual's entitlement will not reflect this, provided the veteran received no credit for the course-work completed up to the point of withdrawal. For example, if someone started a course with 36 months of benefits available, and we paid for 2 months of benefits before he or she dropped the course, we would charge 2 months of entitlement. That individual would have 34 months of benefits remaining. Under the restoration-of-entitlement provisions, we will restore the 2 months of entitlement. So, although an individual received benefits for 2 months, his or her entitlement will not be reduced. We are amending the pertinent regulations to reflect these provisions of Public Law 107-103 and Public Law 109-461. Section 103 of Public Law 107-103 permits VA to extend the DEA eligibility period for an eligible person who is ordered, by orders dated on or after September 11, 2001, to active duty under 10 U.S.C. 688, 12301(a), 12301(d), 12301(g), 12302, or 12304. The extension is equal to the time served on active duty, plus an additional four months. In addition, section 303 of the Veterans Benefits Act of 2003 (Pub. L. 108-183) permitted a similar extension for eligible persons who are National Guard members and who were involuntarily ordered to full-time duty on or after September 11, 2001. Before enactment of Public Law 107-103, the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, in *Ozer* v. *Principi* , 14 Vet. App. 257, 262-264 (2001), decided that 38 U.S.C. 3512 did not contain or authorize a fixed or limited eligibility period for spouses who are entitled to DEA benefits. Section 108 of Public Law 107-103 amended section 3512 to provide that spouses who are entitled to DEA have a 10-year eligibility period to use DEA benefits. Beginning with eligibility determinations (whether administrative or judicial) made on or after December 27, 2001, spouses found eligible for DEA benefits will have 10 years to use those benefits. Under section 108 of Public Law 107-103, spouses whose eligibility determinations were made before December 27, 2001, are subject to this 10-year eligibility period if they are required to reapply for benefits, resulting in a determination on or after December 27, 2001. (Spouses are required to reapply for DEA benefits when they change their educational objective.) We are amending the rules to conform to these provisions of Public Law 107-103. Section 109 of Public Law 107-103 permits payment of special restorative training

(SRT)benefits to disabled spouses and disabled surviving spouses beginning December 27, 2001. The spouses and surviving spouses must be eligible for DEA benefits in order to qualify for SRT. Prior to the enactment of section 109, only disabled children eligible for DEA were eligible for this benefit. SRT is training that helps to overcome or lessen the effects of a physical or mental disability for the purposes of enabling an eligible person to pursue a program of education, special vocational program, or other appropriate goal. We are amending the pertinent regulations to make them conform to this statutory provision. The Act also allows VA to pay veterans, servicemembers, and reservists educational assistance benefits for an independent study course that leads to a certificate that reflects educational attainment offered by an institution of higher learning. The independent study provisions in the Act amended 38 U.S.C. 3680A(a)(4). The provision applies to enrollment in courses on or after December 27, 2001. Prior to enactment, VA could provide education benefits only for independent study courses that were part of a standard college degree program. We are amending the pertinent regulations to reflect this change and to show that the new provision does not apply to DEA benefits for survivors and dependents. (Provisions concerning payment and non-payment of DEA for courses taken by independent study are in 38 U.S.C. 3523(a)(4), which was not amended by Pub. L. 107-103.) In addition, we are amending provisions in the DEA regulations relating to definitions, SRT, and enrollment at the secondary school level for special assistance for the educationally disadvantaged, to reflect current agency organization, including by making changes in the designations of staff handling various functions. Nonsubstantive changes are also made for the purpose of readability or clarity. Administrative Procedure Act Substantive changes made by this final rule merely reflect statutory requirements. Accordingly, there is a basis for dispensing with prior notice and comment and a delayed effective date under the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 553. Use of those procedures would be impracticable, unnecessary, and contrary to the public interest. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 This document contains no provisions constituting a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521). The Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)assigns a control number for each collection of information it approves. VA 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. In § 21.3302 (concerning special restorative training), this final rule amends provisions concerning information collection requirements that are currently approved by OMB. The amended provisions remain within the scope of the approved collections of information. We are adding at the end of § 21.3302 an information collection approval parenthetical containing the OMB control numbers for the collections of information in that section, OMB control numbers 2900-0014 (Authorization and Certification of Entrance or Reentrance into Rehabilitation and Certification of Status), 2900-0073 (Enrollment Certification), and 2900-0156 (Notice of Change in Student Status). Unfunded Mandates The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires, at 2 U.S.C. 1532, that agencies prepare an assessment of anticipated costs and benefits before issuing any rule that may result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more (adjusted annually for inflation) in any given year. This final rule will have no such effect on State, local, and tribal governments, or on the private sector. Executive Order 12866 Executive Order 12866 directs agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, when regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity). The Executive Order classifies a “significant regulatory action,” requiring review by the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)unless OMB waives such review, as any regulatory action that is likely to result in a rule that may:

(1)Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities;

(2)create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency;

(3)materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or

(4)raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order. The economic, interagency, budgetary, legal, and policy implications of this rule have been examined, and it has been determined to be a significant regulatory action under the Executive Order because it may raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order. Regulatory Flexibility Act The Secretary of Veterans Affairs hereby certifies that this final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities as they are defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612. This final rule primarily affects only individuals. This rule reflects the statutory expansion to add certain disabled spouses and disabled surviving spouses to the categories of persons who may be eligible for training from small entities that choose to provide it. Although some small entities may provide special restorative training, any direct effect of this rule on such entities would be minuscule. This statutory change resulted in only 24 additional individuals receiving such training in the most recent year with available data. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b), this final rule, therefore, is exempt from the initial and final regulatory flexibility analyses requirements of sections 603 and 604. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604, an additional reason that those regulatory flexibility analyses requirements are not applicable to this final rule is that no notice of proposed rulemaking was required by law for this rulemaking. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance numbers and titles for the programs affected by this final rule are 64.117, Survivors and Dependents Educational Assistance; 64.120, Post-Vietnam Era Veterans' Educational Assistance; and 64.124, All-Volunteer Force Educational Assistance. This final rule also affects the Montgomery GI Bill—Selected Reserve program, for which there is no Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance number. List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 21 Administrative practice and procedure, Armed forces, Civil rights, Claims, Colleges and universities, Conflict of interests, Education, Employment, Grant programs—education, Grant programs—veterans, Health care, Loan programs—education, Loan programs—veterans, Manpower training programs, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Schools, Travel and transportation expenses, Veterans, Vocational education, Vocational rehabilitation. Approved: October 5, 2007. Gordon H. Mansfield, Deputy Secretary of Veterans Affairs. For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Department of Veterans Affairs amends 38 CFR part 21 (subparts C, D, G, and K) as follows: PART 21—VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION AND EDUCATION Subpart C—Survivors' and Dependents' Educational Assistance Under 38 U.S.C. Chapter 35 1. Revise the authority citation for part 21, subpart C to read as follows: Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501(a), 512, 3500-3566, and as noted in specific sections. 2. Amend § 21.3021 by redesignating paragraph

(m)as paragraph (v), adding and reserving paragraphs

(m)through (s), and adding paragraphs

(t)and (u). The additions read as follows: § 21.3021 Definitions.

(t)*Counseling psychologist* means the same as provided in § 21.35(k)(1). (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, 3118(c), 3541, 3543)

(u)*Vocational rehabilitation counselor* means the same as provided in § 21.35(k)(7). (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, 3118(c), 3541, 3543) 3. Amend § 21.3045 by: a. In paragraph (d)(1) introductory text, removing “VA finds” and adding, in its place, “the requirements of paragraphs (d)(1)(i) and

(ii)of this section are met, by VA finding”. b. Revising paragraph (d)(1)(i) and the authority citation after paragraph (d). c. In paragraph (d)(1)(ii), removing “as described” and adding, in its place, “for a reason described”. The revisions read as follows: § 21.3045 Entitlement charges.

(d)* * *

(1)* * *

(i)Had to discontinue pursuit of the course or courses as a result of being—

(A)Ordered, in connection with the Persian Gulf War by orders dated before September 11, 2001, to serve on active duty under 10 U.S.C. 688, 12301(a), 12301(d), 12301(g), 12302, or 12304, or under former 10 U.S.C. 672(a), 672(d), 672(g), 673, or 673(b) (redesignated effective December 1, 1994, as 10 U.S.C. 12301(a), 12301(d), 12301(g), 12302, and 12304, respectively);

(B)Ordered, by orders dated after September 10, 2001, to serve on active duty under 10 U.S.C. 688, 12301(a), 12301(d), 12301(g), 12302, or 12304; or

(C)Involuntarily ordered, by orders dated after September 10, 2001, to full-time National Guard duty under 32 U.S.C. 502(f). (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3511(a)(2); sec. 103(e), Pub. L. 107-103, 115 Stat. 980) 4. Amend § 21.3046 by revising paragraph

(c)to read as follows: § 21.3046 Periods of eligibility; spouses and surviving spouses.

(c)*Ending date of eligibility period* —(1) *Spouses.*

(i)If on or after December 27, 2001, VA makes a determination of eligibility for a spouse, the period of eligibility cannot exceed 10 years. The eligibility period can be extended only as provided in paragraph (c)(3) of this section and § 21.3047.

(ii)If before December 27, 2001, VA made a determination of eligibility for a spouse, the eligibility period has no ending date unless the spouse changes his or her program of education. If on or after December 27, 2001, the spouse changes his or her program of education, the eligibility period cannot exceed 10 years. The beginning date of the eligibility period is determined as provided in paragraph

(a)of this section. The 10-year eligibility period can be extended only as provided in paragraph (c)(3) of this section and § 21.3047.

(iii)Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this section, if eligibility arises before October 24, 1972, educational assistance will not be afforded later than October 23, 1982, based on a course or program of correspondence, apprentice, or other on-the-job training, approved under the provisions of § 21.4256, § 21.4261, or § 21.4262, except that VA may award educational assistance beyond October 23, 1982, if the eligible spouse qualifies for the extended period of eligibility as provided in paragraph (c)(3) of this section and § 21.3047.

(2)*Surviving spouses.*

(i)For surviving spouses, the period of eligibility cannot exceed 10 years and can be extended only as provided in paragraph (c)(3) of this section and § 21.3047.

(ii)If eligibility arises before October 24, 1972, educational assistance will not be afforded later than October 23, 1982, based on a course or program of correspondence, apprentice, or other on-the-job training approved under the provisions of § 21.4256, § 21.4261, or § 21.4262, except that VA may award educational assistance beyond October 23, 1982, if the eligible surviving spouse qualifies for an extended period of eligibility as provided in paragraph (c)(3) of this section and § 21.3047.

(iii)The eligibility period for a surviving spouse is not reduced by any earlier period during which the surviving spouse was eligible for educational assistance under this chapter as a spouse. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3512; sec. 108(c)(4), Pub. L. 107-103, 115 Stat. 985)

(3)*Extensions due to certain orders dated after September 10, 2001.* Notwithstanding any other provisions of this section, if a spouse or surviving spouse, during the eligibility period otherwise applicable to such individual under this section, serves on active duty pursuant to an order to active duty dated after September 10, 2001, issued under 10 U.S.C. 688, 12301(a), 12301(d), 12301(g), 12302, or 12304, or is involuntarily ordered by an order dated after September 10, 2001, to full-time National Guard duty under 32 U.S.C. 502(f), VA will grant the individual an extension of the ending date of his or her eligibility period. The extension will equal the length of the period of such active duty plus four months. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3512; sec. 303(b), Pub. L. 108-183, 117 Stat. 2659) 5. Amend § 21.3104 by: a. After “psychologist” each time that it appears, adding “or vocational rehabilitation counselor”. b. In paragraph (a), removing “a disabled” and adding, in its place, “an eligible person with a disability who is a”, removing “the child's need for”, removing “if the disabled” and adding, in its place, “if the”, and removing “the disabled child needs”. c. In paragraph (b), removing “eligible child” and adding, in its place, “eligible person” and removing “the child” and adding, in its place, “him or her”. 6. Amend § 21.3130 by: a. At the end of paragraph (d)(2), removing the word “or”. b. At the end of paragraph (d)(3), removing the period and adding, in its place, “; or”. c. Adding paragraph (d)(4) prior to the authority citation at the end of paragraph (d). The addition reads as follows: § 21.3130 Educational assistance.

(d)* * *

(4)For pursuit of a course offered by independent study, unless the course is accredited, meets the requirements of § 21.4253, and leads to a standard college degree. 7. Amend § 21.3300 by: a. In paragraph (a), removing “child” and adding, in its place, “person” and adding an authority citation. b. Redesignating paragraphs

(b)through

(d)as paragraphs

(c)through (e), respectively. c. Adding a new paragraph (b). d. In newly redesignated paragraph (c), adding “or vocational rehabilitation counselor” after “psychologist” and revising its authority citation. The additions and revision read as follows: § 21.3300 Special restorative training.

(a)* * * (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3540 through 3543)

(b)*Eligible persons.* VA may prescribe special restorative training for an eligible person who is a child, spouse, or surviving spouse except for a spouse whose qualification as an eligible person is under § 21.3021(a)(3)(ii). The special restorative training must begin after December 26, 2001, for a spouse or surviving spouse. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3501, 3540, 3541, 3543; sec. 109, Pub. L. 107-103, 115 Stat. 986)

(c)* * * (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3540, 3541, 3543) 8. Amend § 21.3301 by: a. In paragraph

(a)introductory text, removing “a handicapped child” and adding, in its place, “an eligible person with a disability who is a child, spouse, or surviving spouse”, and adding “or vocational rehabilitation counselor” after “psychologist” both places that it appears. b. Redesignating paragraphs (a)(2), (a)(3), (a)(4), and (a)(5) as paragraphs (a)(5), (a)(2), (a)(3), and (a)(4), respectively. c. In newly redesignated paragraph (a)(2), in the introductory text removing “eligible child's” and adding, in its place, “child's, spouse's, or surviving spouse's” and removing the authority citation at the end of the paragraph. d. In newly redesignated paragraph (a)(3), removing “and” from the end of the paragraph. e. In newly redesignated paragraph (a)(4), after “child's”, adding “, spouse's, or surviving spouse's”. f. In newly redesignated paragraph (a)(5), removing “It” and adding, in its place, “In the case of a child, whether it”; removing “interests of an eligible” and adding, in its place, “interest of the”; and adding “and” after the semicolon. g. In paragraph (a)(6)(i), removing “handicapped children,” and adding, in its place, “individuals with disabilities;”. h. In paragraph (a)(6)(ii), removing “child's” and adding, in its place, “eligible person's” and removing “Chapter 35,” and adding, in its place, “38 U.S.C. chapter 35.”, and revising the authority citation at the end of paragraph (a)(6). i. In paragraph (b), adding “or vocational rehabilitation counselor” after “psychologist”. j. Revising paragraphs

(c)and (d). k. In paragraph (e), removing “child” each time that it appears and adding, in its place, “person”, and revising the authority citation at the end of the paragraph. The revisions read as follows: § 21.3301 Need.

(a)* * *

(6)* * * (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3501, 3540, 3541(a), 3543)

(c)*Development and implementation.* Following consultation with the panel and receipt of the panel's report, the counseling psychologist or vocational rehabilitation counselor will determine the need for and feasibility of special restorative training. If this determination is affirmative, the counseling psychologist or vocational rehabilitation counselor will prepare an individualized written plan comparable to a plan for an extended evaluation under 38 U.S.C. chapter 31. In the case of an eligible person who is a spouse or surviving spouse, or a child who has attained majority under laws applicable in his or her State of residence, the plan will be developed jointly with the spouse or surviving spouse, or the child, respectively. In the case of an eligible person who has a guardian or has not attained majority under laws applicable in his or her State of residence, the plan will be developed jointly with the eligible person and his or her parent or guardian (see § 21.3021(d)). (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3501, 3541(a))

(d)*Notification of disallowance.* When an eligible person, or a parent or guardian on behalf of an eligible person, has requested special restorative training, and the counseling psychologist or vocational rehabilitation counselor finds that this training is not needed or will not materially improve the eligible person's condition, VA will inform the eligible person, except that VA will inform his or her parent or guardian (see § 21.3021(d)) if the eligible person has a guardian or has not attained majority under laws applicable in his or her State of residence, in writing of the finding and of his or her appeal rights. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3501, 3540, 3543, 5104)

(e)* * * (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3501, 3540, 3543) 9. Amend § 21.3302 by: a. In paragraph (a), removing “child” and adding, in its place, “person”. b. In paragraph (b), removing “which may be charged the parent or guardian” and adding, in its place, “charged” and removing “an eligible child” and adding, in its place, “to the eligible person”. c. Revising the section heading and paragraph (c). d. Adding, at the end of the section, an information collection approval parenthetical. The revisions and addition read as follows: § 21.3302 Special restorative training agreements and reports.

(c)*Reports.* Each educational institution or other provider of a course of special restorative training must report promptly the eligible person's enrollment in, interruption of, or termination of the course of special restorative training. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501(a), 3543, 3680, 3684) (The Office of Management and Budget has approved the information collection provisions in this section under control numbers 2900-0014, 2900-0073, and 2900-0156.) 10. Amend § 21.3303 by: a. In paragraph (a), adding “or vocational rehabilitation counselor” after “psychologist”. b. Revising paragraph (b). c. In paragraph

(c)introductory text, removing “child” and adding, in its place, “person”. d. In paragraph (c)(1)(i), removing “child's” and adding, in its place, “person's”. e. In paragraph (c)(1)(ii), removing “child's” and adding, in its place, “eligible person's”. f. Revising the authority citation at the end of paragraph (c). The revisions read as follows: § 21.3303 Extent of training.

(b)*Ending dates of eligibility.*

(1)No child may receive special restorative training after reaching the end of his or her eligibility period as determined under § 21.3041.

(2)No spouse or surviving spouse may receive special restorative training after reaching the end of his or her eligibility period as determined under §§ 21.3046 and 21.3047. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3512)

(c)* * * (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3542, 3543) 11. Amend § 21.3304 by: a. Removing “child” each place that it appears and adding, in its place, “person” and removing “vocational rehabilitation specialist” each place that it appears and adding, in its place, “counseling psychologist or vocational rehabilitation counselor”. b. In paragraphs

(b)introductory text, (b)(3) introductory text, and (b)(3)(ii), removing “child's” and adding, in its place, “person's”. c. In paragraph (b)(2), removing “by the counseling psychologist”. d. Revising the authority citation at the end of the section. The revision reads as follows: § 21.3304 Assistance during training. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3520, 3541, 3543, 3561) 12. Amend § 21.3305 by: a. Removing “child” each place that it appears and adding, in its place, “person”. b. In paragraph (a), removing “his or her handicap” and adding, in its place, “the effects of his or her disability(ies)”. c. In paragraph (b)(6), removing “child's” and adding, in its place, “person's”. 13. Amend § 21.3306 by: a. In the introductory text, removing “child” and adding, in its place, “person”. b. In paragraph

(a)introductory text, removing “A vocational rehabilitation specialist” and adding, in its place, “A counseling psychologist or vocational rehabilitation counselor”, and revising the paragraph heading. c. Revising the heading of paragraph

(b)and paragraph (b)(1) introductory text. d. In paragraph (b)(2), removing the first sentence, and removing “If he or she” and adding, in its place, “If the counseling psychologist or vocational rehabilitation counselor”. e. In paragraph (b)(3) introductory text, adding “or vocational rehabilitation counselor” after “psychologist”. f. In paragraph (b)(3)(ii), removing “child” and adding, in its place, “eligible person”. The revisions read as follows: § 21.3306 Reentrance after interruption.

(a)*Reentrance without corrective action.* * * *

(b)*Consultation with Vocational Rehabilitation Panel.*

(1)A counseling psychologist or vocational rehabilitation counselor will consult with the Vocational Rehabilitation Panel when special restorative training was interrupted— 14. Amend § 21.3307 by: a. In paragraph (a), removing “by a counseling psychologist” and removing “the vocational rehabilitation specialist” and adding, in its place, “a counseling psychologist or vocational rehabilitation counselor”. b. Revising paragraphs (b)(1) and (2). c. In paragraph (c), removing “child” and adding, in its place, “person” and adding “or vocational rehabilitation counselor” after “psychologist”. The revisions read as follows: § 21.3307 “Discontinued” status.

(b)* * *

(1)Notify the eligible person of the action taken, except that if the eligible person has a guardian or has not attained majority under laws applicable in his or her State of residence, VA will notify his or her parent or guardian (see § 21.3021(d)) of the action taken.

(2)Inform the eligible person of his or her potential right to a program of education, except that if the eligible person has a guardian or has not attained majority under laws applicable in his or her State of residence, VA will inform his or her parent or guardian (see § 21.3021(d)) of the eligible person's potential right to a program of education. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3501, 3543(b)) 15. Amend § 21.3330 by: a. In the introductory text of paragraph (b), removing “child's” and adding, in its place, “person's” and removing “vocational rehabilitation specialist” and adding, in its place, “counseling psychologist or vocational rehabilitation counselor”. b. In paragraph (b)(1), removing “child” and adding, in its place, “person” and removing the period and adding, in its place, “; or”. 16. Amend § 21.3331 by removing “child” and adding, in its place, “person,”, adding “or vocational rehabilitation counselor” after “psychologist”, and removing “§ 21.3130(c)” and adding, in its place, “§ 21.4131”. 17. Amend § 21.3332 by: a. In paragraphs

(b)and (e), removing “vocational rehabilitation specialist” and adding, in its place, “counseling psychologist or vocational rehabilitation counselor”. b. In paragraph (d), removing “child's” and adding, in its place, “person's”. c. In paragraph (f), removing “§ 21.3130(d).” and adding, in its place, “§ 21.4135.” 18. In § 21.3333, amend paragraph (b)(1) introductory text by removing “parent or guardian concurs in having the eligible child's” and adding, in its place, “eligible person, or his or her parent or guardian (see § 21.3021(d)) if the eligible person has a guardian or has not attained majority under laws applicable in his or her State of residence, concurs in having his or her”. 19. In § 21.3344, amend paragraph (e)(1)(i) by adding “or vocational rehabilitation counselor” after “psychologist”. Subpart D—Administration of Educational Assistance Programs 20. Revise the authority citation for part 21, subpart D to read as follows: Authority: 10 U.S.C. 2141 note, ch. 1606; 38 U.S.C. 501(a), chs. 30, 32, 34, 35, 36, and as noted in specific sections. 21. Amend § 21.4267 by: a. In paragraph (a), removing “21.7120(c)” and adding, in its place, “21.7120(d)”. b. Removing paragraph (b)(2)(i). c. Redesignating paragraphs (b)(2)(ii) through (b)(2)(iv) as paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (b)(2)(iii), respectively. d. Revising paragraph (f). e. Adding paragraph

(g)preceding the authority citation at the end of the section. The revision and addition read as follows: § 21.4267 Approval of independent study.

(f)*Course approval.* A State approving agency may approve a course offered by independent study or a combination of independent study and resident training only if the course—

(1)Is accredited;

(2)Meets the requirements of § 21.4253; and

(3)Either—

(i)Leads to a standard college degree; or

(ii)For courses approved on or after December 27, 2001, leads to a certificate that reflects educational attainment offered by an institution of higher learning. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3672, 3675, 3680A(a)(4))

(g)*Remedial and deficiency courses.* Remedial and deficiency courses offered by independent study cannot be approved. Subpart G—Post-Vietnam Era Veterans' Educational Assistance Under 38 U.S.C. Chapter 32 22. The authority citation for part 21, subpart G, continues to read as follows: Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501(a), chs. 32, 36, and as noted in specific sections. 23. Amend § 21.5072 by: a. In paragraph (d)(3) introductory text, removing “if” and adding, in its place, “if—”. b. In paragraph (d)(3)(i), removing “veteran” and adding, in its place, “veteran's”. c. Revising paragraph (i). The revision reads as follows: § 21.5072 Entitlement charge.

(i)*Entitlement charge may be omitted for course discontinuance due to orders to, or changing, active duty in certain instances.* VA will make no charge against the entitlement of a servicemember or veteran for a payment of educational assistance when— (1)(i) A veteran not serving on active duty had to discontinue course pursuit as a result of being ordered, in connection with the Persian Gulf War by orders dated before September 11, 2001, to serve on active duty under 10 U.S.C. 688, 12301(a), 12301(d), 12301(g), 12302, or 12304, or former 10 U.S.C. 672(a), 672(d), 672(g), 673, or 673b (redesignated effective December 1, 1994, as 10 U.S.C. 12301(a), 12301(d), 12301(g), 12302, and 12304, respectively); or

(ii)A veteran not serving on active duty had to discontinue course pursuit as a result of being ordered, by orders dated after September 10, 2001, to serve on active duty under 10 U.S.C. 688, 12301(a), 12301(d), 12301(g), 12302, or 12304; or

(iii)A servicemember serving on active duty had to discontinue course pursuit as a result of being ordered, in connection with the Persian Gulf War by orders dated before September 11, 2001, to a new duty location or assignment or to perform an increased amount of work; or

(iv)A servicemember serving on active duty had to discontinue course pursuit as a result of being ordered, by orders dated after September 10, 2001, to a new duty location or assignment or to perform an increased amount of work; and

(2)The veteran or servicemember failed to receive credit or lost training time toward completion of his or her educational, professional, or vocational objective as a result of having to discontinue course pursuit as described in paragraph (i)(1) of this section. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3231(a)(5)(B)(i); sec. 2, Pub. L. 102-127, 105 Stat. 619-620; sec. 103, Pub. L. 107-103, 115 Stat. 979-980) Subpart K—All Volunteer Force Educational Assistance Program (Montgomery GI Bill—Active Duty) 24. The authority citation for part 21, subpart K, continues to read as follows: Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501(a), chs. 30, 36, and as noted in specific sections. 25. In § 21.7042, revise paragraph (f)(3) to read as follows: § 21.7042 Basic eligibility requirements.

(f)* * *

(3)Except as provided in this paragraph and in paragraph (f)(4) of this section, an individual who after December 31, 1976, receives a commission as an officer in the Armed Forces upon completion of a program of educational assistance under 10 U.S.C. 2107 (the Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps program) is not eligible for educational assistance under 38 U.S.C. chapter 30. This bar to eligibility under 38 U.S.C. chapter 30 does not apply to an individual who entered active duty after September 30, 1996, and received—

(i)$2,000 or less in educational assistance under 10 U.S.C. 2107 for at least one year of the individual's participation in that program of educational assistance; or

(ii)$3,400 or less in educational assistance under 10 U.S.C. 2107 for at least one year of the individual's participation in that program of educational assistance. This provision applies to payment of educational assistance under 38 U.S.C. chapter 30 for months after December 31, 2001. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3011(c), 3012(d)) 26. Amend § 21.7044 by: a. In paragraph (a)(6), removing the period at the end and adding, in its place “; or”. b. Adding paragraph (a)(7), immediately following the authority citation at the end of paragraph (a)(6). c. Revising paragraph (b)(4). d. Removing paragraph (b)(5). e. Redesignating paragraphs (b)(6) through (b)(12) as paragraphs (b)(5) through (b)(11), respectively. f. In newly redesignated paragraph (b)(7), removing “(b)(5)” each place that it appears and adding, in its place, “(b)(4)”. g. In newly redesignated paragraph (b)(10), removing “(b)(9) or (10)” and adding, in its place, “(b)(8) or (9)”. The revision and addition read as follows: § 21.7044 Persons with eligibility under 38 U.S.C. chapter 34.

(a)* * *

(7)Effective December 27, 2001, an individual must meet the following requirements. He or she—

(i)Was not on active duty on October 19, 1984;

(ii)Reenlists or reenters on a period of active duty after October 19, 1984; and

(iii)Serves at least three years of continuous active duty in the Armed Forces after June 30, 1985. The individual is not required to serve three years if he or she is honorably discharged or released from active duty for one of the reasons shown in paragraphs (a)(4)(ii)(A) through (a)(4)(ii)(F) of this section. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3011(a)(1))

(b)* * *

(4)The individual either—

(i)Must have been on active duty on October 19, 1984, must have served without a break in service from October 19, 1984, through June 30, 1985, and after June 30, 1985—

(A)Except as provided in paragraph (b)(5) of this section, must serve at least two years of continuous active duty in the Armed Forces characterized by the Secretary concerned as honorable service, and

(ii)Effective December 27, 2001, must not have been on active duty on October 19, 1984, must reenlist or reenter on a period of active duty after October 19, 1984, and after June 30, 1985—

(B)Except as provided in paragraph (b)(6) of this section, after completion of this active duty service, must serve at least four continuous years service in the Selected Reserve, during which the individual must participate satisfactorily in training as prescribed by the Secretary concerned. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3012(a)(1)) 27. Amend § 21.7050 by: a. In paragraph (a)(1) introductory text, removing “service member” and adding, in its place, “servicemember”. b. In paragraph (a)(1)(ii)(D), at the end, removing “or”. c. In paragraph (a)(1)(iii), removing “§ 21.7042(b) and § 21.7044(b).” and adding, in its place, “§§ 21.7042(b) and 21.7044(b); or”. d. Adding paragraph (a)(1)(iv). The addition reads as follows: § 21.7050 Ending dates of eligibility.

(a)* * *

(1)* * *

(iv)December 27, 2001, for individuals who become eligible for educational assistance under § 21.7044(a)(7) or (b)(4)(ii). (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3031(a), (e), (g)) 28. Amend § 21.7222 by revising paragraph

(e)to read as follows: § 21.7222 Courses and enrollments which may not be approved.

(e)Any independent study program except—

(1)An accredited independent study program (including open circuit television) leading to a standard college degree;

(2)Enrollments in an independent study course after December 26, 2001, in a program leading to a certificate that reflects educational attainment offered by an institution of higher learning; or

(3)As provided for in § 21.7120(d). (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3676, 3680A) [FR Doc. E8-330 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8320-01-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R05-OAR-2006-0276; FRL-8508-8] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Indiana; Amendments to Lead Rules, Quemetco AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Direct final rule. SUMMARY: On February 7, 2002, Indiana submitted revisions to its State Implementation Plan

(SIP)for lead

(Pb)as part of the State's incorporation of a Federal standard for secondary lead smelters. On October 3, 2006, and November 27, 2007, Indiana supplemented its request as it pertained to Quemetco, Incorporated (Quemetco), in Marion County. The requested SIP revision replaces the Pb emission limits for Quemetco with new, stringent limits. EPA has determined that the new limits will be protective of the Pb air quality standards, and is therefore approving them. DATES: This direct final rule will be effective March 17, 2008, unless EPA receives adverse comments by February 14, 2008. If adverse comments are received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the **Federal Register** informing the public that the rule will not take effect. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-2006-0276, by one of the following methods: 1. *www.regulations.gov:* Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. 2. *E-mail: mooney.john@epa.gov.* 3. *Fax:* (312)886-5824. 4. *Mail:* John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 5. *Hand Delivery:* John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The Regional Office official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding Federal holidays. *Instructions:* Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-2006-0276. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at *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 *www.regulations.gov* or e-mail. The *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 *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. *Docket:* All documents in the docket are listed in the *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 *www.regulations.gov* or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. We recommend that you telephone Mary Portanova, Environmental Engineer, at

(312)353-5954 before visiting the Region 5 office. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Portanova, Environmental Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,

(312)353-5954, *portanova.mary@epa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information section is arranged as follows: I. Background: Pb SIP and NESHAP Rules II. What are the new limits for secondary lead smelters? III. How does removing Quemetco from Article 15 affect the Pb SIP? IV. Demonstration of Pb NAAQS Attainment V. What action is EPA taking? VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Background: Pb SIP and NESHAP Rules Indiana's SIP rules for Pb are currently codified at 326 Indiana Administrative Code

(IAC)15, which is also referred to as Article 15. Article 15 covers lead-bearing emissions and fugitive dust from several facilities in Indiana, including secondary lead smelters. The SIP rules applicable to sources in Marion County, Indiana, were developed to ensure that Marion County would attain and maintain the Pb National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). EPA promulgated the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for secondary lead smelting on June 23, 1995 (60 FR 32587); amended on June 13, 1997 (62 FR 32209). Codified at 40 CFR part 63, subpart X, this NESHAP is a technology-based regulation intended to bring certain sources at secondary lead smelters to a specified level of air pollution control. Indiana incorporated the Maximum Achievable Control Technology

(MACT)standard of the secondary lead smelter NESHAP, with certain adjustments, in 326 IAC 20-13. On August 22, 2006 (71 FR 48923), EPA approved Indiana's request for delegation of authority to implement and enforce the NESHAP for secondary lead smelting through 326 IAC 20-13. The Federal NESHAP in Subpart X is expected to result in air quality benefits where it affects secondary lead smelters which were previously unregulated or which were previously subject to less stringent controls. In Indiana, however, the existing Marion County Pb SIP limits were already more stringent than the NESHAP's limits. Indiana believed that the Federal secondary lead smelter NESHAP would not fully protect the Pb NAAQS in Marion County. Therefore, when Indiana adopted the NESHAP into 326 IAC 20-13, the State adjusted it to make the rule's emission limits at least as stringent as the Marion County Pb SIP limits had been. There are two secondary lead smelters in Marion County, Indiana, Quemetco and Refined Metals of Indianapolis (Refined Metals). Quemetco, located in Indianapolis, recycles lead-acid batteries and other lead-bearing materials. It is currently operating and is affected by both the Marion County Pb SIP and the NESHAP rules for secondary lead smelters. Indiana chose to remove the paragraph that addressed Quemetco from the Pb SIP at Article 15, so that the facility's Pb emission regulations would all reside in one State rule, 326 IAC 20-13. The Refined Metals facility has closed. II. What are the new limits for secondary lead smelters? The emission limits for Quemetco in 326 IAC 20-13 differ from the last Federally approved Pb SIP limits in Article 15. The SIP previously approved by EPA contained Pb emission limits for specific processes and process fugitive emissions. Later, the Quemetco facility enclosed its Pb emission sources. Indiana subsequently revised Quemetco's Pb rules to apply Pb emission limits on individual numbered vent stacks under the facility's new configuration. The Pb limits in 326 IAC 20-13, which were submitted to EPA on February 7, 2002, correspond to Quemetco's current stack configuration. In addition, the limits in 326 IAC 15-1-2(a)(8) were given in units of pounds per hour, but the numerical Pb emission limits for Quemetco in 326 IAC 20-13-2(a) are given in units of milligrams per dry standard cubic meter (mg/dscm) to match the Federal NESHAP's emission limit units. The process source limits in 326 IAC 20-13-2(a) are 1.0 mg/dscm, compared to the corresponding NESHAP limits of 2.0 mg/dscm. This limit applies to Quemetco's Stacks 100 and 111. The process fugitive source limits are 0.5 mg/dscm, compared to the NESHAP limits of 2.0 mg/dscm, and the emission limits for stacks venting fugitive dust sources are also 0.5 mg/dscm, compared to the NESHAP limits of 2.0 mg/dscm. These limits apply to Quemetco's Stacks 101-109. Quemetco has already shown that it can meet these limits. The regulation at 326 IAC 20-13-2(a) also requires the use of High Efficiency Particulate Air

(HEPA)filters, as defined in 40 CFR 63.542, on process fugitive emissions and stacks venting fugitive dust sources. The Quemetco facility already uses HEPA filters on its baghouses. Indiana's secondary lead smelter rules include a partial incorporation by reference of 40 CFR part 63, subpart X, at 326 IAC 20-13-1(c). This specifies standards for process and fugitive sources at secondary lead smelters, test methods, fugitive dust control, standard operating procedures for baghouses, and monitoring and recordkeeping requirements. The regulation at 326 IAC 20-13-1(c) does not include certain portions of 40 CFR part 63, subpart X, which are already covered by other portions of 326 IAC 20-13. The numerical emission limits for process, fugitive, and process fugitive sources found in 40 CFR part 63, subpart X are not included in the incorporation because Indiana's rule replaces them with more stringent limits, as in 326 IAC 20-13-2(a), for Quemetco. Certain requirements for baghouse bag leak detection systems are also not included in 326 IAC 20-13-1(c). These requirements do not apply to Quemetco, which has HEPA filters and is therefore not required to have a bag leak detection system. III. How does removing Quemetco from Article 15 affect the Pb SIP? Because 326 IAC 20-13 now contains Pb emission limits for Quemetco, Indiana chose to delete the portion of Article 15 that contains Pb emission limits for Quemetco under the Marion County SIP, rather than retain duplicate or conflicting emission limits. The final State rule removing 326 IAC 15-1-2(a)(8) was published in the Indiana Register on January 1, 2001 (24 *Ind. Reg.* 954). Simply deleting Quemetco's limits from Article 15 would be an unacceptable relaxation of the Marion County Pb SIP, even though Quemetco's Pb air emissions are still regulated by the NESHAP at 326 IAC 20-13. State Pb SIP limits must be directly linked to local air quality effects. The levels of the Pb SIP limits in Article 15 have been shown, through dispersion modeling, to assure attainment and maintenance of the Pb NAAQS in Marion County. The SIP may not be subsequently relaxed without review and rulemaking action by EPA, to assure continued maintenance of the NAAQS. EPA can bring enforcement action against a facility based on noncompliance with the Federally approved SIP limits. The NESHAP sets emission control requirements for secondary lead smelters as a group. Its emission limits are based on nationally available emission control technology. The NESHAP can be changed as a broad national measure, without requiring an analysis of the effects on local air quality. Therefore, in an October 3, 2006 letter, Indiana requested that portions of 326 IAC 20-13 be approved into the Marion County Pb SIP in place of 326 IAC 15-1-2(a)(8). This request was clarified in a second letter from Indiana to EPA dated November 27, 2007. Incorporating those provisions of 326 IAC 20-13 into the Marion County Pb SIP ensures that the Pb emission limits for Quemetco cannot be changed without proper State rulemaking procedures, a demonstration of attainment of the Pb NAAQS, and review and rulemaking action by EPA. The portions of Article 15 which Indiana requested as SIP revisions are 326 IAC 20-13-2(a) (Quemetco's emission limits and filter requirements); 326 IAC 20-13-1(c) (incorporation of 40 CFR part 63, subpart X); and 326 IAC 20-13-6 (compliance testing). IV. Demonstration of Pb NAAQS Attainment The State performed dispersion modeling in 2005 using the ISCST3 model to demonstrate that the new limits would protect the Pb NAAQS in Marion County. ISCST3 was the appropriate regulatory dispersion model at the time. The modeling used the regulatory default options and five years of surface meteorological data from the Indianapolis, Indiana airport, with upper-air meteorological data from Dayton, Ohio. Building dimensions were included to account for downwash effects. The State included both Quemetco's Pb emissions and the allowable Pb emissions for the Refined Metals secondary smelter under Article 15. The Refined Metals facility is currently not operating; but because Indiana has maintained the SIP rule addressing Refined Metals in Article 15, its allowable emissions must be included in the Marion County attainment demonstration. The model showed that the limits in 326 IAC 20-13 will maintain the Pb NAAQS of 1.5 micrograms per cubic meter, quarterly. The maximum modeled quarterly impact of the Marion County Pb sources was 0.16 micrograms per cubic meter. This value includes a background Pb concentration taken from locally monitored air quality data. V. What action is EPA taking? EPA is approving Indiana's February 7, 2002, SIP revision request, as supplemented in a letter dated October 3, 2006, and another letter dated November 27, 2007. EPA is approving the removal of 326 IAC 15-1-2(a)(8) from the Indiana Pb SIP. EPA is also approving as part of the SIP:

(1)Corresponding minor editorial changes in two sections of 326 IAC 15-1 that refer to Quemetco;

(2)the addition of 326 IAC 20-13-2(a);

(3)the addition of 326 IAC 20-13-1(c); and

(4)the addition of 326 IAC 20-13-6. This SIP revision retains emission limits adequate to protect the Pb NAAQS in Marion County, Indiana, and places the regulations affecting Indiana's active secondary lead smelters in one section of Indiana's pollution control regulations. It should be noted that this action in no way affects the continued enforceability of the Federal NESHAP at 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart X. We are publishing this action without prior proposal because we view this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this **Federal Register** publication, we are publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to approve the state plan if relevant adverse written comments are filed. The proposed rule will be effective March 17, 2008 without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse written comments by February 14, 2008. If we receive such comments, we will withdraw this action before the effective date by publishing a subsequent document that will withdraw the final action. All public comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed action. The EPA will not institute a second comment period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time. If we do not receive any comments, this action will be effective March 17, 2008. VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is not a “significant regulatory action” and, therefore, is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use Because it is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866 or a “significant energy action,” this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). Regulatory Flexibility Act This action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601, *et seq.* ). Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Because this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (59 FR 22951, November 9, 2000). Executive Order 13132: Federalism This action also does not have Federalism implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act (CAA). Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health and Safety Risks This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 “Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks” (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it approves a state rule implementing a Federal Standard. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the state to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. Paperwork Reduction Act This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ). Congressional Review Act The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 *et seq.* , as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the **Federal Register** . A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the **Federal Register** . This action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by March 17, 2008. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).) List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: December 7, 2007. Bharat Mathur, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. For the reasons stated in the preamble, part 52, chapter I, of title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows: PART 52—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, *et seq.* Subpart P—Indiana 2. Section 52.770 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(183) to read as follows: § 52.770 Identification of plan.

(c)* * *

(183)On February 7, 2002, Indiana submitted revisions to its State Implementation Plan

(SIP)for lead

(Pb)as part of the State's incorporation of a Federal standard for secondary lead smelters. On October 3, 2006, and November 27, 2007, Indiana supplemented its request as it pertained to Quemetco, Incorporated, in Marion County. This revision removes from the Indiana SIP the source-specific provisions for Quemetco found in article 326 IAC 15, previously approved in paragraph (c)(95) of this section, and replaces them with the corresponding provisions of article 326 IAC 20-13.

(i)*Incorporation by reference.* The following sections of Title 326 of the Indiana Administrative Code

(IAC)are incorporated by reference:

(A)326 IAC 15-1-2(c) “Source-specific provisions” and 326 IAC 15-1-3 “Control of fugitive lead dust”. Filed with the Secretary of State on December 1, 2000, effective December 30, 2000. Published in the Indiana Register on January 1, 2001 (24 IR 954).

(B)326 IAC 20-13-1(c) “Applicability; incorporation by reference of federal standards”, 326 IAC 20-13-2(a) “Emission limitations lead standards for Quemetco, Incorporated”, and 326 IAC 20-13-6 “Compliance testing”. Filed with the Secretary of State on December 1, 2000, effective December 30, 2000. Published in the Indiana Register on January 1, 2001 (24 IR 958). [FR Doc. E8-440 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services 42 CFR Parts 410, 414, 424, and 484 [CMS-1385-F3] RIN 0938-AO65 Medicare Program; Revisions to Payment Policies Under the Physician Fee Schedule, and Other Part B Payment Policies for CY 2008; Revisions to the Payment Policies of Ambulance Services Under the Ambulance Fee Schedule for CY 2008; and the Amendment of the E-Prescribing Exemption for Computer-Generated Facsimile Transmissions; Correcting Amendment AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS. ACTION: Correcting amendment. SUMMARY: This correcting amendment corrects several technical and typographical errors in the regulations text of the final rule with comment period that appeared in the November 27, 2007 **Federal Register** (72 FR 66222). The final rule with comment period addressed performance standards for diagnostic testing facilities and standards and requirements related to therapy services under Medicare Parts A and B. DATES: *Effective Date:* This correcting amendment is effective January 15, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Diane Milstead,

(410)786-3355. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background In FR Doc. 07-5506 of November 27, 2007 (72 FR 66222) (hereinafter referred to as the CY 2008 PFS final rule with comment period), there were a number of technical and typographical errors that are identified and corrected in regulation text of this correcting amendment. The provisions of this correcting amendment are effective January 15, 2008. II. Summary of Errors in the Regulation Text 1. On page 66398, 3rd column, 8th full paragraph, line 3, the phrase “IDTF does not include the following” is corrected to read “IDTF is prohibited from the following.” 2. On page 66401, a. First column, 1st full paragraph, line 1, the phrase “(1) The services” is corrected to read “(1) For services.” b. Third column, last partial paragraph, line 4, the phrase “members of public may comment” is corrected to read “members of the public may comment.” 3. On page 66402, 1st column, 5th full paragraph, line 4, the phrase “members of public may comment” is corrected to read “members of the public may comment.” 4. On page 66406, 2nd column, 1st full paragraph, line 1, the phrase “(2) The requested information” is corrected to read “(2) The required information”. 5. On page 66407, a. First column,

(1)The 8th paragraph “(e) If educated outside the United States—” is corrected to read “(e) If educated outside the United States, must meet all of the following:”

(2)The 9th paragraph “(1) Must meet both of the following:” is deleted.

(3)Tenth paragraph,

(a)Line 1, the phrase “(i) Graduated” is corrected to read “(1) Graduated”.

(b)Lines 4 and 5, the phrase “occupational therapy assistant entry level education” is corrected to read “occupational therapy entry-level education”.

(4)Eleventh paragraph, line 1, the phrase “(A) The Accreditation” is corrected to read “(i) The Accreditation”.

(5)Twelfth paragraph, line 1, the phrase “(B) Successor” is corrected to read “(ii) Successor”.

(6)Thirteenth paragraph, line 1, the phrase “(C) The World” is corrected to read “(iii) The World”.

(7)Fourteenth paragraph, line 1, the phrase “(D) A credentialing body” is corrected to read “(iv) A credentialing body”.

(8)Fifteenth paragraph, line 1, the phrase “(ii) Successfully completed” is corrected to read “(2) Successfully completed”.

(9)Sixteenth paragraph, line 1, the phrase “(2) On or before December 31, 2009” is corrected to read “(3) Effective January 1, 2010”.

(10)The last full paragraph, “(1) Is licensed or otherwise regulated, if applicable, as an occupational therapy assistant by the State in which practicing, unless licensure does not apply.” is corrected to read “(1) Is licensed, unless licensure does not apply, or otherwise regulated, if applicable, as an occupational therapy assistant by the State in which practicing.” b. Third column,

(1)The 2nd full paragraph, “(a)(1) Graduated after successful completion of one of a physical therapist education program approved by one of the following:” is corrected to read “(a)(1) Graduated after successful completion of a physical therapist education program approved by one of the following:”

(2)Fifth full paragraph, line 10, the phrase “therapists.” is corrected to read as “therapists; and”. 6. On page 66408, a. First column,

(1)Fourth paragraph, line 3, the phrase “Association;” is corrected to read “Association; or”.

(2)Fifth paragraph, line 3, the phrase “Therapists; and” is corrected to read “Therapists; or”.

(3)Sixth paragraph, line 1, the phrase “Graduated from” is corrected to read “Has graduated from”.

(4)The 11th paragraph, “ *Physical therapist assistant.* A person who is licensed, registered or certified as a physical therapist assistant, if applicable, by the State in which practicing, unless licensure does not apply and meets one of the following requirements:” is corrected to read “ *Physical therapist assistant.* A person who is licensed, unless licensure does not apply, registered, or certified as a physical therapist assistant, if applicable, by the State in which practicing, and meets one of the following requirements:”

(5)Twelfth paragraph, line 1, the phrase “(a)(1)(i) Graduated” is corrected to read “(a)(1) Graduated”.

(6)Thirteenth paragraph, line 1, the phrase “(ii) Passed” is corrected to read “(2) Passed”. b. Second column, 1st partial paragraph, lines 1 through 4, the phrase “before December 31, 2009, from a 2-year college-level program approved by the American Physical Therapy Association and after January 1, 2010” is corrected to read “on or before December 31, 2009, from a 2-year college-level program approved by the American Physical Therapy Association and, effective January 1, 2010”. III. Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking and Delay in Effective Date We ordinarily publish a notice of proposed rulemaking in the **Federal Register** to provide a period for public comment before the provisions of a rule take effect in accordance with section 553(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act

(APA)(5 U.S.C. 553(b)). However, we can waive the notice and comment procedures if the Secretary finds, for good cause, that the notice and comment process is impracticable, unnecessary or contrary to the public interest, and incorporates a statement of the finding and the reasons therefore in the rule. Section 553(d) of the APA ordinarily requires a 30-day delay in effective date of final rules after the date of their publication. This 30-day delay in effective date can be waived, however, if an agency finds for good cause that the delay is impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest, and the agency incorporates a statement of the findings and its reasons in the rule issued. This correcting amendment addresses typographical and technical errors made in FR Doc. 07-5506, the CY 2008 PFS final rule with comment period, which appeared in the November 27, 2007 **Federal Register** (72 FR 66222) and is, with limited exceptions as noted in that rule, effective January 1, 2008. The provisions of the final rule with comment period have been subjected previously to notice and comment procedures. These corrections contained in this correcting amendment are consistent with, and do not make substantive changes to, the payment methodologies and policies adopted in the CY 2008 PFS final rule with comment period. As such, this correcting amendment is intended to ensure the CY 2008 PFS final rule with comment period accurately reflects the policies adopted in that rule. We find, therefore, for good cause that it is unnecessary and would be contrary to the public interest to undertake further notice and comment procedures to incorporate these corrections into the final rule with comment period. For the same reasons, we are also waiving the 30-day delay in effective date for this correcting amendment. We believe that it is in the public interest to ensure that the CY 2008 PFS final rule with comment period accurately states our policies. Therefore, we find that delaying the effective date of these corrections would be contrary to the public interest. In so doing, we find good cause to waive the 30-day delay in the effective date. List of Subjects 42 CFR Part 410 Health facilities, Health professions, Kidney diseases, Laboratories, Medicare, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Rural areas, X-rays. 42 CFR Part 414 Administrative practice and procedure, Health facilities, Health professions, Kidney diseases, Medicare, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 42 CFR Part 424 Emergency medical services, Health facilities, Health professions, Medicare, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 42 CFR Part 484 Health facilities, Health professions, Medicare, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Accordingly, 42 CFR chapter IV is corrected by making the following correcting amendments: PART 410—SUPPLEMENTARY MEDICAL INSURANCE

(SMI)BENEFITS 1. The authority citation for part 410 continues to read as follows: Authority: Secs. 1102, 1834, 1871, and 1893 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1302, 1395m, 1395hh, and 1395ddd). § 410.33 [Corrected] 2. In § 410.33, amend paragraph (g)(15) by removing the phrase “IDTF does not include the following” and adding in its place “IDTF is prohibited from the following”. PART 414—PAYMENT FOR PART B MEDICAL AND OTHER HEALTH SERVICES 3. The authority citation for part 414 continues to read as follows: Authority: Secs. 1102, 1871, and 1881(b)(l) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1302, 1395hh, and 1395rr(b)(l)). § 414.50 [Corrected] 4. In § 414.50, amend paragraph (a)(1) by removing the phrase “The services” and adding in its place “For services”. § 414.509 [Corrected] 5. In § 414.509, amend paragraphs (a)(2)(ii) and (b)(1)(ii)(B) by removing the phrase “members of public” and adding in its place “members of the public”. PART 424—CONDITIONS FOR MEDICARE PAYMENT 6. The authority citation for part 424 continues to read as follows: Authority: Secs. 1102 and 1871 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1302 and 1395hh). § 424.36 [Corrected] 7. In § 424.36, amend paragraph (b)(6)(ii)(C)(2) by removing the phrase “The requested information” and adding in its place “The required information”. PART 484—HOME HEALTH SERVICES 8. The authority citation for part 484 continues to read as follows: Authority: Secs. 1102 and 1871 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1302 and 1395(hh)) unless otherwise indicated. § 484.4 [Amended] 9. Amend § 484.4 by— A. Revising paragraph

(e)of the definition of “Occupational therapist”. B. Revising paragraph (a)(1) of the definition of “Occupational therapy assistant.” C. Revising paragraphs (a)(1) introductory text, (a)(1)(iii), and

(e)of the definition of “Physical therapist.” D. Revising the introductory text of the definition of “Physical therapist assistant.” E. Redesignating paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and (a)(1)(ii) as paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of the definition of “Physical therapist assistant.” F. Revising paragraph (b)(2) of the definition of “Physical therapist assistant.” The revisions read as follows: § 484.4 Personnel qualifications. *Occupational therapist* .

(e)If educated outside the United States, must meet all of the following:

(1)Graduated after successful completion of an occupational therapist education program accredited as substantially equivalent to occupational therapist entry level education in the United States by one of the following:

(i)The Accreditation Council for Occupational Therapy Education (ACOTE).

(ii)Successor organizations of ACOTE.

(iii)The World Federation of Occupational Therapists.

(iv)A credentialing body approved by the American Occupational Therapy Association.

(2)Successfully completed the entry-level certification examination for occupational therapists developed and administered by the National Board for Certification in Occupational Therapy, Inc. (NBCOT).

(3)On or before December 31, 2009, is licensed or otherwise regulated, if applicable, as an occupational therapist by the State in which practicing. *Occupational therapy assistant* . * * *

(a)* * *

(1)Is licensed, unless licensure does not apply, or otherwise regulated, if applicable, as an occupational therapy assistant by the State in which practicing. *Physical therapist* . * * * (a)(1) Graduated after successful completion of a physical therapist education program approved by one of the following:

(iii)An education program outside the United States determined to be substantially equivalent to physical therapist entry-level education in the United States by a credentials evaluation organization approved by the American Physical Therapy Association or an organization identified in 8 CFR 212.15(e) as it relates to physical therapists; and

(e)Before January 1, 1966—

(1)Was admitted to membership by the American Physical Therapy Association; or

(2)Was admitted to registration by the American Registry of Physical Therapists; or

(3)Has graduated from a physical therapy curriculum in a 4-year college or university approved by a State department of education. *Physical therapist assistant* . A person who is licensed, unless licensure does not apply, registered, or certified as a physical therapist assistant, if applicable, by the State in which practicing, and meets one of the following requirements:

(b)* * *

(2)In States where licensure or other regulations do not apply, graduated on or before December 31, 2009, from a 2-year college-level program approved by the American Physical Therapy Association and, effective January 1, 2010 meets the requirements of paragraph

(a)of this definition. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program No. 93.774, Medicare—Supplementary Medical Insurance Program) Dated: January 10, 2008. Ann C. Agnew, Executive Secretary to the Department. [FR Doc. E8-576 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4120-01-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services 42 CFR Part 414 [CMS-1385-CN3] RIN 0938-AO65 Medicare Program; Revisions to Payment Policies Under the Physician Fee Schedule, and Other Part B Payment Policies for CY 2008; Delay of the Date of Applicability of the Revised Anti-Markup Provisions for Certain Services Furnished in Certain Locations (§ 414.50); Correction AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS. ACTION: Final rule; correction. SUMMARY: This document corrects typographical errors identified in the final rule that appeared in the January 3, 2008 **Federal Register** (73 FR 404). The final rule delayed until January 1, 2009 the applicability of the anti-markup provisions in § 414.50, as revised at 72 FR 66222, except with respect to the technical component of a purchased diagnostic test and with respect to any anatomic pathology diagnostic testing services furnished in space that is utilized by a physician group practice as a “centralized building” (as defined at § 411.351) for purposes of complying with the physician self-referral rules and does not qualify as a “same building” under § 411.355(b)(2)(i) of this chapter. DATES: *Effective Date:* This correction notice is effective January 1, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donald Romano,

(410)786-1401. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background In FR Doc. 07-6280 (73 FR 404), the final rule entitled “Revisions to Payment Policies Under the Physician Fee Schedule, and Other Part B Payment Policies for CY 2008; Delay of the Date of Applicability of the Revised Anti-Markup Provisions for Certain Services Furnished in Certain Locations (§ 414.50),” there were typographical errors in the preamble that are identified and corrected in this correction notice. The provisions of this correction notice are effective January 1, 2008. II. Summary of Errors On page 406, we are correcting a typographical error in section III., Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking, to clarify that the delay of the applicability date for revised § 414.50 excludes any anatomic pathology diagnostic testing services furnished in space that is utilized by a physician group practice as a “centralized building” (as defined at § 411.351) for purposes of complying with the physician self-referral rules and does not qualify as a “same building” under § 411.355(b)(2)(i). We are also correcting a typographical error in section IV., Collection of Information Requirements, by correcting the U.S.C. citation of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. III. Correction of Errors On page 406, in the 1st column; a. The 1 st partial paragraph, line 2, the phrase “revised § 414.50 with respect to” is corrected to read “revised § 414.50 except with respect to.” b. The 1 st full paragraph, line 8, the phrase “(44 U.S.C. 35)” is corrected read “(44 U.S.C. 3501)” IV. Waiver of Proposed Rulemaking We ordinarily publish a notice of proposed rulemaking and invite public comment on the proposed rule. The notice and comment rulemaking procedure is not required, however, if the rule is interpretive or procedural in nature, and it may be waived if there is good cause that it is impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest and we incorporate in the rule a statement of such a finding and the reasons supporting that finding. Likewise, we ordinarily provide for a delayed effective date of a final rule, but we are not required to do so if the rule is procedural or interpretive. Where a delayed effective date is required, this requirement may be waived for good cause. We set forth below our finding of good cause for the waiver of notice and comment rulemaking and the waiver of a delayed effective date. Our implementation of this action without opportunity for public comment and without a delayed effective date is based on the good cause exceptions in 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B) and (d), respectively. We find that seeking public comment on this action is impracticable and contrary to the public interest. We issued the delay in applicability notice as a result of our review of the informal comments on the final rule with comment period from various stakeholders. We are correcting typographical errors from that notice, and therefore, do not believe that further notice and comment is necessary at this time. Authority: (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program No. 93.773, Medicare—Hospital Insurance; and Program No. 93.774, Medicare—Supplementary Medical Insurance Program) Dated: January 10, 2008. Ann C. Agnew, Executive Secretary to the Department. [FR Doc. E8-561 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4120-01-P 73 10 Tuesday, January 15, 2008 Proposed Rules NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 10 CFR Part 73 Training and Qualification of Security Personnel at Nuclear Power Reactor Facilities; Issuance of Draft Regulatory Guide AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Issuance, Availability of Draft Regulatory Guide (DG). SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission

(NRC)has issued for public comment a draft guide in the agency's “Regulatory Guide” series (DG-5015). DATES: The comment period closes on February 25, 2008. Comments received after that date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the NRC is able to ensure consideration only for comments received on or before this date. Although a time limit is given, comments and suggestions in connection with items for inclusion in guides currently being developed or improvements in all published guides are encouraged at any time. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis Gordon, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, phone:

(301)415-6671 or e-mail *DXG@nrc.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction The NRC has issued for public comment a draft guide in the agency's “Regulatory Guide” series. This series was developed to describe and make available to the public such information as methods that are acceptable to the NRC staff for implementing specific parts of the NRC's regulations, techniques that the staff uses in evaluating specific problems or postulated accidents, and data that the staff needs in its review of applications for permits and licenses. The draft regulatory guide, entitled, “Training and Qualification of Security Personnel at Nuclear Power Reactor Facilities,” is temporarily identified by its task number, DG-5015, which should be mentioned in all related correspondence. DG-5015 provides an approach acceptable to the NRC for the training and qualification of security personnel at nuclear power reactor facilities. Title 10 of the *Code of Federal Regulations* Part 73 (10 CFR part 73), “Physical Protection of Plants and Materials,” § 73.55, “Requirements for physical protection of licensed activities in nuclear power reactors against radiological sabotage,” paragraph (c)(4), requires NRC nuclear power reactor licensees to establish, maintain and follow a Commission-approved training and qualification plan that describes how the criteria set forth in Appendix B to 10 CFR part 73, “General Criteria for Security Personnel,” Section VI, “Nuclear Power Reactor Training and Qualification Plan” will be implemented. Consistent with the requirements of 10 CFR 73.55(d)(5)(i) and Appendix B to 10 CFR part 73, Section VI, paragraph A.2, the licensee is responsible for ensuring that security personnel are adequately trained, equipped, and qualified to effectively perform their assignments and implement the site physical protection program through site-specific security measures, management controls, and protective strategies in a manner that satisfies Commission requirements and provides high assurance of public health and safety, protection of the environment, and common defense and security. DG-5015 contains draft guidance on how licensees should select, train, equip, test, qualify, and re-qualify armed and unarmed security personnel, watchpersons, and other members of the security organization to ensure that these individuals possess and maintain the knowledge, skills, and abilities required to carry out their assigned duties and responsibilities effectively. The approaches and examples described in DG-5015 would provide one methodology for satisfying the Commission requirements in Appendix B, Section VI, for the training and qualification of security personnel at nuclear power reactor facilities to include:

(1)Minimum requirements for employment suitability and qualification;

(2)minimum physical qualifications;

(3)minimum psychological qualifications;

(4)re-qualification of personnel;

(5)duty and on-the-job training;

(6)weapons and tactical response training and exercises;

(7)demonstration of individual capabilities and qualifications;

(8)readiness of security personnel to perform assignments;

(9)maintenance of equipment and program records; and

(10)the conduct of self audits and reviews. DG-5015 would be applicable to operating reactors licensed in accordance with 10 CFR parts 50 and 52. Power reactor licensees and applicants subject to the requirements of 10 CFR 73.55 must comply only with the requirements in Appendix B to 10 CFR part 73, Section VI, and should consider the draft guidance in developing and implementing a site-specific training and qualification program. Applicants for an operating license should also consider this guidance in preparing an application for a combined license

(COL)under 10 CFR part 52. DG-5015 is based on the proposed rule, “Power Reactor Security Requirements,” which was published in the **Federal Register** , 71 FR 62664, on Thursday, October 26, 2006. The proposed rule should be considered during review of the draft guide. II. Further Information The NRC staff is soliciting comments on DG-5015. Comments may be accompanied by relevant information or supporting data, and should mention DG-5015 in the subject line. Comments submitted in writing or in electronic form will be made available to the public in their entirety through the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). Personal information will not be removed from your comments. You may submit comments by any of the following methods: 1. *Mail comments to:* Rulemaking, Directives, and Editing Branch, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. 2. *E-mail comments to: NRCREP@nrc.gov* . 3. *Hand-deliver comments to:* Rulemaking, Directives, and Editing Branch, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. on Federal workdays. 4. *Fax comments to:* Rulemaking, Directives, and Editing Branch, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission at

(301)415-5144. Requests for technical information about DG-5015 may be directed to the NRC Senior Program Manager, Dennis Gordon at

(301)415-6671 or e-mail at *DXG@nrc.gov* . Electronic copies of DG-5015 are available through the NRC's public Web site under Draft Regulatory Guides in the “Regulatory Guides” collection of the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at *http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/* . Electronic copies are also available in ADAMS ( *http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html* ), under Accession No. ML073550020. In addition, regulatory guides are available for inspection at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), which is located at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The PDR's mailing address is USNRC PDR, Washington, DC 20555-0001. The PDR can also be reached by telephone at

(301)415-4737 or

(800)397-4205, by fax at

(301)415-3548, and by e-mail to *PDR@nrc.gov* . Regulatory guides are not copyrighted, and Commission approval is not required to reproduce them. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day of January, 2008. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commisison. Andrea Valentin, Chief, Regulatory Guide Development Branch, Division of Engineering, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research. [FR Doc. E8-535 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY Internal Revenue Service 26 CFR Part 1 [REG-114126-07] RIN 1545-BG54 Reduction of Foreign Tax Credit Limitation Categories Under Section 904(d); Correction AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Correction to notice of proposed rulemaking by cross-reference to temporary regulations and notice of public hearing. SUMMARY: This document contains a correction to a notice of proposed rulemaking by cross-reference to temporary regulations and notice of public hearing that was published in the **Federal Register** on Friday, December 21, 2007 (72 FR 72645) providing guidance relating to the reduction of the number of separate foreign tax credit limitation categories under section 904(d) of the Internal Revenue Code. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey L. Parry, 202-622-3070 (not a toll-free number). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The notice of proposed rulemaking by cross-reference to temporary regulations and notice of public hearing (REG-114126-07) that is the subject of this correction is under section 904 of the Internal Revenue Code. Need for Correction As published, the notice of proposed rulemaking by cross-reference to temporary regulations and notice of public hearing (REG-114126-07) contains an error that may prove to be misleading and is in need of clarification. Correction of Publication Accordingly, the notice of proposed rulemaking by cross-reference to temporary regulations and notice of public hearing (REG-114126-07) that was the subject of FR Doc. E7-24783 is corrected as follows: On page 72645, column 3, in the preamble, under the paragraph heading “Comments and Public Hearing” paragraph 2, line 2, the language “for April 26, 2008, in the auditorium,” is corrected to read “for April 22, 2008 in the auditorium,”. La Nita VanDyke, Branch Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch, Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief Counsel, (Procedure and Administration). [FR Doc. E8-578 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4830-01-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Park Service 36 CFR Part 7 Establishment of Negotiated Rulemaking Advisory Committee for Off-Road Vehicle Management, Cape Hatteras National Seashore; Correction AGENCY: National Park Service. ACTION: Proposed rule; correction. SUMMARY: The National Park Service published a document in the **Federal Register** of December 20, 2007, concerning the establishment of the Negotiated Rulemaking Advisory Committee for Off-Road Vehicle Management, Cape Hatteras National Seashore. The document contained an incorrect organizational affiliation for Ronald Bounds. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mike Murray, Superintendent, Outer Banks Group, 1401 National Park Drive, Manteo, North Carolina 27952,

(252)473-2111, ext. 148. Correction In the **Federal Register** of December 20, 2007, in FR Doc. 07-6152, on page 72318, in the third column, correct the first paragraph to read: 30. Recreational Fishing Alliance, member Patrick Paquette, alternate Ronald Bounds (United Mobile Sportfishermen). Dated: January 7, 2008. Daniel N. Wenk, Deputy Director. [FR Doc. E8-529 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-X6-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R05-OAR-2006-0276; FRL-8408-9] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Indiana; Amendments to Lead Rules, Quemetco AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revised lead

(Pb)emission limits for Quemetco, Incorporated, in Marion County, Indiana. On February 7, 2002, Indiana submitted revisions to its State Implementation Plan

(SIP)for lead as part of the State's incorporation of a Federal standard for secondary lead smelters. On October 3, 2006, and November 27, 2007, Indiana supplemented its request as it pertained to Quemetco, Incorporated, in Marion County. The requested SIP revision replaces the Pb emission limits for Quemetco, Incorporated with similarly stringent limits. The new limits were found to be protective of the national ambient air quality standards. DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 14, 2008. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-2006-0276, by one of the following methods: 1. *www.regulations.gov:* Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. 2. *E-mail: mooney.john@epa.gov.* 3. *Fax:*

(312)886-5824. 4. *Mail:* John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 5. *Hand Delivery:* John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The Regional Office official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding Federal holidays. Please see the direct final rule which is located in the Rules section of this **Federal Register** for detailed instructions on how to submit comments. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Portanova, Environmental Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,

(312)353-5954, *portanova.mary@epa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Final Rules section of this **Federal Register** , EPA is approving the State's SIP submittal as a direct final rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to this rule, no further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. For additional information, see the direct final rule which is located in the Rules section of this **Federal Register** . Dated: December 7, 2007. Bharat Mathur, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. [FR Doc. E8-441 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 47 CFR Parts 25 and 27 [WT Docket No. 07-293, IB Docket No. 95-91; FCC 07-215] The Operation of Wireless Communications Services in the 2.3 GHz Band; Establishment of Rules and Policies for the Digital Audio Radio Satellite Service in the 2310-2360 MHz Frequency Band AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. SUMMARY: The Federal Communications Commission

(FCC)seeks comment on service rules for the Wireless Communications Service

(WCS)and for terrestrial repeaters used in conjunction with the Satellite Digital Audio Radio Service (SDARS). The intended purpose of this proceeding is to determine whether the Commission can develop adequate limits on out-of-band emissions for these two services that would permit them coexist in adjacent frequency bands. DATES: Comments are due on or before February 14, 2008 and reply comments are due on or before March 17, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may submit comment, identified by WT Docket No. 07-293 and IB Docket No. 95-91, by any of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov* . Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • *Federal Communications Commission's Web Site: http:///www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs* . Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • *People with Disabilities:* Contact the FCC to request reasonable accommodations (accessible format documents, sign language interpreters, CART, etc.) by *e-mail: FCC504@fcc.gov* or phone 202-418-0530 or TTY: 202-418-0432. For detail instructions for submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven Spaeth

(202)418-1539, or Stephen Duall,

(202)418-1103, Satellite Division, International Bureau, Federal Communications Commission, Washington, DC 20554. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a summary of the Commission's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

(NPRM)in WT Docket No. 07-293 and Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in IB Docket No. 95-91, adopted December 17, 2007 and released on December 18, 2007. The full text of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is available for public inspection and copying during regular business hours at the FCC Reference Information Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554. This document may also be purchased from the Commission's duplicating contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc., Portals II, 445 12th Street, SW., Room CY-B402, Washington, DC 20554, telephone

(202)488-5300, facsimile

(202)488-5563, or via *e-mail FCC@BCPIWEB.com* . The NPRM does not contain any proposed new or modified information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. In addition, the NPRM does not contain any proposed new or modified “information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees” subject to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4). Summary of Notice of Proposed Rulemaking SDARS licensees operate in the 2320-2345 MHz band. This band is divided evenly between the two SDARS licensees, Sirius (2320-2332.5 MHz) and XM (2332.5-2345 MHz). The WCS service occupies frequencies on either side of the SDARS allocation and consists of six blocks of five megahertz each in the 2305-2320 MHz and 2345-2360 MHz bands. The Commission has previously invited comment on service rules for SDARS terrestrial repeaters, used in conjunction with the SDARS operators' satellite systems in urban canyons and other areas where satellite signal reception is difficult. In this proceeding, the Commission seeks to update that record, and to invite comment on WCS service rules, that would allow both services to coexist in adjacent frequency bands. First, the Commission invites comment on power limits for SDARS terrestrial repeaters and WCS service transmitters, to limit the potential for harmful interference resulting from out-of-band emissions. One proposal is an average “ground-level emission limit” of -44 dBm, which would be applicable to both SDARS and WCS stations. Another proposal is an EIRP limit of 2 kW, based on peak rather than average power, and a 6 dB peak-to-average ratio. The Commission invites parties to suggest other proposals. Second, the Commission seeks comment on whether it is necessary to restrict the collocation of SDARS and WCS stations, either with stations within the same service or with stations of the other service. Third, the Commission invites commenters to recommend coordination and recordkeeping requirements. Fourth, the NPRM notes that the Commission has authorized several SDARS terrestrial repeaters granted pursuant to Special Temporary Authority (STA). The SDARS licensees support grandfathering those repeaters, so that those existing repeaters will not be required to comply with any rules adopted in this proceeding. The WCS licensees propose requiring existing SDARS terrestrial repeaters to come into compliance with any rules adopted in this proceeding within a year. The Commission asks commenters to discuss whether we should adopt the one-year transition advocated by the WCS Coalition, apply a different transition period, or permit SDARS repeaters to continue existing operations until a request is made by a WCS licensee for the SDARS licensee to come into compliance with final rules. Fifth, the NPRM seeks comment on several miscellaneous issues. For example, parties are invited to discuss whether SDARS operators should be required to comply with international agreements as a condition on any SDARS terrestrial repeater license. The NPRM also considers whether to adopt revision to the radiation hazard rules for SDARS terrestrial repeaters. The NPRM further considers allowing blanket licensing of SDARS terrestrial repeaters. Finally, the NPRM solicits comments on a number of possible restrictions on the operation of SDARS terrestrial repeaters. One such possible restriction could be to prohibit operation of SDARS terrestrial repeaters except in conjunction with SDARS satellites, both in the Continental United States, and in Alaska and Hawaii. The NPRM also seeks comment on requiring SDARS terrestrial repeaters to use the same spectrum as their associated satellites. Finally, the NPRM invites comment on prohibiting use of repeaters to retransmit the regional spot beams of SDARS satellites, and on prohibiting use of repeaters to transmit original programming. *Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis:* With respect to WCS licensees subject to part 27 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR part 27, as required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA), 1 the Commission has prepared this present Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

(IRFA)of the possible significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities by the policies and rules proposed in the NPRM. Written public comments are requested on this IRFA. Comments must be identified as responses to the IRFA and must be filed by the deadlines for comments on the NPRM provided above. The Commission will send a copy of the NPRM, including this IRFA, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA). 2 In addition, the NPRM and IRFA (or summaries thereof) will be published in the **Federal Register** . 3 1 *See* 5 U.S.C. 603. The RFA, *see* 5 U.S.C. 601-612, has been amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), Pub. L. No. 104-121, Title II, 110 Stat. 857 (1996). 2 *See* 5 U.S.C. 603(a). 3 *See* 5 U.S.C. 603(a). A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules The primary objective of this proceeding is to consider changes to the rules governing Wireless Communications Service

(WCS)which may be necessary to facilitate the coexistence of those licensees with licensees in the SDARS and satellite digital audio radio service (SDARS). Such rule changes are needed because SDARS terrestrial repeaters and WCS operate in adjacent frequency bands. SDARS licensees rely on terrestrial repeaters to provide a nationwide service. Thus, without appropriate service rules for WCS and SDARS operations, the out-of-band emissions caused by each service could cause harmful interference into the other, which in turn would limit the development of these services and thereby be detrimental to the public interest. The NPRM is intended to refresh the record on any necessary regulatory requirements that would allow SDARS terrestrial repeaters and WCS operation to coexist in adjacent bands. Specifically, the NPRM specifically invites comments on two options for power and emission limits for WCS operations and SDARS repeaters, including a peak ground-level emission limit of −44 dBm, or an average EIRP limit of two kilowatts

(kW)EIRP, with a 6 dB peak-to-average ratio. 4 4 These proposals are discussed in more detail in Section III.A. of the NPRM. In the NPRM, the Commission discusses recordkeeping and coordination proposals to ensure towers are deployed in a fashion to avoid interference. In particular, the Commission is considering whether to adopt a proposal to require licensees to provide notice to all licensed radio stations potentially affected by SDARS repeater and WCS station deployments. B. Legal Basis for Proposed Rules The proposed action is authorized under sections 4(i), 303(r), and 403 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), 303(r), and 403. C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities to Which the Proposed Rules Will Apply The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of and, where feasible, an estimate of the number of small entities that may be affected by the rules adopted. The RFA generally defines the term “small entity” as having the same meaning as the terms “small business,” “small organization,” and “small governmental jurisdiction.” 5 In addition, the term “small business” has the same meaning as the term “small business concern” under the Small Business Act. 6 A small business concern is one which:

(1)Is independently owned and operated;

(2)is not dominant in its field of operation; and

(3)satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business Administration (SBA). 7 A small organization is generally “any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.” 8 Below, we further describe and estimate the number of small entity licensees and regulatees that may be affected by the rules changes explored in the NPRM. 5 *See* 5 U.S.C. 601(6). 6 *See* 5 U.S.C. 601(3) (incorporating by reference the definition of “small business concern” in 15 U.S.C. 632). Pursuant to the RFA, the statutory definition of a small business applies unless an agency, after consultation with the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business Administration and after opportunity for public comment, establishes one or more definitions which are appropriate to the activities of the agency and publishes such definition(s) in the **Federal Register** . 7 *See* Small Business Act, 5 U.S.C. 632 (1996). 8 *See* 5 U.S.C. 601(4). *WCS Licensees.* Wireless Communication Services have flexible rules that allow licensees to either operate commercial fixed or mobile radio services or use the spectrum for private use. The SBA rules establish a size standard for “Wireless Telecommunications Carriers,” which encompasses business entities engaged in radiotelephone communications employing no more that 1,500 persons. 9 There are currently 158 active WCS licenses held by 13 licensees. Of these, 6 licensees qualify as small entities and hold a total of 32 licenses. 9 *See* 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 517110. *RF Equipment Manufacturers.* The Census Bureau defines this category as follows: “This industry comprises establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing radio and television broadcast and wireless communications equipment. Examples of products made by these establishments are: transmitting and receiving antennas, cable television equipment, GPS equipment, pagers, cellular phones, mobile communications equipment, and radio and television studio and broadcasting equipment.” 10 The SBA has developed a small business size standard for Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturing, which is: all such firms having 750 or fewer employees. 11 According to Census Bureau data for 2002, there were a total of 1,041 establishments in this category that operated for the entire year. 12 Of this total, 1,010 had employment of under 500, and an additional 13 had employment of 500 to 999. 13 Thus, under this size standard, the majority of firms can be considered small. 10 U.S. Census Bureau, 2002 NAICS Definitions, “334220 Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment Manufacturing”; *http://www.census.gov/epcd/naics02/def/NDEF334.HTM#N3342.* 11 *See* 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 334220. 12 U.S. Census Bureau, American FactFinder, 2002 Economic Census, Industry Series, Industry Statistics by Employment Size, NAICS code 334220 (released May 26, 2005) *; http://factfinder.census.gov.* The number of “establishments” is a less helpful indicator of small business prevalence in this context than would be the number of “firms” or “companies,” because the latter take into account the concept of common ownership or control. Any single physical location for an entity is an establishment, even though that location may be owned by a different establishment. Thus, the numbers given may reflect inflated numbers of businesses in this category, including the numbers of small businesses. In this category, the Census breaks out data for firms or companies only to give the total number of such entities for 2002, which was 929. 13 *Id.* An additional 18 establishments had employment of 1,000 or more. D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance Requirements for Small Entities There are no specific reporting or recordkeeping requirements proposed in the NPRM, other than the recordkeeping and coordination requirements discussed in Section A, supra. E. Steps Taken To Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities, and Significant Alternatives Considered The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant alternatives that it has considered in reaching its proposed approach, which may include the following four alternatives:

(1)The establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into account the resources available to small entities;

(2)the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance or reporting requirements under the rule for small entities;

(3)the use of performance, rather than design standards; and

(4)an exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for small entities. 14 14 *See* 5 U.S.C. 603(c). As stated in Section A, supra, the NPRM specifically invites comments on two options for power and emission limits for WCS operations and SDARS repeaters, including a peak ground-level emission limit of −44 dBm, or an average EIRP limit of two kilowatts

(kW)EIRP, with a 6 dB peak-to-average ratio. The NPRM also invites interested parties to suggest alternative proposals. At this time, the Commission has not excluded any alternative proposal concerning ground-level emission limits and average EIRP limits from its consideration, but it would do so in this proceeding if the record indicates that a particular proposal would have a significant and unjustifiable adverse economic impact on small entities. However, the Commission has also invited interested parties to propose any other alternative form of coordination if it would be more efficient or effective. However, the Commission will not consider any alternative proposal that would have a significant and unjustifiable adverse economic impact on small entities. In the NPRM, the Commission discusses recordkeeping and coordination proposals to ensure towers are deployed in a fashion to avoid interference. In particular, the Commission is considering a proposal to require licensees to provide notice to all licensed radio stations potentially affected by SDARS repeater and WCS station deployments. However, as noted *supra* in Section A, the Commission has also invited interested parties to propose any other alternative form of coordination if it would be more efficient or effective. However, the Commission will not consider any alternative that would have a significant and unjustifiable adverse economic impact on small entities. In the NPRM, the Commission seeks comment on grandfathering and transition proposals for existing SDARS repeaters. One proposal is to grandfather all existing SDARS terrestrial repeaters, thereby exempting those repeaters from any out-of-band power limits adopted in this rulemaking proceeding. Another is to require the operators of those repeaters to come into compliance with any such limits within a year from the adoption of such rules. The Commission invites comments on both of these grandfathering-related and transition-related proposals, and invites commenters to recommend other transition periods. The Commission solicits any alternative proposals that would not incur significant and unjustifiable adverse impact on small entities. F. Federal Rules That May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed Rules None. *Initial Regulatory Flexibility Certification:* With respect to SDARS licensees subject to part 25 of the Commission's rules, 47 CFR part 25, the Regulatory Flexibility Act

(RFA)15 requires that an agency prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis for notice-and-comment rulemaking proceedings, unless the agency certifies that “the rule will not, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.” 16 The RFA generally defines “small entity” as having the same meaning as the terms “small business,” “small organization,” and “small governmental jurisdiction.” 17 In addition, the term “small business” has the same meaning as the term “small business concern” under the Small Business Act. 18 A “small business concern” is one which:

(1)Is independently owned and operated;

(2)is not dominant in its field of operation; and

(3)satisfies any additional criteria established by the Small Business Administration (SBA). 19 15 *See* 5 U.S.C. 603. The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. 601-612, has been amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), Pub. L. No. 104-121, 110 Stat. 857 (1996). 16 *See* 5 U.S.C. 605(b). 17 5 U.S.C. 601(6). 18 5 U.S.C. 601(3) (incorporating by reference the definition of “ small business concern” in Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 632). Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 601(3), the statutory definition of a small business applies “unless an agency, after consultation with the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business Administration and after opportunity for public comment, establishes one or more definitions of such term which are appropriate to the activities of the agency and publishes such definition(s) in the **Federal Register** .” 19 15 U.S.C. 632. With respect to the DARS licensees, only two operators hold licenses to provide SDARS service, XM and Sirius. Both of these licensees are dominant in their field and neither qualify as small entities. SDARS provides nationally distributed subscription radio service, which requires a great investment of capital for operation. Because SDARS service requires significant capital, we believe it is unlikely that a small entity as defined by the Small Business Administration would have the financial wherewithal to become an SDARS licensee. 20 20 The small business size standard for the census category, “ Radio Networks,” which includes radio satellite broadcasting is $6.5 million or less in receipts, per year. See 13 CFR 121.201, NAICS code 515111. The Commission therefore certifies, pursuant to the RFA, that the proposals in the *Second Further Notice* in IB Docket No. 95-91, if adopted, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. If commenters believe that the proposals discussed in the NPRM require additional RFA analysis, they should include a discussion of these issues in their comments and additionally label them as RFA comments. The Commission will send a copy of the NPRM, including a copy of this initial certification, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA. In addition, a copy of the NPRM and this initial certification will be published in the **Federal Register** . 21 21 *See* 5 U.S.C. 605(b). Ordering Clauses Accordingly, *it is ordered* that, pursuant to the authority contained in sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 7(a), 301, 303(c), 303(f), 303(g), 303(r), 303(y), and 308 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 151, 154(i), 154(j), 157(a), 301, 303(c), 303(f), 303(g), 303(r), 303(y), 308, the Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in IB Docket No. 95-91 and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in WT Docket No. 07-293 *is adopted.* *It is further ordered* that the Commission's Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center *shall send* a copy of the Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in IB Docket No. 95-91 and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in WT Docket No. 07-293, including the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Certification and Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration, in accordance with section 603(a) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, *et seq.* (1981). Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-598 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P 73 10 Tuesday, January 15, 2008 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Food Safety and Inspection Service [Docket No. FSIS-2007-0050] Codex Alimentarius Commission: Meeting on the Ad Hoc Codex Intergovernmental Task Force on the Processing and Handling of Quick Frozen Foods AGENCY: Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety, USDA. ACTION: Notice of public meeting and request for comments. SUMMARY: The Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety, U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), are sponsoring a public meeting on February 5, 2008. The objective of the public meeting is to provide information and receive public comments on agenda items and draft United States positions that will be discussed at the First Session of Ad Hoc Codex Intergovernmental Task Force on the Processing and Handling of Quick Frozen Foods (TFQFF) of the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), which will be held in Bangkok, Thailand on February 25-29, 2008. The Under Secretary for Food Safety and FDA recognize the importance of providing interested parties the opportunity to obtain background information on the First Session of TFQFF and to address items that will be on the agenda. DATES: The public meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, February 5, 2008 from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be held in Room 1B-042, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, Harvey Wiley Federal Building, 5100 Paint Branch Parkway, College Park, MD 20740. The following call-in number will be provided for the meeting: 1-866-859-5767, passcode 3258684. Codex documents related to the First Session of the TFQFF will be accessible via the World Wide Web at the following address: *http://www.codexalimentarius.net/current.asp* . The U.S. Delegate to the First Session of TFQFF, Dr. Donald Zink, FDA, invites interested U.S. parties to submit their comments electronically to the following e-mail address: *donald.zink@fda.hhs.gov* . *Registration:* You may register electronically to the same e-mail address above. Early registration is encouraged because it will expedite entry into the building and its parking area. If you require parking, please include the vehicle make and tag number, if known, when you register. Because the meeting will be held in a Federal building, you should also bring photo identification

(ID)and plan for adequate time to pass through security screening systems. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION ABOUT THE FIRST SESSION OF THE TFQFF CONTACT: Donald Zink, U.S. Delegate to the TFQFF, Office of Food Safety, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, FDA, 5100 Paint Branch Parkway (HFS-317), College Park, MD 20740, *Phone:* (301)436-1692, *Fax:*

(301)436-1692, *E-mail: donald.zink@fda.hhs.gov* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION ABOUT THE PUBLIC MEETING CONTACT: Syed Ali, Staff Officer, U.S. Codex Office, Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS), Room 4861, South Building, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250, *Phone:*

(202)720-0574, *Fax:*

(202)720-3157, *E-mail: syed.ali@fsis.usda.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The Codex Alimentarius (Codex) was established in 1963 by two United Nations organizations, the Food and Agriculture Organization and the World Health Organization. Through adoption of food standards, codes of practice, and other guidelines developed by its committees, and by promoting their adoption and implementation by governments, Codex seeks to protect the health of consumers and ensure that fair practices are used in trade. Issues To Be Discussed at the Public Meeting The items to be discussed during the public meeting will include the Proposed Draft Recommended for the International Code of Practice for the Processing and Handling of Quick Frozen Foods, with attention to outstanding quality and safety provisions, such as the Defect Action Point Analysis concept and the retention of an annex with specific information on temperature monitoring and control in the food chain. These issues will be fully described in documents distributed, or to be distributed, by the Thai Secretariat prior to the meeting. Members of the public may access copies of these documents at *http://www.codexalimentarius.net/current.asp* . Public Meeting At the February 5, 2008, public meeting, draft U.S. positions on the agenda items will be described and discussed, and attendees will have the opportunity to pose questions and offer comments. Written comments may be offered at the meeting or sent to the U.S. Delegate for the First Session of TFQFF, Dr. Donald Zink, at *Donald.Zink@fda.hhs.gov* . Written comments should state that they relate to activities of the First Session of the TFQFF. Additional Public Notification Public awareness of all segments of rulemaking and policy development is important. Consequently, in an effort to ensure that minorities, women, and persons with disabilities are aware of this notice, FSIS will announce it online through the FSIS Web page located at *http://www.fsis.usda.gov/regulations/2008_Notices_Index/* . FSIS will also make copies of this **Federal Register** publication available through the FSIS Constituent Update, which is used to provide information regarding FSIS policies, procedures, regulations, **Federal Register** notices, FSIS public meetings, and other types of information that could affect or would be of interest to constituents and stakeholders. The Update is communicated via Listserv, a free electronic mail subscription service for industry, trade groups, consumer interest groups, health professionals, and other individuals who have asked to be included. The Update is also available on the FSIS Web page. Through the Listserv and Web page, FSIS is able to provide information to a much broader and more diverse audience. In addition, FSIS offers an electronic mail subscription service which provides automatic and customized access to selected food safety news and information. This service is available at *http://www.fsis.usda.gov/news_and_events/email_subscription/* . Options range from recalls to export information to regulations, directives and notices. Customers can add or delete subscriptions themselves, and have the option to password protect their accounts. Done at Washington, DC, on January 9, 2008. Paulo Almeida, Acting U.S. Manager for Codex Alimentarius. [FR Doc. E8-533 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-DM-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request The Department of Commerce will submit to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the emergency provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). *Agency:* National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). *Title:* Converter Box Coupon Program-Consumer and Retailer Pilot Test Surveys. *OMB Control Number:* None. *Agency Form Number:* None. *Type of Request:* Emergency. *Burden Hours:* 150. *Average Time per Response:* 15 minutes. *Number of Respondents:* 1,100. *Needs and Uses:* Congress directed the National Telecommunications and Information Administration

(NTIA)to create and implement a program to provide coupons for consumers to purchase digital-to-analog converter boxes (See Title III of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, Pub. L. No. 109-171, 120 Stat. 4, 21, February 8, 2006). The converter boxes are necessary for consumers who wish to continue receiving broadcast programming over the air using analog-only television sets after February 18, 2009—the date that television stations are required by law to cease analog broadcasting. On March 15, 2007, NTIA published a Final Rule establishing the parameters of the Coupon Program and describing the rights and responsibilities of interested parties (See Rules to Implement and Administer a Coupon Program for Digital-to-Analog Converter Boxes, 72 FR 12097 (codified at 47 CFR 301)). Among other things, the regulations permit consumers to submit applications to NTIA for coupons beginning January 1, 2008. *See* 47 CFR 301.3(b). One critical aspect of testing the coupon program, prior to full launch in all markets in early February 2008, is a “live pilot” test in which a limited number of volunteers will apply for the coupon, receive the coupon through the U.S. mail, and attempt to redeem the coupon at a local retailer for an “eligible” converter box. A material part of the pilot test is that the volunteers (consumers) will be asked to complete a survey regarding their experience in applying for and receiving the coupon and purchasing the converter box at a participating retail outlet. The retailers will be asked to complete a survey to provide feedback on such matters as their experience in redeeming the coupons, inventory issues, and employee training support. The information gathered from the surveys is intended to resolve potential problems in the system at the earliest stage possible. Only the data supplied by actual consumers and retailers through the surveys can accurately identify flaws in the process. *Affected Public:* Individuals or households; business or other for-profit organizations. *Frequency:* One-time only. *Respondent's Obligation:* Voluntary. *OMB Desk Officer:* Jasmeet K. Seehra,

(202)395-5167. Copies of the above information collection proposal can be obtained by calling or writing Diana Hynek, Departmental Paperwork Clearance Officer,

(202)482-0266, Department of Commerce, Room 6625, 14th and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC, 20230, or via the Internet at *dHynek@doc.gov.* Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent by January 25, 2008 to Jasmeet Seehra, OMB Desk Officer, FAX number

(202)395-5167 or via the Internet at *Jasmeet_K._Seehra@omb.eop.gov* . Dated: January 9, 2008. Gwellnar Banks, Management Analyst, Office of the Chief Information Officer. [FR Doc. E8-488 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-60-P U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board Order No. 1538 Expansion of Foreign-Trade Zone 221, Mesa, Arizona Pursuant to its authority under the Foreign-Trade Zones Act of June 18, 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the Board) adopts the following Order: *Whereas* , the City of Mesa, Arizona, grantee of Foreign-Trade Zone 221, submitted an application to the Board for authority to reorganize and expand its existing site at the Williams Gateway Airport in Mesa, Arizona, within and adjacent to the Williams Gateway Airport Customs and Border Protection user-fee airport (FTZ Docket 34-2007, filed 8/8/07); *Whereas* , notice inviting public comment was given in the **Federal Register** (72 FR 46602, 8/21/07) and the application has been processed pursuant to the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations; and, *Whereas* , the Board adopts the findings and recommendations of the examiner's report, and finds that the requirements of the FTZ Act and Board's regulations are satisfied, and that the proposal is in the public interest; Now, therefore, the Board hereby orders: The application to reorganize and expand FTZ 221 is approved, subject to the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations, including Section 400.28. Signed at Washington, DC, this 7th day of January 2008. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Import Administration, Alternate Chairman, Foreign-Trade Zones Board Attest: Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-555 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Foreign-Trade Zones Board [Docket 1-2008] Foreign-Trade Zone 22—Chicago, Illinois, Application for Subzone Euromarket Designs, Inc. d/b/a/ Crate & Barrel (Home Furnishings) An application has been submitted to the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the Board) by the Illinois International Port District, grantee of FTZ 22, requesting special-purpose subzone status for the home furnishings distribution and processing facilities of Euromarket Designs, Inc. d/b/a Crate and Barrel (Crate & Barrel), located in Naperville, Illinois. The application was submitted pursuant to the provisions of the Foreign-Trade Zones Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), and the regulations of the Board (15 CFR part 400). It was formally filed on January 1, 2008. The proposed subzone would include Crate & Barrel's facilities at two adjacent sites in Naperville, Illinois: *Site 1* (one building/827,268 sq.ft./36 acres)—1860 West Jefferson Avenue; and *Site 2* (one building/365,000 sq.ft./16 acres)—443 Fort Hill Drive. The facilities are used for warehousing, distribution and processing of both foreign-origin and domestic home furnishing goods for both the U.S. market and export. FTZ procedures would be used to support Crate & Barrel's Illinois-based distribution activity that competes with facilities abroad. FTZ procedures would exempt Crate & Barrel from customs duty payments on foreign products that are re-exported. On domestic sales, duty payments would be deferred until the foreign merchandise is shipped from the facilities and entered for U.S. consumption. The company would also realize significant logistical benefits related to the use of direct delivery and weekly customs entry procedures. The application indicates that the savings from FTZ procedures would help improve the company's international competitiveness and help facilitate the company's plans to grow their export market. In accordance with the Board's regulations, a member of the FTZ staff has been designated examiner to investigate the application and report to the Board. Public comment is invited from interested parties. Submissions (original and 3 copies) shall be addressed to the Board's Executive Secretary at the address below. The closing period for their receipt is March 17, 2008. Rebuttal comments in response to material submitted during the foregoing period may be submitted during the subsequent 15-day period March 31, 2008. A copy of the application and accompanying exhibits will be available at each of the following addresses: U.S. Department of Commerce Export Assistance Center, 200 West Adams Street, Suite 2450, Chicago, IL 60606; and, Office of the Executive Secretary, Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Room 2111, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1401 Constitution Ave, NW, Washington, D.C. 20230. For further information contact Christopher Kemp at christopher—kemp@ita.doc.gov or

(202)482-0862. Dated: January 8, 2008. Andrew McGilvray, Executive Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-552 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of Industry and Security Sensors and Instrumentation Technical Advisory Committee; Notice of Open Meeting The Sensors and Instrumentation Technical Advisory Committee will meet on January 29, 2008, 9:30 a.m., in the Herbert C. Hoover Building, Room 3884, 14th Street between Pennsylvania and Constitution Avenues, NW., Washington, DC. The Committee advises the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Export Administration with respect to technical questions that affect the level of export controls applicable to sensors and instrumentation equipment and technology. Agenda 1. Welcome and Introductions. 2. Remarks from Bureau of Industry and Security Management. 3. Industry Presentations. 4. New Business. The open session will be accessible via teleconference to 20 participants on a first come, first serve basis. To join the conference, submit inquiries to Ms. Yvette Springer at *Yspringer@bis.doc.gov* no later than January 22, 2008. The meeting will be open to the public and a limited number of seats will be available. Reservations are not accepted. To the extent that time permits, members of the public may present oral statements to the Committee. Written statements may be submitted at any time before or after the meeting. However, to facilitate distribution of public presentation materials to the Committee members, the Committee suggests that presenters forward the public presentation materials two weeks prior to the meeting date to Yvette Springer at *Yspringer@bis.doc.gov* . FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT: Yvette Springer on

(202)482-2813. Dated: January 10, 2008. Yvette Springer, Committee Liaison Officer. [FR Doc. E8-549 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-JT-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-583-833] Certain Polyester Staple Fiber From Taiwan; Notice of Extension of Time Limits for Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. DATES: *Effective Date:* January 15, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Schauer, AD/CVD Operations, Office 5, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:

(202)482-0410. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On June 29, 2007, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published a notice of initiation of administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain polyester stable fiber from Taiwan. See *Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews* , 72 FR 35690 (June 29, 2007). The period of review is May 1, 2006, through April 30, 2007, and the preliminary results are currently due no later than January 31, 2008. The review covers one producer/exporter of the subject merchandise to the United States. Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results Pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), the Department shall make a preliminary determination in an administrative review of an antidumping order within 245 days after the last day of the anniversary month of the date of publication of the order. Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act provides further that the Department may extend the 245-day period to 365 days if it determines that it is not practicable to complete the review within the foregoing time period. For this administrative review of the antidumping duty order on polyester staple fiber from Taiwan, the Department requires additional time to analyze a number of complex cost-accounting issues such as determining how to value affiliated-party inputs. Therefore, we are extending the deadline for completing the preliminary results until April 15, 2008, which is 320 days from the last day of the anniversary month of the date of publication of the order. The deadline for the final results of the review continues to be 120 days after the publication of the preliminary results. This extension notice is published in accordance with sections 751(a)(3)(A) and 777(i)(I) of the Act. Dated: January 9, 2008. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E8-550 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C-580-818] Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from the Republic of Korea: Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On September 10, 2007, the U.S. Department of Commerce (“the Department”) published in the **Federal Register** its preliminary results of the administrative review of the countervailing duty (“CVD”) order on corrosion-resistant carbon steel flat products (“corrosion-resistant carbon steel plate”) from the Republic of Korea (“Korea”) for the period of review (“POR”) January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2005. *See Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from the Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review:* 72 FR 51602 (September 10, 2007) (“ *Preliminary Results* ”). We preliminarily found that Pohang Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. (“POSCO”) and Dongbu Steel Co., Ltd. (“Dongbu”) received *de minimis* countervailable subsidies during the POR. We received comments on our preliminary results from POSCO, a respondent company. The final results are listed in the section “Final Results of Review” below. EFFECTIVE DATE: January 15, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Copyak or Gayle Longest, AD/CVD Operations, Office 3, Import Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 4014, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone:

(202)482-2209 or

(202)482-3338, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On August 17, 1993, the Department published in the **Federal Register** the CVD order on corrosion-resistant carbon steel flat products from Korea. *See Countervailing Duty Orders and Amendments to Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determinations: Certain Steel Products from Korea* , 58 FR 43752 (August 17, 1993). On September 10, 2007, the Department published in the **Federal Register** its preliminary results of the administrative review of this order for the period January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2005. *See Preliminary Results* , 72 FR 51602. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b), this administrative review covers POSCO and Dongbu, producers and exporters of subject merchandise. In the *Preliminary Results* , we invited interested parties to submit briefs or request a hearing. We received comments from POSCO, a respondent. We received no comments from United States Steel Corporation and Nucor Corporation, the petitioners, or Dongbu. The Department did not conduct a hearing in this review because none was requested. Scope of Order Products covered by this order are certain corrosion-resistant carbon steel flat products from Korea. These products include flat-rolled carbon steel products, of rectangular shape, either clad, plated, or coated with corrosion-resistant metals such as zinc, aluminum, or zinc-, aluminum-, nickel- or iron-based alloys, whether or not corrugated or painted, varnished or coated with plastics or other nonmetallic substances in addition to the metallic coating, in coils (whether or not in successively superimposed layers) and of a width of 0.5 inch or greater, or in straight lengths which, if of a thickness less than 4.75 millimeters, are of a width of 0.5 inch or greater and which measures at least 10 times the thickness or if of a thickness of 4.75 millimeters or more are of a width which exceeds 150 millimeters and measures at least twice the thickness. The merchandise subject to this order is currently classifiable in the *Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States* (“HTSUS”) at subheadings: 7210.30.0000, 7210.31.0000, 7210.39.0000, 7210.41.0000, 7210.49.0030, 7210.49.0090, 7210.60.0000, 7210.61.0000, 7210.69.0000, 7210.70.6030, 7210.70.6060, 7210.70.6090, 7210.90.1000, 7210.90.6000, 7210.90.9000, 7212.20.0000, 7212.21.0000, 7212.29.0000, 7212.30.1030, 7212.30.1090, 7212.30.3000, 7212.30.5000, 7212.40.1000, 7212.40.5000, 7212.50.0000, 7212.60.0000, 7215.90.1000, 7215.9030, 7215.90.5000, 7217.12.1000, 7217.13.1000, 7217.19.1000, 7217.19.5000, 7217.20.1500, 7217.22.5000, 7217.23.5000, 7217.29.1000, 7217.29.5000, 7217.30.15.0000, 7217.32.5000, 7217.33.5000, 7217.39.1000, 7217.39.5000, 7217.90.1000 and 7217.90.5000. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the Department's written description of the merchandise is dispositive. Period of Review The POR for which we are measuring subsidies is from January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2005. Analysis of Comments On October 10, 2007, POSCO filed comments. Neither Dongbu nor petitioners filed a case brief or a rebuttal brief. All issues in POSCO's case brief by are addressed in the accompanying *Issues and Decision Memorandum for the Countervailing Duty Administrative Review on Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from Korea* (“Decision Memorandum”), which is hereby adopted by this notice. A listing of the issues that parties raised and to which we have responded is attached to this notice as Appendix I. Parties can find a complete discussion of the issues raised in this review and the corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum, which is on file in the Central Records Unit (“CRU”), room B-099 of the main Commerce building. In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum, can be accessed directly on the World Wide Web at *http://ia.ita.doc.gov.frn* . The paper copy and the electronic version of the Decision Memorandum are identical in content. Final Results of Review After reviewing POSCO's comments, we have made adjustments to our calculations as explained in our Decision Memorandum. Consistent with the *Preliminary Results* , we find that POSCO and Dongbu received *de minimis* countervailable subsidies during the POR. Company Net subsidy rate Pohang Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. (POSCO) 0.09 percent *ad valorem* ( *de minimis* ) Dongbu Steel Co. Ltd. (Dongbu) 0.27 percent *ad valorem* ( *de minimis* ) Assessment Rates/Cash Deposits The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) 15 days after the date of publication of these final results of review to liquidate shipments of subject merchandise by POSCO and Dongbu entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2005, without regard to countervailing duties. We will also instruct CBP not to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing duties on shipments of the subject merchandise by POSCO and Dongbu entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of these final results of review. For all non-reviewed companies, the Department has instructed CBP to assess countervailing duties at the cash deposit rates in effect at the time of entry, for entries between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2005. The cash deposit rates for all companies not covered by this review are not changed by the results of this review. Return of Destruction of Proprietary Information This notice serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (“APO”) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of return or destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation. We are issuing and publishing these results in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: January 8, 2008. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. Appendix I - Issues in Decision Memorandum Company-Specific Issues 1. Whether Certain Research and Development (“R&D”) Grants Under the Industrial Development Act (“IDA”) Provide Countervailable Benefits 2. Calculation of R&D Benefits to POSCO [FR Doc. E8-564 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-602-806, A-570-919] Postponement of Preliminary Determinations of Antidumping Duty Investigations:Electrolytic Manganese Dioxide from Australia and the People's Republic of China AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: January 15, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Hermes Pinilla (Australia) or Eugene Degnan (the People's Republic of China), AD/CVD Operations, Office 5 or Office 8, respectively, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone:

(202)482-3477 or

(202)482-0414, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Postponement of Preliminary Determinations On September 17, 2007, the Department of Commerce (the Department) initiated the antidumping duty investigations of electrolytic manganese dioxide from Australia and the People's Republic of China. *See Notice of Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigations: Electrolytic Manganese Dioxide from Australia and the People's Republic of China* , 72 FR 52850 (September 17, 2007). The notice of initiation stated that the Department would issue its preliminary determinations for these investigations no later than 140 days after the date of issuance of the initiation, in accordance with section 733(b)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act). On December 31, 2007, the petitioner, Tronox, LLC, made a timely request pursuant to 19 CFR 351.205(b)(2) and

(e)for a 50-day postponement of the preliminary determinations. The petitioner requested postponement of the preliminary determinations in order to allow the Department additional time to do a thorough investigation of the respondents in these investigations. For the reason identified by the petitioner and because there are no compelling reasons to deny the request, the Department is postponing the deadline for the preliminary determinations under section 733(c)(1)(A) of the Act by 50 days to March 19, 2008. The deadline for the final determinations will continue to be 75 days after the date of the preliminary determinations, unless extended. This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 733(c)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(f)(1). Dated: January 8, 2008. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E8-544 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A-570-910] Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe from the People's Republic of China: Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: January 15, 2008. SUMMARY: We preliminarily determine that circular welded carbon quality steel pipe (“CWP”) from the People's Republic of China (“PRC”) is being, or is likely to be, sold in the United States at less than fair value (“LTFV”), as provided in section 733 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the “Act”). The estimated margins of sales at less than fair value (“LTFV”) are shown in the “Preliminary Determination” section of this notice. Pursuant to requests from interested parties, we are postponing for 60 days the final determination and extending provisional measures from a four-month period to not more than six months. Accordingly, we will make our final determination not later than 135 days after publication of the preliminary determination. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas Martin or Maisha Cryor, AD/ CVD Operations, Office 4, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC, 20230; telephone:

(202)482-3936 and

(202)482-5831, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On June 7, 2007, the Department of Commerce (the “Department”) received a petition on imports of CWP from the PRC filed in proper form by Allied Tube & Conduit, Sharon Tube Company, IPSCO Tubulars, Inc., Western Tube & Conduit Corporation, Northwest Pipe Company, Wheatland Tube Co., *i.e.* , the Ad Hoc Coalition For Fair Pipe Imports From China, and the United Steelworkers (collectively, the “petitioners”) on behalf of the domestic industry producing CWP. The Department initiated this investigation on June 27, 2007. *See Initiation of Antidumping Duty Investigation: Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe from the People's Republic of China* , 72 FR 36663 (July 5, 2007) (“ *Initiation Notice* ”). Additionally, in the Initiation Notice, the Department notified parties of the application process by which exporters and producers may obtain separate-rate status in non-market economy (“NME”) investigations. *See Initiation Notice* 72 FR at 36666. The process requires exporters and producers to submit a separate-rate status application. *See Policy Bulletin 05.1: Separate-Rates Practice and Application of Combination Rates in Antidumping Investigations involving Non-Market Economy Countries* , (April 5, 2005), (“ *Policy Bulletin 05.1* ”) available at *http://ia.ita.doc.gov.* However, the standard for eligibility for a separate rate (which is whether a firm can demonstrate an absence of both *de jure* and *de facto* governmental control over its export activities) has not changed. On July 31, 2007, the International Trade Commission (“ITC”) issued its affirmative preliminary determination that there is a reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is materially injured or threatened with material injury by reason of imports of CWP from the PRC. *See Circular Welded Carbon-Quality Steel Pipe from the PRC* , Investigation Nos. 701-TA-447 and 731-TA-1116, 72 FR 43295 (Preliminary) (August 3, 2007). On October 2, 2007, the petitioners filed a timely request that the Department postpone the preliminary determination pursuant to section 733(c)(1)(B)(i) of the Act. We did so on October 31, 2007. *See Postponement of Preliminary Determination of Antidumping Duty Investigation: Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe from the People's Republic of China* , 72 FR 62626 (November 6, 2007). Postponement of Final Determination and Extension of Provisional Measures Pursuant to section 735(a)(2) of the Act, on December 18, 2007, respondent Jiangsu Yulong Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. (“Yulong”) requested that in the event of an affirmative preliminary determination in this investigation, the Department postpone its final determination by 60 days. In addition, Yulong requested that the Department extend the application of the provisional measures prescribed under 19 CFR 351.210(e)(2) from a four-month period to not more than six-months. In accordance with section 733(d) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.210(b), because

(1)our preliminary determination is affirmative,

(2)the requesting exporter accounts for a significant proportion of exports of the subject merchandise, and

(3)no compelling reasons for denial exist, we are granting this request and are postponing the final determination until no later than 135 days after the publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** . Suspension of liquidation will be extended accordingly. Scope Comments In accordance with the preamble to the Department's regulations, we set aside a period of time in our *Initiation Notice* for parties to raise issues regarding product coverage, and encouraged all parties to submit comments within 20 calendar days of publication of that notice. *See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties* , 62 FR 27296, 27323, (May 19, 1997) and *Initiation Notice* , 72 FR at 36669.On July 19, 2007, the petitioners submitted timely comments concerning the scope of the CWP antidumping and countervailing duty investigations. Man Ferrostaal Inc., Macsteel Service Centers USA, and Sunbelt Group L.P. (collectively, “Ferrostaal”), U.S. interested parties, also submitted timely comments concerning the scope of these investigations on July 19, 2007. The petitioners and Ferrostaal both submitted rebuttal comments on July 26, 2007. We analyzed the comments of the interested parties regarding the scope of this investigation and, based upon those comments, revised the scope language. See Memorandum to Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, Re: Scope of the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations of Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe from the People's Republic of China, “Analysis of Comments and Recommendation for Scope of Investigations” (November 5, 2007) (“Scope Memorandum”). In addition, on December 18, 2007, the petitioners submitted additional comments concerning the scope of the CWP antidumping and countervailing duty investigations. In their comments, the petitioners requested that the Department revise the scope of the investigations to define product coverage by end-use application. The petitioners also requested that the Department explicitly state that single-stenciled line pipe meeting certain product characteristics is covered by the scope of this investigation, to eliminate reference to the grade “X-42” when referring to API stenciled pipe, and to define the length criterion for “single random length” CWP. Regarding end-use application, the petitioners provided an affidavit which states that substitutions of API 5L stenciled products for subject ASTM pipe have occurred. See the petitioners' December 18, 2007, comments at Exhibit 2. The petitioners argue that the inclusion of end-use application to determine product coverage is necessary to distinguish between single-stenciled API 5L imports that are not intended to be covered by this investigation and pipe products that are intended to be covered. Next, the petitioners argue that the Department should revise the scope language to eliminate the reference to grade “X-42” when referring to API stenciled pipe because they view this reference as unnecessary given that the grade is subsumed within the API 5L specification. In addition, to prevent evasion of any antidumping order issued in this proceeding, the petitioners urge the Department to define the length criterion for inclusion of imported API specification CWP to include any such pipe of 32 feet or less. Lastly, the petitioners urge the Department to state in the scope that imports of single-stenciled API 5L line pipe are covered by the scope if such imports have one or more of the following physical characteristics:

(1)a length of 32 feet or less;

(2)an outer diameter less than 2 inches;

(3)a galvanized and/or painted surface; or

(4)a threaded and/or coupled end finish. Upon review of the petitioner's December 18, 2007, submission, we have preliminarily adopted two of the petitioners' proposed changes. Specifically, we have preliminarily accepted the petitioners' request that single random length be defined as 32 feet in length or less. In addition, we preliminarily accepted the petitioners' request to eliminate the reference to grade “X-42” when referring to API 5L stenciled pipe. These two changes are reflected in the “Scope of Investigation” section below. Period of Investigation The period of investigation (“POI”) is October 1, 2006, through March 31, 2007. This period corresponds to the two most recent fiscal quarters prior to the month of the filing of the petition, *i.e.* , June 2007. *See* 19 CFR 351.204(b)(1). Scope of Investigation The scope of this investigation covers certain welded carbon quality steel pipes and tubes, of circular cross-section, and with an outside diameter of 0.372 inches (9.45 mm) or more, but not more than 16 inches (406.4 mm), whether or not stenciled, regardless of wall thickness, surface finish ( *e.g.* , black, galvanized, or painted), end finish ( *e.g.* , plain end, beveled end, grooved, threaded, or threaded and coupled), or industry specification ( *e.g.* , ASTM, proprietary, or other), generally known as standard pipe and structural pipe (they may also be referred to as circular, structural, or mechanical tubing). Specifically, the term “carbon quality” includes products in which

(a)iron predominates, by weight, over each of the other contained elements;

(b)the carbon content is 2 percent or less, by weight; and

(c)none of the elements listed below exceeds the quantity, by weight, as indicated:

(i)1.80 percent of manganese;

(ii)2.25 percent of silicon;

(iii)1.00 percent of copper;

(iv)0.50 percent of aluminum;

(v)1.25 percent of chromium;

(vi)0.30 percent of cobalt;

(vii)0.40 percent of lead;

(viii)1.25 percent of nickel;

(ix)0.30 percent of tungsten;

(x)0.15 percent of molybdenum;

(xi)0.10 percent of niobium;

(xii)0.41 percent of titanium;

(xiii)0.15 percent of vanadium; or

(xiv)0.15 percent of zirconium. Standard pipe is made primarily to American Society for Testing and Materials (“ASTM”) specifications, but can be made to other specifications. Standard pipe is made primarily to ASTM specifications A-53, A-135, and A-795. Structural pipe is made primarily to ASTM specifications A-252 and A-500. Standard and structural pipe may also be produced to proprietary specifications rather than to industry specifications. This is often the case, for example, with fence tubing. Pipe multiple-stenciled to a standard and/or structural specification and to any other specification, such as the American Petroleum Institute (“API”) API-5L specification, is also covered by the scope of this investigation when it meets the physical description set forth above and also has one or more of the following characteristics: is 32 feet in length or less; is less than 2.0 inches (50 mm) in outside diameter; has a galvanized and/or painted surface finish; or has a threaded and/or coupled end finish. The scope of this investigation does not include:

(a)pipe suitable for use in boilers, superheaters, heat exchangers, condensers, refining furnaces and feedwater heaters, whether or not cold drawn;

(b)mechanical tubing, whether or not cold-drawn;

(c)finished electrical conduit;

(d)finished scaffolding;

(e)tube and pipe hollows for redrawing;

(f)oil country tubular goods produced to API specifications; and

(g)line pipe produced to only API specifications. The pipe products that are the subject of this investigation are currently classifiable in HTSUS statistical reporting numbers 7306.30.10.00, 7306.30.50.25, 7306.30.50.32, 7306.30.50.40, 7306.30.50.55, 7306.30.50.85, 7306.30.50.90, 7306.50.10.00, 7306.50.50.50, 7306.50.50.70, 7306.19.10.10, 7306.19.10.50, 7306.19.51.10, and 7306.19.51.50. However, the product description, and not the harmonized tariff schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”) classification, is dispositive of whether merchandise imported into the United States falls within the scope of the investigation. Respondent Selection On June 28 and 29, 2007, and July 2, 2007, the Department requested quantity and value (“Q&V”) information from a total of 53 companies identified by the petitioners as potential producers or exporters of CWP from the PRC. *See* Memorandum to The File, from Maisha Cryor, Analyst, Office 4, Regarding “Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe from the People's Republic of China: Summary of Issuance of Quantity and Value Questionnaires,” dated July 2, 2007 (“Q&V Memorandum”). Also, on June 29, 2007, the Department sent a letter requesting Q&V information to the Ministry of Commerce (“MOFCOM”) and requested that MOFCOM transmit the letter to all companies who export subject merchandise to the United States, or produce the subject merchandise for the companies who were engaged in exporting the subject merchandise to the United States during the POI. *Id* . For a complete list of all parties from which the Department requested Q&V information, *see* Q&V Memorandum. The Department received timely Q&V responses from 32 interested parties. *See* Memorandum from Abdelali Elouaradia, Director, Office 4, to Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, “Selection of Respondents for the Antidumping Duty Investigation of Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe from the People's Republic of China,” dated August 2, 2007 (“Respondent Selection Memorandum”). The Department did not receive any communication from MOFCOM regarding its request for Q&V information. In August and September 2007, the Department returned untimely Q&V responses submitted by Bazhou Dongsheng Hot Dip Galvanizing Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. (“Bazhou”); Shanxi Tianli Industries Co., Ltd. (“Shanxi”); and Zhejiang Kingland Pipeline and Technologies Co., Ltd. (“Kingland”). On August 2, 2007, the Department selected Tianjin Shuangjie Group (“Shuangjie”) and Yulong as mandatory respondents in this investigation. *See* Respondent Selection Memorandum at 4. On August 8 and 15, 2007, Weifang East Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. (“Weifang”), submitted letters requesting that the Department select it as a mandatory respondent. In addition, in its August 15, 2007, letter, Weifang requested that, in the event it was not selected as a mandatory respondent, it be permitted to participate in the investigation as a voluntary respondent. On August 24, 2007, the Department informed Weifang that it would not be selected as a mandatory respondent. *See* Letter from Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary, to Weifang, Regarding “Antidumping Duty Investigation of Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe from the People's Republic of China; Respondent Selection,” dated August 24, 2007. In addition, on November 17, 2007, the Department informed Weifang that it would not be selected as a voluntary respondent. *See* Letter from Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary, to Weifang, Regarding “Antidumping Duty Investigation of Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe from the People's Republic of China; Respondent Selection,” dated November 17, 2007. On December 26, 2007, Weifang again requested that it be selected as a mandatory respondent. If it is not selected as a mandatory respondent, Weifang also provided recommended methodologies that the Department should use in determining its separate rate. In addition, Weifang noted that the Department calculated countervailing duty margins in the companion countervailing duty investigation on CWP from the PRC. According to Weifang, application of the NME methodology in conjunction with countervailing duty margins will result in double-remedy. Weifang argues that the Department is legally obligated to avoid such double-remedy. As these comments were submitted five business days prior to this preliminary determination, the Department did not consider Weifang's arguments. However, the Department will consider them for the final determination. Separate Rates Applications Between August 2, 2007, and August 26, 2007, we received timely separate-rate applications from 27 non-mandatory respondent companies: Weifang; Shijiazhuang Zhongqing Imp & Exp Co., Ltd. (“Shijiazhuang”); Tianjin Baolai Int'l Trade Co., Ltd. (“Baolai”); Wai Ming (Tianjin) Int'l Trading Co., Ltd. (“Wai Ming”); Kunshan Lets Win Steel Machinery Co., Ltd. (“Kunshan Lets Win”); Shenyang BOYU M/E Co., Ltd. (“BOYU”); Dalian Brollo Steel Tubes Ltd. (“Dalian”); Benxi Northern Pipes Co., Ltd. (“Benxi”); Shanghai Metals & Minerals Import & Export Corp. (“Shanghai Metals”); Huludao Steel Pipe Industrial Co., Ltd. (“Huludao”); Tianjin Xingyuda Import & Export Co. Ltd. (“Xingyuda”); Jiangyin Jianye Metal Products Co., Ltd. (“Jianye”); Rizhao Xingye Import & Export Co., Ltd. (“Rizhao”); Tianjin No. 1 Steel Rolled Co., Ltd. (“Tianjin No. 1”); Kunshan Hongyuan Machinery Manufacture Co., Ltd. (“Kunshan”); Qingdao Yongjie Import & Export Co., Ltd. (“Yongjie”);Wuxi Fastube Industry Co., Ltd. (“Fastube”); Jiangsu Guoqiang Zinc-Plating Company, Ltd. (“Jiangsu”); Wuxi Eric Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. (“Wuxi Eric”); Beijing Sai Lin Ke Hardware Co., Ltd. (“SLK”); Qingdao Xiangxing Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. (“Qingdao”); Wah Cit Enterprises (“Wah Cit”); Guangdong Walsall Steel Pipe Industrial Co., Ltd. (“Guangdong”); Hengshui Jinghua Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. (“Hengshui”); Zhangjiagang Zhongyuan Pipe-Making Co., Ltd. (“Zhongyuan”); Shandong Fubo Group Co. (“Fubo”) and Tianjin Youcheng Galvanized Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. (“Youcheng”). In August and September 2007, the Department informed Kingland and Bazhou that it would not consider their separate-rate applications because their Q&V submissions were untimely filed and returned. *See* Letter from Abdelali Elouaradia, Office Director, to Kingland, Regarding “Antidumping Duty Investigation of Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe From the People's Republic of China Submissions by Zhejiang Kingland Pipeline and Technologies Co., Ltd.,” dated August 24, 2007; *see also* Letter from Abdelali Elouaradia, Office Director, to Bazhou, Regarding “Quantity and Value Information and Separate Rate Application,” dated September 14, 2007. Questionnaires On August 3, 2007, the Department issued to Shuangjie and Yulong sections A, C, D, and E 1 of the antidumping duty questionnaire, which included draft product characteristics used in the designation of control numbers (“CONNUMs”) and assigned to the merchandise under consideration. On August 3, 2007, the Department also requested comments from all interested parties on the draft product characteristics included in the Department's questionnaire. The Department received comments from the petitioners and rebuttal comments from Shuangjie. On September 13, 2007, the Department issued the final product characteristics used in the designation of CONNUMs and assigned to the merchandise under consideration. 1 Section A of the questionnaire requests general information concerning a company's corporate structure and business practices, the merchandise under investigation that it sells, and the manner in which it sells that merchandise in all of its markets. Section C requests a complete listing of U.S. sales. Section D requests information on factors of production, and Section E requests information on further manufacturing. On September 4, 2007, Yulong submitted its response to Section A of the Department's questionnaire, and on September 10, 2007, Shuangjie submitted its response to section A of the Department's questionnaire. On September 24, 2007, Shuangjie submitted its responses to sections C and D of the Department's questionnaire. On September 24, 2007, Yulong submitted its responses to sections C and D of the Department's questionnaire. Weifang voluntarily submitted responses to section A of the Department's questionnaire on September 10, 2007, and to sections C and D of the Department's questionnaire on September 24, 2007. The Department issued supplemental questionnaires to Shuangjie in September and October 2007. However, Shuangjie did not submit responses to the Department's supplemental questionnaires because it withdrew from the investigation and requested that the Department return all of its proprietary filings. *See* Letter from Shuangjie, dated October 31, 2007. On November 15, 2007, the Department returned Shuangjie's business proprietary information. *See* Letter from Abdelali Elouaradia, Office Director, to Shuangjie, Regarding “Antidumping Duty Investigation: Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe from the People's Republic of China,” dated November 15, 2007. The Department issued supplemental questionnaires to Yulong between September 21, 2007, and November 28, 2007, and received responses between October 15, 2007, and December 10, 2007. On October 9, 2007 and November 13, 2007, the petitioners submitted comments on Shuangjie and Yulong's questionnaire responses. On October 10, 2007, the Department issued supplemental questionnaires to separate rate applicants Shanghai Metals and Huludao and received responses on October 19, 2007. On October 15, 2007, the Department issued supplemental questionnaires to separate rate applicants Benxi and Xingyuda and received responses on October 25, 2007. On October 17, 2007, the Department issued a supplemental questionnaire to separate rate applicant Jianye and received a response on October 29, 2007. On October 25, 2007, the Department issued a supplemental questionnaire to separate rate applicant Weifang and received a response on November 8, 2007. On November 8, 2007, the Department issued supplemental questionnaires to separate rate applicants Fastube, Jiangsu, Wuxi Eric, SLK, Qingdao, Guangdong, Hengshui and Zhongyuan. Qingdao submitted its response on November 19, 2007. Hengshui and SLK submitted their responses on November 21, 2007. Wuxi Eric, Jiangsu, Fastube, Guangdong, and Zhongyuan submitted their responses on November 26, 2007. On November 15, 2007, the Department issued a supplemental questionnaire to the separate rate applicants Fubo, Shijiazhuang, Baolai, Wai Ming, Kunshan Lets Win, BOYU, and Dalian, and received responses from Shijiazhuang on November 29, 2007, and from Baoli, Dalian, and Fubo from December 3-4, 2007. Wai Ming, Kunshan Lets Win, and BOYU submitted their responses on December 27, 2007. Critical Circumstances On September 17, 2007, the petitioners requested that the Department make an expedited finding that critical circumstances exist with respect to imports of CWP from the PRC. Shuangjie submitted comments responding to the petitioners' allegations of critical circumstances on September 24, 2007. The petitioners responded to Shuangjie's comments on September 27, 2007. The Department issued questionnaires to Shuangjie and Yulong regarding the critical circumstances allegation on October 29, 2007. Yulong submitted its response on November 5, 2007. As explained further above, Shuangjie did not respond to the Department's request because it withdrew from the investigation on October 31, 2007. On December 11, 2007, the Department preliminarily found that there is reason to believe or suspect that critical circumstances exist for imports of subject merchandise from Yulong, the separate-rate companies, and the PRC-wide entity (including Shuangjie) because, A) in accordance with section 733(e)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, there is a history of dumped imports of subject merchandise and of material injury caused by such dumped imports, and B) in accordance with section 733(e)(1)(B) of the Act, Yulong, the separate-rate companies, and the PRC-wide entity had massive imports during a relatively short period. *See* Memorandum from Abdelali Elouaradia, Director, Office 4, “Preliminary Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances,” dated December 11, 2007. Non-Market Economy Country For purposes of initiation, the petitioners submitted LTFV analyses for the PRC as a non-market economy (“NME”). *See Initiation Notice* , 72 FR at 36665. The Department considers the PRC to be a NME country. In accordance with section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Act, any determination that a foreign country is an NME country shall remain in effect until revoked by the administering authority. On December 26, 2007, Weifang argued that the PRC should be treated as a market economy. As these comments were submitted five business days prior to this preliminary determination, the Department did not consider Weifang's comments. However, the Department will consider them for the final determination. Therefore, we have treated the PRC as an NME country for purposes of this preliminary determination. Separate Rates In proceedings involving NME countries, the Department has a rebuttable presumption that all companies within the NME country are subject to government control and thus should be assessed a single antidumping duty rate. It is the Department's standard policy to assign all exporters of the merchandise subject to review in NME countries a single rate unless an exporter can affirmatively demonstrate an absence of government control, both in law ( *de jure* ) and in fact ( *de facto* ), with respect to exports. We have considered whether each PRC company that submitted a complete and timely separate-rate application is eligible for a separate rate. The Department's separate-rate test is not concerned, in general, with macroeconomic/border-type controls, *e.g.* , export licenses, quotas, and minimum export prices (“EPs”), particularly if these controls are imposed to prevent dumping. *See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Preserved Mushrooms from the People's Republic of China* , 63 FR 72255, 72256 (December 31, 1998). The test focuses, rather, on controls over the investment, pricing, and output decision-making process at the individual firm level. *See Certain Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel Plate from Ukraine: Final Determination of Sales at Less than Fair Value* , 62 FR 61754, 61758 (November 19, 1997), and *Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and Unfinished, from the People's Republic of China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review* , 62 FR 61276, 61279 (November 17, 1997). To establish whether a firm is sufficiently independent from government control of its export activities to be entitled to a separate rate, the Department analyzes each entity exporting the subject merchandise under a test arising from the *Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Sparklers from the People's Republic of China* , 56 FR 20588 (May 6, 1991) (“ *Sparklers* ”), as further developed in *Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Silicon Carbide from the People's Republic of China* , 59 FR 22585 (May 2, 1994) (“ *Silicon Carbide* ”). In accordance with the separate-rate criteria, the Department assigns separate rates in NME cases only if respondents can demonstrate the absence of both *de jure* and *de facto* governmental control over export activities. In this case, Shuangjie did not provide information we requested that is necessary to determine whether it is eligible for a separate rate. Specifically, on October 31, 2007, Shuangjie notified the Department of its decision to no longer participate in this investigation and withdrew all of its proprietary information from the record. As Shuangjie has decided to no longer participate in this investigation, and has withdrawn all of its responses from the record, the Department has no basis upon which to grant Shuangjie a separate rate. Although Shuangjie remains a mandatory respondent, the Department considers Shuangjie part of the PRC-wide entity because it failed to demonstrate that it qualifies for a separate rate. Wai Ming, Fastube, Wuxi Eric, SLK, Wah Cit, and Guangdong provided company-specific separate-rate information and stated that the standards for the assignment of separate rates have been met because they are privately owned trading companies incorporated and held by foreign ownership. Because each of these companies is foreign owned, it is not necessary to undertake additional separate-rates analysis for the Department to determine that the export activities of Wai Ming, Fastube, Wuxi Eric, SLK, Wah Cit, and Guangdong are independent from the PRC government's control. Accordingly, Wai Ming, Fastube, Wuxi Eric, SLK, Wah Cit, and Guangdong are eligible for separate rates. *See, e.g., Brake Rotors From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of the Tenth New Shipper Review* , 69 FR 30875, 30876 (June 1, 2004) (unchanged in the final results, *Brake Rotors From the People's Republic of China: Final Results of the Tenth New Shipper Review* , 69 FR 52228 (August 25, 2004)) (“Brake Rotors 10th NSR”); *Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Creatine Monohydrate From the People's Republic of China* , 64 FR 71104 (December 20, 1999); and *Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Bicycles From the People's Republic of China* , 61 FR 19026, 19027 (April 30, 1996). As a result, for the purposes of this preliminary determination, we have granted separate company-specific rates to Wai Ming, Fastube, Wuxi Eric, SLK, Wah Cit, and Guangdong. *See* Memorandum to Abdelali Elouaradia, Director, AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, through Mark Manning, Program Manager, AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, from Maisha Cryor, Senior International Trade Analyst, AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, Regarding “Antidumping Duty Investigation of Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe from the People's Republic of China: Separate Rates Memorandum,” dated January 3, 2008 (“Separate Rates Memorandum”). Youcheng stated in its August 27, 2007, separate-rate application that it sold subject merchandise to a U.S. customer during the POI and, as evidence, presented a sales contract dated within the POI. This contract covers multiple sizes and types of subject merchandise. Section 351.401(i) of the Department's regulations states that, “in identifying the date of sale of the subject merchandise or foreign like product, the Secretary normally will use the date of invoice, as recorded in the exporter or producer's records kept in the normal course of business.” However, the Secretary may use a date other than the date of invoice if the Secretary is satisfied that a different date better reflects the date on which the exporter or producer establishes the material terms of sale. *See* 19 CFR 351.401(i); *see also Allied Tube and Conduit Corp. v. United States* , 132 F. Supp. 2d 1087, 1090-1093 (CIT 2001) (“ *Allied Tube* ”). In other words, the date of the invoice is the presumptive date of sale, although this presumption may be overcome. The date of sale is generally the date on which the parties finalize the substantive terms of the sale, such as the price, quantity, delivery terms, and payment terms. Youcheng claims that the appropriate date of sale should be the contract date. However, Youcheng acknowledges that the first shipment of subject merchandise pursuant to this contract did not take place until well after the POI. Because this contract covers multiple sizes and types of subject merchandise, and each different product is considered separately by the Department for purposes of its dumping analysis, the Department preliminarily finds that the contract does not include product-specific prices. Instead, it provides only the total value and total quantity of all products that will be shipped pursuant to this contract. In addition, Youcheng provided a memorandum between itself and the U.S. customer, dated well after the POI, in which Youcheng provided the customer a price reduction for all products shipped pursuant to the contract due to a change in the terms of delivery. Thus, even if the contract had product-specific prices, which it did not, such prices were not final, as they were reduced after the POI at time of shipment. For these reasons, the Department determines that the terms of sale were not finalized until the final commercial invoice was issued, after the POI. Therefore, the appropriate date of sale to use in analyzing Youcheng's separate-rate application is the invoice date. As the invoice date is outside the POI, the Department finds that Youcheng did not have a sale within the POI and is, therefore, not eligible to receive a separate rate. 1. Absence of De Jure Control The Department considers the following *de jure* criteria in determining whether an individual company may be granted a separate rate:

(1)an absence of restrictive stipulations associated with an individual exporter's business and export licenses;

(2)any legislative enactments decentralizing control of companies; and

(3)other formal measures by the government decentralizing control of companies. *See Sparklers* , 56 FR at 20588. The evidence provided by Yulong, Weifang, Shijiazhuang, Baolai, Dalian, Benxi, Shanghai Metals, Huludao, Xingyuda, Jianye, Rizhao, Tianjin No. 1, Yongjie, Hengshui, Zhongyuan, Kunshan Lets Win, and BOYU indicates that there are no restrictive stipulations associated with their exporter and/or business licenses and that there are legislative enactments decentralizing control of the companies. The Department's analysis of the record evidence supports a preliminary finding of absence of *de jure* control. *See* Separate Rates Memorandum. In its August 26, 2007, separate-rate application, Fubo reported that it was established and is completely owned by the Fushan Village Committee (“Fushan Committee”), and the Fushan Committee operates under the Village Committee Law. In *Brake Rotors* , the Department examined a village committee, which operated under the Village Committee Law, and found that the committee was a PRC government entity. *See Brake Rotors From the People's Republic of China: Final Results and Partial Rescission of the Seventh Administrative Review; Final Results of the Eleventh New Shipper Review* , 70 FR 69937 (November 18, 2005) and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 7 (“ *Brake Rotors* ”). In analyzing the village committee, the Department found the Village Committee Law demonstrates that village committees are part of the PRC government. Specifically, the Department stated that “Article 2 of the Village Committee Law indicates that a Village Committee is not an independent entity but operates under the leadership of the Chinese Communist Party. The party branch is in effect the core of the village power structure.” *Id* . Fubo's description of the role of the Fushan Committee supports this analysis, as the Fushan Committee “has an active role in implementing policy directives, expanding local commerce, and overseeing social welfare matters such as education, healthcare, and sanitation.” *See* Fubo's December 4, 2007, supplemental questionnaire response at 1. Accordingly, we examined whether there is sufficient evidence of *de facto* absence of government control of Fubo's export activities. 2. Absence of De Facto Control Typically the Department considers four factors in evaluating whether each respondent is subject to *de facto* governmental control of its export functions:

(1)whether the export prices are set by or are subject to the approval of a governmental agency;

(2)whether the exporter has authority to negotiate and sign contracts and other agreements;

(3)whether the exporter has autonomy from the government in making decisions regarding the selection of management; and

(4)whether the exporter retains the proceeds of its export sales and makes independent decisions regarding disposition of profits or financing of losses. *See Silicon Carbide* , 59 FR at 22586-87; *see also Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Furfuryl Alcohol From the People's Republic of China* , 60 FR 22544, 22545 (May 8, 1995). The Department has determined that an analysis of *de facto* control is critical in determining whether respondents are, in fact, subject to a degree of governmental control which would preclude the Department from assigning separate rates. We determine that, for Yulong, Weifang, Shijiazhuang, Baolai, Dalian, Benxi, Shanghai Metals, Huludao, Xingyuda, Jianye, Rizhao, Tianjin No. 1, Kunshan, Yongjie, Jiangsu, Qingdao, Hengshui, Zhongyuan, Kunshan Lets Win, and BOYU, the evidence on the record supports a preliminary finding of an absence of *de facto* governmental control based on record statements and supporting documentation showing the following: 1) each exporter sets its own export prices independent of the government and without the approval of a government authority; 2) each exporter retains the proceeds from its sales and makes independent decisions regarding disposition of profits or financing of losses; 3) each exporter has the authority to negotiate and sign contracts and other agreements; and 4) each exporter has autonomy from the government regarding the selection of management. *See* Separate Rates Memorandum. Therefore, the Department has preliminarily found an absence of *de facto* government control over these companies' export activities. Regarding Fubo, the Fushan Committee appoints Fubo's board of directors and managers. During the POI, Fubo's directors and managers were also members of the Fushan Committee. In particular, Fubo reported that its general manager, chief financial supervisor, and sales manager were members of the Fushan Committee. Since these managers control the day-to-day operations of the company, it is clear that the Fushan Committee directly controls Fubo's sales negotiation and export pricing. In addition, Fubo acknowledges that its profits are distributed to the Fushan Committee. For these reasons, the Department preliminarily finds that Fubo has not demonstrated that there is an absence of *de facto* control by the PRC government. As stated above, because Wai Ming, Fastube, Wuxi Eric, SLK, Wah Cit, and Guangdong are wholly foreign-owned, we have determined that they are independent of the PRC government's control and are eligible for a separate rate. In addition, the evidence placed on the record of this investigation by Yulong, Weifang, Shijiazhuang, Baolai, Dalian, Benxi, Shanghai Metals, Huludao, Xingyuda, Jianye, Rizhao, Tianjin No. 1, Kunshan, Yongjie, Jiangsu, Qingdao, Hengshui, Zhongyuan, Kunshan Lets Win, and BOYU demonstrates an absence of *de jure* and *de facto* government control with respect to each of the exporters' exports of the merchandise under investigation, in accordance with the criteria identified in *Sparklers* and *Silicon Carbide* . As a result, for the purposes of this preliminary determination, we have granted a separate company-specific rate to Wai Ming, Fastube, Wuxi Eric, SLK, Wah Cit, Guangdong, Yulong, Weifang, Shijiazhuang, Baolai, Dalian, Benxi, Shanghai Metals, Huludao, Xingyuda, Jianye, Rizhao, Tianjin No. 1, Kunshan, Yongjie, Jiangsu, Qingdao, Hengshui, Zhongyuan, Kunshan Lets Win, and BOYU. In determining what rate to assign companies receiving separate rates, the Department's normal practice is to weight-average the individually calculated margins from the mandatory respondents. In this investigation, Yulong is the only mandatory respondent receiving an individually calculated margin, and its margin is zero percent. Shuangjie, the other mandatory respondent, is receiving a rate based entirely on adverse facts available (“AFA”) as part of the PRC-wide entity for its failure to cooperate. *See* “Adverse Facts Available” section below. Therefore, in this case, we have assigned to the companies receiving separate rates the simple average of Yulong's zero percent margin and the AFA margin assigned to Shuangjie as part of the PRC-wide entity. Since the Department has selected 51.34 percent as the AFA rate ( *see* “Adverse Facts Available” section below), the simple average of this rate and zero percent is 25.67 percent. Therefore, we have assigned 25.67 percent as the rate applicable to Wai Ming, Fastube, Wuxi Eric, SLK, Wah Cit, Guangdong, Weifang, Shijiazhuang, Baolai, Dalian, Benxi, Shanghai Metals, Huludao, Xingyuda, Jianye, Rizhao, Tianjin No. 1, Kunshan, Yongjie, Jiangsu, Qingdao, Hengshui, Zhongyuan, Kunshan Lets Win, and BOYU. *See* Separate Rates Memorandum. Adverse Facts Available Sections 776(a)(1) and

(2)of the Act provide that the Department shall apply “facts otherwise available” if, *inter alia* , necessary information is not on the record or an interested party or any other person:

(A)withholds information that has been requested;

(B)fails to provide information within the deadlines established, or in the form and manner requested by the Department, subject to subsections (c)(1) and

(e)of section 782 of the Act;

(C)significantly impedes a proceeding; or

(D)provides information that cannot be verified as provided by section 782(i) of the Act. Where the Department determines that a response to a request for information does not comply with the request, section 782(d) of the Act provides that the Department will so inform the party submitting the response and will, to the extent practicable, provide that party the opportunity to remedy or explain the deficiency. If the party fails to remedy the deficiency within the applicable time limits and subject to section 782(e) of the Act, the Department may disregard all or part of the original and subsequent responses, as appropriate. Section 782(e) of the Act provides that the Department “shall not decline to consider information that is submitted by an interested party and is necessary to the determination but does not meet all applicable requirements established by the administering authority” if the information is timely, can be verified, is not so incomplete that it cannot be used, and if the interested party acted to the best of its ability in providing the information. Where all of these conditions are met, the statute requires the Department to use the information if it can do so without undue difficulties. In this case, all PRC exporters of subject merchandise to the United States were given an opportunity to provide Q&V information to the Department. However, not all exporters responded to the Department's request for Q&V information. 2 Based upon our knowledge of the volume of imports of subject merchandise, we have concluded that the companies that responded to the Q&V questionnaire do not account for all U.S. imports during the POI of subject merchandise. We have treated the non-responsive PRC producers/exporters (including Shuangjie) as part of the PRC-wide entity because they did not qualify for a separate rate. 2 The Department received only 32 timely responses to the requests for Q&V information that it sent to the 53 potential exporters identified in the petition. *See* Q&V Memorandum; *see also* Respondent Selection Memorandum. Since the PRC-wide entity (including Shuangjie) withheld information requested by the Department, we find that the use of facts available is appropriate to determine the PRC-wide rate, pursuant to section 776(a)(2)(A) of the Act. *See Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Critical Circumstances and Postponement of Final Determination: Certain Frozen Fish Fillets from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam* , 68 FR 4986 (January 31, 2003), unchanged in *Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Affirmative Critical Circumstances: Certain Frozen Fish Fillets from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam* , 68 FR 37116 (June 23, 2003). Section 776(b) of the Act provides that, in selecting from among the facts otherwise available, the Department may employ an adverse inference if an interested party fails to cooperate by not acting to the best of its ability to comply with requests for information. *See Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cold-Rolled Flat-Rolled Carbon-Quality Steel Products from the Russian Federation* , 65 FR 5510, 5518 (February 4, 2000); *Certain Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes From Thailand: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review* , 62 FR 53808, 53819-20 (October 16, 1997); *Crawfish Processors Alliance v. United States* , 343 F. Supp.2d 1242 (CIT 2004) (approving use of AFA when respondent refused to participate in verification); *see also Statement of Administrative Action* , accompanying the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (“URAA”), H.R. Rep. No. 103-316, 870

(1994)(“ *SAA* ”). Because the PRC-wide entity (including Shuangjie) did not respond to the Department's request for information, the Department has concluded it has failed to cooperate to the best of its ability. Therefore, the Department preliminarily finds that, in selecting from among the facts available, an adverse inference is appropriate. Section 776(b) of the Act authorizes the Department to use, as AFA, information derived from the petition, the final determination from the LTFV investigation, a previous administrative review, or any other information placed on the record. In selecting a rate for AFA, the Department selects one that is sufficiently adverse “as to effectuate the purpose of the facts available rule to induce respondents to provide the Department with complete and accurate information in a timely manner.” *See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Static Random Access Memory Semiconductors From Taiwan* , 63 FR 8909, 8932 (February 23, 1998). It is the Department's practice to select, as AFA, the higher of the

(a)highest margin alleged in the petition, or

(b)the highest calculated rate for any respondent in the investigation. *See Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Cold-Rolled Flat-Rolled Carbon Quality Steel Products From the People's Republic of China* , 65 FR 34660 (May 21, 2000) and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum, at “Facts Available”. Because the dumping margin derived from the petition is higher than the calculated weighted-average margin for the mandatory respondents, we examined whether it was appropriate to base the PRC-wide dumping margin on the secondary information in the petition. When the Department relies on secondary information, rather than information obtained in the course of an investigation, section 776(c) of the Act requires it to corroborate that information, to the extent practicable, from independent sources reasonably at its disposal. 3 The *SAA* also states that the independent sources may include published price lists, official import statistics and customs data, and information obtained from interested parties during the particular investigation. *See SAA* at 870. 3 Secondary information is described in the *SAA* as “information derived from the petition that gave rise to the investigation or review, the final determination concerning subject merchandise, or any previous review under section 751 concerning the subject merchandise.” *See SAA* at 870. The *SAA* also clarifies that “corroborate” means that the Department will satisfy itself that the secondary information to be used has probative value. *See SAA* at 870. To corroborate secondary information, the Department will, to the extent practicable, examine the reliability and relevance of the information used. *See Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and Unfinished, From Japan, and Tapered Roller Bearings, Four Inches or Less in Outside Diameter, and Components Thereof, From Japan; Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and Partial Termination of Administrative Reviews* , 61 FR 57391, 57392 (November 6, 1996), unchanged in *Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and Unfinished, From Japan, and Tapered Roller Bearings, Four Inches or Less in Outside Diameter, and Components Thereof, From Japan: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and Termination in Part* , 62 FR 11825 (March 13, 1997). To corroborate the dumping margin alleged in the petition (as adjusted by the Department in initiating the instant investigation), we compared sales-specific dumping margins calculated for the preliminary determination to the dumping margins alleged in the petition. We found that Yulong's highest sales-specific dumping margin corroborates, to the extent practicable, the petition margin of 51.34 percent. *See Initiation Notice, see also* Memorandum from Maisha Cryor, Senior International Trade Compliance Analyst, to Abdelali Elouaradia, Office Director, “Corroboration of the Facts Available Rate for the Preliminary Determination,” dated January 3, 2008. We are assigning this rate, 51.34 percent, as AFA to the PRC-wide entity (including Shuangjie). Fair Value Comparisons To determine whether sales of CWP to the United States by Yulong were made at less than fair value, we compared the export price (“EP”) to normal value (“NV”), as described in the “U.S. Price,” and “Normal Value” sections of this notice. We compared NV to weighted-average EPs in accordance with section 777A(d)(1) of the Act. U.S. Price For Yulong, we based U.S. price on EP in accordance with section 772(a) of the Act, because the first sale to an unaffiliated purchaser was made prior to importation, and CEP was not otherwise warranted by the facts on the record. We calculated EP based on the packed price from the exporter to the first unaffiliated customer in the United States. Where appropriate, we made deductions from the starting price (gross unit price) for foreign inland freight, brokerage and handling, international freight, and marine insurance, in accordance with section 772(c) of the Act. Where foreign inland freight, brokerage and handling, or international ocean freight was provided by PRC service providers, or paid for in Renminbi (“RMB”), we analyzed the amount of service provided by PRC entities to determine the appropriate method of valuing the services. Yulong received foreign inland freight services, and brokerage and handling services, from PRC service providers. Yulong paid for international ocean freight services through a PRC freight forwarder. *See* Yulong's October 31, 2007, questionnaire response at 9. For a complete discussion of the calculations of the U.S. price for Yulong, *see* Memorandum to the File, through Mark Manning, Program Manager, AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, from Thomas Martin, Senior International Trade Analyst, AD/CVD Operations, Office 4, Regarding “Program Analysis for the Preliminary Determination of Antidumping Duty Investigation of Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe from the People's Republic of China: Yulong,” dated January 3, 2007 (“Yulong Analysis Memorandum”). *See* also the “Factors of Production” section below. Yulong reported that all of its U.S. sales had foreign inland freight provided by NME freight providers. Therefore, we valued foreign inland freight using a surrogate value obtained from the web site of an Indian transportation company, InFreight Technologies India Limited. *See* *http://www.infreight.com/.* This average rate was used by the Department in the antidumping duty administrative review of *Saccharin from the PRC. See Saccharin from the People's Republic of China; Preliminary Results of the 2005-2006 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review* , 72 FR 25247 (May 4, 2007) (“ *Saccharin from the PRC* ”). Because this value is not contemporaneous with the POI, we adjusted it to account for inflation using the Indian Wholesale Price Index (“WPI”). *See* Memorandum to the File, from Thomas Martin, Senior International Trade Compliance Analyst, Office 4, AD/CVD Operations, Regarding “Less-Than-Fair-Value (“LTFV”) Investigation of Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe (“CWP”) from the People's Republic of China (“PRC”): Surrogate Values for the Preliminary Determination - Jiangsu Yulong Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. (“Yulong”),” dated January 3, 2008 (“Factor Value Memorandum”), at Exhibit 7. For brokerage and handling, Yulong reported that all of its U.S. sales had foreign brokerage and handling provided by NME companies. We valued Yulong's use of foreign brokerage and handling using a simple average of the public version of the brokerage and handling expenses reported in an administrative review of preserved mushrooms from India by Agro Dutch Industries Ltd., in its section A-D submission, dated May 24, 2005, at Exhibit B-1, ( *see Certain Preserved Mushrooms From India: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review* , 71 FR 10646 (March 2, 2006)), and the section C submission from Kejriwal Paper Ltd., dated January 9, 2006, at Exhibit C-2, used in *Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Postponement of Final Determination, and Affirmative Preliminary Determination of Critical Circumstances in Part: Certain Lined Paper Products From India* , 71 FR 19706 (April 17, 2006) (unchanged in *Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, and Negative Determination of Critical Circumstances: Certain Lined Paper Products from India* , 71 FR 45012 (August 8, 2006)). Because these data were not contemporaneous to the POI, we adjusted them for inflation using the Indian WPI. *See* Factor Value Memorandum at Exhibit 8. Yulong also reported that all of its U.S. sales had international freight provided by NME companies. We valued international freight expenses using U.S. dollar freight quotes that the Department obtained from Maersk Sealand (“Maersk”), a market-economy shipper. We obtained quotes from Maersk for shipments from the PRC port of export and the U.S. port of import reported by Yulong for its U.S. sales. Because these data were not contemporaneous to the POI, we adjusted them for inflation using the U.S. WPI. *See* Factor Value Memorandum at Exhibit 9. Normal Value Section 773(c)(1) of the Act provides that the Department shall determine the NV using a factors-of-production (“FOP”) methodology if the merchandise is exported from an NME country and the information does not permit the calculation of NV using home-market prices, third-country prices, or constructed value under section 773(a) of the Act. The Department bases NV on the FOP because the presence of government controls on various aspects of non-market economies renders price comparisons and the calculation of production costs invalid under the Department's normal methodologies. 1. Factors of Production Yulong reported that it does not have complete, product-specific POI records that track the consumption of hot-rolled steel in coils on a product-specific basis, and, therefore, it allocated the same quantity of steel to all subject merchandise products. However, the Department finds that a single steel consumption rate for all products is not reasonable. Therefore, on the basis of the production data submitted by Yulong, which the Department intends to verify, the Department has adjusted Yulong's reported consumption rate for hot-rolled steel in coils to be product-specific on the basis of steel coil and pipe thickness. See Yulong Analysis Memorandum. An amount for yield loss was added to the reported consumption rate per metric ton of CWP produced. 2. Surrogate Country Selection In antidumping proceedings involving NME countries, the Department, pursuant to section 773(c)(1) of the Act, will generally base NV on the value of the NME producer's factors of production. In accordance with section 773(c)(4) of the Act, in valuing the factors of production, the Department shall utilize, to the extent possible, the prices or costs of factors of production in one or more market-economy countries that are at a level of economic development comparable to that of the NME country and are significant producers of merchandise comparable to the subject merchandise. On November 5, 2007, the Department determined that India, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, the Philippines, and Egypt are countries comparable to the PRC in terms of economic development. *See* Letter to All Interested Parties, from Mark Manning, Program Manager, Office 4, AD/CVD Operations, Regarding “Antidumping Duty Investigation of Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe from the People's Republic of China (“PRC”),” dated November 5, 2007, attaching Memorandum to Mark Manning, Program Manager, Office 4, AD/CVD Operations, from Ron Lorentzen, Director, Office of Policy, Regarding “Investigation of Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe (“Pipe”) from the People's Republic of China from the People's Republic of China (PRC): Request for List of Surrogate Countries,” dated October 29, 2007. On November 5, 2007, the Department requested comments on surrogate country selection, and on surrogate values, from the interested parties in this investigation. No interested party commented on the selection of a surrogate country. However, on November 15, 2007, Yulong submitted surrogate value information, *i.e.* , surrogate financial statements, for use in this investigation. 4 4 The petitioners submitted surrogate value information, including surrogate financial statements, in their June 7, 2007, petition. As detailed in the Surrogate Country Memorandum, the Department has preliminarily selected India as the surrogate country because:

(1)it is a significant producer of comparable merchandise;

(2)it is at a similar level of economic development pursuant to 773(c)(4) of the Act; and

(3)we have reliable data from India that we can use to value the factors of production. For a detailed discussion of the selection of the surrogate country, see Memorandum to the File, through Abdelali Elouaradia, Director, Office 4, AD/CVD Operations, from Maisha Cryor, Analyst, Office 4, AD/CVD Operations, Regarding “Antidumping Duty Investigation of Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Pipe from the People's Republic of China: Selection of a Surrogate Country,” dated December 14, 2007 (“Surrogate Country Memorandum”). Thus, we have calculated NV using Indian prices when available and appropriate to value Yulong's factors of production. *See* Factor Value Memorandum. In accordance with 19 CFR 351.301(c)(3)(i), for the final determination in an antidumping investigation, interested parties may submit publicly available information to value the factors of production within 40 days after the date of publication of the preliminary determination. 3. Factor Value Methodology In accordance with section 773(c) of the Act, we calculated NV based on FOP data reported by Yulong for the POI. The FOPs for subject merchandise include:

(1)quantities of raw materials consumed;

(2)hours of labor required;

(3)amounts of energy and other utilities consumed;

(4)representative capital and selling costs; and

(5)packing materials. We valued the reported FOPs by multiplying the reported per-unit factor-consumption rates by publicly available prices and financial statements from the surrogate country, India, or, where appropriate, the market economy prices paid for the factor ( *see* further discussion below). In selecting the surrogate values, we considered the quality of the source of surrogate information, the specificity of the surrogate value to the FOP being valued, and contemporaneity of the data to the POI. To the extent practicable, we selected values that are non-export average values and tax-exclusive. * See, e.g., Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value, Negative Preliminary Determination of Critical Circumstances and Postponement of Final Determination: Certain Frozen and Canned Warmwater Shrimp From the Socialist Republic of Vietnam * , 69 FR 42672, 42682 (July 16, 2004), unchanged in *Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Frozen and Canned Warmwater Shrimp from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam* , 69 FR 71005 (December 8, 2004) (“ *Shrimp from Vietnam* ”). We valued material inputs and packing by multiplying the amount of the factor consumed in producing subject merchandise by the average unit value of the factor. We derived the average unit value of the factors from Indian import statistics. As appropriate, we added to the surrogate values a cost for inland freight to make them delivered prices. Specifically, we calculated the inland freight cost by multiplying a surrogate freight rate by the shorter of the reported distance from the PRC domestic supplier to the respondent's factory or the distance from the nearest seaport to the respondent's factory, where appropriate. This adjustment is in accordance with the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's decision in *Sigma Corp. v. United States* , 117 F. 3d 1401, 1407-1408 (Fed. Cir. 1997). A detailed description of all surrogate values used for respondents can be found in the Factor Value Memorandum. Where we could not obtain publicly available information contemporaneous to the POI with which to value factors, we adjusted the surrogate values, where appropriate, using the WPI as published in the International Financial Statistics of the International Monetary Fund. *See* Factor Value Memorandum at Exhibit 2. Furthermore, with regard to the Indian import-based surrogate values, we disregarded import prices that we have reason to believe or suspect may be subsidized. We have reason to believe or suspect that prices of inputs from Indonesia, South Korea, and Thailand may have been subsidized. We have found in other proceedings that these countries maintain broadly available, non-industry-specific export subsidies and, therefore, it is reasonable to infer that all exports to all markets from these countries may be subsidized. *See, e.g., Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Negative Final Determination of Critical Circumstances: Certain Color Television Receivers From the People's Republic of China* , 69 FR 20594 (April 16, 2004) and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 7 (“ *CTVs from the PRC* ”). We are also directed by legislative history not to conduct a formal investigation to ensure that such prices are not subsidized. *See* H.R. Rep. 100-576 at 590 (1988). Rather, Congress directed the Department to base its decision on information that is available to it at the time it makes its determination. Therefore, we have not used prices from these countries either in calculating the Indian import-based surrogate values or in calculating market-economy input values. In instances where a market-economy input was obtained solely from suppliers located in these countries, we used Indian import-based surrogate values to value the input. *See Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Certain Automotive Replacement Glass Windshields From The People's Republic of China* , 67 FR 6482 (February 12, 2002), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 1. Yulong purchased certain inputs into the production of the merchandise under investigation from market economy suppliers and paid for such purchases in market economy currencies. The Department has instituted a rebuttable presumption that market economy input prices are the best available information for valuing an input when the total volume of the input purchased from all market economy sources during the POI or period of review is 33 percent or greater of the total volume of the input purchased from all sources during the period. 5 In these cases, unless case-specific facts provide adequate grounds to rebut the Department's presumption, the Department will use the weighted-average market economy purchase price to value the input. Alternatively, when the volume of an NME firm's purchases of an input from market economy suppliers during the period is below 33 percent of its total volume of purchases of the input during the period, but where these purchases are otherwise valid and there is no reason to disregard the prices, the Department will weight-average the weighted-average market economy purchase price with an appropriate surrogate value according to their respective shares of the total volume of purchases, unless case-specific facts provide adequate grounds to rebut the presumption. When a firm has made market economy input purchases that may have been dumped or subsidized, are not *bona fide* , or are otherwise not acceptable for use in a dumping calculation, the Department will exclude them from the numerator of the ratio to ensure a fair determination of whether valid market economy purchases meet the 33 percent threshold. *See Antidumping Methodologies: Market Economy Inputs, Expected Non-Market Economy Wages, Duty Drawback; and Request for Comments* , 71 FR 61716 (October 19, 2006) (“ *Notice for Antidumping Methodologies* ”). 5 Notwithstanding the determination the Department reached in *Shrimp from Vietnam* , at Comment 8, the Department will examine if and when the inputs were used in the production process when case-specific conditions demand it. Unless there are case-specific reasons to examine other criteria, the Department will base its decision on whether to accept market economy input purchases to value the input on the relative share of market economy purchases during the POI or period of review to total purchases during that period. In accordance with this policy, we valued Yulong's inputs using the market economy prices paid for in market economy currencies where appropriate. Alternatively, when the volume of Yulong's purchases of an input from market economy suppliers during the POI was below 33 percent of the company's total volume of purchases of the input during the POI, we weight-averaged the weighted-average market economy purchase price with an appropriate surrogate value according to their respective shares of the total volume of purchases. *See* Yulong's September 24, 2007, section D response at Exhibit D-3. 4. Surrogate Values The Department valued direct materials and packing materials using publicly available import prices reported in the *Monthly Statistics of the Foreign Trade of India* for the POI, as published by the Directorate General of Commercial Intelligence and Statistics of the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Government of India. The same import prices are also available from the *World Trade Atlas (“WTA”)* , published by Global Trade Information Services, Inc., which is a secondary electronic source based upon the publication *Monthly Statistics of the Foreign Trade of India. Volume II: Imports. See* *http://www.gtis.com/wta.htm.* To value electricity, we used the 2000 electricity price in India of 3.602 Rs. per kilowatt hour from *Energy Prices & Taxes, Second Quarter 2003* published by the International Energy Agency. Because these data were not contemporaneous to the POI, we adjusted for inflation using WPI. *See* Factor Value Memorandum at Exhibit 5. To value water, the Department used data from the Maharastra Industrial Development Corporation (www.midcindia.org) to be the best available information since it includes a wide range of industrial water rates. This source provides 386 industrial water rates within the Maharashtra province from June 2003: 193 for the “inside industrial areas” usage category and 193 for the “outside industrial areas” usage category. The data was averaged accordingly. Because these data were not contemporaneous to the POI, we adjusted for inflation using WPI. *See* Factor Value Memorandum at Exhibit 6. Consistent with 19 CFR 351.408(c)(3), we valued direct, indirect, and packing labor using the most recently calculated regression-based wage rate, which relies on 2004 data. This wage rate can currently be found on the Department's website on Import Administration's home page, Import Library, Expected Wages of Selected NME Countries, revised in January 2007, *http://ia.ita.doc.gov/wages/index.html.* The source of these wage-rate data on the Import Administration's web site is the Yearbook of Labour Statistics 2002, ILO (Geneva: 2002), Chapter 5B: Wages in Manufacturing. Because this regression-based wage rate does not separate the labor rates into different skill levels or types of labor, we have applied the same wage rate to all skill levels and types of labor reported by Yulong. As we did in valuing foreign inland freight for U.S. sales, we valued truck freight expenses using a per kilometer per kilogram average rate from data obtained from the web site of an Indian transportation company, InFreight Technologies India Limited. *See* *http://www.infreight.com/.* Because this value is not contemporaneous with the POI, we adjusted to account for inflation using the WPI. *See* Factor Value Memorandum at Exhibit 7. To value factory overhead, selling, general and administrative (“SG&A”) expenses, and profit values, we used the financial statements from the following Indian companies for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2006: Zenith Birla (India) Limited; Surya Roshni Limited; Bhawani Industries Limited; and Bihar Tubes Limited. From this information, we were able to determine factory overhead as a percentage of the total raw materials, labor, and energy (“ML&E”) costs; SG&A as a percentage of ML&E plus overhead ( *i.e.* , cost of manufacture); and profit as a percentage of the cost of manufacture plus SG&A. *See* Factor Value Memorandum at Exhibit 10. Currency Conversion We made currency conversions into U.S. dollars, in accordance with section 773A(a) of the Act, based on the exchange rates in effect on the dates of the U.S. sales as certified by the Federal Reserve Bank. Verification As provided in section 782(i)(1) of the Act, we intend to verify all information relied upon in making our final determination. Combination Rates In the *Initiation Notice* , the Department stated that it would calculate combination rates for respondents that are eligible for a separate rate in this investigation. *See Initiation Notice* . This change in practice is described in *Policy Bulletin 05.1* , available at *http://ia.ita.doc.gov/.* Policy Bulletin 05.1, states: {w}hile continuing the practice of assigning separate rates only to exporters, all separate rates that the Department will now assign in its NME investigations will be specific to those producers that supplied the exporter during the period of investigation. Note, however, that one rate is calculated for the exporter and all of the producers which supplied subject merchandise to it during the period of investigation. This practice applies both to mandatory respondents receiving an individually calculated separate rate as well as the pool of non-investigated firms receiving the weighted-average of the individually calculated rates. This practice is referred to as the application of “combination rates” because such rates apply to specific combinations of exporters and one or more producers. The cash-deposit rate assigned to an exporter will apply only to merchandise both exported by the firm in question and produced by a firm that supplied the exporter during the period of investigation. *See Policy Bulletin 05.1* , “Separate Rates Practice and Application of Combination Rates in Antidumping Investigations Involving Non-Market Economy Countries.” Preliminary Determination The Department has determined that the following preliminary weighted-average dumping margins exist: Exporter Producer Weighted-Average Margin Beijing Sai Lin Ke Hardware Co., Ltd. Xuzhou Guang Huan Steel Tube Products Co, Ltd. 25.67 Wuxi Fastube Industry Co., Ltd Wuxi Fastube Industry Co., Ltd. 25.67 Jiangsu Guoqiang Zinc-Plating Co., Ltd. Jiangsu Guoqiang Zinc-Plating Co., Ltd. 25.67 Wuxi Eric Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. Wuxi Eric Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. 25.67 Qingdao Xiangxing Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. Qingdao Xiangxing Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. 25.67 Wah Cit Enterprises Guangdong Walsall Steel Pipe Industrial Co., Ltd. 25.67 Guangdong Walsall Steel Pipe Industrial Co., Ltd. Guangdong Walsall Steel Pipe Industrial Co., Ltd. 25.67 Hengshui Jinghua Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. Hengshui Jinghua Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. 25.67 Zhangjiagang Zhongyuan Pipe-Making Co., Ltd. Zhangjiagang Zhongyuan Pipe-Making Co, Ltd. 25.67 Weifang East Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. Weifang East Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. 25.67 Shijiazhuang Zhongqing Imp & Exp Co., Ltd. Bazhou Zhuofa Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. 25.67 Tianjin Baolai Int'l Trade Co., Ltd. Tianjin Jinghai County Baolai Business and Industry Co., Ltd. 25.67 Wai Ming (Tianjin) Int'l Trading Co., Ltd. Bazhou Dong Sheng Hot-dipped Galvanized Steel Pipes Co., Ltd. 25.67 Kunshan Lets Win Steel MachineryCo., Ltd. Kunshan Lets Win Steel Machinery Co., Ltd. 25.67 Shenyang Boyu M/E Co., Ltd. Bazhou Dong Sheng Hot-dipped Galvanized Steel Pipes Co., Ltd. 25.67 Dalian Brollo Steel Tubes Ltd. Dalian Brollo Steel Tubes Ltd. 25.67 Benxi Northern Pipes Co., Ltd. Benxi Northern Pipes Co., Ltd. 25.67 Shanghai Metals & Minerals Import & Export Corp. Huludao Steel Pipe Industrial Co. 25.67 Shanghai Metals & Minerals Import & Export Corp. Benxi Northern Pipes Co., Ltd. 25.67 Huludao Steel Pipe Industrial Co. Huludao Steel Pipe Industrial Co. 25.67 Tianjin Xingyuda Import & Export Co., Ltd. Tianjin Lifengyuanda Steel Group 25.67 Tianjin Xingyuda Import & Export Co., Ltd. Tianjin Xingyunda Steel Pipe Co. 25.67 Tianjin Xingyuda Import & Export Co., Ltd. Tianjin Lituo Steel Products Co. 25.67 Tianjin Xingyuda Import & Export Co., Ltd. Tangshan Fengnan District Xinlida Steel Pipe Co., Ltd. 25.6 Jiangyin Jianye Metal Products Co., Ltd. Jiangyin Jianye Metal Products Co., Ltd. 25.67 Rizhao Xingye Import & Export Co., Ltd. Shandong Xinyuan Group Co., Ltd. 25.67 Tianjin No. 1 Steel Rolled Co., Ltd. Tianjin Hexing Steel Co., Ltd. 25.67 Tianjin No. 1 Steel Rolled Co., Ltd. Tianjin Ruitong Steel Co., Ltd. 25.67 Tianjin No. 1 Steel Rolled Co., Ltd. Tianjin Yayi Industrial Co. 25.67 Kunshan Hongyuan Machinery Manufacture Co., Ltd. Kunshan Hongyuan Machinery Manufacture Co., Ltd. 25.67 Qingdao Yongjie Import & Export Co., Ltd. Shandong Xinyuan Group Co., Ltd. 25.67 Jiangsu Yulong Steel Pipe Co. Ltd. Jiangsu Yulong Steel Pipe Co. Ltd. 0.00 PRC-Wide Entity (Including Shuangjie) 51.34 Disclosure We will disclose the calculations performed within five days of the date of publication of this notice to parties in this proceeding in accordance with 19 CFR 351.224(b). Suspension of Liquidation As noted above, the Department has found that critical circumstances exist with respect to imports of subject merchandise from the PRC. Therefore, in accordance with section 733(d) of the Act, we will instruct U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) to suspend liquidation of all entries of CWP from the PRC as described in the “Scope of Investigation” section, entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption from the separate rate companies and the PRC-wide entity (including Shuangjie) on or after 90 days prior to the date of publication in the **Federal Register** of our preliminary determination. We will instruct CBP to require a cash deposit or the posting of a bond equal to the weighted-average amount by which the NV exceeds U.S. price, as indicated above. The suspension of liquidation will remain in effect until further notice. In accordance with section 733(d)(2) of the Act, we are directing CBP not to suspend liquidation of imports of certain CWP from the PRC produced and exported by Yulong, and entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of this preliminary determination in the **Federal Register** . CBP shall not require a cash deposit or the posting of a bond, as indicated above, because we have calculated a margin of zero percent for Yulong. International Trade Commission Notification In accordance with section 733(f) of the Act, we have notified the ITC of our preliminary affirmative determination of sales at less than fair value. Section 735(b)(2) of the Act requires the ITC to make its final determination as to whether the domestic industry in the United States is materially injured, or threatened with material injury, by reason of imports of CWP, or sales (or the likelihood of sales) for importation, of the subject merchandise within 45 days of our final determination. Public Comment Case briefs or other written comments may be submitted to the Assistant Secretary for Import Administration no later than seven days after the date of the final verification report is issued in this proceeding and rebuttal briefs limited to issues raised in case briefs no later than five days after the deadline date for case briefs. A list of authorities used and an executive summary of issues should accompany any briefs submitted to the Department. This summary should be limited to five pages total, including footnotes. In accordance with section 774 of the Act, we will hold a public hearing, if requested, to afford interested parties an opportunity to comment on arguments raised in case or rebuttal briefs. If a request for a hearing is made, we intend to hold the hearing three days after the deadline of submission of rebuttal briefs at the U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Ave, NW, Washington, DC 20230, at a time and location to be determined. Parties should confirm by telephone the date, time, and location of the hearing two days before the scheduled date. Interested parties who wish to request a hearing, or to participate if one is requested, must submit a written request to the Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room 1870, within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. See 19 CFR 351.310(c). Requests should contain the party's name, address, and telephone number, the number of participants, and a list of the issues to be discussed. At the hearing, each party may make an affirmative presentation only on issues raised in that party's case brief and may make rebuttal presentations only on arguments included in that party's rebuttal brief. This determination is issued and published in accordance with sections 733(f) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: January 3, 2008. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E8-494 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration (C-580-835) Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from the Republic of Korea: Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. **Background** : On September 10, 2007, the Department of Commerce (“the Department”) published in the **Federal Register** its preliminary results of administrative review of the countervailing duty (“CVD”) order on stainless steel sheet and strip in coils from the Republic of Korea (“Korea”) for the period January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2005. *See Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from the Republic of Korea: Preliminary Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review* , 72 FR 51615 (September 10, 2007) (“ *Preliminary Results* ”). The Department preliminarily found that Dai Yang Metal Co., Ltd. (“DMC”), the producer/exporter of subject merchandise covered by this review, had a *de minimis* net subsidy rate during the period of review (“POR”). We did not receive any comments on our preliminary results and have made no revisions to those results. EFFECTIVE DATE: January 15, 2008 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric Greynolds, AD/CVD Operations, Office 3, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone:

(202)482-6071. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Scope of the Order The products subject to this order are certain stainless steel sheet and strip in coils. Stainless steel is an alloy steel containing, by weight, 1.2 percent or less of carbon and 10.5 percent or more of chromium, with or without other elements. The subject sheet and strip is a flat-rolled product in coils that is greater than 9.5 mm in width and less than 4.75 mm in thickness and that is annealed or otherwise heat treated and pickled or otherwise descaled. The subject sheet and strip may also be further processed ( *e.g.* , cold-rolled, polished, aluminized, coated), provided that it maintains the specific dimensions of sheet and strip following such processing. The merchandise subject to this order is currently classifiable in the *Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States* (“HTSUS”) at subheadings: 7219.13.00.30, 7219.13.00.50, 7219.13.00.70, 7219.13.00.80, 7219.14.00.30, 7219.14.00.65, 7219.14.00.90, 7219.32.00.05, 7219.32.00.20, 7219.32.00.25, 7219.32.00.35, 7219.32.00.36, 7219.32.00.38, 7219.32.00.42, 7219.32.00.44, 7219.33.00.05, 7219.33.00.20, 7219.33.00.25, 7219.33.00.35, 7219.33.00.36, 7219.33.00.38, 7219.33.00.42, 7219.33.00.44, 7219.34.00.05, 7219.34.00.20, 7219.34.00.25, 7219.34.00.30, 7219.34.00.35, 7219.35.00.05, 7219.35.00.15, 7219.35.00.30, 7219.35.00.35, 7219.90.00.10, 7219.90.00.20, 7219.90.00.25, 7219.90.00.60, 7219.90.00.80, 7220.12.10.00, 7220.12.50.00, 7220.20.10.10, 7220.20.10.15, 7220.20.10.60, 7220.20.10.80, 7220.20.60.05, 7220.20.60.10, 7220.20.60.15, 7220.20.60.60, 7220.20.60.80, 7220.20.70.05, 7220.20.70.10, 7220.20.70.15, 7220.20.70.60, 7220.20.70.80, 7220.20.80.00, 7220.20.90.30, 7220.20.90.60, 7220.90.00.10, 7220.90.00.15, 7220.90.00.60, and 7220.90.00.80. Although the HTSUS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the Department's written description of the merchandise is dispositive. Excluded from the scope of this order are the following:

(1)sheet and strip that is not annealed or otherwise heat treated and pickled or otherwise descaled,

(2)sheet and strip that is cut to length,

(3)plate ( *i.e.* , flat-rolled stainless steel products of a thickness of 4.75 mm or more),

(4)flat wire ( *i.e.* , cold-rolled sections, with a prepared edge, rectangular in shape, of a width of not more than 9.5 mm), and

(5)razor blade steel. Razor blade steel is a flat rolled product of stainless steel, not further worked than cold-rolled (cold-reduced), in coils, of a width of not more than 23 mm and a thickness of 0.266 mm or less, containing, by weight, 12.5 to 14.5 percent chromium, and certified at the time of entry to be used in the manufacture of razor blades. *See* Chapter 72 of the HTSUS, “Additional U.S. Note” 1(d). The Department has determined that certain specialty stainless steel products are also excluded from the scope of this order. These excluded products are described below: Flapper valve steel is defined as stainless steel strip in coils containing, by weight, between 0.37 and 0.43 percent carbon, between 1.15 and 1.35 percent molybdenum, and between 0.20 and 0.80 percent manganese. This steel also contains, by weight, phosphorus of 0.025 percent or less, silicon of between 0.20 and 0.50 percent, and sulfur of 0.020 percent or less. The product is manufactured by means of vacuum arc remelting, with inclusion controls for sulphide of no more than 0.04 percent and for oxide of no more than 0.05 percent. Flapper valve steel has a tensile strength of between 210 and 300 ksi, yield strength of between 170 and 270 ksi, plus or minus 8 ksi, and a hardness

(Hv)of between 460 and 590. Flapper valve steel is most commonly used to produce specialty flapper valves in compressors. Also excluded is a product referred to as suspension foil, a specialty steel product used in the manufacture of suspension assemblies for computer disk drives. Suspension foil is described as 302/304 grade or 202 grade stainless steel of a thickness between 14 and 127 microns, with a thickness tolerance of plus-or-minus 2.01 microns, and surface glossiness of 200 to 700 percent Gs. Suspension foil must be supplied in coil widths of not more than 407 mm, and with a mass of 225 kg or less. Roll marks may only be visible on one side, with no scratches of measurable depth. The material must exhibit residual stresses of 2 mm maximum deflection, and flatness of 1.6 mm over 685 mm length. Certain stainless steel foil for automotive catalytic converters is also excluded from the scope of this order. This stainless steel strip in coils is a specialty foil with a thickness of between 20 and 110 microns used to produce a metallic substrate with a honeycomb structure for use in automotive catalytic converters. The steel contains, by weight, carbon of no more than 0.030 percent, silicon of no more than 1.0 percent, manganese of no more than 1.0 percent, chromium of between 19 and 22 percent, aluminum of no less than 5.0 percent, phosphorus of no more than 0.045 percent, sulfur of no more than 0.03 percent, lanthanum of between 0.002 and 0.05 percent, and total rare earth elements of more than 0.06 percent, with the balance iron. Permanent magnet iron-chromium-cobalt alloy stainless strip is also excluded from the scope of this order. This ductile stainless steel strip contains, by weight, 26 to 30 percent chromium, and 7 to 10 percent cobalt, with the remainder of iron, in widths 228.6 mm or less, and a thickness between 0.127 and 1.270 mm. It exhibits magnetic remanence between 9,000 and 12,000 gauss, and a coercivity of between 50 and 300 oersteds. This product is most commonly used in electronic sensors and is currently available under proprietary trade names such as “Arnokrome III.” 1 1 “Arnokrome III” is a trademark of the Arnold Engineering Company. Certain electrical resistance alloy steel is also excluded from the scope of this order. This product is defined as a non-magnetic stainless steel manufactured to American Society of Testing and Materials (“ASTM”) specification B344 and containing, by weight, 36 percent nickel, 18 percent chromium, and 46 percent iron, and is most notable for its resistance to high temperature corrosion. It has a melting point of 1390 degrees Celsius and displays a creep rupture limit of 4 kilograms per square millimeter at 1000 degrees Celsius. This steel is most commonly used in the production of heating ribbons for circuit breakers and industrial furnaces, and in rheostats for railway locomotives. The product is currently available under proprietary trade names such as “Gilphy 36.” 2 2 “Gilphy 36” is a trademark of Imphy, S.A. Certain martensitic precipitation-hardenable stainless steel is also excluded from the scope of this order. This high-strength, ductile stainless steel product is designated under the Unified Numbering System (“UNS”) as S45500-grade steel, and contains, by weight, 11 to 13 percent chromium and 7 to 10 percent nickel. Carbon, manganese, silicon and molybdenum each comprise, by weight, 0.05 percent or less, with phosphorus and sulfur each comprising, by weight, 0.03 percent or less. This steel has copper, niobium, and titanium added to achieve aging, and will exhibit yield strengths as high as 1700 Mpa and ultimate tensile strengths as high as 1750 Mpa after aging, with elongation percentages of 3 percent or less in 50 mm. It is generally provided in thicknesses between 0.635 and 0.787 mm, and in widths of 25.4 mm. This product is most commonly used in the manufacture of television tubes and is currently available under proprietary trade names such as “Durphynox 17.” 3 3 “Durphynox 17” is a trademark of Imphy, S.A. Finally, three specialty stainless steels typically used in certain industrial blades and surgical and medical instruments are also excluded from the scope of this order. These include stainless steel strip in coils used in the production of textile cutting tools ( *e.g.* , carpet knives). 4 This steel is similar to ASTM grade 440F, but containing, by weight, 0.5 to 0.7 percent of molybdenum. The steel also contains, by weight, carbon of between 1.0 and 1.1 percent, sulfur of 0.020 percent or less and includes between 0.20 and 0.30 percent copper and between 0.20 and 0.50 percent cobalt. This steel is sold under proprietary names such as “GIN4 HI-C.” The second excluded stainless steel strip in coils is similar to AISI 420-J2 and contains, by weight, carbon of between 0.62 and 0.70 percent, silicon of between 0.20 and 0.50 percent, manganese of between 0.45 and 0.80 percent, phosphorus of no more than 0.025 percent and sulfur of no more than 0.020 percent. This steel has a carbide density on average of 100 carbide particles per square micron. An example of this product is “GIN5” steel. The third specialty steel has a chemical composition similar to AISI 420 F, with carbon of between 0.37 and 0.43 percent, molybdenum of between 1.15 and 1.35 percent, but lower manganese of between 0.20 and 0.80 percent, phosphorus of no mor than 0.025 percent, silicon of between 0.20 and 0.50 percent, and sulfur of no more than 0.020 percent. This product is supplied with a hardness of more than Hv 500 guaranteed after customer processing, and is supplied as, for example, “GIN6.” 4 This list of uses is illustrative and provided for descriptive purposes only. Final Results of Review As noted above, the Department received no comments concerning the Preliminary Results. Therefore, consistent with the *Preliminary Results* , we continue to find the net subsidy for DMC to be 0.03 percent *ad valorem* , which is *de minimis* . *See* 19 CFR 351.106(c)(1). As there have been no changes to or comments on the *Preliminary Results* , we are not attaching a decision memorandum to this **Federal Register** notice. For further details of the programs included in this proceeding, see the *Preliminary Results* . Assessment Rates/Cash Deposits The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) 15 days after the date of publication of these final results of this review, to liquidate shipments of subject merchandise by DMC entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2005, without regard to countervailing duties. We will also instruct CBP not to collect cash deposits of estimated countervailing duties on shipments of the subject merchandise by DMC entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of the final results of this review. For all non-reviewed companies, we will instruct CBP to continue to collect cash deposits at the most recent company-specific or country-wide rate applicable to the company. Accordingly, the cash deposit rates that will be applied to non-reviewed companies covered by this order are those established in the most recently completed administrative proceeding. *See Final Results of Countervailing Duty Administrative Review: Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils from the Republic of Korea* , 72 FR 120 (January 3, 2007). These rates shall apply to all non-reviewed companies until a review of a company assigned these rates is completed. Return of Destruction of Proprietary Information This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective order (“APO”) of their responsibility concerning the disposition of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and the terms of an APO is a sanctionable violation. We are issuing and publishing these results in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: January 8, 2008. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E8-558 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Institute of Standards and Technology Visiting Committee on Advanced Technology AGENCY: National Institute of Standards and Technology Department of Commerce. ACTION: Notice of Public Meeting. SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. app. 2, notice is hereby given that the Visiting Committee on Advanced Technology (VCAT), National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), will meet Tuesday, February 5, 2008, from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. and Wednesday, February 6, 2008, from 8 a.m. to 12 p.m. The Visiting Committee on Advanced Technology is composed of fifteen members appointed by the Director of NIST who are eminent in such fields as business, research, new product development, engineering, labor, education, management consulting, environment, and international relations. The purpose of this meeting is to review and make recommendations regarding general policy for the Institute, its organization, its budget, and its programs within the framework of applicable national policies as set forth by the President and the Congress. Agenda items will include preparation of the VCAT annual report, with break-out sessions for the three sub-committee groups on Information Technology, Nanotechnology, and Biosciences to discuss recommendations made to NIST throughout the year, with input back to the full committee. The agenda may change to accommodate Committee business. The final agenda will be posted on the NIST Web site at *http://www.nist.gov/director/vcat/agenda.htm* . Anyone wishing to attend this meeting must submit name, e-mail address and phone number to Denise Herbert ( *denise.herbert@nist.gov* or 301-975-5607) no later than February 1, 2008. DATES: The meeting will convene on February 5, 2008, at 8:30 a.m. and will adjourn on February 6, 2008, at 12 p.m. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held in the Employees Lounge, Administration Building, at NIST, Gaithersburg, Maryland. All visitors to the NIST site will have to pre-register to be admitted. Please submit your name, time of arrival, e-mail address and phone number to Denise Herbert no later than Friday, February 1, 2008, and she will provide you with instructions for admittance. Ms. Herbert's e-mail address is *denise.herbert@nist.gov* and her phone number is

(301)975-5607. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Denise Herbert, Visiting Committee on Advanced Technology, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899-1000, telephone number

(301)975-5607. Dated: January 9, 2008. Richard Kayser, Acting Deputy Director. [FR Doc. E8-537 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-13-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XE97 Endangered and Threatened Species; Take of Anadromous Fish AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Issuance of a scientific research permit. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that NMFS has issued Permit 10017 to California Department of Parks and Recreation

(CDPR)in Half Moon Bay, California. ADDRESSES: The application, permit, and related documents are available for review by appointment at: Protected Resources Division, NMFS, 777 Sonoma Avenue, Room 315, Santa Rosa, CA 95404 (ph: 707-575-6097, fax: 707-578-3435, e-mail at: *Jeffrey.Jahn@noaa.gov* ) FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Jahn at 707-575-6097, or e-mail: *Jeffrey.Jahn@noaa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Authority The issuance of permits and permit modifications, as required by the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543) (ESA), is based on a finding that such permits/modifications:

(1)are applied for in good faith;

(2)would not operate to the disadvantage of the listed species which are the subject of the permits; and

(3)are consistent with the purposes and policies set forth in section 2 of the ESA. Authority to take listed species is subject to conditions set forth in the permits. Permits and modifications are issued in accordance with and are subject to the ESA and NMFS regulations (50 CFR parts 222-226) governing listed fish and wildlife permits. Species Covered in This Notice This notice is relevant to federally endangered Central California Coast coho salmon ( *Oncorhynchus kisutch* ) and threatened Central California Coast steelhead ( *O. mykiss* ). Permit Issued A notice of the receipt of an application for a scientific research permit (10017) was published in the **Federal Register** on July 23, 2007 (72 FR 40119). Permit 10017 was issued to CDPR on November 27, 2007. Permit 10017 authorizes:

(1)unintentional non-lethal capture (by beach seine and dipnet), and release of adult Central California Coast coho salmon and adult Central California Coast steelhead;

(2)capture (by backpack electrofishing, beach seine, dip-net, and fyke-net trap), handling, and release of juvenile Central California Coast coho salmon;

(3)capture (by backpack electrofishing, beach seine, dip-net, and fyke-net trap), handling, marking (using fin-clips, PIT tags, or VIE tags), and release of juvenile Central California Coast steelhead;

(4)capture (by beach seine or dip-net), lethal sacrifice, and collection of sick or injured juvenile Central California Coast steelhead; and

(5)capture (by beach seine or dip-net) and collection of previously dead juvenile Central California Coast steelhead. Permit 10017 authorizes unintentional lethal take of: juvenile Central California Coast steelhead not to exceed 2 percent of juvenile Central California Coast steelhead captured. Permit 10017 does not authorize any lethal take of adult Central California Coast coho salmon and adult Central California Coast steelhead. Permit 10017 authorizes intentional lethal take of five juvenile Central California Coast steelhead that appear to be sick or injured (appear lethargic, are unresponsive to disturbance, or swim rapidly in a circular or erratic manner) as a result of fish die-off events in Pescadero Lagoon, San Mateo County, California. Permit 10017 is for research to be conducted in the lagoons and streams of San Gregorio Creek, Pomponio Creek, and Pescadero Creek in San Mateo County, California. The purpose of the research is to provide ESA-listed salmonid population, distribution, and habitat assessment data which will:

(1)contribute to the general body of scientific knowledge pertaining to ESA-listed salmonids;

(2)assess the effects of chronic hypoxia and annual fish die-off events on the status of juvenile ESA-listed salmonid populations and habitat use in Pescadero Lagoon;

(3)guide habitat restoration and management actions to prevent future fish die-off events in Pescadero Lagoon; and

(4)evaluate the effects of wetland restoration and altered sandbar regimes on juvenile ESA-listed salmonid populations and lagoon habitat to guide future restoration and management activities. Permit 10017 expires on November 30, 2012. Dated: January 10, 2008. Angela Somma, Chief, Endangered Species Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E8-553 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XF00 Marine Mammals; File No. 642-1536-03 AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice; withdrawal of application. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that Joseph R. Mobley, Ph.D., University of Hawaii at Manoa, 2528 McCarthy Mall, Webster 404, Honolulu, HI 96822 has withdrawn his application for an amendment to his existing scientific research permit. ADDRESSES: The documents related to this action are available for review upon written request or by appointment in the following offices: Permits, Conservation and Education Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13705, Silver Spring, MD 20910; phone (301)713-2289; fax (301)427-2521; and Pacific Islands Region, NMFS, 1601 Kapiolani Blvd., Rm 1110, Honolulu, HI 96814-4700; phone (808)973-2935; fax (808)973-2941. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kate Swails or Amy Hapeman, (301)713-2289. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 4, 2007 a notice was published in the **Federal Register** (72 FR 30775) that an application had been filed by Dr. Mobley for an amendment to Permit No. 642-1536. Permit No. 642-1536 authorizes the permit holder to conduct aerial and vessel-based research, including surface and underwater photography/videography for identification and sex verification, on North Pacific humpback whales ( *Megaptera novaeangliae* ) and several other species of cetaceans in Hawaiian waters. The withdrawn amendment request was for authorization to use sound playback on up to 250 humpback whales annually in the waters off West Maui and possibly other inshore areas among the main Hawaiian Islands. After completing revisions the applicant plans to resubmit the application at a later date. Dated: January 9, 2008. P. Michael Payne, Chief, Permits, Conservation and Education Division,Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E8-556 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN: 0648-XF02 South Atlantic Fishery Management Council; Public Meetings AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Commerce. ACTION: Notice of public scoping meetings. SUMMARY: The South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council) will hold a series of public scoping meetings regarding a proposed Comprehensive Allocation Amendment, Amendment 17 to the Snapper Grouper Fishery Management Plan

(FMP)for the South Atlantic, Amendment 18 to the Snapper Grouper FMP for the South Atlantic, and commercial allocation of the South Atlantic king mackerel quota. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION . DATES: The series of 5 public scoping meetings will be held February 4 - 7, 2008 and February 20, 2008. All scoping meetings will be open from 2 p.m. - 5 p.m. and from 6 p.m. - 8 p.m. Council staff and area Council members will be available for informal round table discussions and to answer questions. Members of the public will have an opportunity to go on record at any time during the meeting hours to record their comments on the scoping issues for Council consideration. Written comments must be received in the South Atlantic Council's office by 5 p.m. on February 22, 2008. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION . ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent to Bob Mahood, Executive Director, South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 4055 Faber Place Drive, Suite 201, North Charleston, SC 29405, or via email to: *CompAllocScoping@safmc.net* for the Comprehensive Allocation Amendment; *SGAm17Scoping@safmc.net* for Amendment 17 to the Snapper Grouper FMP; *SGAm18Scoping@safmc.net* for Amendment 18 to the Snapper Grouper FMP; and *Mack16Scoping@safmc.net* for the commercial king mackerel quota allocation comments. Copies of the scoping documents are available from Kim Iverson, South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 4055 Faber Place Drive, Suite 201, North Charleston, SC 29405; telephone:

(843)571-4366 or toll free at

(866)SAFMC-10. Copies will also be available online at *www.safmc.net* as they become available. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim Iverson, South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 4055 Faber Place Drive, Suite 201, North Charleston, SC 29405; telephone:

(843)571-4366; fax:

(843)769-4520; email address: *kim.iverson@safmc.net* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Meeting Dates and Locations: The scoping meetings will be held at the following locations: 1. *February 4, 2008* - The Mutiny Hotel, 2951 South Bayshore Drive, Coconut Grove, FL 33133, telephone:

(305)441-2100; 2. *February 5, 2008* - Radisson Resort at the Port, 8701 Astronaut Boulevard, Cape Canaveral, FL 32920, telephone:

(321)784-0000; 3. *February 6, 2008* - Quality Inn, 125 Venure Drive, Brunswick, GA 31525, telephone:

(912)265-4600; 4. *February 7, 2008* - Sheraton New Bern, 100 Middle Street, New Bern, NC 28560, telephone:

(252)638-3585; 5. *February 20, 2008* - Hilton Garden Inn, 5265 International Blvd., North Charleston, South CA 29418, telephone:

(843)308-9331. The public scoping meetings will address overlapping fisheries issues for the South Atlantic region. These include:

(1)A Comprehensive Allocation Amendment - the Council is considering this amendment to address commercial and recreational sector allocations of species under its jurisdiction in order to meet the Annual Catch Limit requirements;

(2)Amendment 17 to the Snapper Grouper FMP - addressing requirements to establish Annual Catch Limits and Accountability Measures for overfished species by 2010 as specified in the Reauthorized Magnuson Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, reduction of bycatch for deepwater snapper grouper species, options for the black sea bass pot and longline gear snapper grouper fisheries, changes to the golden tilefish fishing year, a 6-month winter closure for the snowy grouper fishery, extension of the management unit (and regulations) through the Mid-Atlantic Council's area of jurisdiction, golden tilefish allocations, and possible removal of some species from the snapper grouper fishery management unit;

(3)Amendment 18 to the Snapper Grouper FMP - addressing possible Limited Access Privilege Programs for the commercial snapper grouper fishery; and

(4)Commercial allocation of the commercial king mackerel fishery. With possible reductions in the Total Allowable Catch

(TAC)for South Atlantic king mackerel, the Council is looking at options to ensure allocations of the commercial quota are fairly distributed from North Carolina to Florida. Special Accommodations These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to the Council office (see ADDRESSES ) by 3 days prior to the start of each meeting. Dated: January 10, 2008. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E8-541 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE Information Collection; Submission for OMB Review, Comment Request AGENCY: Corporation for National and Community Service. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Corporation for National and Community Service (hereinafter the “Corporation”), has submitted a public information collection request

(ICR)entitled the AmeriCorps NCCC Team Leader Application to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13, (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). Copies of this ICR, with applicable supporting documentation, may be obtained by calling the Corporation for National and Community Service, Mr. Nicholas Zefran

(202)606-6703. Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TTY-TDD) may call

(202)565-2799 between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. eastern time, Monday through Friday. ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted, identified by the title of the information collection activity, to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: Ms. Katherine Astrich, OMB Desk Officer for the Corporation for National and Community Service, by any of the following two methods within 30 days from the date of publication in this **Federal Register** :

(1)*By fax to:*

(202)395-6974, *Attention:* Ms. Katherine Astrich, OMB Desk Officer for the Corporation for National and Community Service; and

(2)Electronically by e-mail to: *Katherine_T._Astrich@omb.eop.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The OMB is particularly interested in comments which: • Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Corporation, including whether the information will have practical utility; • Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; • Propose ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and • Propose ways to 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 submissions of responses. Comments A 60-day public comment Notice was published in the **Federal Register** on November 1, 2007. This comment period ended December 31, 2007. No public comments were received from this notice. *Description:* The Corporation is seeking approval of the AmeriCorps NCCC Team Leader Application. The AmeriCorps NCCC Team Leader Application must be completed as part of the application process for acceptance into the program. This form is used to determine eligibility of applicants to successfully serve in the Team Leader role of the program. *Type of Review:* Renewal. *Agency:* Corporation for National and Community Service. *Title:* AmeriCorps NCCC Team Leader Application. *OMB Number:* 3045-0005. *Agency Number:* None. *Affected Public:* Citizens interested in serving as team leaders. *Total Respondents:* 300 annually. *Frequency:* One-time. *Average Time per Response:* 1 hour. *Estimated Total Burden Hours:* 300 hours. *Total Burden Cost (capital/startup):* None. *Total Burden Cost (operating/maintenance):* None. Dated: January 8, 2008. Merlene Mazyck, Director, AmeriCorps NCCC. [FR Doc. E8-532 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6050-$$-P DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Navy Notice of Intent To Grant Partially Exclusive Patent License; Soil Information Systems, Inc. AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DoD. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Department of the Navy herby gives notice of its intent to grant to Soil Information Systems, Inc., a revocable, nonassignable, partially exclusive license in the United States to practice the Government-Owned invention(s) described in U.S. Patent Number 5,316,950 entitled “Method for quantitative calibration of in situ optical chemical measurements in soils using soil class and characteristics”, issue date May 31, 1994. DATES: Anyone wishing to object to the grant of this license must file written objections along with supporting evidence, if any, not later than January 30, 2008. ADDRESSES: Written objections are to be filed with the Office of Research and Technology Applications, Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center, Code 73120, 53560 Hull St., San Diego, CA 92152-5048. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen H. Lieberman, Ph.D., Head, Office of Research and Technology Applications, Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center, Code 73120, 53560 Hull St., San Diego, CA 92152-5048, telephone 619-553-2778, *E-Mail: stephen.lieberman@navy.mil* . (Authority: 35 U.S.C. 207, 37 CFR Part 404) Dated: January 9, 2008. T.M. Cruz, Lieutenant, Office of the Judge Advocate General, U.S. Navy, Federal Register Liaison Officer. [FR Doc. E8-517 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3810-FF-P DENALI COMMISSION Fiscal Year 2008 Draft Work Plan AGENCY: Denali Commission. ACTION: Denali Commission Fiscal Year 2008 Draft Work Plan request for comments. SUMMARY: The Denali Commission (Commission) is an independent federal agency based on an innovative federal-state partnership designed to provide critical utilities, infrastructure and support for economic development and in-training in Alaska by delivering federal services in the most cost-effective manner possible. The Commission was created in 1998 with passage of the October 21, 1998 Denali Commission Act

(Act)(Title III of Pub. L. 105-277, 42 U.S.C. 3121). The Denali Commission Act requires that the Commission develop proposed work plans for future spending and that the annual Work Plan be published in the **Federal Register** , providing an opportunity for a 30-day period of public review and written comment. This **Federal Register** notice serves to announce the 30-day opportunity for public comment on the Denali Commission Draft Work Plan for Federal Fiscal Year 2008. DATES: Comments and related material must be received by *February 14, 2008.* ADDRESSES: Submit comments to the Denali Commission, Attention: Automme Circosta, 510 L Street, Suite 410, Anchorage, AK 99501. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Automme Circosta, Denali Commission, 510 L Street, Suite 410, Anchorage, AK 99501. Telephone:

(907)271-1414. E-mail: *acircosta@denali.gov.* *Background:* The Commission's mission is to partner with tribal, federal, state, and local governments and collaborate with all Alaskans to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of government services, to develop a well-trained labor force employed in a diversified and sustainable economy, and to build and ensure the operation and maintenance of Alaska's basic infrastructure. By creating the Commission, Congress mandated that all parties involved partner together to find new and innovative solutions to the unique infrastructure and economic development challenges in America's most remote communities. Pursuant to the Denali Commission Act, as amended, the Commission determines its own basic operating principles and funding criteria on an annual federal fiscal year (October 1 to September 30) basis. The Commission outlines these priorities and funding recommendations in an annual Work Plan. Pursuant to the Act, the Work Plan is first provided in draft by the Commission for publication in the **Federal Register** providing an opportunity for a 30-day period of public review and written comment. The Work Plan is also disseminated widely to Commission program partners including, but not limited to the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), the Economic Development Administration (EDA), and the United States Department of Agriculture—Rural Development (USDA-RD). Commission staff are responsible for compiling written public comment and forwarding it to the Commission's Federal Co-Chair (Mr. George J. Cannelos). The Federal Co-Chair then adopts a final version of the Work Plan, which includes, to the degree the Federal Co-Chair deems appropriate, modifications, additions and deletions based on the policy and program recommendations of the full Commission and public comment. The final version of the Work Plan is forwarded to the Secretary of Commerce for approval on behalf of the Federal Co-Chair. The Work Plan authorizes the Federal Co-Chair to enter into grant agreements, award grants and contracts and obligate the federal funds identified by appropriation below. FY 08 Appropriations Summary The FY 08 Draft Work Plan has been developed based on the appropriations approved by Congress for Fiscal Year 2008 (FY08), as detailed in the FY08 Denali Commission Funding Summary Table below. Some appropriations have been identified as “Estimates.” These figures will be updated in the final Work Plan upon receipt of FY08 appropriations by the Commission. The Denali Commission has historically received several federal funding sources (identified by the varying colors in the table below). These fund sources, commonly referred to as “appropriations,” are governed by the following general principles: • In FY 08 no project specific earmarks were provided in any appropriations; • Energy and Water Appropriations (commonly referred to as Commission “Base” funding) is eligible for use in all programs, but has historically been used substantively to fund the Energy Program. • The Energy Policy Act of 2005 established new authorities for the Commission's Energy Program, with an emphasis on renewable and alternative energy projects. No new funding accompanied the Energy Policy Act, and prior fiscal year Congressional direction has indicated that the Commission should fund renewable and alternative Energy Program activities from the available “Base” appropriation. • All other appropriations outlined below may be used only for the specific program area and may not be used across programs. For instance, Health Resources and Services Administration

(HRSA)funding, which is appropriated for the Health Facilities Program, may not be moved to the Economic Development Program. The figures appearing in the table below include an administrative deduction of 5%, which constitutes the Commission's 5% overhead. In instances where the overhead differs from the 5% it is due to the requirements related to that appropriation. For example, USDA-Rural Utilities Services

(RUS)funding is limited to 4% overhead. Final transportation appropriations received are typically slightly reduced due to agency modifications, reductions and fees determined by the U.S. Department of Transportation. The table below provides the following information, by appropriation: • Total FY 08 Appropriations: These are the figures that appear in the rows entitled “FY 08 Appropriation” and are the original appropriation amounts which do not include Commission overhead deductions. These appropriations are identified by their source name (i.e., “Energy and Water Appropriation; USDA, Rural Utilities Service, etc.) • Total FY 08 Program Available Funding: These are the figures that appear in the rows entitled “FY 08 Appropriations—Program Available” and are the amounts of funding available for program(s) activities after Commission overhead has been deducted. • Program Funding: These are the figures that appear in the rows entitled with the specific Program and Sub-Program area, and are the amounts of funding the Draft FY 08 Work Plan recommends, within each appropriation. • Subtotal of Program Funding These are the figures that appear in the rows entitled “subtotal” and are the subtotals of all program funding within a given appropriation. The subtotal must always equal the Total FY 08 Program Available Funding. Denali Commission FY 08 Appropriations Funding Table FY 08 Energy & Water Appropriation $21,800,000 FY 08 Energy & Water Appropriations (“Base”)—Program Available (less 5% Commission overhead) 20,511,620 *Energy Program: bulk fuel, RPSU, etc.* 10,000,000 *Energy Program: alternative & renewable energy* 9,000,000 (up to) *Teacher Housing Program: design & construction* 1,000,000 *Economic Development Program: various* 511,620 Sub-total $ 20,511,620 FY 08 USDA, Rural Utilities Service

(RUS)15,000,000 FY 08 USDA—Rural Utilities Service (RUS)—Program Available (less 4% overhead) 14,400,000 *Energy Program: high energy cost communities* 14,400,000 Sub-total $ 14,400,000 FY 08 Trans Alaska Pipeline Liability

(TAPL)Trust 4,201,398 FY 08 Trans Alaska Pipeline Liability (TAPL)—Program Available (less 5% overhead) ESTIMATE 3,991,328 *Energy Program: bulk fuel* 3,991,328 Sub-total $ 3,991,328 FY 08 DHHS—Health Resources & Services Administration

(HRSA)39,283,200 FY 08 DHHS—Health Resources & Services Administration (HRSA)—Program Available (less 5% Commission overhead) 37,319,040 *Health Program: Primary Care Clinic Design, Planning, and Construction* 23,319,040 *Health Program: Behavioral Health* 5,000,000 *Health Program: Primary Care in Hospitals* 4,000,000 *Health Program: Domestic Violence Facilities* 1,000,000 *Health Program: Hospital Designs* 4,000,000 Sub-total $ 37,319,040 FY 08 Department of Labor

(DOL)6,875,000 FY 08 Department of Labor (DOL)—Program Available (less 5% Commission overhead) 6,531,250 *Training Program: Various* 6,531,250 Sub-total $ 6,531,250 FY 08 Federal Transportation Administration (FTA)—Estimate 5,000,000 FY 08 Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)—Estimate 19,000,000 FY 08 Transportation (less 5% Commission overhead)—Estimate 22,800,000 *Transportation Program: Docks & Harbors* 9,000,000 *Transportation Program: Roads* 13,800,000 Sub-total $ 22,800,000 FY 08 USDA, Solid Waste 437,000 FY 08 USDA—Solid Waste—Program Available (less 5% Commission overhead) 415,150 *Solid Waste Program: planning, design and construction* 415,150 Sub-total $ 415,150 TOTAL FY 08 Appropriations—Estimate $111,596,598 TOTAL FY 08 Program Available—Estimate $105,968,388 FY 08 Program Details & General Information The following section provides narrative discussion, by each of the Commission Programs identified for FY 08 funding in the table above, in the following categories: • Program History and Approach • Applicant/Grant Process • Program Project Selection Process • Program Policy Issues (as applicable) In addition to the FY 08 funded program activities; the last section of the narrative provides an update on the Commission's Government Coordination Program. The Program is not funded by Commission appropriations, but is an integral component of the Commission's mission, the success of other programs, and the legacy of the Commission's work in Alaska. The final section also includes a general summary of the Commission's potential role in erosion and relocation in Alaska, as well as a summary of the Commission's goals regarding agency-wide program evaluation in FY 08. Energy Program The Energy Program is the Commission's oldest program and is often identified, along with the Health Program, as a “legacy” program. The Program focuses on bulk fuel

(BFU)and rural power system upgrades/power generation

(RPSU)across Alaska. The purpose of this program is to provide code-compliant bulk fuel storage and electrification throughout rural Alaska, especially for communities “off the grid” and not reachable by road or rail. The needs in the bulk fuel and power generation projects are presently estimated at $198 million and $211 million, respectively, in 2004 construction costs. At FY 06 funding rates, it will take another eight to nine years for BFU and ten to eleven years for RPSU before these programs are completed. The Commission has also funded a very successful program of competitively selected energy cost reduction-alternative energy projects. In three completed rounds of funding, approximately $6 million in grant funds have leveraged $8.1 million in participant funding, with estimated life-cycle cost savings (generally diesel fuel avoided over the life of the project) of $29 million. *The Energy Policy Act of 2005* established new authorities for the Commission's Energy Program, with an emphasis on alternative and renewable energy projects, energy transmission, including interties, and fuel transportation systems. Although the 2005 Energy Policy Act did not include specific appropriations, the Commission is expected to carry out the intent of the Act through a portion of its “Base” funding. To date, the Commission has co-funded a number of renewable projects, including hydroelectric facilities, a geothermal power plant, a biomass boiler, and a number of diesel- wind power generation systems. In FY 07 the Commission issued a request for proposals for alternative and renewable energy projects. The FY 08 Work Plan outlines a strategy to rebalance the Energy Program in both legacy and renewable systems, providing up to $9,000,000 for alternative and renewable projects. About 94% of electricity in rural communities which receive Power Cost Equalization

(PCE)payments is produced by diesel and about half the fuel storage in most villages is used for the power plants. Any alternative means of generating power can reduce the capacity needed for fuel storage. This reduces capital costs and operations and maintenance (O&M) and repair and renovation (R&R) costs for fuel storage facilities and may reduce the cost of power to the community. The Energy Program has historically used a “universe of need” model to determine project and program funding. Specifically, the Program is focused on using the existing statewide deficiency lists of bulk fuel facilities and power generation/distribution systems to prioritize project funding decisions. A program partnership model is utilized for project management and partners are actively involved in the design and construction of projects. Partners coordinate project funding requests with the Commission to balance the relative priority or urgency of bulk fuel and power generation needs against available funding, readiness of individual communities and project participants for the project(s), and capacity of the partners to carry out the work. Communities are identified by partners and through the deficiency list process. Legacy program (RPSU, bulk fuel and intertie) Projects are selected and reviewed by Commission staff and program partners. Thus, a renewable project sometimes is proposed in conjunction with a deficiency list project to reduce the dependence on diesel fuel, and the concomitant fuel storage requirements. So too, an intertie, can remove the need for a new power plant, and reduce fuel storage requirements in the intertied communities. Therefore, the legacy Program may include these types of energy infrastructure also. Each community and project must be evaluated holistically. Program partners also perform initial due diligence and Investment Policy screenings, as well as assisting in development of the business plans for the participants as the designs are underway. The Program is dynamic: priorities fluctuate throughout the year, based on design decisions, due diligence and investment policy considerations, site availability, the timing of funding decisions, etc. It is anticipated that alternative/renewable projects will be selected via a Request for Proposal

(RFP)process, similar to the RFP utilized in FY 07. Commission staff and an independent body will review and select projects submitted via RFP. The Energy Advisory Committee, provides policy guidance to the Program. The Energy Advisory Committee does not select or prioritize individual projects. Health Facilities Program The Denali Commission Act was amended in 1999 to provide for the, “planning, constructing and equipping of health facilities.” Since 1999, the Health Facilities Program has been methodically investing in the planning, design and construction of primary care clinics across Alaska. Primary care clinics have remained the “legacy” priority for the Program. However, in 2003 the “Other Than” primary care component of the Program was adopted in response to Congressional direction to fund a mix of other health and social service related facility needs. Over time, the Program has developed Program sub-areas such as Behavioral Health Facilities, Domestic Violence Facilities, Elder Housing, Primary Care in Hospitals, Emergency Medical Services Equipment and Hospital Designs. The Program utilizes a “universe of need” model for primary care and a competitive selection process for other sub-program areas. In 1999 the Program created a deficiency list for primary care clinics, which totaled 288 communities statewide in need of clinic replacement, expansion and/or renovation. Currently, 70 clinics have been completed (either new construction or renovation), 33 are in construction and 62 are in planning/design. The Program is guided by the Health Steering Committee, an advisory body comprised of the following membership organizations: the State of Alaska, Alaska Primary Care Association, the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium, the Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority, the Alaska Native Health Board, the Indian Health Service, the Alaska State Hospital and Nursing Home Association, and the University of Alaska. Projects are recommended for funding by Commission staff if they demonstrate project readiness, which includes the completion of all due diligence requirements. This includes an approved business plan, community plan, site plan checklist, completed 100% design, documentation of cost share match, and realistic ability to move the project forward in a given construction season. The Health Facilities Program anticipates two major policy changes in FY 08, 1) the development of size guidelines for large clinics, as well as potential changes to the existing size guidelines for medium and large clinics, and 2) issuance of an RFP for the design of a multipurpose clinic/facility for communities with less than 100 year round residents. Training Program In a majority of rural communities unemployment rates exceed 50% and per capita income rates are over 50% below the national average. When job opportunities in rural Alaska do become available, rural residents often lack the skills necessary to compete and often lose those jobs to people from outside the community, region or even state. With the limited number of jobs available, the Commission believes it is imperative to ensure that local residents have the skills and knowledge necessary to work on the construction of projects funded by the Denali Commission. In addition the Commission builds sustainability into the development of infrastructure by providing training for the long term management, operations and maintenance of facilities and thus increasing local employment at the same time. The Program's mission is to increase the employment and wages of unemployed or underemployed Alaskans through training for careers in construction, operations and maintenance of public facilities. The Program is also guided by the following principles: • Priority on training for construction, operations and maintenance of public infrastructure. • Training will be tied to a job. • Training will encourage careers not short term employment. • Funding will support a “Training System”. To date the Commission has dedicated training funds to the careers associated with infrastructure development and long-term sustainability in rural Alaska. The Commission has funded construction, operations and maintenance training in communities statewide with large success. The Training Program's primary purpose is to support the Commission's investment in infrastructure development by providing training for the careers related to the Commission infrastructure programs (such as Energy and Health Facilities). The Commission anticipates that the general priority areas of construction, operations and maintenance of Commission Projects; management training for Commission Projects; youth initiatives in support of Commission projects; and construction, operations and maintenance training of “other public infrastructure” will continue to be funded in FY 08. Projects are selected through various RFP processes with partners, and at the recommendation of Commission staff, and policy guidance and priority areas for funding are set by the Training Advisory Committee. Historically the Commission has provided funding directly to organizations that are able to deliver results in the priority areas as described above. These organizations have typically been selected by the Commission directly or through competitive requests for proposals managed by partner organizations. Transportation On August 10, 2005, the President signed into law new highway program reauthorization legislation titled Safe, Accountable Flexible Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). This Act provides the Commission with $15 million annually for fiscal years 2005-2009 for a Denali Access System program. The Act also provides the Commission $10 million annually for Fiscal Years 2005-2009 for docks, harbors and related waterfront development projects. The Act also outlined the array of road projects Denali Access System is designed to target, rural community streets and roads, roads between rural communities, state highway system; and roads to access resource development. The Act requires the formation of the Denali Access System Transportation Advisory Committee

(TAC)to advise the Commission with members appointed by the Governor of Alaska. The nine member committee includes by law, four members who represent existing regional Native corporations, native non-profit entities, tribal governments and four members who represent rural Alaska regions or villages. The committee chair is Denali Commission Federal Co-Chair, George J. Cannelos. The TAC is a central feature of the amendments to the Denali Commission Act of 1998 that defines the Denali Access System. Section 309 defines key committee responsibilities that include: recommend transportation priorities and funding strategies; develop public involvement and coordinating planning programs; develop annual capital budget recommendations; and coordinate multi-region projects. As a result of a TAC-directed public outreach and agency coordination effort, the program has now begun to focus attention on two important transportation needs: roads and boardwalks, and barge landing moorage systems. Village connector roads and roads to local and regional resources will continue to receive significant attention, but to the extent practical each year, local roads and boardwalks in small rural communities will receive primary attention. The program will also maintain its focus on dust control in villages. In the waterfront development program, docks and harbors in small coastal communities will continue to receive attention, but there is a significant need for barge landings in coastal and riverine communities to improve operational safety and efficiencies. This class of project will receive primary consideration each year to the extent funding and construction schedules allow. Another evolution in Program development, especially in the road Program, has been a shift from maximizing financial leveraging opportunities with other transportation agencies, to fully fund, as necessary, the program's highest priority projects. In FY 06, the $23 million transportation program leveraged almost $100 million in projects. In coming years, while striving to leverage funding opportunities, an emphasis on priorities over funding partnerships will likely reduce the overall program joint-fund total. This has been critical because of the nature of the projects the Commission is able to fund. These projects are typically very important, but may not rise to prioritization for funding on State or other Federal transportation systems. The TAC reviews project nominations on a semi-annual basis, once in December for project selections and once during the summer to monitor project development. In addition to meeting transportation-specific criteria and processes, the Program fully incorporates Denali Commission policies including a commitment to sustainable community projects, and a commitment to the Commission's Investment Policy. Solid Waste The Commission began receiving solid waste funding in FY 06. The Commission partners with USDA Rural Development to address deficiencies in solid waste disposal sites which threaten to contaminate rural drinking water supplies. Proper solid waste collection, processing and disposal are an essential public service that often presents a difficult challenge in rural Alaska. Due to several factors, including limited rural Alaska local government budgets, community remoteness, limited transportation infrastructure and obstacles posed by Alaska's severe climate, solid waste service is a prominent widespread deficiency in the context of Alaska's wide array of environmental issues and public health and quality of life issues. The program relies on a competitive RFP process to select and identify projects, and utilizes a multidiscipline review panel to ensure that projects meet all Commission due diligence and policy requirements. Program partners administer individual grant awards on behalf of the Commission. Typically this RFP process occurs once or twice in a given year depending on need and project eligibility. Teacher Housing Teaching in rural Alaska can be one of the most rewarding and challenging professions. A critical issue for rural teachers is finding safe, affordable housing during the school year. Housing availability varies by community from newer adequate homes, to old housing units with multiple safety and structural problems, to a lack of enough available housing, requiring teachers to double-up or even live in the school. Teacher turnover rates are high in rural Alaska, with many teachers citing unavailable or inadequate housing as a factor in their decision to move. The quality of education received by students is impacted by teacher retention. By improving the availability and quality of housing for teachers, the Commission strives to also increase the quality of education received by the next generation of Alaskans. In FY 04, Congress directed the Commission to address the teacher housing needs in rural Alaska. The Commission launched a statewide survey of 51 school districts and rural education attendance areas to identify and prioritize the teacher housing needs throughout the state. Urban districts in Anchorage, Fairbanks, Mat-Su and Juneau were not included in the survey. The Commission utilizes a program partnership model to implement the teacher housing program. An annual RFP process identifies eligible projects and other funding sources, such as debt service, available to fill the gap between the project's capacity to carry debt and the total development cost of the project. Acquisition, rehabilitation, new construction, and multi-site rehabilitation are eligible development activities under this program. Economic Development Since its earliest days as a territory of the United States, Alaska has contributed to the economy of America, largely through supply of raw materials or partially processed products. Now Alaska's abundant natural resources, from fossil fuel and mineral products to timber and fish, must compete in the global marketplace. Innovation and entrepreneurship have become critical to business success. One of the purposes of the Commission is economic development. The Commission firmly believes that sustainable economic development for Alaska's rural communities, like that of the rest of America, will be generated in the private, commercial sector, not within government. To that end, the Commission supports the development of public infrastructure upon which the private sector creates jobs and wealth, and helps ensure that good businesses and business ideas have a chance to become long-term, self-sustaining enterprises. Over the history of the Program, the Commission has supported and advanced a wide array of economic development program activities ranging from community profile mapping to supporting innovative models for lending, and equity investment in Alaska. The Program is guided by Commission staff and the Economic Development Advisory Committee, which provides general policy guidance and funding recommendations in broad categories. It is anticipated that FY 08 funds will be made available via an RFP process. Government Coordination The Commission is charged with the special role of increasing the effectiveness of government programs by acting as a catalyst to coordinate the many Federal and State programs that serve Alaska. In FY 08 the Commission will continue its role of coordinating State and Federal agencies and other partner organizations to accomplish its overall mission of developing Alaska's communities. Other Emerging Issues The Commission anticipates an active role in the emerging issues and challenges related to erosion and relocation in Alaska in the future. The Commission is committed to partnering with other Federal, State and tribal entities to ensure that public policy solutions are developed in the most expedient, responsive and culturally-appropriate manner. While no funds are appropriated for the Commission for this purpose in FY 08, Commission staff are working diligently to ensure that communities that may experience erosion or relocation issues are being vetted and reviewed appropriately prior to infrastructure development occurring. The Commission is committed to innovative, cost-effective and creative design and construction solutions. To that end, the Commission anticipates engaging in more diverse and experimental partnerships in FY 08, and will be seeking innovative design, construction and program and project management practices. In FY 08 the Commission will be creating an ongoing, agency wide evaluation system to measure the outcomes of Commission programs. It is anticipated that this work will begin in late spring or early summer, and would be designed to provide by empirical and qualitative data regarding Commission programs, projects and overall goal accomplishments in a broad set of evaluation criteria. It is the Commission's intent to maintain high-level measures that are correlated to the Commission's goals related to improving access, reducing cost and improving the quality of services and facilities across Alaska. Program Advisory Committees, staff and Commissioners will play a critical role in shaping this evaluation methodology. Dated: January 9, 2008. George J. Cannelos, Federal Co-Chair. [FR Doc. E8-519 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3300-01-P DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request AGENCY: Department of Education. ACTION: Correction Notice. SUMMARY: On December 21, 2007, the Department of Education published a comment period notice in the **Federal Register** (Page 72682, Column 3) for the information collection, “Understanding Science Professional Development and the Science Achievement of English Learners.” The burden hours are hereby corrected to 680. The IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of Management, hereby issues a correction notice as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. Dated: January 9, 2008. Angela C. Arrington, IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of Management. [FR Doc. E8-548 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-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 “Natural Gas Processing Plant Survey,” Form EIA-757 to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for review and a three-year approval 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 February 14, 2008. 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. “Natural Gas Processing Plant Survey” Form EIA-757. 2. Energy Information Administration. 3. OMB Number 1905-NEW. 4. NEW. 5. Mandatory. 6. The purposes of the survey are to collect information and produce periodic reports about the operational status of U.S. natural gas processing plants to improve public understanding of their production capacities and operating levels as well as to monitor constraints resulting from natural gas supply emergencies. The survey consists of Schedule A “Baseline Report,” a census which will be used to collect baseline operational information on all U.S. natural gas processing plants. Schedule A will collect information as frequently as every three years and the information will be used for periodic reports on the plants as well as to develop the survey frame for Schedule B “Emergency Status Report”. In the event of a natural gas supply emergency, Schedule B will collect information about operating levels, damage and recovery of operations. 7. Operators of natural gas processing plants. 8. 84 hours annually. 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, January 8, 2008. Jay H. Casselberry, Agency Clearance Officer, Energy Information Administration. [FR Doc. E8-523 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 13015-000] Town of Edgartown; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests December 18, 2007. Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection: a. *Type of Application:* Preliminary Permit. b. *Project No.:* 13015-000. c. *Date Filed:* September 12, 2007. d. *Applicant:* Town of Edgartown. e. *Name of Project:* Nantucket Tidal Energy Plant Water Power Project. f. *Location:* The project would be located in Nantucket Sound and Muskeget Channel, between Nantucket Island and Martha's Vineyard, in Nantucket and Dukes Counties, Massachusetts. The project uses no dam or impoundment. g. *Filed Pursuant to:* Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r). h. *Applicant Contact:* Ms. Pamela Dolby, Town Administrator, Town of Edgartown, 70 Main Street, P.O. Box 5158, Edgartown, MA 02539, phone

(508)627-6180. i. *FERC Contact:* Ms. Kelly Houff,

(202)502-6393. j. *Deadline for filing motions to intervene, protests and comments:* 60 days from the issuance date of this notice. All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. Please include the project number (P-13015-000) on any comments or motions filed. The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person in the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. k. *Competing Application:* Project No. 12802-000, Date Filed: May 21, 2007, Date Public Notice Issued: June 13, 2007, Due Date: August 13, 2007. l. *Description of Project:* The proposed project consists of:

(1)50 OCGen TM horizontal hydrokinetic cross flow turbine generation units from Ocean and Renewable Power Company, LLC, or a similar technology, having a total installed capacity of 20 megawatts,

(2)a proposed 3-mile-long transmission line connected to a 4.8 kV circuit, and

(3)appurtenant facilities. The Town of Edgartown's project would have an average annual generation of 50.48 gigawatt-hours, which would be sold to a local utility. m. * Locations of Applications:* A copy of the application is available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission in the Public Reference Room, located at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426, or by calling

(202)502-8371. This filing may also be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3676 or e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov.* For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item h above. n. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission. o. *Proposed Scope of Studies under Permit:* A preliminary permit, if issued, does not authorize construction. The term of the proposed preliminary permit would be 36 months. The work proposed under the preliminary permit would include economic analysis, preparation of preliminary engineering plans, and a study of environmental impacts. Based on the results of these studies, the Applicant would decide whether to proceed with the preparation of a development application to construct and operate the project. p. *Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene:* Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application. q. *Filing and Service of Responsive Documents:* Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “PROTEST”, or “MOTION TO INTERVENE”, as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing refers. Any of the above-named documents must be filed by providing the original and the number of copies provided by the Commission's regulations to: The Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. A copy of any motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application. r. *Agency Comments:* Federal, State, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described application. A copy of the application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-499 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #1 December 18, 2007. Take notice that the Commission received the following exempt wholesale generator filings: *Docket Numbers:* EG08-23-000. *Applicants:* Beech Ridge Energy LLC. *Description:* Beech Ridge Energy LLC submits a notice of self-certification of its status as an exempt wholesale generator. *Filed Date:* 12/12/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071214-0017. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, January 2, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* EG08-24-000. *Applicants:* Las Vegas Cogeneration LP. *Description:* Notice of Self-Certification for exempt wholesale generator status. *Filed Date:* 12/14/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071214-5094. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 4, 2008. Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings: *Docket Numbers:* ER03-478-017; ER06-200-010; ER07-254-002; ER03-1326-010; ER07-460-001; ER05-534-011; ER05-365-011; ER05-1262-009; ER06-1093-005; ER03-296-013; ER01-3121-012; ER02-418-011; ER03-416-014; ER05-332-011; ER07-287-004; ER07-242-004; ER03-951-013; ER04-94-011; ER02-417-011; ER07-1378-001; ER05-1146-011; ER05-481-011; ER07-240-005; ER07-195-002; ER02-2085-006. *Applicants:* PPM Energy Inc.; Big Horn Wind Project LLC; Casselman Windpower, LLC; Colorado Green Holdings, LLC; Dillon Wind LLC; Eastern Desert Power LLC; Elk River Windfarm LLC; Flat Rock Windpower LLC; Flat Rock Windpower II LLC; Flying Cloud Power Partners, LLC; Klamath Energy LLC; Klamath Generation LLC; Klondike Wind Power LLC; Klondike Wind Power II LLC; Klondike Wind Power III LLC; MinnDakota Wind LLC; Moraine Wind LLC; Mountain View Power Partners III, LLC; Phoenix Wind Power LLC; Providence Heights Wind, LLC; Shiloh I Wind Project LLC; Trimont Wind I LLC; Twin Buttes Wind LLC; Locust Ridge Wind Farm, LLC; Northern Iowa Windpower LLC. *Description:* The Iberdrola Companies informs FERC that they have not erected barriers to entry and will not erect barriers to entry re PPM Energy Inc *et al.* *Filed Date:* 12/11/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071213-0040. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, January 2, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER03-765-006. *Applicants:* Calpine Oneta Power, L.P. *Description:* Calpine Oneta Power, LP's compliance filing of its revised Rate Schedule FERC 2. *Filed Date:* 12/12/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071213-0157. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, January 2, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER03-1331-005. *Applicants:* Williams Power Company, Inc. *Description:* Williams Gas Marketing, Inc. f/k/a Williams Power Company, Inc. submits Notice of Change in Status. *Filed Date:* 12/11/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071214-0009. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, January 2, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER05-349-004. *Applicants:* Georgia Energy Cooperative. *Description:* Georgia Energy Cooperative submits notice of non-material change in status, in compliance with Order 697. *Filed Date:* 12/14/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071217-0062. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 4, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER06-629-002. *Applicants:* California Independent System Operator Corporation. *Description:* California Independent System Operator Corp. submits its Small Generator Interconnection Procedures and on 12/17/07 submit a supplement to this filing. *Filed Date:* 12/13/2007; 12/17/07. *Accession Number:* 20071217-0058. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, January 3, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER06-630-001. *Applicants:* Pacific Gas and Electric Company. *Description:* California Independent System Operator Corp. & Pacific Gas and Electric Co. *et al.* submits a Small Generator Interconnection Agreement. *Filed Date:* 12/13/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071217-0059. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, January 3, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-357-002. *Applicants:* Fenton Power Partners I, LLC. *Description:* Fenton Power Partners I, LLC submits notice of non-material change in status related to a change in its upstream ownership. *Filed Date:* 12/12/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071213-0158. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, January 2, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-943-001. *Applicants:* Black Hills Power, Inc. *Description:* Black Hills Power, Inc and Cheyenne Light, Fuel and Power Co submits additional information as a supplement to their 5/29/07 filing of a Generator Dispatch and Energy Management Agreement. *Filed Date:* 12/13/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071214-0086. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 26, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-1071-003; ER07-1072-003. *Applicants:* PJM Interconnection, LLC; Virginia Electric and Power Company. *Description:* Virgina Electric and Power Company submits executed amended service agreement containing the terms and conditions of wholesale distribution service to Emporia Hydropower Limited Partnership. *Filed Date:* 12/12/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071214-0008. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, January 2, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-1317-002. *Applicants:* Citizens Electric Co. of Lewisburg. *Description:* Citizens' Electric Company of Lewisburg, PA submits Exhibit A—revised FERC Electric Tariff, Original Volume 1. *Filed Date:* 12/13/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071217-0065. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, January 3, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-1318-002. *Applicants:* Wellsboro Electric Company. *Description:* Wellsboro Electric Company submits Exhibit A—Revised FERC Electric Tariff, Original Volume 1. *Filed Date:* 12/13/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071217-0068. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, January 3, 2008 *Docket Numbers:* ER07-1330-002. *Applicants:* Twin Cities Hydro LLC. *Description:* Twin Cities Hydro, LLC submits a response to questions posed by the Commission Staff on 11/13/07. *Filed Date:* 12/13/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071217-0060. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, January 3, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-1335-002. *Applicants:* Santa Rosa Energy Center, LLC. *Description:* Santa Rosa Energy Center, LLC submits Substitute First Revised Sheet 2 to its FERC Electric Tariff 1. *Filed Date:* 12/12/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071214-0002. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, January 2, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-1375-001. *Applicants:* Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc. *Description:* Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc submits five copies of the information requested in the FERC 11/13/07 deficiency letter. *Filed Date:* 12/13/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071217-0099. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, January 3, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-1387-001. *Applicants:* Maine Electric Power Company, Inc. *Description:* Maine Electric Power Company Inc. *et al.* submits a revised version of Attachment H—MEPCO Grandfathered Transmission Service Agreements of the ISO New England Open Access Transmission Tariff. *Filed Date:* 12/13/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071217-0067. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, January 3, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-1419-001; ER07-1423-001. *Applicants:* PacifiCorp. *Description:* PacifiCorp's response to FERC's questions & request for additional details & clarification regarding the notice of cancellation of a firm point-to-point transmission service agreement w/Black Hills Power, Inc. *Filed Date:* 12/12/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071213-0156. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, January 2, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-38-003. *Applicants:* Northern Renewable Energy

(USA)Ltd. *Description:* Northern Renewable Energy

(USA)Ltd submits a change in status. *Filed Date:* 12/07/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071214-0003. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, December 28, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-68-001. *Applicants:* Virginia Electric and Power Company *Description:* Virginia Electric & Power Co. dba Dominion Virginia Power submits amendment to amended filing of 10/17/07 agreement for the purchase of electricity for resale with Virginia Municipal Electric Association 1. *Filed Date:* 12/12/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071213-0159. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, January 2, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-293-001. *Applicants:* Forward Windpower, LLC. *Description:* Forward WindPower LLC submits revised pivotal supplier and market share screen analyses based on 2006 data for PJM Interconnection LLC. *Filed Date:* 12/14/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071217-0064. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 4, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-297-001. *Applicants:* Lookout Windpower, LLC. *Description:* Lookout Windpower LLC submits its revised pivotal supplier and market share screen analyses based on 2006 data for PJM Interconnection LLC. *Filed Date:* 12/14/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071217-0063. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 4, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-326-000. *Applicants:* Lehigh Capital, LLC. *Description:* Lehigh Capital, LLC submits petition for acceptance of initial rate schedule, waivers and blanket authority. *Filed Date:* 12/12/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071213-0161. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, January 2, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-327-000. *Applicants:* Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation. *Description:* Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. submits the executed Electric Support Services Agreement w/Empire Generating Co., LLC. *Filed Date:* 12/12/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071213-0160. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, January 2, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-328-000. *Applicants:* BE KJ LLC. *Description:* BE KJ LLC submits Notification of Succession informing that they have succeeded Williams Gas Marketing, Inc formerly known as Williams Power Company, Inc as owner of its Rate Schedule FERC No. 3. *Filed Date:* 12/10/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071214-0007. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, December 31, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-329-000. *Applicants:* BE Red Oak LLC. *Description:* BE Red Oak LLC notifies FERC that with the closing of a transfer approved by FERC it is owner of Rate Schedule 2. *Filed Date:* 12/10/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071214-0006. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, December 31, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-330-000. *Applicants:* ISO New England Inc. *Description:* ISO New England Inc. submits its proposed revisions to re-designate the Procedure to Protect for the Loss of Phase II Imports as Attachment G to the ISO Tariff. *Filed Date:* 12/07/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071214-0005. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, December 28, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-331-000. *Applicants:* Southwest Power Pool, Inc. *Description* : Southwest Power Pool, Inc. submits an executed Service Agreement for Network Integration Transmission Service Agreement with American Electric Power Services Corporation *et al.* *Filed Date:* 12/13/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071214-0004. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, January 3, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-332-000. *Applicants:* Northwestern Corp. *Description* : Northwestern Corp. submits their First Revised Tariff Sheets 74 and 75, which amended Schedule 3 of its Montana Open Access Transmission Tariff, FERC Electric Tariff, Seventh Revised Volume 5. *Filed Date:* 12/17/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071217-0061. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 7, 2008. Take notice that the Commission received the following electric securities filings: *Docket Numbers:* ES08-5-001. *Applicants:* Progress Energy Service Company LLC. *Description* : Progress Energy Service Co., LLC on behalf of Carolina Power & Light Co. submits an amended application. *Filed Date:* 12/12/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071214-0013. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 26, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ES08-8-001. *Applicants:* FirstEnergy Service Company. *Description* : Supplement to Application of FirstEnergy Service Company, *et al.* , for Authorization to Issue Securities. *Filed Date:* 12/14/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071214-5056. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, December 26, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ES08-14-000. *Applicants:* New York State Electric & Gas Corp. *Description* : Application of New York State Electric & Gas Corp for authorization to issue short-term debt under Section 204 of the Federal Power Act. *Filed Date:* 12/12/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071214-0011. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, January 2, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ES08-15-000. *Applicants:* Rochester Gas & Electric Corporation. *Description* : Application of Rochester Gas & Electric Corp. for authorization to issue short-term debt under Section 204 of the Federal Power Act. *Filed Date:* 12/12/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071214-0010. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, January 2, 2008. Take notice that the Commission received the following open access transmission tariff filings: *Docket Numbers:* OA08-31-001. *Applicants:* NorthWestern Corporation. *Description:* Amended Order No. 890 OATT Attachment K Filing of NorthWestern Corporation. *Filed Date:* 12/11/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071211-5018. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, January 2, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* OA08-54-000; OA08-55-000; OA08-56-000; OA08-57-000. *Applicants:* Deseret Generation & Transmission Co-op.; Idaho Power Company; NorthWestern Corporation; PacifiCorp. *Description:* Deseret Generation & Transmission Co-operative Inc, PacifiCorp *et al.* submits Agreements. *Filed Date:* 11/30/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071210-0041. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, December 21, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* OA08-59-000. *Applicants:* Entergy Services, Inc. *Description:* Entergy Operating Companies submits Attachment K to their Open Access Transmission Tariff, FERC Electric Tariff Third Revised Volume 3. *Filed Date:* 12/07/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071211-0050. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, December 28, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* OA08-60-000. *Applicants:* Southwest Power Pool, Inc. *Description:* Southwest Power Pool, Inc.'s Request for Waiver of Rollover Policy in Order No. 890 OATT. *Filed Date:* 12/14/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071214-5125. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 4, 2008. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding, interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline need not be served on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at *http://www.ferc.gov.* To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426. The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* or call

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

(202)502-8659. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Direct. [FR Doc. E8-482 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #1 January 9, 2008. Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings: *Docket Numbers:* RP99-176-149. *Applicants:* Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America. *Description:* Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America submits Third Revised Sheet 26K et al. to Amendment 14 with a negotiated rate exhibit, to Transportation Rate Schedule FTS Agreement with Reliant Energy Wholesale Generation, LLC. *Filed Date:* 01/04/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080107-0174. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, January 16, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* RP00-305-035. *Applicants:* CenterPoint Energy-Mississippi River Transmission. *Description:* CenterPoint Energy-Mississippi River Transmission Corp submits a negotiated rate agreement with Laclede Energy Resources, Inc for the provision of natural gas transportation services under its Rate Schedule FTS Service Agreement. *Filed Date:* 01/04/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080107-0175. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, January 16, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* RP08-154-000. *Applicants:* National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation. *Description:* National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation submits the 110th Revised Sheet 9 to its FERC Gas Tariff, Fourth Revised Volume 1, to become effective 1/1/08. *Filed Date:* 01/02/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080103-0024. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 14, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* RP08-155-000. *Applicants:* Northern Natural Gas Company. *Description:* Northern Natural Gas Company submits 14th Revised Sheet 66B et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, Fifth Revised Volume 1 to their non-conforming and negotiated rate service agreement with Intergrys Energy Services, Inc under RP08-155. *Filed Date:* 01/04/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080107-0173. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, January 16, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* RP08-156-000. *Applicants:* Saltville Gas Storage Company L.L.C. *Description:* Saltville Gas Storage Company, LLC submits their Second Revised Sheet 2 et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume 1, effective 2/7/08. *Filed Date:* 01/07/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080108-0239. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, January 22, 2008. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding, interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline need not be served on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at *http://www.ferc.gov.* To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426. The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov.* or call

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

(202)502-8659. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-485 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings # 1 January 8, 2008. Take notice that the Commission received the following electric corporate filings: *Docket Numbers:* EC08-31-000. *Applicants:* Commonwealth Chesapeake Company LLC; TPF Chesapeake, LLC; Tyr Chesapeake, LLC. *Description:* Application of Commonwealth Chesapeake Co, LLC *et al.* for approval of the sale of all of the membership interests in Commonwealth Chesapeake. *Filed Date:* 12/28/2007. *Accession Number:* 20080102-0112. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 18, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* EC08-32-000. *Applicants:* Hillabee Energy Center, LLC; CER Generation, LLC. *Description:* Joint application of Hillabee Energy Center, LLC and CER Generation, LLC for approval of transfer of certain facilities to be constructed in Alexander City, Alabama. *Filed Date:* 12/28/2007. *Accession Number:* 20080102-0103. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 18, 2008. Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings: *Docket Numbers:* ER03-345-010. *Applicants:* New England Power Pool Participants Committee. *Description:* ISO New England Inc submits the semi-annual status report on the Load Response Program. *Filed Date:* 12/28/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071231-0110. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 18, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER03-478-019; ER06-200-012; ER07-254-004; ER03-1326-012; ER07-460-003; ER05-534-013; ER05-365-013; ER05-1262-011; ER06-1093-007; ER03-296-015; ER01-3121-014; ER02-418-013; ER05-332-013; ER03-416-016; ER07-287-006; ER07-242-006; ER03-951-015; ER04-94-013; ER02-417-013; ER07-1378-003; ER05-1146-013; ER07-240-007; ER07-195-004; ER02-2085-008; ER05-481-013. *Applicants:* PPM Energy; Big Horn Wind Project LLC; Casselman Windpower, LLC; Colorado Green Holdings LLC; Dillion Wind LLC; Eastern Desert Power LLC; Elk River Windfarm LLC; Flat Rock Windpower LLC; Flat Rock Windpower II LLC; Flying Cloud Power Partners LLC; Klamath Energy LLC; Klondike Wind Power II LLC; Klondike Wind Power LLC; Klondike Wind Power III LLC; MinnDakota Wind LLC; Moraine Wind LLC; Mountain View Power Partners III, LLC; Phoenix Wind Power LLC; Providence Heights Wind, LLC; Shiloh I Wind Project LLC; Twin Buttes Wind LLC; Locust Ridge Wind Farm, LLC; Northern Iowa Windpower II LLC; Trimont Wind I LLC. *Description:* Notification of Change in Status of Iberdrola Renewables Companies. *Filed Date:* 01/07/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080107-5014. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 28, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-1096-003. *Applicants:* Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation. *Description:* Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. submits Service Agreement 1155 with an updated effective date and with all amendments incorporated etc. *Filed Date:* 01/03/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080107-0008. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, January 24, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-1137-001. *Applicants:* Lockhart Power Company. *Description:* Lockhart Power Co. submits a non-material change in status to reflect a change in its upstream ownership and Order 697 Compliance Filing. *Filed Date:* 01/02/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080103-0090. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, January 23, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-1291-002; OA07-54-001. *Applicants:* PacifiCorp. *Description:* PacifiCorp submits First Revised Sheet 30 *et al.* to FERC Electric Tariff, Seventh Revised Volume 11 to their Open Access Transmission Tariff and a revised business practice—Exhibit A and Exhibit C. *Filed Date:* 12/28/2007. *Accession Number:* 20080102-0092. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 18, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-28-001. *Applicants:* Puget Sound Energy, Inc. *Description:* Puget Sound Energy, Inc submits FERC Electric Tariff Eighth Revised Volume 7, Original Sheets 3A, 5A, 22A, 49A, 54A and 61 A *et al.* *Filed Date:* 01/03/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080107-0006. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, January 24, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-325-001. *Applicants:* Patriot Partnership, LLC. *Description:* Patriot Partnership, LLC submits Second Substitute Original Sheet 1 to FERC Electric Tariff, Original Volume 1. *Filed Date:* 01/02/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080103-0091. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, January 23, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-371-000. *Applicants:* Cooperative Energy Incorporated. *Description:* Cooperative Energy Incorporated submits its Petition for Authority to Sell Power at Market-Based Rates, Acceptance of Initial Rate Schedule, Waivers, and Blanket Authority. *Filed Date:* 12/21/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071227-0022. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 11, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-394-000. *Applicants:* Midwest Independent Transmission System. *Description:* Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc submits proposed revisions to its Open Access Transmission and Energy Markets Tariff, to revise Module E to comprehensively address long-term Resource Adequacy Requirements. *Filed Date:* 12/28/2007. *Accession Number:* 20080107-0064. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 28, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-396-000. *Applicants:* Westar Energy, Inc.; Kansas Gas and Electric Company *Description:* Westar's revised tariff sheets to its Open Access Transmission Tariff for service in the Westar Zone. *Filed Date:* 12/28/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071228-4005. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 18, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-397-000. *Applicants:* ALLETE, Inc. *Description:* ALLETE, Inc hereby proposes an increase to the rates that it currently charges 16 customers and 2 private utilities. *Filed Date:* 12/28/2007. *Accession Number:* 20071228-4003. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 18, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-399-000. *Applicants:* Portland General Electric Company. *Description:* Portland General Electric Company submits a Network Operating Agreement with EPCOR Energy Marketing

(US)Inc. *Filed Date:* 12/31/2007. *Accession Number:* 20080102-0245. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, January 22, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-400-000. *Applicants:* CalPeak Power-El Cajon LLC. *Description:* CalPeak Power LLC on behalf of CalPeak Power—El Cajon LLC submits revises the Reliability Must-Run Service Agreement with the California Independent System Operator Corporation. *Filed Date:* 12/31/2007. *Accession Number:* 20080102-0246. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, January 22, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-401-000. *Applicants:* Cheyenne Light Fuel & Power Company. *Description:* Application of Cheyenne Light, Fuel and Power Company for order accepting initial market-based rate tariff, waiving regulations, and granting blanket approvals. *Filed Date:* 12/31/2007. *Accession Number:* 20080102-0247. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, January 22, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-405-000. *Applicants:* Indianapolis Power & Light Company. *Description:* Indianapolis Power & Light Co. submits a letter agreement with Wabash Valley Power Association, Inc re extension of Rate Schedule FERC 21. *Filed Date:* 01/02/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080103-0088. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, January 23, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-406-000. *Applicants:* New England Power Pool. *Description:* New England Power Pool (NEPOOL) Participants Committee submits the New England Power Pool Agreement re-member applications and termination. *Filed Date:* 01/02/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080103-0089. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, January 23, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-407-000. *Applicants:* CMT Fund IX LLC. *Description:* CMT Fund IX, LLC's request to terminate their market-based rate authority. *Filed Date:* 01/03/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080104-0012. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, January 24, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-408-000. *Applicants:* PacifiCorp. *Description:* PacifiCorp submits Service Agreement 370 for Network Integration Transmission Service for Clark County Public Utility District dated 12/6/07 with Bonneville Power Administration. *Filed Date:* 01/03/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080107-0004. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, January 24, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-409-000. *Applicants:* PacifiCorp. *Description:* PacifiCorp submits Service Agreement 379 dated 12/6/07 for the provisions of Long-Term Firm Point-to-Point Transmission Service with PacifiCorp Energy. *Filed Date:* 01/03/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080107-0005. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, January 24, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-410-000. *Applicants:* Power Hedging Dynamics, LLC. *Description:* Power Hedging Dynamics, LLC requests that the Commission rescind authority since the company is not active and does not plan to be active. *Filed Date:* 12/28/2007. *Accession Number:* 20080107-0007. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 18, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-411-000. *Applicants:* Tiger Natural Gas, Inc. *Description:* Tiger Natural Gas Inc submits its Petition for Acceptance of Initial Tariff, Waivers and Blanket Authority designated as FERC Electric Tariff, Original Volume 1. *Filed Date:* 01/04/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080107-0043. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, January 25, 2008. Take notice that the Commission received the following electric securities filings: *Docket Numbers:* ES08-19-000. *Applicants:* AEP Texas North Power Company. *Description:* Form 523—Request for Permission to Issue Securities of AEP Texas North Power Company. *Filed Date:* 01/03/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080103-5003. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, January 24, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ES08-20-000. *Applicants:* Wheeling Power Company. *Description:* Form 523—Request for Permission to Issue Securities of Wheeling Power Company. *Filed Date:* 01/03/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080103-5004. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, January 24, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ES08-21-000; ES08-22-000; ES08-23-000. *Applicants:* Kansas Gas and Electric Company; Westar Energy, Inc. *Description:* Form 523—Request for Permission to Issue Securities, Form 523—Request for Permission to Guarantee Indebtedness of Westar Energy Inc and Issue Securities of Kansas Gas and Electric Company *et al.* *Filed Date:* 01/07/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080104-5126. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, January 28, 2008. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding, interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline need not be served on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at *http://www.ferc.gov* . To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426. The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov,* or call

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

(202)502-8659. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-538 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP08-45-000] Dominion Transmission, Inc.; Notice of Application January 8, 2008. Take notice that on December 21, 2007, Dominion Transmission, Inc. (DTI), 120 Tredegar Street, Richmond, VA, filed in Docket No. CP08-45-000, an application pursuant to section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act

(NGA)and Part 157 of the Commission's Regulations seeking authorization to construct, install, own, operate, and maintain certain compression facilities located in Herkimer County, New York that comprise the Utica 7 Project. These facilities will provide increased transmission capacity, all as more fully set forth in the application which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. This filing is accessible on-line at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* , or call

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

(202)420-5589. Specifically, DTI proposes to expand its existing Utica Compressor Station by installing an additional 2,250 HP compressor unit (Unit No. 7). Utica Station currently consists of 6 compressor engines with a total rating of 7,250 horsepower. DTI will provide firm transportation service for a Maximum Daily Transportation Quantity

(MDTQ)of 15,000 Dt/day and up to a Maximum Annual Transportation Quantity

(MATQ)of 5,475,000 Dt. The Project is fully subscribed by one customer for an initial term of fifteen years. The Project is designed to provide firm natural gas transportation service to Cornell University in connection with Cornell's project known as its Central Heating Project. Cornell is constructing a combined heat and power project using two gas turbine generators to ensure the necessary heat and electric capacity for the university's future while reducing greenhouse gas emissions by reducing its coal combustion. In addition, Cornell plans to construct and own an 8-inch diameter delivery line approximately 3 miles in length to connect the central heating plant on the university campus to a new interconnection with DTI. The DTI's total estimated cost for construction of the Project is $6,381,023. Any questions regarding this application should be directed to Matthew R. Bley, Manager, Gas Transmission Certificates, Dominion Transmission, Inc., 120 Tredegar Street, Richmond, VA 23219, at

(804)819-2877. Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9, within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either: complete its environmental assessment

(EA)and place it into the Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of the final environmental impact statement

(FEIS)or EA for this proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA. There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must submit 14 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the proceeding. However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project. The Commission will consider these comments in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly involved in the protest. Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings associated with the Commission's environmental review process. Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentors will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court review of the Commission's final order. Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link at *http://www.ferc.gov.* The Commission strongly encourages intervenors to file electronically. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. *Comment Date:* January 29, 2008. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-505 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket Nos. ER08-19-000, ER08-19-001, ER08-19-002, ER08-19-003] Energy Algorithms, LLC; Notice of Issuance of Order January 7, 2008. Energy Algorithms, LLC (EnAlgo) filed an application for market-based rate authority, with accompanying rate schedule. The proposed market-based rate schedule provide for the sale of energy and capacity at market-based rates. EnAlgo also requested waivers of various Commission regulations. In particular, EnAlgo requested that the Commission grant blanket approval under 18 CFR part 34 of all future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability by EnAlgo. On January 4, 2008, pursuant to delegated authority, the Director, Division of Tariffs and Market Development-West, granted the requests for blanket approval under Part 34 (Director's Order). The Director's Order also stated that the Commission would publish a separate notice in the **Federal Register** establishing a period of time for the filing of protests. Accordingly, any person desiring to be heard concerning the blanket approvals of issuances of securities or assumptions of liability by EnAlgo, should file a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. 18 CFR 385.211, 385.214 (2004). Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests is February 4, 2008. Absent a request to be heard in opposition to such blanket approvals by the deadline above, EnAlgo is authorized to issue securities and assume obligations or liabilities as a guarantor, indorser, surety, or otherwise in respect of any security of another person; provided that such issuance or assumption is for some lawful object within the corporate purposes of EnAlgo, compatible with the public interest, and is reasonably necessary or appropriate for such purposes. The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by continued approvals of EnAlgo's issuance of securities or assumptions of liability. Copies of the full text of the Director's Order are available from the Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. The Order may also be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number filed to access the document. Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)

(iii)and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-512 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket Nos. NJ07-6-001; NJ08-6-000] Orlando Utilities Commission; Notice of Filing December 18, 2007. Take notice that on December 7, 2007, Orlando Utilities Commission filed a supplement to its July 13, 2007, Petition for Declaratory Order. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov.* Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible on-line at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* , or call

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

(202)502-8659. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on January 7, 2008. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-497 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project Nos.: 12540-001, 12544-001, 12545-001, 12548-001, 12549-001] Hydrodynamics Inc.; Notices of Intent To File License Applications; Filing of Pre-Application Documents; and Notice of, and Soliciting Comments on, the Request To Use the Traditional Licensing Process and To Waive Certain Pre-Filing Consultation Requirements December 18, 2007. a. *Type of Filing:* Notices of Intent To File License Applications, Pre-Application Documents, Request To Use the Traditional Licensing Process, and Request To Waive Certain Pre-Filing Consultation Requirements. b. *Project Nos.:* 12540, 12544, 12545, 12548, 12549. c. *Dated Filed:* November 27, 2007. d. *Submitted By:* Hydrodynamics Inc. e. *Names of Projects:* Woods, Knights, Johnson, Greenfield, A-Drop. f. *Location:* On the Greenfields Main and South Irrigation Canals, in Cascade and Teton Counties, Montana. The projects would occupy in part lands of the United States administered by the Bureau of Reclamation. g. *Filed Pursuant to:* 18 CFR 5.3 of the Commission's regulations. h. *Potential Applicant Contact:* Jason Cohn, Hydrodynamics, 521 East Peach, Suite 2B, Bozeman, MT 59715;

(406)587-5086; e-mail— *Jason@hydrodynamics.biz.* i. *FERC Contact:* Dianne Rodman at

(202)502-6077; or e-mail at *dianne.rodman@ferc.gov.* j. Hydrodynamics filed its request to use the Traditional Licensing Process

(TLP)on November 27, 2007. The filing also included a request for waiver of certain of the pre-filing consultation requirements in § 4.38 of the Commission's regulations, specifically:

(1)The requirement that the potential applicant hold a joint meeting with all pertinent agencies, Indian tribes, and members of the public no earlier than 30 days from the date of the Commission's approval of the request to use the TLP, § 4.38(b)(3)(ii)(A);

(2)the requirement that the potential applicant conduct any studies requested during the 60-day comment period after the joint meeting, § 4.38(b)(5) and § 4.38(c)(1); and

(3)the requirement that the potential applicant allow resource agencies and Indian tribes 90 days in which to review and comment on the draft license applications, § 4.38(c)(5). Hydrodynamics provided public notice of its request to use the TLP on November 20, 2007. k. On December 11, 2007, Hydrodynamics clarified that it is requesting that

(1)the meeting it held on December 3, 2007, constitute the joint meeting required by § 4.38(b)(3)(i)(A)(1);

(2)the pre-application documents

(PADs)serve as the draft license applications; and

(3)comments on the draft license applications be due within 60 days of the joint meeting (by February 3, 2008). l. Comments on the request to use the TLP and to waive parts of the Commission's regulations for pre-filing consultation are due to the Commission and Hydrodynamics within 30 days from the date of this notice. In accordance with § 5.3(d)(2)(v) of the Commission's regulations, comments on the request to use the TLP should address, as appropriate, the following factors:

(1)Likelihood of timely license issuance;

(2)complexity of the resource issues;

(3)level of anticipated controversy;

(4)relative cost of the TLP compared to the Integrated Licensing Process;

(5)the amount of available information and potential for significant disputes over studies; and

(6)other factors believed to be pertinent. Comments must be filed with the Commission at the following address: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. All filings with the Commission must include on the first page, the project names (Woods, Knights, Johnson, Greenfield, and A-Drop Hydroelectric Projects) and numbers (P-12540, P-12544, P-12545, P-12548, and P-12549). 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 the instructions on the Commission's Web site ( *http://www.ferc.gov* ) under the “e-filing” link. m. With this notice, we are waiving the requirement of 18 CFR 5.8(a) of the Commission's regulations for the Commission to act on Hydrodynamics' request to use the TLP within 60 days from the notice of intent. n. Hydrodynamics filed PADs for the projects with the Commission, pursuant to 18 CFR 5.6 of the Commission's regulations. o. Copies of each of the PADs are available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site ( *http://www.ferc.gov* ), using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket numbers, excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the documents. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at *FERCONlineSupport@ferc.gov* or toll free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,

(202)502-8659. Copies are also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in paragraph h. p. Register online at *http://ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm* to be notified via e-mail of new filings and issuances related to these or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-498 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP08-44-000] Kinder Morgan Interstate Gas Transmission LLC; Notice of Request Under Blanket Authorization January 8, 2008. Take notice that on December 21, 2007, Kinder Morgan Interstate Gas Transmission LLC (KMIGT), Post Office Box 281304, Lakewood, Colorado 80228-8304, filed in Docket No. CP08-44-000 a prior notice request pursuant to sections 157.205 and 157.210 of the Commission's regulations under the Natural Gas Act

(NGA)and KMIGT's blanket certificate issued March 16, 1983 in Docket Nos. CP83-140-000 and CP83-140-001, for authorization to construct and operate mainline pipeline looping and ancillary facilities primarily to serve existing and new ethanol plants under construction in the State of Nebraska, all as more fully set forth in the application, which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. The filing may also be viewed on the Web 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, contact FERC at *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* or call toll-free,

(886)208-3676 or TYY,

(202)502-8659. KMIGT states that as a result of an open season and subsequent negotiations, KMIGT has entered into binding precedent agreements with five shippers to provide natural gas service totaling 21,810 Dth per day. KMIGT proposes to construct and operate two mainline looping pipeline segments consisting of approximately 7.5 miles of 16-inch pipe and approximately 17 miles of 12-inch pipe, located in Hall, Merrick and Nance Counties, Nebraska. In addition, KMIGT proposes to construct and operate certain ancillary facilities. The estimated cost of constructing the proposed facilities is $23,940,143. Any questions regarding the application should be directed to Skip George, Manager of Regulatory, Kinder Morgan Interstate Gas Transmission LLC, P.O. Box 281304, Lakewood, Colorado 80228-8304, phone

(303)914-4969. Any person or the Commission's Staff may, within 60 days after the issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to intervene or notice of intervention and, pursuant to section 157.205 of the Commission's Regulations under the Natural Gas Act

(NGA)(18 CFR 157.205) a protest to the request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefore, the proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the day after the time allowed for protest. If a protest is filed and not withdrawn within 30 days after the time allowed for filing a protest, the instant request shall be treated as an application for authorization pursuant to section 7 of the NGA. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov* . Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible online at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* , or call

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

(202)502-8659. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-504 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket Nos. CP07-62-000, CP07-63-000, CP07-64-000, CP07-65-000] AES Sparrows Point LNG, L.C.C., Mid-Atlantic Express, L.L.C., Amendment to Previous, Notice of Technical Conference January 8, 2008. On Tuesday, January 15, 2008, staff of the Office of Energy Projects will convene a technical conference regarding the proposed Sparrows Point Import Terminal and Pipeline Project. The technical conference will be held at the Commission Headquarters in Washington, DC, room 3M-3. The conference will now be held in one session at 10 a.m.

(EDT)and discuss issues related to Mid-Atlantic Express's proposal to construct some of its proposed pipeline in Baltimore Gas & Electric's right of way. The conference is open to the public. The public is no longer restricted from any portion of the conference. Any person planning to attend the January 15th technical conference must register by close of business on Monday, January 14, 2008. Registration may be submitted either online at *https://www.ferc.gov/whats-new/registration/tech-conf-01-15-form.asp* or by faxing a copy of the form (found at the referenced online link) to 202-208-0353. For additional information regarding the technical conference, please contact Joanne Wachholder at 202-502-8056. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-509 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. PL07-2-000] Composition of Proxy Groups for Determining Gas and Oil Pipeline Return on Equity; Notice of Procedures and Agenda for Technical Conference January 7, 2008. On November 15, 2007, the Commission issued a notice requesting additional comments in the captioned proceeding solely on the issue of master limited partnership

(MLP)growth rates (November 15 Notice). 1 The Commission also established a staff led technical conference to discuss the MLP growth issue, and requested parties interested in serving on a panel to so indicate in their comments. Subsequently, the Commission established January 23, 2008 as the date for the conference. The parties filed their comments and requests for participation on a panel on December 21, 2007. 1 Composition of Proxy Groups for Determining Gas and Oil Pipeline Return on Equity, 121 FERC ¶ 61,165 (2007). Staff will conduct the technical conference beginning at 1 p.m. on January 23, 2008 in Hearing Room 1 at 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC. Based on the parties' requests for participation in a panel, there will be one Panel, consisting of the following eight members: Professor J. Peter Williamson on behalf of the Association of Oil Pipelines, Mr. J. Bertram Solomon on behalf of the American Public Gas Association, Mr. Michael J. Vilbert on behalf of the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America, Mr. Park Shaper and Mr. Yves Siegel on behalf of the National Association of Publicly Traded Partnerships, Mr. Patrick Barry on behalf of the Public Service Commission of New York, Mr. Thomas Horst on behalf of the State of Alaska, and Mr. Paul Moul on behalf of TransCanada Corporation. As stated in the November 15 Notice, the conference is intended to be a working session focused solely on the appropriate growth component to be used in the Commission's Discounted Cash Flow model for determining return on equity. The agenda for the technical conference is as follows: 1 to 1:15: Introductory Remarks by Staff. 1:15 to 2: Initial Comments by the Panel, with each member limited to five minutes. 2 to 3:15: Staff Directed Discussion with the Panel. 3:15 to 3:30: Break. 3:30 to 4:45: Further questions to the Panel from Staff and “open mike” for questions to the Panel from other attendees. 4:45 to 5: Next steps. For further information about the conference, please call or e-mail John Robinson (202-502-8288; *john.robinson@ferc.gov* ). Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-514 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. RM01-8-000, Docket No. ER02-2001-000] Revised Public Utility Filing, Electric Quarterly Reports; Notice of Electric Quarterly Reports Technical Conference January 7, 2008. On September 24, 2007, the Commission issued Order No. 2001-G, the Electric Quarterly Report

(EQR)Data Dictionary. 1 The Commission issued an order on rehearing, Order No. 2001-H, on December 21, 2007. These orders may be found at *http://elibrary.ferc.gov* . The EQR Data Dictionary collects in one document the definitions of certain terms and values used in filing EQR data. This notice announces a technical conference regarding the changes associated with the EQR Data Dictionary. The technical conference will be held Tuesday, February 26, 2008, in the Commission Meeting Room at 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC and via teleconference. The conference will run from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. (EST). 1 *Revised Public Utility Filing Requirements for Electric Quarterly Reports* , Order No. 2001-G, 120 FERC ¶ 61,270 (Sep. 24, 2007), 72 FR 56735 (Oct. 4, 2007). During the technical conference, Commission staff will review the EQR Data Dictionary and address questions from EQR users. An agenda will be issued prior to the conference. Members of the public interested in raising questions about the EQR Data Dictionary are invited to submit them in writing in advance of the technical conference via the eFiling link on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* by January 31, 2008. Questions submitted should refer to Docket Nos. RM01-8-000 and ER02-2001-000. Questions submitted in advance will be given priority and will be addressed by Commission staff at the technical conference. All interested persons are invited to participate in the technical conference by attending in person or by dialing in. Those interested in participating are asked to register no later than February 12, 2008, on the FERC Web site at *https://www.ferc.gov/whats-new/registration/eqr-02-26-form.asp* . Please indicate whether you will be attending in person or plan to dial in. There is no registration fee. Information and further details about the technical conference will be sent to registered participants. For additional information, please contact Christie Kim of FERC's Office of Enforcement at

(202)502-8216 or by e-mail at *eqr@ferc.gov* . FERC conferences and meetings are accessible under section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Requests for accessibility accommodations should be sent by e-mail to *accessibility@ferc.gov* or by calling toll free

(866)208-3372 (voice), 202-502-8659 (TTY), or by sending a fax to 202-208-2106. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-510 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Sunshine Act Meeting Notice January 10, 2008. The following notice of meeting is published pursuant to section 3(a) of the government in the Sunshine Act (Pub. L. No. 94-409), 5 U.S.C. 552b: *Agency Holding Meeting:* Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. *Date and Time:* January 17, 2008, 10 a.m. *Place:* Room 2C, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. *Status:* Open. *Matters To Be Considered:* Agenda. *Note.—Items listed on the agenda may be deleted without further notice. CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Telehone

(202)502-8400. For a recorded message listing items struck from or added to the meeting, call

(202)502-8627. This is a list of matters to be considered by the Commission. It does not include a listing of all documents relevant to the items on the agenda. All public documents, however, may be viewed on line at the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the eLibrary link, or may be examined in the Commission's Public Reference Room. 928th—Meeting Item No. Docket No. Company Administrative A-1 AD02-1-000 Agency Administrative Matters. A-2 AD02-7-000 Customer Matters, Reliability, Security and Market Operations. A-3 AD06-3-000 Energy Market Update. Electric E-1 OMITTED E-2 RM06-22-000 Mandatory Reliability Standards for Critical Infrastructure Protection. E-3 ER08-194-000 Duquesne Light Company. E-4 ER01-2569-005 Boralex Livermore Falls LP. ER98-4652-005 Boralex Stratton Energy LP. ER02-1175-004 Boralex Ft. Fairfield LP. ER01-2568-004 Boralex Ashland LP. E-5 EL07-41-001, ER07-583-003 Commonwealth Edison Company and Commonwealth Edison Company of Indiana, Inc. E-6 OMITTED E-7 QM8-2-000 PECO Energy Company. E-8 ER04-157-021 Bangor Hydro-Electric Company. ER04-714-011 Florida Power and Light Company. EL05-89-001 Maine Public Utilities Commission v. Central Maine Power Company. E-9 OMITTED E-10 ER07-576-003 Baltimore Gas and Electric Company. E-11 ER00-2268-019, ER00-2268-023, EL05-10-000 Pinnacle West Capital Corporation. ER99-4124-016, ER99-4124-020, EL05-11-000 Arizona Public Service Company. EL05-12-000 Pinnacle West Energy Corporation. ER99-4122-018, ER99-4122-024, EL05-13-000 APS Energy Services Company, Inc. ER07-428-001, ER07-428-002, EL07-82-000 Pinnacle West Marketing and Trading Co., LLC. E-12 EL08-10-000 Wisconsin Electric Power Company. E-13 OMITTED E-14 EL07-70-001 Hudson Transmission Partners, LLC vs. New York Independent System Operator, Inc. E-15 EL07-42-001 Constellation Energy Commodities Group, Inc. MISCELLANEOUS M-1 RM08-5-000 Revisions to Forms, Statements and Reporting Requirements for Electric Utilities and Licensees. HYDRO H-1 P-2524-012 Grand River Dam Authority. H-2 P-2149-137 Public Utility District No. 1 of Douglas County, Washington. H-3 P-12911-003 The Electric Plant Board of the City of Paducah, Kentucky. H-4 P-7267-045 Joseph M. Keating. CERTIFICATES C-1 RM06-7-003 Revisions to the Blanket Certificate Regulations and Clarification Regarding Rates. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. A free webcast of this event is available through *www.ferc.gov.* Anyone with Internet access who desires to view this event can do so by navigating to *www.ferc.gov* 's Calendar of Events and locating this event in the Calendar. The event will contain a link to its webcast. The Capitol Connection provides technical support for the free webcasts. It also offers access to this event via television in the DC area and via phone bridge for a fee. If you have any questions, visit *www.CapitolConnection.org* or contact Danelle Springer or David Reininger at 703-993-3100. Immediately following the conclusion of the Commission Meeting, a press briefing will be held in the Commission Meeting Room. Members of the public may view this briefing in the designated overflow room. This statement is intended to notify the public that the press briefings that follow Commission meetings may now be viewed remotely at Commission headquarters, but will not be telecast through the Capitol Connection service. [FR Doc. E8-625 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ID-5550-000] Mulva, James J.; Notice of Filing December 18, 2007. Take notice that on December 12, 2007, James J. Mulva filed an application for authorization to hold interlocking positions, pursuant to Part 45 of the Commission's regulations, 18 CFR part 45 (2007). Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov.* Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible on line at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* , or call

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

(202)502-8659. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on January 2, 2008. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-501 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket Nos. ER07-546-004; ER07-546-005; ER07-546-006; ER07-546-007; ER07-546-008; ER07-546-009] Connecticut Municipal Electric; Cooperative Acushnet Company; University of Rhode Island; Commonwealth of Massachusetts ; UTC Power; Notice of Filings January 7, 2008. Take notice that on December 21, 2007, December 23, 2007, December 27, 2007, and January 3, 2008, respectively, Acushnet Company, Connecticut Municipal Electric Cooperative, University of Rhode Island, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and UTC Power filed a temporary waiver of qualification process reimbursement deposit due date, pursuant to Market Rule 1. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this proceeding. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov.* Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible on line at *http://www.ferc.gov,* using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov,* or call

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

(202)502-8659. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on January 11, 2008. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-515 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. PF08-1-000] Orbit Gas Storage, Inc.; Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Kentucky Energy Hub Project, Request for Comments on Environmental Issues, and Notice of Public Scoping Meeting January 7, 2008. The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) will prepare an environmental assessment

(EA)that will discuss the environmental impacts of the proposed Kentucky Energy Hub Project, which involves construction and operation of natural gas storage facilities in Hopkins County, Kentucky. This notice announces the opening of the scoping period that will be used to gather environmental input from the public and interested agencies on the project. Your input will help the Commission staff determine which issues need to be evaluated in the EA. Please note that the scoping period will close on February 6, 2008. Comments may be submitted in written form or verbally. Further details on how to submit written comments are provided in the Public Participation portion of this notice. In addition to or in lieu of sending written comments, we invite you to attend the public scoping meeting at the location listed below. Date and Time Location Wednesday, January 30, 2008, 7-10 p.m Madisonville Technology Economic Center, 755 Industrial Road, Madisonville, KY 42431. Public scoping meetings are designed to provide state and local agencies, interested groups, affected landowners, and the general public with another opportunity to offer comments on the project. Interested groups and individuals are encouraged to attend the meeting and to present comments on the environmental issues they believe should be addressed in the EA. If you are a landowner receiving this notice, you may be contacted by a pipeline company representative about the acquisition of an easement to construct, operate, and maintain the proposed facilities. Orbit Gas Storage, Inc. (Orbit) would seek to negotiate a mutually acceptable agreement. However, if the project is approved by the Commission, that approval conveys with it the right of eminent domain. Therefore, if easement negotiations fail to produce an agreement, Orbit could initiate condemnation proceedings in accordance with state law. This notice is being sent to affected landowners; federal, state, and local government representatives and agencies; elected officials; Native American tribes; other interested parties; and local libraries and newspapers. State and local government representatives are asked to notify their constituents of this proposed project and to encourage them to comment on their areas of concern. A fact sheet prepared by the FERC entitled “An Interstate Natural Gas Facility On My Land? What Do I Need To Know?” addresses a number of typically asked questions, including the use of eminent domain and how to participate in the Commission's proceedings. It is available for viewing on the FERC Internet Web site ( *http://www.ferc.gov* ). Summary of the Proposed Project Orbit seeks authorization to construct a new natural gas storage facility in Hopkins County, Kentucky. The Kentucky Energy Hub Project would consist of developing a 5 billion-cubic-foot storage cavern from a depleted production reservoir; 10 new gas storage wells on 3 new well pads; a new 5,400-horsepower compressor station; an 8.6-mile-long, 16-inch-diameter gathering pipeline; a 13.3-mile-long, 24-inch diameter pipeline; and a new meter station. The proposed project would connect with an existing ANR Pipeline Company pipeline system near Rabbit Ridge, Kentucky. The general location of the proposed storage field expansion is shown in Appendix 1. 1 1 The appendices referenced in this notice are not being printed in the **Federal Register** . Copies are available on the Commission's Internet Web site ( *http://www.ferc.gov* ) at the “eLibrary” link or from the Commission's Public Reference Room at

(202)502-8371. For instructions on connecting to eLibrary, refer to the “Additional Information” section at the end of this notice. Copies of the appendices were sent to all those receiving this notice in the mail. Requests for detailed maps of the well locations and other proposed facilities should be made directly to Orbit. Land Requirements for Construction Construction of the proposed project would affect a total of about 246 acres during construction. Following construction, about 134 acres would be allowed to revert to its previous conditions. Disturbance associated with aboveground facilities would permanently impact approximately 45 acres of land. The compressor station would require about 25 acres and the three well pads would require about 5, 7, and 8 acres of disturbance. Orbit would seek a 75-foot-wide construction right-of-way for the pipelines, and it would maintain a 30-foot-wide permanent right-of-way for operation of the pipelines. The EA Process We 2 are preparing this EA to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA)which requires the Commission to take into account the environmental impact that could result if it authorizes Orbit's proposal. By this notice, we are also asking federal, state, and local agencies with jurisdiction and/or special expertise with respect to environmental issues to formally cooperate with us in the preparation of the EA. Agencies that would like to request cooperating status should follow the instructions for filing comments provided below. 2 “We,” “us,” and “our” refer to the environmental staff of the FERC's Office of Energy Projects. NEPA also requires the FERC to discover and address concerns the public may have about proposals. This process is referred to as “scoping.” The main goal of the scoping process is to focus the analysis in the EA on the important environmental issues. By this Notice of Intent, we are requesting public comments on the scope of the issues to address in the EA. All comments received will be considered during the preparation of the EA. The EA will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of the construction and operation of the proposed project under these general headings: • geology and soils • wetlands and waterbodies • land use • cultural resources • vegetation and wildlife (including sensitive species) • air and noise quality Our independent analysis of the issues will be in the EA. Depending on the comments received during the scoping process, the EA may be published and mailed to federal, state, and local agencies, public interest groups, interested individuals, affected landowners, newspapers, libraries, and the Commission's official service list for this proceeding. A comment period will be allotted for review if the EA is published. We will consider all comments on the EA before we make our recommendations to the Commission. Although no formal application has been filed, the FERC staff has already initiated its NEPA review under its Pre-filing Process. The purpose of the Pre-filing Process is to encourage the early involvement of interested stakeholders and to identify and resolve issues before an application is filed with the FERC. With this notice, we are asking federal, state, and local governmental agencies with jurisdiction and/or special expertise with respect to environmental issues, to express their interest in becoming cooperating agencies for the preparation of the EA. These agencies may choose to participate once they have evaluated the proposal relative to their responsibilities. Agencies that would like to request cooperating status should follow the instructions for filing comments provided below. Public Participation You can make a difference by providing us with your specific comments or concerns about the project. By becoming a commentor, your concerns will be addressed in the EA and considered by the Commission. You should focus on the potential environmental effects of the proposal, reasonable alternatives to the proposal including alternative locations and routes, and measures to avoid or lessen environmental impact. The more specific your comments, the more useful they will be. Please carefully follow these instructions to ensure that your comments are received in time and properly recorded: • Send an original and two copies of your letter to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426. • Label one copy of the comments for the attention of Gas Branch 1. • Reference Docket No. PF08-1-000. • Mail your comments so that they will be received in Washington, DC on or before February 6, 2008. The Commission encourages electronic filing of comments. See 18 Code of Federal Regulations 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Internet Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* under the “eFiling” link and the link to the User's Guide. Prepare your submission in the same manner as you would if filing on paper and save it to a file on your hard drive. Before you can file comments you will need to create an account by clicking on “Login to File” and then “New User Account.” You will be asked to select the type of filing you are making. This filing is considered a “Comment on Filing.” We may mail the EA for comment. If you are interested in receiving it, please return the Information Request (Appendix 3). If you do not return the Information Request, you will be taken off the mailing list. Additional Information 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 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 which 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. Go to *http://www.ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm* . Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. Appendix 2 Information Request Docket No. PF08-1-000 Please keep my name on the mailing list for the Kentucky Energy Hub Project. Name Agency Address City______State__Zip Code____ FROM ATTN: OEP—Gas 1, PJ—11.1, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. Staple or Tape Here [FR Doc. E8-513 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. PR08-9-000] Jefferson Island Storage & Hub, L.L.C.; Notice of Petition for Rate Approval December 18, 2007. Take notice that on December 5, 2007, Jefferson Island Storage & Hub, L.L.C. (Jefferson Island) filed a petition for rate approval pursuant to section 284.123(b)(2) of the Commission's regulations. Jefferson Island requests that the Commission approve market-based rates, including negotiated fuel, for its Interruptible Wheeling Service. The proposed Interruptible Wheeling Service will replace Jefferson Island's Interruptible Transportation Service. Jefferson Island also requests waiver of the triennial rate review filing required by the Commission's June 20, 2005 Letter Order in Docket Nos. PR05-9-000 and PR05-9-001. Any person desiring to participate in this rate proceeding must file a motion to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the date as indicated below. Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov* . Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible online at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* , or call

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

(202)502-8659. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time December 28, 2007. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-496 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 2535-110] South Carolina Electric & Gas Company; Notice of Application for Amendment of License and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests December 18, 2007. Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection: a. *Type of Application:* Request for increase in water withdrawal for municipal use. b. *Project No.:* 2535-110. c. *Date Filed:* October 26, 2007. d. *Applicant:* South Carolina Electric & Gas Company. e. *Name of Project:* Stevens Creek. f. *Location:* At the confluence of the Savannah River and Stevens Creek, in Edgefield and McCormick Counties, South Carolina and Columbia County, Georgia. g. *Filed Pursuant to:* Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r. h. *Applicant Contact:* Raymond Ammarell, South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, 111 Research Drive, Columbia, SC 29203

(803)217-7322. i. *FERC Contact:* John K. Novak, *john.novak@ferc.gov*

(202)502-6076. j. *Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene and protests:* January 22, 2008. All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person whose name appears on the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy of any motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application. k. *Description of Request:* The South Carolina Electric & Gas Company is requesting authorization to allow an increase in water withdrawn from the Stevens Creek Project reservoir from the current withdrawal of 10 million gallons per day

(mgd)to a maximum of 47.1 mgd for municipal use by the Columbia County Water and Sewerage System of Columbia County, Georgia. The existing facilities will not need modification to accommodate the increased water withdrawal. l. *Location of the Application:* The filing is available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public Reference Room, located at 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426 or by calling

(202)502-8371, or by calling

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

(202)502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item

(h)above. m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission. n. *Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene:* Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application. o. Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “PROTEST”, or “MOTION TO INTERVENE”, as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing refers. p. *Agency Comments:* Federal, State, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described application. A copy of the application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives. q. Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(I)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* under the “e-Filing” link. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-500 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 67-113] Southern California Edison Company; Notice of Application Ready for Environmental Analysis and Soliciting Comments, and Recommendations, Final Terms and Conditions, and Prescriptions January 8, 2008. Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection. a. *Type of Application:* New License for Major Project-Existing Dam. b. *Project No.:* P-67-113. c. *Date Filed:* February 23, 2007. d. *Applicant:* Southern California Edison Company. e. *Name of Project:* Big Creek Nos. 2A, 8 and Eastwood Power Station Hydroelectric Power Project. f. *Location:* The Big Creek Nos. 2A, 8 and Eastwood Hydroelectric Project is located in Fresno County, California near the town of Shaver Lake within the South Fork San Joaquin River, Big Creek, and Stevenson Creek watersheds. The project affects 2,143.25 acres of federal lands. g. *Filed Pursuant to:* Federal Power Act 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r). h. *Applicant Contact:* Russ W. Krieger, Vice President, Power Production, Southern California Edison Company, 300 North Lone Hill Ave., San Dimas, California 91773. Phone:

(909)394-8667. i. *FERC Contact:* Ken Hogan at

(i)Big Creek Powerhouse No. 2A with two turbine/generator units and a total dependable operating capacity of about 98.5 MW;

(ii)Powerhouse No. 8 with two turbine/generator units and a dependable operating capacity of about 64.5 MW; and

(iii)Eastwood Power Station, with one turbine/pump/ generator unit and a dependable operating capacity of about 207 MW. • *Major dams and reservoirs*

(i)Shaver Dam, forming Shaver Lake, which has a usable storage capacity of about 135,568 ac-ft, at an elevation of about 5,370 ft above mean sea level (msl); and

(ii)Florence Dam, forming Florence Lake, which has a usable storage capacity of about 64,406 ac-ft, at an elevation of about 7,327 ft above msl. • *Moderate-sized dams, forebays and diversion pools*

(i)Balsam Forebay, with a usable storage capacity of about 1,547 ac-ft, at an elevation of about 6,670 ft above msl;

(ii)Dam 5 Impoundment (Powerhouse 8 Forebay), with a usable storage capacity of 49 ac-ft, at an elevation of about 2,943 ft above msl;

(iii)Pitman Diversion Pool, with a usable capacity of about 1 ac-ft, at an elevation of about 6,900 ft above msl;

(iv)Bear Diversion Pool, with a usable capacity of about 103 ac-ft, at an elevation of about 7,350 ft above msl; and

(v)Mono Diversion Pool, with a usable capacity of about 47 ac-ft, at an elevation of about 7,350 ft above msl. • *Small diversions*

(i)Hooper Creek Diversion, with a usable capacity of about 3 ac-ft, at an elevation of about 7,505 ft above msl;

(ii)Bolsillo Creek Diversion, with a usable capacity of less than 1 ac-ft, at an elevation of about 7,535 ft above msl;

(iii)Chinquapin Creek Diversion, with a usable capacity of less than 1 ac-ft, at an elevation of about 7,629 ft above msl;

(iv)Camp 62 Creek Diversion, with a usable capacity of less than 1 ac-ft, at an elevation of about 7,307 ft above msl. • *Water conveyance systems*

(i)Ward Tunnel, about 12.8 miles long, conveys water from Florence Lake to Huntington Lake (Huntington Lake is a component of FERC Project No. 2175) and has a conveyance capacity of about 1,760 cubic feet per second (cfs). The tunnel receives water from Florence Lake, Mono Creek, Bear Creek, the small tributaries discussed above, and the East and West Forks of Camp 61 Creek (via Portal Forebay, a component of the Portal Project, (FERC Project No. 2174);

(ii)Mono-Bear Siphon, about 1.6 miles of flowline from Mono Diversion and 1.4 miles of flowline and tunnel from Bear Creek Diversion connect at the Mono-Bear Wye and continues for about 2.6 miles through a combined flowline/siphon, conveys water from the Mono and Bear diversions to Ward Tunnel. The Mono Tunnel and Bear Tunnel have conveyance capacities of 450 cfs each and the combined flowline/siphon has a conveyance capacity of about 650 cfs;

(iii)Huntington-Pitman-Shaver Conduit, also known as Tunnel No. 7, conveys water from Huntington Lake and the Pitman Creek Diversion to Shaver Lake through either North Fork Stevenson Creek or through Balsam Forebay and the Eastwood Power Station. Tunnel No. 7 is about 5.4 miles long and terminates at Gate No. 2 tunnel outlet located on North Fork Stevenson Creek upstream of Shaver Lake. The Balsam Diversion Tunnel is about 1.1 miles long and branches off Tunnel No. 7 about 1,200 ft upstream of the Gate No. 2 outlet, connecting to Balsam Forebay;

(iv)Eastwood Power Station and Tailrace Tunnels, which convey water from Balsam Forebay through the Eastwood Power Station to Shaver Lake. The Eastwood Power Station Tunnel is about 1 mile long. The Tailrace Tunnel is about 1.4 miles long. The conveyance capacity of the tunnels is about 2,500 cfs.

(v)Tunnel No. 5, about 2.6 miles long, conveys water from Shaver Lake to Big Creek Powerhouse No. 2A and has a conveyance capacity of about 650 cfs.

(vi)Tunnel No. 8, about 1 mile long, conveys water from the Dam No. 5 Impoundment just downstream of Powerhouse 2/2A to Powerhouse No. 8, has a conveyance capacity of about 1,173 cfs. • *Transmission line*

(i)Eastwood Power Station—Big Creek 1 Transmission Line, which connects Eastwood Power Station to a non-Project switchyard at Big Creek Powerhouse No. 1. This transmission line is about 4.7 miles long, and is a 220 kV line. m. A copy of the application is 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 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. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item h above. All filings must

(1)bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS,” “REPLY COMMENTS,” “RECOMMENDATIONS,” “FINAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS,” or “PRESCRIPTIONS;”

(2)set forth in the heading the name of the applicant and the project number of the application to which the filing responds;

(3)furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the person submitting the filing; and

(4)otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All comments, recommendations, final terms and conditions, or prescriptions must set forth their evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the applicant. Each filing must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010. You may also register online at *http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp* to be notified via e-mail of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support. n. A license applicant must file not later than 60 days following the date of issuance of this notice:

(1)A copy of the water quality certification;

(2)a copy of the request for certification, including proof of the date on which the certifying agency received the request; or

(909)394-8667. i. *FERC Contact:* Ken Hogan at

(202)502-8434, or e-mail: *Kenneth.Hogan@ferc.gov.* j. Deadline for filing comments, and recommendations, final terms and conditions, and prescriptions is 60 days from the issuance date of this notice; reply comments are due 105 days from the issuance date of this notice. All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. The Commission's Rules of Practice require all intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person on the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. Comments, recommendations, final terms and conditions, and prescriptions 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 the instructions on the Commission's Web site ( *http://www.ferc.gov* ) under the “e-Filing” link. k. This application has been accepted for filing and is ready for environmental analysis at this time. l. *Description of Project:* The existing Big Creek No. 3 Hydroelectric Power Project consists of one powerhouse; one moderate-sized dam and forebay; and one water conveyance system. The Project is operated as a reservoir-storage type plant with an installed operating capacity of 174.45 MW. Water for the Project is taken from the San Joaquin River just downstream of its confluence with Big Creek and conveyed to the Big Creek No. 3 Powerhouse through Tunnel No. 3. The energy generated by the Project is transmitted to the SCE transmission and distribution system and used for public utility purposes. The project would have an average annual generation of 804,240 megawatt-hours. • *Powerhouse:* Big Creek Powerhouse No. 3, with five turbine generator units. • *Moderate-sized dam and forebay:* Dam 6 and Dam 6 Impoundment, with a capacity of about 933 ac-ft, at an elevation of about 2,230 ft above mean sea level (msl). • *Water conveyance system:* Powerhouse No. 3 water conveyance system, about 5.3 miles long, conveys water from Dam No. 6 Impoundment to Big Creek Powerhouse No. 3 through a tunnel with a capacity of about 3,250 cfs. The system includes a pressure-relief valve system and penstocks providing pressurized water from the tunnel to the turbine. m. A copy of the application is 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 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. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item h above. All filings must

(1)bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS,” “REPLY COMMENTS,” “RECOMMENDATIONS,” “FINAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS,” or “PRESCRIPTIONS;”

(2)set forth in the heading the name of the applicant and the project number of the application to which the filing responds;

(3)furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the person submitting the filing; and

(4)otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All comments, recommendations, final terms and conditions, or prescriptions must set forth their evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the applicant. Each filing must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010. You may also register online at *http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp* to be notified via e-mail of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support. n. A license applicant must file no later than 60 days following the date of issuance of this notice:

(1)a copy of the water quality certification;

(2)a copy of the request for certification, including proof of the date on which the certifying agency received the request; or

(909)394-8667. i. *FERC Contact:* Ken Hogan at

(i)Powerhouse No. 1 with four turbine/generator units and a total dependable operating capacity of about 82.9 MW; and

(ii)Powerhouse No. 2, with four turbine/generator units and a total dependable operating capacity of about 67.1 MW. • *Major dams and reservoirs*

(i)Dams 1, 2, 3, and 3a, which form Huntington Lake, with a capacity of about 89,166 ac-ft, at an elevation of about 6,950 ft above mean sea level (msl). • *Moderate dam*

(i)Dam 4, which forms Dam 4 Impoundment (Powerhouse 2 Forebay), with a capacity of about 60 ac-ft, at an elevation of about 4,810 ft above msl. • *Small diversions*

(i)Balsam Creek Diversion, with a usable capacity of less than 1 ac-ft, at an elevation of about 4,880 ft above msl;

(ii)Ely Creek Diversion, with a usable capacity of less than 1 ac-ft, at an elevation of about 4,844 ft above msl; and

(iii)Adit 8 Diversion, with a usable capacity of less than 1 ac-ft, at an elevation of about 4,825 ft above msl. • *Water conveyance systems*

(i)Tunnel No. 1, about 2 miles long, conveys water from Huntington Lake through an 84-inch diameter pipe to Big Creek Powerhouse No. 1.;

(ii)Tunnel No. 2, approximately 4.1 miles long, conveys water from the Dam 4 impoundment just downstream of Powerhouse 1 to Big Creek Powerhouse No. 2. Water from Ely and Balsam Creek diversions also enter into Tunnel No. 2 between the forebay and powerhouse; and

(iii)The Shoo Fly, conveys water from Shaver Lake. • (FERC Project No. 67) through Tunnel 5 and into Tunnel 2 leading to Powerhouse No. 2. The Shoo fly was used during the construction of Shaver Lake Dam and Powerhouse No. 2A to keep water off the dam and to get more generation from Powerhouse No. 2. Although not currently in use, the Shoo fly Complex gives SCE the flexibility to divert water from Shaver Lake to Powerhouse No. 2, if required. m. A copy of the application is 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 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. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item h above. All filings must

(1)bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS,” “REPLY COMMENTS,” “RECOMMENDATIONS,” “FINAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS,” or “PRESCRIPTIONS;”

(2)set forth in the heading the name of the applicant and the project number of the application to which the filing responds;

(3)furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the person submitting the filing; and

(4)otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All comments, recommendations, final terms and conditions, or prescriptions must set forth their evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b). Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the applicant. Each filing must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010. You may also register online at *http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp* to be notified via e-mail of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support. n. A license applicant must file no later than 60 days following the date of issuance of this notice:

(1)a copy of the water quality certification;

(2)a copy of the request for certification, including proof of the date on which the certifying agency received the request; or

(3)evidence of waiver of water quality certification. o. *Procedural schedule:* The application will be processed according to the following Hydro Licensing Schedule. Revisions to the schedule will be made if the Commission determines it necessary to do so: Milestone Tentative date Comments, recommendations, final terms and conditions, and prescriptions due March 8, 2008. Reply comments due from applicant April 22, 2008. Notice of the availability of the draft EIS September 2008. Comments on draft EIS due November 2008. Notice of the availability of the final EIS March 2009. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-508 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket Nos. ER08-110-000, ER08-110-001, ER08-110-002] Starwood Power-Midway, LLC; Notice of Issuance of Order January 7, 2008. Starwood Power-Midway, LLC (Starwood Midway) filed an application for market-based rate authority, with accompanying tariff. The proposed market-based rate schedule provides for the sale of energy, capacity and ancillary services at market-based rates. Starwood Midway also requested waivers of various Commission regulations. In particular, Starwood Midway requested that the Commission grant blanket approval under 18 CFR part 34 of all future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability by Starwood Midway. On December 19, 2007, pursuant to delegated authority, the Director, Division of Tariffs and Market Development-West, granted the requests for blanket approval under part 34 (Director's Order). The Director's Order also stated that the Commission would publish a separate notice in the **Federal Register** establishing a period of time for the filing of protests. Accordingly, any person desiring to be heard concerning the blanket approvals of issuances of securities or assumptions of liability by Starwood Midway, should file a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure. 18 CFR 385.211, 385.214 (2004). Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests is January 22, 2008. Absent a request to be heard in opposition to such blanket approvals by the deadline above, Starwood Midway is authorized to issue securities and assume obligations or liabilities as a guarantor, indorser, surety, or otherwise in respect of any security of another person; provided that such issuance or assumption is for some lawful object within the corporate purposes of Starwood Midway compatible with the public interest, and is reasonably necessary or appropriate for such purposes. The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by continued approvals of Starwood Midway's issuance of securities or assumptions of liability. Copies of the full text of the Director's Order are available from the Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. The Order may also be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number filed to access the document. Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-511 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP08-46-000] Tarpon Whitetail Gas Storage, LLC; Notice of Application January 8, 2008. Take notice that on December 21, 2007, Tarpon Whitetail Gas Storage, LLC (Whitetail), 3010 Briarpark Drive, Suite 550, Houston, Texas 77042, pursuant to section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act

(NGA)and Parts 157 and 284 of the Commission's regulations, filed an abbreviated application for certificates of public convenience and necessity, seeking authority to own, operate, construct, install, and maintain a high deliverability natural gas storage facility in Monroe County, Mississippi; to provide open-access firm and interruptible storage and hub services in interstate commerce at market-based rates under 18 CFR part 284, subpart G; and to undertake the limited construction and operation activities permitted under 18 CFR part 157, subpart F. This filing is 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 “e-Library” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC at FERCOnlineSupport or call toll-free,

(866)208-3676, or for TTY,

(202)502-8659. Specifically, Whitetail states that the project will consist of up to twenty injection/withdrawal wells and a total working gas capacity of up to 8.6 billion cubic feet. Whitetail proposes to offer open access firm and interruptible storage and hub services and requests authority to charge market-based rates for its proposed services. The proposed terms and conditions for Whitetail's services are included in the pro forma tariff included in the application. Any questions regarding this application should be directed to James F. Bowe, Jr., Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP, 975 F Street, NW., Washington, DC 20004-1405 at phone number

(202)862-1000, Fax number

(202)862-1093 or e-mail *jbowe@dl.com.* Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9, within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either: complete its environmental assessment

(FEIS)or EA for this proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA. There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must submit 14 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the proceeding. However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project. The Commission will consider these comments in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly involved in the protest. Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings associated with the Commission's environmental review process. Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court review of the Commission's final order. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments protests and interventions via the Internet in lieu of paper. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web ( *http://www.ferc.gov* ) site under the “e-Filing” link. *Comment Date:* January 29, 2008. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-506 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-8516-7] Proposed CERCLA Administrative Cost Recovery Settlement; Columbia American Plating Company Site AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency. ACTION: Notice; request for public comment. SUMMARY: In accordance with section 122(i) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, as amended (CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. 9622(i), notice is hereby given of a proposed administrative settlement for recovery of past response costs concerning the COLUMBIA AMERICAN PLATING COMPANY Time-Critical Removal Site in Portland, Oregon, with the following settling parties: LAKEA CORPORATION (dba Columbia American Plating Company) and LARRY ANSON, an individual. The settlement requires the settling parties to pay: $15,000.00 to the EPA Hazardous Substance Superfund; the net sale proceeds from selling the site if the settling parties are able to redeem the property out of foreclosure from Multnomah County; and assignment of all rights to insurance claims proceeds to EPA. The settlement includes a covenant not to sue the settling party pursuant to Sections 106 and 107(a) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9606 and 9607(a). For thirty

(30)days following the date of publication of this notice, the Agency will receive written comments relating to the settlement. The Agency will consider all comments received and may modify or withdraw its consent to the settlement if comments received disclose facts or considerations which indicate that the settlement is inappropriate, improper, or inadequate. The Agency's response to any comments received will be available for public inspection at the U.S. EPA Region 10 offices, located at 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101. DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before February 14, 2008. ADDRESSES: The proposed settlement is available for public inspection at the U.S. EPA Region 10 offices, located at 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101. A copy of the proposed settlement may be obtained from Carol Kennedy, Regional Hearing Clerk, U.S. EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Mail Stop ORC-158, Seattle, Washington 98101;

(206)553-0242. Comments should reference the COLUMBIA AMERICAN PLATING Time-Critical Removal Site in Portland, Oregon. EPA Docket No. CERCLA-10-2008-0048 and should be addressed to Lori Cora, Assistant Regional Counsel, U.S. EPA Region 10, Mail Stop ORC-158, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, Washington 98101. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lori Cora, Assistant Regional Counsel, U.S. EPA Region 10, Mail Stop ORC-158, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, Washington 98101;

(206)553-1115. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The COLUMBIA AMERICAN PLATING Site is located at 3003 NW. 35th Avenue, Portland, Oregon (Site). LAKEA CORPORATION (dba as COLUMBIA AMERICAN PLATING) operated a metal plating business. In May 2003, in response to a request from the State of Oregon's Department of Environmental Quality's Emergency Response and Removal Program, EPA assisted in evaluating and mitigating the imminent threat to human health and the environment posed by hazardous substances and chemicals stored or otherwise handled at the Site. EPA removed approximately 80,000 gallons and 78,260 pounds of hazardous and non-hazardous waste located in tanks, drums, containers, sumps, and secondary containment systems for proper off-site treatment and disposal. EPA also conducted soil, groundwater, and surface water sampling at the Site. The removal was completed in 2004. This settlement requires LAKEA CORPORATION and LARRY ANSON to pay: $15,000.00 to the EPA Hazardous Substance Superfund; the net sale proceeds from selling the site if the settling parties are able to redeem the property out of foreclosure from Multnomah County; and assignment of all rights to insurance claims proceeds to EPA. This is in settlement of the approximately $1.8 million in past costs incurred by EPA at the Site. Dated: December 20, 2007. Michael F. Gearheard, Director of Office of Water and Watersheds. [FR Doc. E8-599 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [PA-HQ-OAR-2007-1182, 1183, and 1184; FRL-8516-8] Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collections; Request for Comment on Three Proposed Information Collection Requests

(ICRs)AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency. 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 three existing approved Information Collection Requests

(ICRs)to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Two of these ICRs, 1684.08 and 1695.08, are scheduled to expire March 31, 2008. ICR 1800.03 is scheduled to expire May 31, 2008. Before submitting these ICRs 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 March 17, 2008. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by the Docket ID numbers provided for each item in the text, by one of the following methods: • *http://www.regulations.gov:* Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. • *E-mail: a-and-r-Docket@epa.gov.* • *Fax:*

(202)566-9744. • *Mail:* Air Docket, Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. • *Hand Delivery:* Docket Center, (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. 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 the Docket ID Numbers identified for each item in the text. 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

(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 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.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nydia Yanira Reyes-Morales, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, Mail Code 6403J NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: 202-343-9264; fax number: 202-343-2804; e-mail address: *reyes-morales.nydia@epa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: How Can I Access the Docket and/or Submit Comments? EPA has established a public docket for each of the ICRs identified in this document (see the Docket ID numbers for each ICR that are provided in the text), which is available for online viewing at *http://www.regulations.gov,* or in person viewing at the Air 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 Air Docket is 202-566-1742. 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

(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. In particular, EPA is requesting comments from very small businesses (those that employ less than 25) on examples of specific additional efforts that EPA could make to reduce the paperwork burden for very small businesses affected by this collection. What Should I Consider When I Prepare My Comments for EPA? You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your comments: 1. Explain your views as clearly as possible and provide specific examples. 2. Describe any assumptions that you used. 3. Provide copies of any technical information and/or data you used that support your views. 4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you arrived at the estimate that you provide. 5. Offer alternative ways to improve the collection activity. 6. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline identified under DATES . 7. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and **Federal Register** citation. What Information Collection Activities or ICRs Does This Apply to? Docket ID Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-1182 *Affected Entities:* Entities potentially affected by these actions are manufacturers of nonroad compression ignition engines, equipment and components. *Title:* Emissions Certification and Compliance Requirements for Nonroad Compression-ignition Engines and On-highway Heavy Duty Engines. *ICR Numbers:* EPA ICR No. 1684.09, OMB Control No. 2060-0287. *ICR Status:* This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on March 31, 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:* This information collection is requested under the authority of Title II of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7521 *et seq.* ). Under this Title, EPA is charged with issuing certificates of conformity for those engines which comply with applicable emission standards. Such a certificate must be issued before engines may be legally introduced into commerce. Certification requirements for nonroad compression-ignition engines and on-highway heavy duty engines are set forth at 40 CFR Parts 86, 89, 94, 1039 and 1065. To apply for a certificate of conformity, manufacturers are required to submit descriptions of their planned production line, including detailed descriptions of the emission control system and test data. This information is organized by “engine family” groups expected to have similar emission characteristics. Manufacturers must also comply with requirements related to audits and other compliance assurance programs. There are also recordkeeping and labeling requirements. Manufacturers electing to participate in the Averaging, Banking and Trading

(ABT)Program are also required to submit information regarding the calculation of projected and actual generation and usage of credits in an initial report, end-of-year report and final report. These reports are used for certification and enforcement purposes. Manufacturers need to maintain records for eight years on the engine families participating in the program. *Burden Statement:* The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden is estimated to average 2,112 hours. 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: 68. • Frequency of response: Annual and quarterly and on occasion. • Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent: 15. • Estimated total annual burden hours: 143,604. • Estimated total annual costs: $13,978,203. This includes an estimated burden cost of $5,484,884 for operation and maintenance costs. Are There Changes in the Estimates From the Last Approval? To date, there are no changes in the number of hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared with that identified in the ICR currently approved by OMB. However, EPA is still evaluating information that may lead to a change in the estimates. Docket ID Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-1183 *Affected Entities:* Entities potentially affected by these actions are manufacturers of nonroad spark-ignition engines, equipment and components. *Title:* Emissions Certification and Compliance Requirements for Nonroad spark-ignition

(SI)Engines. *ICR Numbers:* EPA ICR No. 1695.09, OMB Control No. 2060-0338. *ICR Status:* This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on March 31, 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:* This information collection is requested under the authority of Title II of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7521 *et seq.* ). Under this Title, EPA is charged with issuing certificates of conformity for those engines which comply with applicable emission standards. Such a certificate must be issued before engines may be legally introduced into commerce. Certification requirements for spark-ignition engines are set forth at 40 CFR Parts 90, 1048, 1051 and 1065. To apply for a certificate of conformity, manufacturers are required to submit descriptions of their planned production line, including detailed descriptions of the emission control system, and test data. This information is organized by “engine family” groups expected to have similar emission characteristics. The emission values achieved during certification testing are used in the ABT Program. The program allows manufacturers to bank credits for engine families that emit below the standard and use the credits for families that are above the standard, or trade banked credits with other manufacturers. Participation in the ABT program is voluntary. Manufacturers must also comply with requirements related to audits and other compliance assurance programs. There are also recordkeeping and labeling requirements. *Burden Statement:* The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden is estimated to average 1,379 hours. 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: 106. • Frequency of response: Annual and quarterly and on occasion. • Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent: 11. • Estimated total annual burden hours: 81,331. • Estimated total annual costs: $9,925,673. This includes an estimated burden cost of $1,642,476 for operation and maintenance costs. Are There Changes in the Estimates From the Last Approval? To date, there are no changes in the number of hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared with that identified in the ICR currently approved by OMB. However, EPA is still evaluating information that may lead to a change in the estimates. Docket ID Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-1184 *Affected Entities:* Entities potentially affected by these actions are manufacturers and remanufacturers of locomotives and locomotive engines. *Title:* Information Requirements for Locomotive and Locomotive Engines. *ICR Numbers:* EPA ICR Number 1800.04, OMB Control Number 2060-0392. *ICR Status:* This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on May 31, 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:* The Clean Air Act requires manufacturers and remanufacturers of locomotives and locomotive engines to obtain a certificate of conformity with applicable emission standards before they may legally introduce their products into commerce. To apply for a certificate of conformity, respondents are required to submit descriptions of their planned production, including detailed descriptions of emission control systems and test data. This information is organized by “engine family” groups expected to have similar emission characteristics and is submitted every year, at the beginning of the model year. Respondents electing to participate in the ABT Program are also required to submit information regarding the calculation, actual generation, and usage of credits in quarterly reports, and an end-of-the-year report. Under the Production-line Testing

(PLT)Program, manufacturers are required to test a sample of engines as they leave the assembly line. The Installation Audit Program requires remanufacturers to audit the installation of a sample of remanufactured engines. These self-audit programs (collectively referred to as the “PLT Program”) allow manufacturers and remanufacturers to monitor compliance with statistical certainty and minimize the cost of correcting errors through early detection. Under the In-use Testing Program, manufacturers and remanufacturers are required to test locomotives after a number of years of use to verify that they comply with emission standards throughout their useful lives. There are recordkeeping requirements in all programs. *Burden Statement:* The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden associated with the certification program is estimated to average 17,074 hours. 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: 7. • Frequency of response: Annual and quarterly and on occasion. • Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent: 10. • Estimated total annual burden hours: 17,074. • Estimated total annual costs: $2,326,156. This includes an estimated burden cost of $1,384,025 for operation and maintenance costs. Are There Changes in the Estimates From the Last Approval? To date, there are no changes in the number of hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared with that identified in the ICR currently approved by OMB. However, EPA is still evaluating information that may lead to a change in the estimates. What Is the Next Step in the Process for These ICRs? EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICRs 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: January 9, 2008. Karl Simon, Director, Compliance and Innovative Strategies Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Office of Air and Radiation. [FR Doc. E8-570 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0015; FRL-8516-2] Workshop To Discuss Policy-Relevant Science To Inform EPA's Integrated Plan for the Review of the Primary Carbon Monoxide National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice of Workshop. SUMMARY: The EPA is announcing that a workshop entitled “Workshop to Discuss Policy-Relevant Science to Inform EPA's Integrated Plan for the Review of the Primary Carbon Monoxide National Ambient Air Quality Standards” is being organized by EPA's National Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA), Office of Research and Development and EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS), Office of Air and Radiation. The workshop will be held on January 28-29, 2008 in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. The workshop will be open to attendance by interested public observers on a first-come, first-served basis up to the limits of available space. DATES: The workshop will be held on January 28 and 29, 2008. ADDRESSES: The workshop will be held at U.S. EPA, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. An EPA contractor, E.H. Pechan & Associates, Inc., is providing logistical support for the workshop. For further information on the workshops, contact Ms. Barbara Bauer, E.H. Pechan Conference Coordinator, 3622 Lyckan Parkway, Durham, NC 27707, telephone: 919-493-3144 ext. 188; facsimile: 919-493-3182; e-mail: *barbara.bauer@pechan.com.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Questions regarding information, registration, and logistics for the workshop should be directed to the E.H. Pechan conference coordinator listed in ADDRESSES above or from the following Web site: *http://projects.pechan.com/epa/coreview/.* Additional questions regarding the workshop should be directed to Ms. Chris Trent, U.S. EPA, OAQPS, telephone: 919-541-5337; facsimile: 919-541-0237; e-mail: *trent.chris@epa.gov* or Dr. Tom Long, U.S. EPA, NCEA, telephone: 919-541-1880; facsimile: 919-541-2985; e-mail: *long.tom@epa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Information About the Workshop The Agency's last review of the carbon monoxide

(CO)national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) was completed on August 1, 1994 with a final determination that no revision of the CO standard was appropriate (59 FR 38906). This review of the CO NAAQS is consistent with the Clean Air Act's requirement that the Agency periodically review the latest scientific information and the standards. In completing this review, the Agency will apply the Agency's new NAAQS review process. 1 This workshop is a key step in this new process. The workshop will provide an opportunity for internal and external experts to highlight significant new and emerging CO research, and to make recommendations to the Agency regarding the design and scope of the review for the primary (health-based) CO standard to ensure that it addresses key policy-relevant issues and considers the new science relevant to informing our understanding of these issues. 2 1 For more information on the NAAQS review process, please see *http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/.* 2 This workshop will not address a secondary welfare-based standard as the CO NAAQS includes only a primary standard. We intend that workshop discussions will build upon three prior publications or events: 1. *National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Carbon Monoxide: Final Rule* ( *59 FR 38906,* August 1, 1994). The preamble to the final rule included detailed discussions of policy-relevant issues central to the last review. 2. *Air Quality Criteria for Carbon Monoxide (EPA 600/P-99/001F, June 2000)* . 3 3 Please see *http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/co/s_co_index.html* to obtain a copy of the 2000 Air Quality Criteria Document, the notice of final rulemaking from 1994, and other related documents. 3. December 2006 workshop sponsored by NCEA, entitled “Interpretation of Epidemiologic Studies of Multi-pollutant Exposure and Health Effects.” The workshop dealt with important issues relevant to this review, such as the interpretation and understanding of criteria air pollutant health effects analyses in population-level epidemiologic studies, with a focus on multi-pollutant exposures (71 FR 67566, November 22, 2006). Workshop participants are encouraged to review each of these documents and/or supporting materials thoroughly before the meeting begins, as they provide important insights into new scientific advances and key policy-relevant questions. Based in large part on the input received during this workshop, EPA will develop a draft integrated CO NAAQS review plan that will outline the schedule, process, and approaches for evaluating the relevant scientific information and addressing the key policy-relevant issues to be considered in this review. The Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) will be asked to conduct a consultation with the Agency on the draft integrated plan later this year, and the public will have the opportunity to comment on it as well. The final integrated plan will be used to frame each of the major elements of the CO review under the new NAAQS process: an integrated science assessment document, a risk/exposure assessment report, and a policy assessment to be published as an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR). II. Workshop Information Members of the public may attend the workshop as observers. Space is limited, and reservations will be accepted on a first-come, first-served basis. Dated: January 8, 2008. Jenny N. Edmonds, Acting Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. [FR Doc. E8-543 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Proposed Agency Information Collection Activities: Comment Request AGENCY: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Board). ACTION: Notice and request for comment. SUMMARY: In accordance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 35), the Board, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (the “agencies”) may not conduct or sponsor, and the respondent is not required to respond to, an information collection unless it displays a currently valid Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)control number. The Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC), of which the agencies are members, has approved the agencies' publication for public comment of a proposal to extend, with revision, the Report of Assets and Liabilities of U.S. Branches and Agencies of Foreign Banks (FFIEC 002) and the Report of Assets and Liabilities of a Non-U.S. Branch That Is Managed or Controlled by a U.S. Branch or Agency of a Foreign (Non-U.S.) Bank (FFIEC 002S), which are currently approved information collections. The Board is publishing this proposal on behalf of the agencies. At the end of the comment period, the comments and recommendations received will be analyzed to determine the extent to which the FFIEC and the agencies should modify the reports. The Board will then submit the reports to OMB for review and approval. DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before March 17, 2008. ADDRESSES: Interested parties are invited to submit written comments to the agency listed below. All comments, which should refer to the OMB control numbers, will be shared among the agencies. You may submit comments, identified by FFIEC 002 (7100-0032) or FFIEC 002S (7100-0273), by any of the following methods: • *Agency Web Site: http://www.federalreserve.gov.* Follow the instructions for submitting comments on the *http://www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/foia/ProposedRegs.cfm.* • *Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.* Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • *E-mail: regs.comments@federalreserve.gov.* Include the OMB control number in the subject line of the message. • *FAX:* 202-452-3819 or 202-452-3102. • *Mail:* Jennifer J. Johnson, Secretary, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 20th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20551. All public comments are available from the Board's Web site at *http://www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/foia/ProposedRegs.cfm* as submitted, unless modified for technical reasons. Accordingly, your comments will not be edited to remove any identifying or contact information. Public comments may also be viewed electronically or in paper form in Room MP-500 of the Board's Martin Building (20th and C Streets, NW.) between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. on weekdays. Additionally, commenters may send a copy of their comments to the OMB desk officer for the agencies by mail to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, U.S. Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Room 10235, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503, or by fax to 202-395-6974. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Additional information or a copy of the collections may be requested from Michelle E. Shore, Federal Reserve Board Clearance Officer, 202-452-3829, Division of Research and Statistics, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 20th and C Streets, NW., Washington, DC 20551. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf

(TDD)users may call 202-263-4869. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Proposal To Extend for Three Years With Revision the Following Currently Approved Collections of Information *Report Titles:* Report of Assets and Liabilities of U.S. Branches and Agencies of Foreign Banks; Report of Assets and Liabilities of a Non-U.S. Branch That Is Managed or Controlled by a U.S. Branch or Agency of a Foreign (Non-U.S.) Bank. *Form Numbers:* FFIEC 002; FFIEC 002S. *OMB Numbers:* 7100-0032; 7100-0273. *Frequency of Response:* Quarterly. *Affected Public:* U.S. branches and agencies of foreign banks. *Estimated Number of Respondents:* FFIEC 002—264; FFIEC 002S—65. *Estimated Time per Response:* FFIEC 002—25 hours; FFIEC 002S—6 hours. *Estimated Total Annual Burden:* FFIEC 002—26,400 hours; FFIEC 002S—1,560 hours. *General Description of Reports:* These information collections are mandatory: 12 U.S.C. 3105(c)(2), 1817(a)(1) and (3), and 3102(b). Except for select sensitive items, the FFIEC 002 is not given confidential treatment and the FFIEC 002S is given confidential treatment [5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4) and (8)]. *Abstract:* On a quarterly basis, all U.S. branches and agencies of foreign banks are required to file the FFIEC 002, which is a detailed report of condition with a variety of supporting schedules. This information is used to fulfill the supervisory and regulatory requirements of the International Banking Act of 1978. The data are also used to augment the bank credit, loan, and deposit information needed for monetary policy and other public policy purposes. The FFIEC 002S is a supplement to the FFIEC 002 that collects information on assets and liabilities of any non-U.S. branch that is managed or controlled by a U.S. branch or agency of the foreign bank. Managed or controlled means that a majority of the responsibility for business decisions, including but not limited to decisions with regard to lending or asset management or funding or liability management, or the responsibility for recordkeeping in respect of assets or liabilities for that foreign branch, resides at the U.S. branch or agency. A separate FFIEC 002S must be completed for each managed or controlled non-U.S. branch. The FFIEC 002S must be filed quarterly along with the U.S. branch or agency's FFIEC 002. The data from both reports are used for:

(1)Monitoring deposit and credit transactions of U.S. residents;

(2)monitoring the impact of policy changes;

(3)analyzing structural issues concerning foreign bank activity in U.S. markets;

(4)understanding flows of banking funds and indebtedness of developing countries in connection with data collected by the International Monetary Fund

(IMF)and the Bank for International Settlements

(BIS)that are used in economic analysis; and

(5)assisting in the supervision of U.S. offices of foreign banks. The Federal Reserve System collects and processes these reports on behalf of all three agencies. *Current Actions:* The agencies propose to implement a number of revisions to the existing reporting requirements of the FFIEC 002. The proposed revisions would help to achieve consistency with the Reports of Condition and Income (Call Report) (FFIEC 031 and FFIEC 041) filed by insured commercial banks and state-chartered savings banks. The agencies are also proposing to combine the FFIEC 002 and FFIEC 002S into one OMB control number, 7100-0032. The proposed revisions to the FFIEC 002 summarized below have been approved for publication by the FFIEC. The agencies would implement the proposed changes for the June 30, 2008, reporting date. Discussion of Proposed Revisions A. Officer Signature Requirements and Contact Information Considering the importance of data quality, the agencies believe that it is most appropriate for the branch or agency's chief financial officer (or the individual performing an equivalent function) to ensure that the FFIEC 002 and FFIEC 002S are reported accurately. The agencies are proposing to revise the existing officer signature requirement so that the FFIEC 002 and FFIEC 002S must be signed by the branch or agency's chief financial officer rather than by any authorized officer of the branch or agency. In signing the FFIEC 002 and FFIEC 002S, the chief financial officer would attest that the reporting forms have been prepared in conformance with the instructions issued by the FFIEC and are true and correct to the best of the officer's knowledge and belief. The agencies would also retain the existing requirement for the branch or agency's senior executive officer to sign the report. The agencies are also proposing to add contact information (name, title, e-mail address, telephone number, and fax number) for the chief financial officer and another person to whom questions about the reports should be directed to facilitate communication between the agencies and the branch or agency concerning the FFIEC 002 and FFIEC 002S. B. Bankers Acceptances The FFIEC 002 balance sheet (Schedule RAL) requires branches and agencies to separately disclose the amount of their “Customers' liability to this branch or agency on acceptances outstanding” (data items 1.g.(1) and 1.g.(2)) and their “Branch or agency liability on acceptances executed and outstanding” (data item 4.d). On the loan schedule (Schedule C) branches and agencies disclose “Holdings of own acceptances included in Schedule C, part I, item 4” (data item M.2). On the derivatives and off-balance-sheet items schedule (Schedule L) branches and agencies disclose “Participations in acceptances conveyed to others by the reporting branch or agency” (data item 5). On the confidential due from/due to related institutions in the U.S. and in Foreign Countries schedule (Schedule M, Part V) branches and agencies disclose “Participations in acceptances conveyed to related depository institutions by the reporting branch or agency” (data item 5). Over time, the volume of acceptance assets and liabilities as a percentage of industry assets and liabilities has declined substantially to a nominal amount, with only a small number of branches and agencies submitting these data items. The agencies are proposing to delete these six data items and branches and agencies would be instructed to include any acceptance assets and liabilities (other than holdings of the reporting branch or agency's own acceptances) in “Other assets” and “Other liabilities,” respectively, on the FFIEC 002 balance sheet. C. Scope of Securitizations To Be Included in Schedule S In column G of Schedule S, “Servicing, Securitization, and Asset Sale Activities,” branches and agencies submit information on securitizations and on asset sales with recourse or other seller-provided credit enhancements involving loans and leases other than those covered in columns A through F. Although the scope of Schedule S was intended to cover all of a branch's or agency's securitizations and credit-enhanced asset sales, as currently structured column G does not capture transactions involving assets other than loans and leases. As a result, securitization transactions involving such assets as securities, for example, have not been submitted in Schedule S. Therefore, the agencies propose to revise the scope of column G to encompass “All Other Loans, All Leases, and All Other Assets” to ensure that they can identify and monitor the full range of branches' and agencies' involvement in and credit exposure to securitizations and asset sales. As a result, column G would begin to reflect securitization transactions involving such assets as securities. With fewer than 5 branches and agencies submitting data on securitizations in column G of Schedule S at present, the proposed change in the scope of column G is expected to affect only a nominal number of branches and agencies. D. Breakdown of Real Estate Loans by Category FFIEC 002 reporters have become increasingly involved in real estate lending and the agencies are proposing that “Loans secured by real estate” (Schedule C, data item 1) be broken out by category in order to better track this activity. The proposed change would also make the FFIEC 002 more consistent with the Call Report. Specifically, the agencies are proposing to add the following categories of loans secured by real estate: • Construction, land development, and other land loans; • Loans secured by farmland (including farm residential and other improvements); • Revolving, open-ended loans secured by 1-4 family residential properties and extended under lines of credit; • Closed-end loans secured by 1-4 family residential properties; • Loans secured by multi-family (5 or more) residential properties; and • Loans secured by nonfarm nonresidential properties. E. Reporting of Certain Fair Value Measurements and the Use of the Fair Value Option On September 15, 2006, the Financial Accounting Standards Board

(FASB)issued Statement No. 157, *Fair Value Measurements* (FAS 157), which generally is effective for banks and other entities for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007. On February 15, 2007, the FASB issued Statement No. 159, *The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities* (FAS 159), which is effective for banks and other entities for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007. Earlier adoption of FAS 157 is permitted as of the beginning of an earlier fiscal year, provided the entity has not yet issued a financial statement or filed an FFIEC 002 for any period of that fiscal year. Early adoption of FAS 159 was also permitted provided the entity also elected to apply FAS 157 at the same date or earlier. In addition, the FASB also issued Statement No. 155, *Accounting for Certain Hybrid Financial Instruments* (FAS 155), and Statement No. 156, *Accounting for Servicing of Financial Assets* (FAS 156), in 2006. The fair value measurements standard provides guidance on how to measure fair value and requires entities to disclose the inputs used to measure fair value based on a three-level hierarchy for all assets and liabilities that are remeasured at fair value on a recurring basis. 1 FAS 155, FAS 156, and FAS 159 allow entities to irrevocably elect to report certain financial and servicing assets and liabilities at fair value with the changes in fair value included in earnings. This accounting election is referred to as a fair value option. 1 The FASB's three-level fair value hierarchy gives the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3). Level 1 inputs are quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the reporting entity has the ability to access at the measurement date (e.g., the FFIEC 002 reporting date). Level 2 inputs are inputs other than quoted prices included within Level 1 that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly. Level 3 inputs are unobservable inputs for the asset or liability. The agencies are proposing to add a new Schedule Q to the FFIEC 002 to collect data, by major asset and liability category, on the total fair value of those assets and liabilities within the category to which a fair value option has been applied along with separate disclosure of the amount of such assets and liabilities within the category whose fair values were estimated under Levels 1, 2, and 3 of the FASB's fair value hiearchy. The schedule would also include an item for each asset and liability category that would allow branches and agencies to report any amounts netted in the determination of total fair value reported for that category on Schedule RAL. The categories are: • Securities held for purposes other than trading with changes in fair value reported in current earnings; • Loans and leases; • All other financial assets and servicing assets; • Deposit liabilities; • All other financial liabilities and servicing liabilities; and • Loan commitments (not accounted for as derivatives). In addition, the agencies propose to collect fair value data on trading assets and trading liabilities in new Schedule Q from those branches and agencies that reported trading assets (the sum of Schedule RAL, data items 1.f.1 and 1.f.2, column A) of $2 million or more for any of the four preceding quarters. 2 In the proposed new schedule, such entities would report the total fair value carrying amount of trading assets and trading liabilities as well as a breakdown of these assets and liabilities into the three fair value levels under FASB's fair value hierarchy and any netted amounts. Trading assets and trading liabilities are required to be reported at fair value and, thus, are not covered under the fair value option. The proposed change would also make the FFIEC 002 more consistent with the Call Report. 2 For example, if a branch or agency reported trading assets of $2 million or more for the first time in its FFIEC 002 for March 31, 2008, it would begin to report the proposed fair value data on trading assets and trading liabilities in Schedule Q in its FFIEC 002 for June 30, 2008. Assuming the branch or agency reported trading assets of less than $2 million in its FFIEC 002 for June 30, 2008 and subsequent report dates, it would complete the Schedule Q items for trading assets and liabilities in its FFIEC 002 for June 30, 2008, through March 31, 2009, but would discontinue completing these items beginning June 30, 2009. The agencies are also proposing to add memorandum items to capture the fair value and unpaid principal balance of loans measured at fair value under a fair value option. One set of memorandum items would apply to such loans that are reported in “Other trading assets” (data item 1.f.2) on Schedule RAL and another set would apply to such loans that are reported on Schedule C. These proposed memorandum items would collect data for the following categories of loans: • Construction, land development, and other land loans; • Loans secured by farmland (including farm residential and other improvements); • Revolving, open-ended loans secured by 1-4 family residential properties and extended under lines of credit; • Closed-end loans secured by 1-4 family residential properties; • Loans secured by multi-family (5 or more) residential properties; • Loans secured by nonfarm nonresidential properties; • Commercial and industrial loans; and • Other loans. These additional data items are necessary to enable the agencies to understand the differences between fair value and contractual cash flows for loans to which the fair value option is applied and to improve the agencies' ability to make comparisons among entities that elect a fair value option and those that do not, consistent with proposed Call Report changes. F. Time Deposits Data The Federal Reserve uses data from Schedule E, Deposit Liabilities, to ensure accurate construction of the monetary aggregates for monetary policy purposes. In order to more accurately calculate the monetary aggregates, the agencies propose to revise “Total time deposits of $100,000 or more” (data item M.1.a). Memorandum item 1.a would be revised to exclude brokered time deposits issued in denominations of $100,000 or more that are participated out by the broker in shares of less than $100,000 as well as brokered certificates of deposit issued in $1,000 amounts under a master certificate of deposit (when information on the number of $1,000 amounts held by each of the broker's customers is not readily available to the branch or agency). A corresponding change would be made to Memorandum item 1.c, “Time certificates of deposit of $100,000 or more with remaining maturity of more than 12 months.” In addition, as a result of the increase in the deposit insurance limit for certain retirement plan deposit accounts from $100,000 to $250,000, a new Memorandum item 1.b, “Individual Retirement Accounts

(IRAs)and Keogh Plan accounts included in Memorandum item 1.a, ‘Total time deposits of $100,000 or more,' above,” would be added to Schedule E to separately identify the portion of the total time deposits of $100,000 or more reported in Memorandum item 1.a that represents IRA and Keogh Plan accounts. This new memorandum item is also necessary to support the accurate calculation of the monetary aggregates. The agencies are proposing a similar instructional change for Schedule O that would direct insured branches to include brokered time deposits, as discussed above, in Memorandum item 1.a, “Deposit accounts of $100,000 or less,” and to exclude these brokered time deposits from Memorandum item 1.b, “Deposit accounts of more than $100,000.” G. Information on Credit Derivatives Branches and agencies currently report the notional amounts of the credit derivatives on which they are the guarantor and on which they are the beneficiary as well as the gross positive and negative fair values of these credit derivatives in Memoranda items 1 and 2 of Schedule L, Derivatives and Off-Balance Sheet Items, and Schedule M, Due from/Due to Related Institutions in the U.S. and in Foreign Countries, Part V. The agencies propose to revise these existing items so that branches and agencies with credit derivatives will provide a breakdown of these notional amounts by type of credit derivative: Credit default swaps, total return swaps, credit options, and other credit derivatives, with those where the branch or agency is the guarantor reported in column A and those where the branch or agency is the beneficiary in column B. Branches and agencies would continue to separately report the gross positive and negative fair values of credit derivatives on which they are the guarantor and the beneficiary without a breakdown by type of credit derivative. The agencies are also proposing to move credit derivatives from a memoranda item to a line item on Schedule L and Schedule M, Part V. H. Revising the Reporting of Federal Funds Transactions and Securities Repurchase/Resale Agreements On Schedule RAL, the agencies are proposing to revise the existing breakdowns of federal funds sold and securities purchased under agreements to resell that are reported in data items 1.d.1 and 1.d.2, respectively. First, the counterparty coverage of the federal funds sold and securities resale agreements reported in data items 1.d.1.a and 1.d.2.a would be changed from depository institutions in the U.S. to commercial banks in the U.S. This revision would facilitate the derivation of interbank loans, used for a weekly Federal Reserve release. Second, the agencies are proposing to add two-way breakdowns of federal funds sold to others, currently reported in data item 1.d.1.b, and securities resale agreements with others, currently reported in data item 1.d.2.b. In the first two-way breakdown, branches and agencies would separately report federal funds sold to nonbank brokers and dealers in securities and federal funds sold to others (including depository institutions in the U.S. other than commercial banks). Similarly, branches and agencies would separately report securities resale agreements with nonbank brokers and dealers in securities and securities resale agreements with others (including depository institutions in the U.S. other than commercial banks). This revision would facilitate the derivation of total security loans, used for a weekly Federal Reserve release. On the liability side, the agencies are proposing a more limited revision of the existing breakdowns of federal funds purchased and securities sold under agreements to repurchase that are reported in data items 4.b.1 and 4.b.2, respectively. Thus, the counterparty coverage of the federal funds purchased and securities repurchase agreements reported in data items 4.b.1.a and 4.b.2.a would be changed from depository institutions in the U.S. to commercial banks in the U.S. As a result, federal funds purchased from and securities repurchase agreements with depository institutions in the U.S. other than commercial banks would be included in data item 4.b.1.b, “Federal funds purchased from others,” and data item 4.b.2.b, “Securities sold under agreements to repurchase with others,” respectively. This would facilitate the collection of data on borrowings from commercial banks in the U.S. and borrowings from others that is published weekly in Federal Reserve releases. A further breakdown of the “Other borrowed money” reported in data item 4.c of Schedule RAL would not be required since data on such borrowings from commercial banks in the U.S. is already available from Schedule P of the FFIEC 002. I. Deposit Insurance Assessment Revisions for FDIC-Insured Branches On November 30, 2006, the FDIC published a final rule amending Part 327 of its regulations, “Assessments,” to improve and modernize its operational systems for deposit insurance assessments (71 FR 69270). These amendments to Part 327 revised the definition of the assessment base for deposit insurance purposes to be consistent with Section 3(l) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (FDI Act). This was intended to eliminate the need for periodic updates to the FDIC's assessment regulations in response to outside factors and allow a simplification of the associated reporting requirements. In addition, to address timing issues with quarter-end reporting, under amended Part 327, the FDIC will use daily average deposits and exclusions over the quarter instead of quarter-end totals for deposits and exclusions to compute the assessment base for insured institutions with $1 billion or more in assets and other institutions that meet specified criteria. All other insured institutions may opt permanently to determine their assessment base using daily averages. In conjunction with these amendments to Part 327 of the FDIC's regulations, the agencies revised and reduced the overall reporting requirements related to deposit insurance assessments in the Call Report in order to simplify regulatory reporting. These assessment data reporting changes included an interim transition period during 2007 with final implementation of the revised Call Report requirements taking place in 2008. The agencies are proposing to make comparable changes to the reporting requirements related to deposit insurance assessments in Schedule O of the FFIEC 002 for those branches of foreign banks that are insured by the FDIC. These proposed revised reporting requirements would contain the following key elements: • Insured branches would separately report

(a)gross deposits as defined in Section 3(l) of the FDI Act (12 U.S.C. 1813(l)) before any allowable exclusions,

(b)allowable exclusions, including foreign deposits, and

(c)foreign deposits; • The same data items would be reported for both quarter-end and daily average deposits; • All insured branches would report using quarter-end deposits, allowable exclusions, and foreign deposits; and • All insured branches with $1 billion or more in total claims on nonrelated parties, and other insured branches that meet specified criteria, would also report daily averages for deposits, allowable exclusions, and foreign deposits in addition to quarter-end amounts. The agencies would also provide an interim transition period covering the June 30, 2008, through December 31, 2008, report dates during which insured branches would have the option to submit Schedule O using either the current or revised formats for reporting data for measuring their assessment base. An insured branch that chooses to begin reporting under the revised format in any quarter during the interim period would be required to continue to report under the revised format through the rest of the interim period and would not be permitted to revert back to the current reporting format. The revised reporting format would take effect for all insured branches on March 31, 2009, at which time the current reporting format would be eliminated. Although no insured branch that chose to report under the revised format during the 2008 interim period would be required to report daily averages during this period, any insured branch could elect to report daily averages as of any quarter-end report date (beginning June 30) in 2008. However, once an insured branch begins to report daily averages (even during the interim period), it would be required to continue to report daily averages each quarter thereafter in Schedule O of its FFIEC 002. At present, 20 items are required in Schedule O of the FFIEC 002 to determine an insured branch's assessment base. As proposed by the agencies, the changes to Schedule O would effectively reduce the number of reported items to as few as two for certain small insured branches (without foreign deposits) and no more than six for other insured branches. Specifically, the agencies propose to replace items 1 through 7 and Memorandum items 4 and 5 (including their subitems) on Schedule O, “Other Data for Deposit Insurance Assessments,” with the following six items: • Total deposit liabilities before exclusions (gross) as defined in Section 3(l) of the FDI Act and FDIC regulations; • Total allowable exclusions (including foreign deposits); • Total foreign deposits (included in total allowable exclusions); • Total daily average of deposit liabilities before exclusions (gross) as defined in Section 3(l) of the FDI Act and FDIC regulations; • Total daily average of allowable exclusions (including foreign deposits); and • Total daily average of foreign deposits (included in total daily average of allowable exclusions). Thus, instead of starting with total demand deposits and total time and savings deposits as reported in Schedule O of the FFIEC 002 and making adjustments to these reported deposits for purposes of measuring an insured branch's assessment base, which is the present method, the computation of the insured branch's assessment base under the FDIC's amended assessment regulations and these proposed revisions to the FFIEC 002 would start with the gross total deposit liabilities that meet the statutory definition of deposits in Section 3(l) of the FDI Act before any allowable exclusions from the definition. The total amount of allowable exclusions from the assessment base would be reported separately for any insured branch that maintains such records as will readily permit verification of the correctness of its assessment base. The allowable exclusions, which are set forth in Section 3(l)(5) and other sections of the FDI Act and in the FDIC's regulations, include foreign deposits (including International Banking Facility deposits), reciprocal balances, drafts drawn on other depository institutions, pass-through reserve balances, depository institution investment contracts, and deposits accumulated for the payment of personal loans that are assigned or pledged to assure payment at maturity. The net amount of unposted debits and credits would no longer be considered within the definition of the assessment base. The agencies believe that the amount of gross total deposit liabilities that meet the statutory definition of deposits is typically found in and supported by the control totals in an insured branch's deposit systems that provide the detail sufficient to track, control, and handle inquiries from depositors about their specific individual accounts. These deposit systems can be automated or manual. In any case, control totals for deposit liabilities should be readily available, which should ease an insured branch's transition to the revised Schedule O reporting requirements. Compared to the amount of information that an insured branch currently reports in order to determine its assessment base, the proposed changes to the Schedule O reporting requirements should also facilitate the reporting of daily averages for deposits and allowable exclusions since many of the presently reported adjustments will not need to be tracked and averaged separately. In addition to quarter-end balance reporting, insured branches that meet certain criteria would be required to report average daily deposit liabilities, average daily allowable exclusions, and average daily foreign deposits to determine their assessment base effective March 31, 2009. The amounts to be reported would be averages of the balances as of the close of business for each day for the calendar quarter. For days that an insured branch is closed (e.g., Saturdays, Sundays, or holidays), the amounts outstanding from the previous business day would be used. An insured branch is considered closed if there are no transactions posted to the general ledger as of that date. The agencies are proposing to require an insured branch to report daily averages beginning March 31, 2009, if it reports $1 billion or more in total claims on nonrelated parties in data item 1.i, column A, of Schedule RAL of the FFIEC 002 for March 31, 2008, regardless of the amount its total claims on nonrelated parties in subsequent quarters. In addition, if an insured branch reports $1 billion or more in total claims on nonrelated parties in Schedule RAL in two consecutive FFIEC 002 reports beginning with its June 30, 2008, report, daily average reporting would begin on the later date of March 31, 2009, or the report date six months after the second consecutive quarter. An insured branch reporting less than $1 billion in total claims on nonrelated parties in Schedule RAL of its FFIEC 002 for March 31, 2008, would be permitted to continue to determine its assessment base using quarter-end balances until it met the two-consecutive-quarter total claims size test for reporting daily averages unless it opted to determine its assessment base using daily averages. After an insured branch begins to report daily averages for its total deposits, allowable exclusions, and foreign deposits, either voluntarily or because it is required to do so, the insured branch would not be permitted to switch back to reporting only quarter-end balances. Under this proposal, insured branches will continue to report information on the number and amount of deposit accounts, the estimated amount of uninsured deposits (if total claims on nonrelated parties are $1 billion or more), and preferred deposits in Memorandum items 1 through 3 of Schedule O. However, the agencies are proposing to reduce the reporting frequency for the memorandum item for preferred deposits. This memorandum item would be reported only as of December 31 each year, which is consistent with the reporting frequency in the Call Report, rather than quarterly as at present. J. Instructional Clarifications For Schedule E, Column D, branches and agencies report all deposit liabilities of their International Banking Facilities (IBF). A footnote on the reporting form indicates that amounts in this column should exclude those IBF liabilities to be reported as federal funds purchased and securities sold under agreements to repurchase or as other borrowed money. In contrast, the FFIEC 002 instructions for Schedule E state that branches and agencies should “[r]eport in column D all deposit liabilities of the branch or agency's International Banking Facility liabilities, regardless of whether they are transaction or nontransaction accounts. For purposes of this report, IBF deposit liabilities include deposits, placements, borrowings and similar obligations represented by promissory notes, acknowledgements of advance, or similar instruments that are *not* issued in negotiable or bearer form and that are issued to other IBFs or to nonrelated non-U.S. addressees, including banks.” Since the FFIEC 002 instructional language conflicts with the language in the footnote on the reporting form, which provides correct guidance, the agencies will clarify the FFIEC 002 instructional language by removing the second sentence of the current instruction to Column D and by deleting the word “liabilities” the second time it appears in the first sentence of the current instruction. Request for Comment International Financial Reporting Standards On November 15, 2007, the Securities and Exchange Commission

(SEC)approved amendments to its rules that would allow foreign private issuers to file financial statements prepared using International Financial Reporting Standards

(IFRS)as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board without a reconciliation to U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). The agencies have received a number of questions concerning the potential use of IFRS in regulatory reports, including the FFIEC 002 and FFIEC 002s. The current reporting basis for the FFIEC 002 and FFIEC 002s is GAAP. The agencies are evaluating the potential use of IFRS in the FFIEC 002 and FFIEC 002S. As part of this analysis, the agencies request comment on the following:

(a)The ability of respondents to prepare the FFIEC 002 and FFIEC 002s based on IFRS as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board;

(b)The degree to which respondents would need the agencies to provide specific reporting instructions to supplement IFRS to accurately prepare the FFIEC 002 and FFIEC 002s; and

(c)The amount of time respondents would need to prepare their systems, personnel, and processes to transition from the current GAAP-based FFIEC 002 and FFIEC 002S to IFRS-based reports. Paperwork Reduction Act Request for Comment Comments are invited on: a. Whether the information collections are necessary for the proper performance of the agencies' functions, including whether the information has practical utility; b. The accuracy of the agencies' estimate of the burden of the information collections, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; c. Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; d. Ways to minimize the burden of the information collections on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and e. Estimates of capital or start up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information. Comments submitted in response to this notice will be shared among the agencies. All comments will become a matter of public record. Written comments should address the accuracy of the burden estimate and ways to minimize burden including the use of automated collection techniques or the use of other forms of information technology as well as other relevant aspects of the information collection request. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, January 10, 2008. Jennifer J. Johnson, Secretary of the Board. [FR Doc. E8-531 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-P FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Federal Open Market Committee; Domestic Policy Directive of December 11, 2007 In accordance with § 271.25 of its rules regarding availability of information (12 CFR part 271), there is set forth below the domestic policy directive issued by the Federal Open Market Committee at its meeting held on December 11, 2007. 1 1 Copies of the Minutes of the Federal Open Market Committee meeting on December 11, 2007, which includes the domestic policy directive issued at the meeting, are available upon request to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Washington, DC 20551. The minutes are published in the Federal Reserve Bulletin and in the Board's annual report. The Federal Open Market Committee seeks monetary and financial conditions that will foster price stability and promote sustainable growth in output. To further its long-run objectives, the Committee in the immediate future seeks conditions in reserve markets consistent with reducing the federal funds rate at an average of around 4 1/4 percent. By order of the Federal Open Market Committee, January 9, 2008. Brian F. Madigan, Secretary, Federal Open Market Committee. [FR Doc. 08-107 Filed 1-14-08; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 87

Traces to 87 documents

CFR