Notices. Thirty-day notice requesting comments

14,345 words·~65 min read·/register/2008/02/13/08-612

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

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request Periodically, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) will publish a summary of information collection requests under OMB review, in compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). To request a copy of these documents, call the SAMHSA Reports Clearance Officer on

(240)276-1243. Project: Access to Recovery

(ATR)Program (OMB No. 0930-0266)—Revision The Center for Substance Abuse Treatment

(CSAT)is charged with implementing the Access to Recovery

(ATR)program which will allow grantees (States, Territories, the District of Columbia and Tribal Organizations) a means to implement voucher programs for substance abuse clinical treatment and recovery support services. The ATR program is part of a Presidential initiative to:

(1)Provide client choice among substance abuse clinical treatment and recovery support service providers,

(2)expand access to a comprehensive array of clinical treatment and recovery support options (including faith-based programmatic options), and

(3)increase substance abuse treatment capacity. Monitoring outcomes, tracking costs, and preventing waste, fraud and abuse to ensure accountability and effectiveness in the use of Federal funds are also important elements of the ATR program. Grantees, as a contingency of their award, are responsible for collecting data from their clients at intake, discharge, and follow-up (at six months post intake). The primary purpose of this data collection activity is to meet the reporting requirements of the Government Performance and Results Act

(GPRA)by allowing SAMHSA to quantify the effects and accomplishments of SAMHSA programs. The following table is an estimated annual response burden for this effort. Estimates of Annualized Hour Burden 1 Center/form/respondent type Number of respondents Responses per respondent Total responses Hours per response Total hour burden Added burden proportion 2 Total annual burden hours CSAT GPRA Client Outcome Measures for Access to Recovery Programs Clients Adults 53,333 3 160,000 .33 52,800 .33 17,424 Client Subtotal 53,333 160,000 17,424 Data Extract 3 Adult Records 53,333 3 160,000 .16 25,600 — 25,600 Data Extract Subtotal 53,333 160,000 25,600 Upload 4 24 grants 160,000 1 hr. per 6,000 records 27 — 27 Upload Subtotal 24 grants 160,000 27 ATR Voucher Information and Voucher Transaction Voucher information and transaction 53,333 1.5 80,000 .03 2,400 2,400 Voucher information and transaction Subtotal 53,333 80,000 2,400 Subtotal 160,000 480,000 45,451 Total 160,000 480,000 45,451 1 This table represents the maximum additional burden if adult respondents provide three sets of responses/data. 2 Added burden proportion is an adjustment reflecting customary and usual business practices programs engage in (e.g., they already collect the data items). 3 Data Extract: Grant burden for capturing customary and usual data. 4 Upload: All ATR grants upload data. Written comments and recommendations concerning the proposed information collection should be sent by March 14, 2008 to: SAMHSA Desk Officer, Human Resources and Housing Branch, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503; due to potential delays in OMB's receipt and processing of mail sent through the U.S. Postal Service, respondents are encouraged to submit comments by fax to: 202-395-6974. Dated: February 7, 2008. Elaine Parry, Acting Director, Office of Program Services. [FR Doc. E8-2740 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4162-20-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard [USCG-2007-0007] Collection of Information Under Review by Office of Management and Budget: OMB Control Number: 1625-0106 AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Thirty-day notice requesting comments. SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this request for comments announces that the U.S. Coast Guard is forwarding an Information Collection Request (ICR), abstracted below, to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs

(OIRA)of the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)requesting an extension of their approval for the following collection of information: 1625-0106, Unauthorized Entry into Cuban Territorial Waters. Our ICR describes the information we seek to collect from the public. Review and comments by OIRA ensure we only impose paperwork burdens commensurate with our performance of duties. DATES: Please submit comments on or before March 17, 2008. ADDRESSES: To prevent duplicate submissions to the docket [USCG-2007-0007] or to OIRA, please submit your comments and related material by only one of the following means:

(1)Electronic submission.

(a)To Coast Guard docket at *http://www.regulations.gov* .

(b)To OIRA by e-mail to: *nlesser@omb.eop.gov* .

(2)Mail or Hand delivery.

(a)To Docket Management Facility

(DMF)(M-30), U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001. Hand deliver between the hours of 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone number is 202-366-9329.

(b)To OIRA, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503, to the attention of the Desk Officer for the Coast Guard.

(3)Fax.

(a)To DMF at 202-493-2251

(b)To OIRA at 202-395-6566. To ensure your comments are received in time, mark the fax to the attention of Mr. Nathan Lesser, Desk Officer for the Coast Guard. The DMF maintains the public docket for this notice. Comments and material received from the public, as well as documents mentioned in this notice as being available in the docket, will become part of this docket and will be available for inspection or copying at room W12-140 on the West Building Ground Floor, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. You may also find this docket on the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov* . A copy of the complete ICR is available through this docket on the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov* . Additionally, copies are available from Commandant (CG-611), U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters (Attn: Mr. Arthur Requina), 2100 2nd Street, SW., Washington, DC 20593-0001. The telephone number is 202-475-3523. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Arthur Requina, Office of Information Management, telephone 202-475-3523 or fax 202-475-3929, for questions on these documents. Contact Ms. Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, 202-366-9826, for questions on the docket. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard invites comments on whether this information collection request should be granted based on it being necessary in the proper performance of Departmental functions. In particular, the Coast Guard would appreciate comments addressing:

(1)The practical utility of the collections;

(2)the accuracy of the estimated burden of the collections;

(3)ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of information subject to the collections; and

(4)ways to minimize the burden of collections on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Comments to DMF or OIRA must contain the OMB Control Number of the ICR addressed. Comments to DMF must contain the docket number, [USCG 2007-0007]. For your comments to OIRA to be considered, it is best if OIRA receives them on or before the March 17, 2008. *Public participation and request for comments:* We encourage you to respond to this request by submitting comments and related materials. We will post all comments received, without change, to *http://www.regulations.gov* . They will include any personal information you provide. We have an agreement with DOT to use their DMF. Please see the paragraph on DOT's “Privacy Act Policy” below. *Submitting comments:* If you submit a comment, please include the docket number [USCG-2007-0007], indicate the specific section of the document to which each comment applies, providing a reason for each comment. We recommend you include your name, mailing address, an e-mail address, or other contact information in the body of your document so that we can contact you if we have questions regarding your submission. You may submit your comments and material by electronic means, mail, fax, or delivery to the Docket Management Facility at the address under ADDRESSES ; but please submit them by only one means. If you submit them by mail or delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8 1/2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit them by mail and would like to know that they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. We may change the documents supporting this collection of information or even the underlying requirements in view of them. The Coast Guard and OIRA will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. *Viewing comments and documents:* Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* to view documents mentioned in this notice as being available in the docket. Click on “Search for Dockets,” and enter the docket number [USCG-2007-0007] in the Docket ID box, and click enter. You may also visit the DMF in room W12-140 on the West Building Ground Floor, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. *Privacy Act:* Anyone can search the electronic form of all comments received in dockets by the name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review the Privacy Act Statement of DOT in the **Federal Register** published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477), or by visiting *http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.* Previous Request for Comments This request provides a 30-day comment period required by OIRA. The Coast Guard has published the 60-day notice (72 FR 59100, October 18, 2007) required by 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2). That notice elicited no comments. Information Collection Request *Title:* Unauthorized Entry into Cuban Territorial Waters. *OMB Control Number:* 1625-0106. *Type of Request:* Extension of a currently approved collection. *Affected Public:* Owners, operators and masters of vessels. *Abstract:* Title 33 CFR part 107 prescribes regulations governing the unauthorized entry by U.S. vessels into Cuban territorial waters and their applications for permits to enter. The collection of information from applicants is required to comply with the regulations and to facilitate the application process for persons seeking permits to enter Cuban territorial seas pursuant to the regulation. *Burden Estimate:* The estimated burden has decreased from 133 hours to 1 hour a year. Dated: February 4, 2008. D.T. Glenn, Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant Commandant for Command, Control, Communications, Computers and Information Technology. [FR Doc. E8-2691 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-15-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard [Docket No. USCG-2008-0017] Commercial Fishing Industry Vessel Safety Advisory Committee; Vacancies AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Request for applications. SUMMARY: The Coast Guard seeks applications for membership on the Commercial Fishing Industry Vessel Safety Advisory Committee (CFIVSAC). The CFIVSAC provides advice and makes recommendations to the Coast Guard for improving commercial fishing industry safety practices. DATES: Applications for membership should reach the Coast Guard at the address below on or before June 1, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may request an application form by writing to Commandant (CG-5433), U.S. Coast Guard, 2100 Second Street, SW., Washington, DC 20593-0001; by calling 202-372-1249; or by faxing 202-372-1917. Send your application in written form to the above street address. This notice and the application form are available on the Internet at *http://www.FishSafe.info.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Mike Rosecrans, a Designated Federal Officer

(DFO)of the CFIVSAC by telephone at 202-372-1245, fax 202-372-1917, *e-mail: Michael.M.Rosecrans@uscg.mil.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The CFIVSAC is an advisory committee established in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act

(FACA)5 U.S.C. (Pub. L. 92-463). The Coast Guard chartered the CFIVSAC to provide advice on issues related to the safety of commercial fishing industry vessels regulated under Chapter 45 of Title 46, United States Code, which includes uninspected fishing vessels, fish processing vessels, and fish tender vessels. (See 46 U.S.C. 4508.) The CFIVSAC meets at least once a year. It may also meet for other extraordinary purposes. Its subcommittees may gather throughout the year to prepare for meetings or develop proposals for the committee as a whole to address specific problems. We will consider applications for six positions that expire or become vacant in October 2008 in the following categories:

(a)Commercial Fishing Industry (four positions);

(b)Equipment Manufacturer (one position); and

(c)General Public (one position). The CFIVSAC consists of 17 members as follows:

(a)Ten members from the commercial fishing industry who reflect a regional and representational balance and have experience in the operation of vessels to which Chapter 45 of Title 46, United States Code applies, or as a crew member or processing line member on an uninspected fish processing vessel;

(b)one member representing naval architects or marine surveyors;

(c)one member representing manufacturers of vessel equipment to which Chapter 45 applies;

(d)one member representing education or training professionals related to fishing vessel, fish processing vessel, or fish tender vessel safety, or personnel qualifications;

(e)one member representing underwriters that insure vessels to which Chapter 45 applies; and

(f)three members representing the general public including, whenever possible, an independent expert or consultant in maritime safety and a member of a national organization composed of persons representing owners of vessels to which Chapter 45 applies and persons representing the marine insurance industry. Each member serves a 3-year term. Members may serve consecutive terms. All members serve at their own expense and receive no salary from the Federal Government, although travel reimbursement and per diem may be provided. In support of the policy of the Coast Guard on gender and ethnic diversity, qualified women and minorities are encouraged to apply for membership. If you are selected as a non-representative member, or as a member who represents the general public, you will be appointed and serve as a Special Government Employee

(SGE)as defined in section 202(a) of title 18, United States Code. As candidates for appointment as an SGE, applicants are required to complete a Confidential Financial Disclosure Report (OGE From 450). A completed OGE Form 450 is not releasable to the public except under an order issued by a Federal court or as otherwise provided under the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a). Only the Designated Agency Ethics Official or the DAEO's designate may release a Confidential Disclosure Report. Dated: January 31, 2008. J.G. Lantz, Director of Commercial Regulations and Standards. [FR Doc. E8-2680 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-15-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Customs and Border Protection Accreditation and Approval of SGS North America, Inc., as a Commercial Gauger and Laboratory AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security. ACTION: Notice of accreditation and approval of SGS North America, Inc., as a commercial gauger and laboratory. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13, SGS North America, Inc., 1201 W. 8th at Georgia Ave., Deer Park, TX 77536, has been approved to gauge and accredited to test petroleum and petroleum products, organic chemicals and vegetable oils for customs purposes, in accordance with the provisions of 19 CFR 151.12 and 19 CFR 151.13. Anyone wishing to employ this entity to conduct laboratory analyses and gauger services should request and receive written assurances from the entity that it is accredited or approved by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to conduct the specific test or gauger service requested. Alternatively, inquires regarding the specific test or gauger service this entity is accredited or approved to pelform may be directed to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection by calling

(202)344-1060. The inquiry may also be sent to *cbp.labhq@dhs.gov.* Please reference the Web site listed below for a complete listing of CBP approved gaugers and accredited laboratories. DATES: The accreditation and approval of SGS North America, Inc., as commercial gauger and laboratory became effective on May 2, 2007. The next triennial inspection date will be scheduled for May 2010. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Commercial Gauger Laboratory Program Manager, Laboratories and Scientific Services, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Suite 1500N, Washington, DC 20229, 202-344-1060. Dated: January 31, 2008. Ira S. Reese, Executive Director, Laboratories and Scientific Services. [FR Doc. E8-2632 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Customs and Border Protection Notice of Issuance of Final Determination Concerning Multifunctional Machines AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security. ACTION: Notice of final determination. SUMMARY: This document provides notice that the U.S. Customs and Border Protection

(CBP)has issued a final determination concerning the country of origin of certain multifunctional machines which may be offered to the United States Government under an undesignated government procurement contract. CBP has concluded that, based upon the facts presented, certain goods imported into Japan are substantially transformed in Japan such that Japan is the country of origin of the finished multifunctional machines for government procurement purposes. DATES: The final determination was issued on January 4, 2008. A copy of the final determination is attached. Any party-at-interest, as defined in 19 CFR 177.22(d), may seek judicial review of this final determination within 30 days of February 13, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gerry O'Brien, Valuation and Special Programs Branch, Regulations and Rulings, Office of International Trade (202-572-8792). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that on January 4, 2008, pursuant to subpart B of part 177, Customs Regulations (19 CFR part 177, subpart B), CBP issued a final determination concerning the country of origin of certain multifunctional machines which may be offered to the United States Government under an undesignated government procurement contract. This final determination, in HQ H018467, was issued at the request of Panasonic Corporation of North America under procedures set forth at 19 CFR part 177, subpart B, which implements Title III of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2511-18). In the final determination, CBP concluded that, based upon the facts presented, certain goods imported into Japan are substantially transformed in Japan such that Japan is the country of origin of the finished multifunctional machines for government procurement purposes. Section 177.29, Customs Regulations (19 CFR 177.29), provides that notice of final determinations shall be published in the **Federal Register** within 60 days of the date the final determination is issued. Section 177.30, CBP Regulations (19 CFR 177.30), provides that any party-at-interest, as defined in 19 CFR 177.22(d), may seek judicial review of a final determination within 30 days of publication of such determination in the **Federal Register** . Dated: January 4, 2008. Sandra L. Bell, Executive Director, Office of Regulations and Rulings, Office of International Trade. Attachment HQ H018467 January 4, 2008, MAR-2-05 OT:RR:CTF:VS H018467 GOB *Category:* Marking Madeline B. Kuflik, Esq., Assistant General Counsel, Panasonic Corporation of North America, One Panasonic Way, 3B-6, Secaucus, NJ 07094. RE: U.S. Government Procurement; Title III, Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (19 U.S.C. 2511); Subpart B, Part 177, CBP Regulations; Country of Origin of Multifunctional Machines. Dear Ms. Kuflik: This is in response to your letter of October 5, 2007, requesting a final determination on behalf of Panasonic Corporation of North America (“PNA”), pursuant to subpart B of Part 177, Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) Regulations (19 CFR 177.21 *et seq.* ). Under these regulations, which implement Title III of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2511 *et seq.* ), CBP issues country of origin advisory rulings and final determinations as to whether an article is or would be a product of a designated country or instrumentality for the purpose of granting waivers of certain “Buy American” restrictions in U.S. law or practice for products offered for sale to the U.S. Government. In response to our request, you provided additional information with your correspondence of November 7, 2007 and December 5, 2007. This final determination concerns the country of origin of certain color digital multifunctional machines. We note that PNA is a party-at-interest within the meaning of 19 CFR 177.22(d)(1) and is entitled to request this final determination. Facts You describe the pertinent facts as follows. The product at issue is a full-color digital multifunctional machine which can scan, copy, and print. The machine has the following functions: up to 26 ppm color printing; 600 dpi × 600 dpi scanning resolution; 1200 dpi × 1200 dpi printing resolution; high-speed image editing; high speed image compression; network function; automatic duplex scanning; automatic duplex printing; paper ejection; and direct printing function from SD card and PC card. The machine is sold under model number DP-C354. You state that the multifunctional machine consists of the following units: 1. *Automatic Document Feeder Unit* —takes several pages and feeds the paper one page at a time into the scanner. 2. *Scanner Unit* —consists of CCD board, lens, lamp, mirror, drive motor, detection sensor, scanner controlling board, image signal conversion board and SD (secure digital) memory board. 3. *Operation Panel Unit* —consists of tilt mechanism, 7.8 inch LCD, 23 operation buttons, 14 LED, five printing boards, and backup battery. 4. *Feed Unit* —consists of feeding roller, pick up roller, pick up solenoid, paper detection sensor, paper passage sensor and electromagnetic timing clutch. 5. *Manual Paper Feed Unit* —for use with special paper; consists of feeding roller, pick up roller, pick up solenoid, paper detection sensor, paper passage sensor and electromagnetic timing clutch. 6. *Lift-Up Motor Unit* —consists of driving motor, paper detection sensor and pick-up sensor. 7. *Automatic Document Transferring Unit* —feeds the printing paper to the toner transferring unit; consists of driving motor, cooling fan, paper passage sensor, paper ejection roller, transferring roller, switching solenoid, electromagnetic clutch, jam-proof door and pinch roller. 8. *Induction Heating Fuser Unit* —fuses the toner on paper by the induction heating method; consists of induction heating coil, fusing belt, heating roller, fusing roller and pressure roller. 9. *Induction Heating Power Supply Unit* —supplies power to the induction fuser unit. 10. *Transcription Unit* —transcribes the unit on the printing paper; consists of bias roller and OPC (organic photo conductor) drum unit. 11. *OPC Drum Unit* —this unit is charged with electricity and the laser beam sweeps across it to make the electrostatic latent image; consists of cleaning blade, cleaning roller and OPC drum. 12. *Developing Unit* —transfers the toner to the charged part of the OPC drum; consists of concentration sensor, magnet roller, developer, doctor blade and screw. *13. Laser Scanning Unit* —irradiates the laser beam on the OPC drum to make the surface potential; consists of lens, mirrors, polygon motor and fan. *14. Motor Drive Board* —controls the driving of the motors. *15. Automatic Duplex Unit Board* —controls the paper detection sensor and paper passage sensor. *16. High-Voltage Power Supply Board* —controls the high-voltage power supply. *17. Low-Voltage Power Supply Board* —controls the low-voltage power supply. *18. Main Drive Unit* —controls the transcription unit, OPC drum and developing units. *19. Subassembly Units* —there are five different types of simple units which consist of two to five parts. *20. System Control Board* —This board, which acts as the central control system, has a central processing unit

(CPU)and 512 MB of memory. It performs “image processing” which is the editing, color tuning, enlarging, reducing and manipulating of the image data to fit the image quality which is designated by the user for the copy output or the print output. Image data is the data which is scanned by the scanner. The user controls the multifunctional printer by touching the operational panel and sending the data from the PC. The system control board processes the data from the operation panel and PC and sends the processed command to the other boards that control the function which meets the user's intention. The three other boards which receive data from the system control board are the scanner unit, the operation panel unit and the engine control board. The system control board is the core part of this product. It measures approximately 244 mm long and 330 mm wide and it contains approximately 2750 parts. *21. Engine Control Board* —This board controls the machinery parts that feed the recording papers. The machinery parts controlled by the engine control board are the feed unit, manual paper feed unit, lift up motor unit, automatic document feeding unit and main drive unit. The board also controls the units that print the image to the recording papers such as the induction heating fuser unit, transcription unit, OPC drum unit, developing unit and laser scanning unit. This board is approximately 244 mm long and 187 mm wide and consists of approximately 1610 parts. In your submission of December 5, 2007, you state that “[t]he system control board can be compared to the brain of a human being as it is responsible for coordinating all of the activity of the machine and controlling all of the following important functions of the machine.” These functions include: all image processing functions ( *e.g.* , where the toner is to be applied and the temperature of the toner); enlargement and reduction functions; all functions which are available from the control panel ( *e.g.* , choices of multiple copies, double-sided copies, etc.); color image tuning (adding or subtracting color); user interface control (control panel and touch screen operations); and “rastering” of the printed data (the process of taking data sent by a computer's printer driver and converting it so that it can be understood by the engine control board to put the image on paper). In the same submission, you state that “[t]he engine control board can be analogized to the nervous system of a human being. It carries out the commands of the brain, or in this case the system control board.” The engine control board controls the functions relating to the feed of paper, including the paper feed units, the manual feed units, the automatic document feeder unit, the paper lift-up motors, and the main drive unit motor. The engine control board also controls the following units with respect to the printing process: the laser unit, which exposes the photo-receptor to create the copy; the photo-conductor unit; the transfer belt units; the developing units, which contain the toners which are applied to the photo-conductors and transfer unit; and the fixing unit, which makes the toner permanent on the paper. PNA's request involves two manufacturing scenarios. In the first scenario, there are three countries in which manufacturing occurs; in the second scenario, there are two countries in which manufacturing occurs. First Scenario—Manufacturing in China, the Philippines, and Japan The following seven units are manufactured in China from components produced in various countries: automatic document feeder unit; scanner unit; operation panel unit; feed unit; manual paper feed unit; lift up motor unit; and subassembly units. After these components are manufactured in China, they are sent to the factory in the Philippines. The following eleven units are manufactured in the Philippines from components produced in various countries: Automatic document transferring unit; induction heating fuser unit; induction heating power supply unit; transcription unit; developing unit; laser scanning unit; main drive unit; motor drive board; high voltage power supply board; low voltage power supply board; and automatic duplex unit board. The components manufactured in China and those manufactured in the Philippines are assembled into one main body in the Philippines. That body is sent to the factory in Japan. The following work is performed in Japan. The OPC drum unit and the toner reservoir are manufactured. The system control board and the engine control board, which are manufactured in Japan, are mounted and inspected. Approximately 1,600 electronic parts and 500 electronic parts are mounted on the back of the system control board and the engine control board, respectively, by three large mounting machines. The boards are then inspected. At that point, about 1,100 electronic parts and 1,000 electronic parts are mounted on the front sides of the system control board and the engine control board, respectively. The boards are then inspected again. Workers then mount 19 parts on the system control board and 40 parts on the engine control board by hand soldering. The boards are then inspected again. You state that the workers involved in the mounting and soldering of the parts should be highly skilled because the parts are mounted densely in view of the large number of parts and the fact that each electronic part is microminiaturized. After the mounting process is completed, the boards are inspected as to functionality by special measurement equipment. This inspection takes approximately 10 to 20 minutes per board. At this point in the process, the OPC drum unit, the toner reservoir, the system control board and the engine control board are incorporated into the main body which was assembled in the Philippines. The next step is the installation of firmware into the system control board and the engine control board. You state that the firmware in the system control board controls the user interface, imaging, and memories; the firmware in the engine control board controls machinery. You state that the firmware, which is developed in Japan, is similar to the application software of a personal computer. The process concludes with the inspection of the completed product and adjustments to the concentration in the toner, print position, print color, and print quality. These adjustments are necessary for accurate printing. Second Scenario—Manufacturing in the Philippines and Japan The following 18 units are manufactured in the Philippines from components produced in various countries: Automatic document feeder unit; scanner unit; operation panel unit; feed unit; manual paper feed unit; lift up motor unit; subassembly units; automatic document transferring unit; induction heating fuser unit; induction heating power supply unit; transcription unit; developing unit; laser scanning unit; main drive unit; motor drive board; high voltage power supply board; low voltage power supply board; and automatic duplex unit board. These components are assembled into one main body in the Philippines. That body is sent to the factory in Japan. The manufacturing process in Japan in this scenario is the same as the process described in the first scenario. The second scenario differs from the first scenario in that no units are manufactured in China in the second scenario. The 18 units manufactured in the Philippines in the second scenario include the 11 units manufactured there in the first scenario and the seven units manufactured in China in the first scenario. Issue What is the country of origin of the subject color digital multifunction machines for the purpose of U.S. Government procurement? Law and Analysis Pursuant to Subpart B of Part 177, 19 CFR 177.21 *et seq.* , which implements Title III of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2511 *et seq.* ), CBP issues country of origin advisory rulings and final determinations as to whether an article is or would be a product of a designated country or instrumentality for the purposes of granting waivers of certain “Buy American” restrictions in U.S. law or practice for products offered for sale to the U.S. Government. Under the rule of origin set forth under 19 U.S.C. 2518(4)(B): An article is a product of a country or instrumentality only if

(i)it is wholly the growth, product, or manufacture of that country or instrumentality, or

(ii)in the case of an article which consists in whole or in part of materials from another country or instrumentality, it has been substantially transformed into a new and different article of commerce with a name, character, or use distinct from that of the article or articles from which it was so transformed. *See also,* 19 CFR 177.22(a). In determining whether the combining of parts or materials constitutes a substantial transformation, the determinative issue is the extent of operations performed and whether the parts lose their identity and become an integral part of the new article. *Belcrest Linens* v. *United States,* 573 F. Supp. 1149 (Ct. Int'l Trade 1983), *aff'd,* 741 F.2d 1368 (Fed. Cir. 1984). Assembly operations that are minimal or simple, as opposed to complex or meaningful, will generally not result in a substantial transformation. *See,* C.S.D. 80-111, C.S.D. 85-25, C.S.D. 89-110, C.S.D. 89-118, C.S.D. 90-51, and C.S.D. 90-97. If the manufacturing or combining process is a minor one which leaves the identity of the article intact, a substantial transformation has not occurred. *Uniroyal, Inc.* v. *United States,* 3 CIT 220, 542 F. Supp. 1026 (1982), *aff'd* 702 F. 2d 1022 (Fed. Cir. 1983). In C.S.D. 85-25, 19 Cust. Bull. 844 (1985), CBP held that for purposes of the Generalized System of Preferences (“GSP”), the assembly of a large number of fabricated components onto a printed circuit board in a process involving a considerable amount of time and skill resulted in a substantial transformation. In that case, in excess of 50 discrete fabricated components (such as resistors, capacitors, diodes, integrated circuits, sockets, and connectors) were assembled. Whether an operation is complex and meaningful depends on the nature of the operation, including the number of components assembled, number of different operations, time, skill level required, attention to detail, quality control, the value added to the article, and the overall employment generated by the manufacturing process. In order to determine whether a substantial transformation occurs when components of various origins are assembled into completed products, CBP considers the totality of the circumstances and makes such determinations on a case-by-case basis. The country of origin of the item's components, extent of the processing that occurs within a country, and whether such processing renders a product with a new name, character, and use are primary considerations in such cases. Additionally, factors such as the resources expended on product design and development, extent and nature of post-assembly inspection and testing procedures, and worker skill required during the actual manufacturing process may be relevant when determining whether a substantial transformation has occurred. No one factor is determinative. In HQ 735315, dated April 10, 1995, CBP stated: We agree * * * that the assembly of the various components into the optics module shell, mainly the PWBs which are manufactured in the U.S., constitutes a substantial transformation. * * * [W]e find that the manufacture of the PWBs and their subsequent installation into the shells constitutes a complex and meaningful assembly pursuant to C.S.D. 85-25. Although the imported shells consist of important components, such as the sampling device, furnace, light bulbs, and mirrors/optics, the PWBs give the optics module the ability to function and analyze * * *. In HQ 561734, dated March 22, 2001, CBP determined that certain multifunctional machines (printer, copier, and facsimile) assembled in Japan were a product of Japan for purposes of government procurement. The machines were comprised of 227 parts (108 parts obtained from Japan, 92 from Thailand, three from China, and 24 from other countries) and eight subassemblies, each of which was assembled in Japan. It was further noted that the scanner unit (one of the eight subassemblies assembled in Japan) was characterized as “the heart of the machine.” In HQ 562936, dated March 17, 2004, CBP found that a multifunctional machine (printer, copier, scanner, facsimile) was a product of Japan for the purpose of U.S. government procurement. CBP noted that a substantial portion of the machine's components and assemblies were of Japanese origin. The requester had described certain of these components as the “most complex,” “key,” and “essential.” CBP recognized that, in addition to the Japanese subassemblies, certain critical Japanese-origin parts were incorporated into the Chinese subassemblies. CBP found that the processing that occurred in Japan was complex and meaningful, required the assembly of a large number of components, and resulted in a new and distinct article of commerce that possessed a new name, character, and use. Based upon the facts which you present, we note that operations are performed in three countries in the first scenario and two countries in the second scenario. In situations like these, no one country imparts the dominant portion of the work conducted. Nonetheless, based upon the applicable legal standard, we determine that, with respect to each of the two scenarios, the goods imported into Japan are substantially transformed in Japan such that Japan is the country of origin of the multifunctional machines (model number DP-C354) for government procurement purposes. In making this determination, we give substantial weight to the fact that the system control board, the engine control board, and the firmware are manufactured in Japan. Based upon the facts presented, these components are of utmost importance to the functionality of the completed good. We also find that the operations performed in Japan are meaningful and relatively complex and result in an article of commerce which possesses a new name, character, and use. Therefore, as Japan is the final country of production and a substantial amount of work is performed there, we find that the country of origin in both scenarios is Japan. Holding With respect to each of the two scenarios, the goods imported into Japan are substantially transformed in Japan such that Japan is the country of origin of the multifunctional machines (model number DP-C354) for government procurement purposes. Notice of this final determination will be given in the **Federal Register** , as required by 19 CFR 177.29. Any party-at-interest other than the party which requested this final determination may request, pursuant to 19 CFR 177.31, that CBP reexamine the matter anew and issue a new final determination. Pursuant to 19 CFR 177.30, any party-at-interest may, within 30 days after publication of the **Federal Register** notice referenced above, seek judicial review of this final determination before the Court of International Trade. Sincerely, Sandra L. Bell, Executive Director, Office of Regulations and Rulings, Office of International Trade. [FR Doc. E8-2636 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Customs and Border Protection Notice of Issuance of Final Determination Concerning; Standard and Rolled-Edge Ball Seals AGENCY: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security. ACTION: Notice of final determination. SUMMARY: This document provides notice that the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection

(CBP)has issued a final determination concerning the country of origin of two types of ball seals to be offered to the United States Government under an undesignated government procurement contract. Based on the facts presented, CBP has concluded that the operations performed in China do not result in a substantial transformation of the U.S. components. Therefore, the assembled ball seals will not be considered to be products of China. DATES: The final determination was issued on February 6, 2008. A copy of the final determination is attached. Any party-at-interest, as defined in 19 CFR 177.22(d), may seek judicial review of this final determination within 30 days of February 13, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Holly Files, Valuation and Special Programs Branch, Regulations and Rulings, Office of International Trade (202-572-8740). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that on February 6, 2008, pursuant to subpart B of part 177, Customs Regulations (19 CFR part 177, subpart B), CBP issued a final determination concerning the country of origin of two types of ball seals to be offered to the United States Government under an undesignated government procurement contract. The CBP ruling number is H021398. This final determination was issued at the request of Brammall, Inc. d/b/a/ TydenBrammall (“TydenBrammall”) under procedures set forth at 19 CFR part 177, subpart B, which implements Title III of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2511-18). The final determination concluded that, based upon the facts presented, the simple assembly in China of three major U.S.-origin components with two minor Chinese-origin components does not result in a substantial transformation of the U.S.-origin components. Therefore, the assembled ball seals will not be considered to be products of China for purposes of U.S. Government procurement. Section 177.29, Customs Regulations (19 CFR 177.29), provides that notice of final determinations shall be published in the **Federal Register** within 60 days of the date the final determination is issued. Section 177.30, CBP Regulations (19 CFR 177.30), states that any party-at-interest, as defined in 19 CFR 177.22(d), may seek judicial review of a final determination within 30 days of publication of such determination in the **Federal Register** . Dated: February 6, 2008. Myles B. Harmon, Acting Executive Director, Office of Regulations and Rulings, Office of International Trade. Attachment: HQ H021398 February 6, 2008 MAR-2-05 OT:RR:CTF:VS H021398 HEF CATEGORY: Marking. Ms. Linda M. Weinberg, *Barnes & Thornburg LLP, Suite 900, 750 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20006.* RE: U.S. Government Procurement; Final Determination; country of origin of ball seals; substantial transformation; 19 CFR Part 177. Dear Ms. Weinberg: This is in response to your letter dated December 21, 2007, requesting a final determination on behalf of Brammall, Inc. d/b/a TydenBrammall (“TydenBrammall”), pursuant to subpart B of Part 177, Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) Regulations (19 CFR 177.21 *et seq.* ). Under these regulations, which implement Title III of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2511 *et seq.* ), CBP issues country of origin advisory rulings and final determinations on whether an article is or would be a product of a designated country or instrumentality for the purpose of granting waivers of certain “Buy American” restrictions in U.S. law or practice for products offered for sale to the U.S. Government. This final determination concerns the country of origin of certain ball seals. We note that TydenBrammall is a party-at-interest within the meaning of 19 CFR 177.22(d)(1) and is entitled to request this final determination. Samples of the ball seals, at various stages of the manufacturing process, were also submitted with your request. In preparing this final determination, consideration was given to your supplemental submission dated January 9, 2008. Facts The products subject to this final determination are two types of ball seals known as the “Tyden Standard Ball Seal” and the “Tyden Rolled-Edge Ball Seal.” The ball seals are used to secure rail, container, and truck cargo shipments. The “ball” of a seal is comprised of metal top and bottom caps. A metal strap runs through the center of the ball and extends at length from the bottom cap. The metal strap may have a custom seal number embossed on it and/or a printed bar code. A die cut notch at the end of the metal strap is used to engage with two interlocking D-shaped rings, located inside the ball, to form a functional security lock. The ball itself is slotted to provide visible proof to the user that the seal is locked. You advise that TydenBrammall uses identical materials and components in the manufacture of both the Tyden Standard Ball Seal and the Tyden Rolled-Edge Ball Seal. The manufacturing processes for the two products are also identical, with the exception that the Rolled-Edge Ball Seal requires the additional step of having its edges rolled under at the end of the U.S. processing. The ball seals are assembled from five components. You advise that the seals' three major components are produced in the United States from U.S. materials. The other two components are sourced in China. To produce the U.S.-origin components, TydenBrammall purchases rolls of coiled steel from a U.S. steel producer. You note that highly trained operators and maintenance die technicians load the steel coils onto two computer-controlled presses and dies at TydenBrammall's U.S. facility. The presses and dies are used to stamp the strap, ball seal top cap, and ball seal bottom cap from the coiled steel into specific sizes and subject to precise tolerances. You assert that the U.S.-origin components have no other use other than as components of the finished ball seals due to their specific shapes, sizes, and tolerances. Next, the three U.S.-origin components are shipped to China for a simple assembly process. You state that in China, unskilled laborers manually assemble two Chinese-origin “D” shaped locking rings with the U.S.-origin strap. After the rings are attached to the strap, the top and bottom caps are manually attached using a small hand press that seals the caps together by slightly bending the top cap around the bottom cap. The assembled ball seals are then returned to TydenBrammall's U.S. facility where they are stored until ordered by specific end-customers. When a customer places an order, assembled seals are removed from storage and placed on a machine that die cuts a notch into the “male” end of the strap. You explain that the notch, like the teeth on a key, makes the seal a functional security lock. You also advise that prior to the die cutting of the notch, the seal is not functional. The same machine used to die cut the notch also embosses and/or inkjet prints a unique serial number and/or bar code onto the strap of the seal. The operator of the machine then bundles the ball seals in sequential numbered order in groups of 100 seals. Issue What is the country of origin of the assembled ball seals for purposes of U.S. Government procurement? Law and Analysis Pursuant to subpart B of Part 177, 19 CFR 177.21 *et seq.* , which implements Title III of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979, as amended (“TAA”; 19 U.S.C. 2511 *et seq.* ), CBP issues country of origin advisory rulings and final determinations on whether an article is or would be a product of a designated country or instrumentality for the purposes of granting waivers of certain “Buy American” restrictions in U.S. law or practice for products offered for sale to the U.S. Government. Under the rule of origin set forth at 19 U.S.C. 2518(4)(B): An article is a product of a country or instrumentality only if

(i)it is wholly the growth, product, or manufacture of that country or instrumentality, or

(ii)in the case of an article which consists in whole or in part of materials from another country or instrumentality, it has been substantially transformed into a new and different article of commerce with a name, character, or use distinct from that of the article or articles from which it was so transformed. *See also,* 19 CFR 177.22(a). In rendering advisory rulings and final determinations for purposes of U.S. Government procurement, CBP applies the provisions of subpart B of Part 177 consistent with the Federal Procurement Regulations. *See* 19 CFR 177.21. In this regard, CBP recognizes that the Federal Procurement Regulations restrict the U.S. Government's purchase of products to U.S.-made or designated country end products for acquisitions subject to the TAA. *See* 48 CFR 25.403(c)(1). The Federal Procurement Regulations define “U.S.-made end product” as: * * * an article that is mined, produced, or manufactured in the United States or that is substantially transformed in the United States into a new and different article of commerce with a name, character, or use distinct from that of the article or articles from which it was transformed. 48 CFR 25.003 In determining whether the combining of parts or materials constitutes a substantial transformation, the determinative issue is the extent of operations performed and whether the parts lose their identity and become an integral part of the new article. *Belcrest Linens* v. *United States,* 6 Ct. Int'l Trade 204, 573 F. Supp. 1149 (1983), *aff'd,* 741 F.2d 1368 (Fed. Cir. 1984). If the manufacturing or combining process is a minor one which leaves the identity of the imported article intact, a substantial transformation has not occurred. *Uniroyal, Inc.* v. *United States,* 3 Ct. Int'l Trade 220, 542 F. Supp. 1026 (1982). In *Uniroyal,* the court determined that a substantial transformation did not occur when an imported footwear upper, the essence of the finished article, was combined with a domestically produced outsole to form a shoe. *See id.* Assembly operations that are minimal or simple, as opposed to complex or meaningful, will generally not result in a substantial transformation. *See* C.S.D. 80-111, C.S.D. 85-25, and C.S.D. 90-97. In order to determine whether a substantial transformation occurs when components of various origins are assembled to form completed articles, CBP considers the totality of the circumstances and makes such decisions on a case-by-case basis. The country of origin of the article's components, the extent of the processing that occurs within a given country, and whether such processing renders a product with a new name, character, and use are primary considerations in such cases. Additionally, facts such as resources expended on product design and development, extent and nature of post-assembly inspection procedures, and worker skill required during the actual manufacturing process will be considered when analyzing whether a substantial transformation has occurred; however, no one such factor is determinative. CBP has considered a number of different scenarios involving the assembly of locking apparatus. In Headquarters Ruling Letter (“HRL”) 734440, dated March 30, 1992, CBP found that a lock apparatus was substantially transformed in the United States as a result of combining it with pieces manufactured in the United States. In rendering the country of origin marking decision, CBP noted that the predominant expense of the assembled lock was from the parts produced in the United States, which required extensive manufacturing and development. By contrast, the imported piece was a generic mechanism that was inserted into the U.S. piece. In another country of origin marking case, HRL 734923, dated May 14, 1993, CBP determined that imported components of a door lockset, the rosettes and parts of the latch, were substantially transformed when they were assembled together with significant U.S. components in the United States to make the finished door lockset. CBP found the manufacture of the rosettes in China to be relatively simple and that it did not require a great deal of precision as compared to the manufacture of the other components in the United States, which required significant precision and substantial machinery and tooling. In HRL 735133, dated May 5, 1994, CBP held that imported lock parts and assemblies were not substantially transformed when assembled in the United States with a U.S.-origin coverplate screw. CBP noted that most of the cost in making the finished lock was attributable to operations performed in Taiwan and that the production in the United States was a simple manual assembly operation of basically finished parts. Most recently, in HRL W563587, dated February 8, 2007, CBP issued another government procurement final determination to TydenBrammall concerning bolt container seals and cable seals. In HRL W563587, CBP considered two different manufacturing scenarios for each of the two products: one where the seals were assembled in the United States from imported components and another where the seals were assembled in the United States from imported components and a U.S.-origin lock body. In each instance, the U.S. operations involved the simple assembly of only four or five parts. The production of the bolt container seal involved the assembly of four parts to form a lock body assembly and the packaging of the assembly with a finished bolt shank of Chinese-origin. CBP found that packaging the bolt shank with the assembly did not substantially transform the bolt shank. Thus, the bolt shank retained its Chinese origin under both manufacturing scenarios, and the country of origin of the lock body assembly was determined separately. Where the products were produced entirely from foreign components, CBP found the U.S. assembly operations insufficient to substantially transform the foreign components into products of the United States. After finding that the Chinese-origin lock bodies imparted the essential character of both the cable seal and the lock body assembly, CBP determined that their country of origin was China. Where U.S. lock bodies were used, CBP determined that the country of origin of the cable seal and the lock body assembly was the United States. In reaching this determination, CBP noted that the U.S.-origin parts and the U.S. labor accounted for most of the cost of making the seals. In the instant case, the major components of the ball seals are stamped in the United States from U.S.-origin steel to precise sizes and tolerances by skilled technicians using relatively sophisticated machinery. Next, the three U.S.-origin components are shipped to China where unskilled workers perform a simple manual assembly of the three components with two minor Chinese-origin components. The seals are then returned to the United States where notches are die cut into the straps to make the products functional locking mechanisms. We find that the U.S.-origin components impart the essential character to the assembled seals. Based on our previous rulings and the facts presented in the instant case, we also find that the operations performed in China are not complex or meaningful. The Chinese operations are simple assembly operations that involve a small number of components and do not appear to require a considerable amount of time, skill, or attention to detail. As such, the assembled ball seals, upon importation to the United States, will not be considered to be products of China. Holding Based on the facts provided, the U.S.-origin components impart the essential character to the assembled ball seals. The operations performed in China do not result in a substantial transformation of the U.S.-origin components. As such, the assembled ball seals, upon importation to the United States, will not be considered to be products of China. Notice of this final determination will be given in the **Federal Register** as required by 19 CFR 177.29. Any party-at-interest other than the party which requested this final determination may request, pursuant to 19 CFR 177.31, that CBP reexamine the matter anew and issue a new final determination. Any party-at-interest may, within 30 days after publication of the **Federal Register** notice referenced above, seek judicial review of this final determination before the Court of International Trade. Sincerely, Myles B. Harmon, *Acting Executive Director, Office of Regulations and Rulings, Office of International Trade.* [FR Doc. E8-2631 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5194-N-05] Notice of Proposed Information Collection for Public Comment; HOPE VI Public Housing Programs: Funding and Program Data Collection AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing, HUD. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The proposed information collection requirement described below will be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for review, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act. The Department is soliciting public comments on the subject proposal. DATES: *Comments Due Date:* April 14, 2008. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name/or OMB Control number and should be sent to: Lillian L. Deitzer, Departmental Reports Management Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20410-5000; telephone 202-708-2374 (this is not a toll-free number) or e-mail Ms. Deitzer at *Lillian_L._Deitzer@HUD.gov* for a copy of the proposed form and other available information. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Schulhof, Office of Policy, Programs and Legislative Initiatives, PIH, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street, SW., Washington DC 20410, telephone 202-402-4112, (this is not a toll-free number). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Department will submit the proposed information collection to OMB for review, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended). This Notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information to:

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

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

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

(4)minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. This Notice also lists the following information: *Title of Proposal:* HOPE VI program. *OMB Control Number:* 2577-0208. *Description of the need for the information and proposed use:* Section 24 of the U.S. Housing Act of 1937, as added by section 535 of the Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act of 1998 (Pub. L. 105-276, 112 Stat. 2461, approved October 21, 1998) and revised by the HOPE VI Program Reauthorization and Small Community Main Street Rejuvenation and Housing Act of 2003 (Pub. L. 108-186, 117 Stat. 2685, approved December 16, 2003), establishes the HOPE VI program for the purpose of making assistance available on a competitive basis to public housing agencies

(PHAs)in improving the living environment for public housing residents of severely distressed public housing projects through the demolition, rehabilitation, reconfiguration, or replacement of severely distressed public housing projects (or portions thereof); in revitalizing areas in which public housing sites are located, and contributing to the improvement of the surrounding community; in providing housing that avoids or decreases the concentration of very low-income families; and in building sustainable communities. In addition, the HOPE VI Program Reauthorization and Small Community Main Street Rejuvenation and Housing Act of 2003 added to the HOPE VI program the purpose of making assistance available on a competitive basis to small units of local government to develop affordable housing as part of Main Street rejuvenation projects. The program authorization was renewed by the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 (Pub. L. 110-161, approved December 26, 2007), which extends the program until September 30, 2008. Under this requirement, the Department only has a few months to award and obligate the 2008 funds or they will be returned to the Treasury. These information collections are required in connection with the annual publication in the **Federal Register** of Notices of Funding Availability (NOFAs), contingent upon available funding and authorization, which announce the availability of funds provided in annual appropriations for HOPE VI Revitalization, Demolition grants, and HOPE VI Main Street grants. Eligible public housing agencies

(PHAs)(for HOPE VI Revitalization and Demolition) and eligible local units of government (for HOPE VI Main Street) interested in obtaining HOPE VI grants are required to submit applications to HUD, as explained in each program NOFA. The information collection conducted in the applications enables HUD to conduct a comprehensive, merit-based selection process in order to identify and select the applications to receive funding. With the use of HUD-prescribed forms, the information collection provides HUD with sufficient information to approve or disapprove applications. Applicants that are awarded HOPE VI grants are required to report on a quarterly basis on the sources and uses of all amounts expended for revitalization, demolition, or Main Street activities. HOPE VI Revitalization grantees use a fully-automated, Internet-based process for the submission of quarterly reporting information. HUD reviews and evaluates the collected information and uses it as a primary tool with which to monitor the status of HOPE VI Revitalization projects and the HOPE VI Revitalization program. *Agency form numbers:* HUD-52774, HUD-52780, HUD 52785, HUD-52787, HUD-52798, HUD-52790, HUD-52797, HUD-52799, HUD-52800, HUD-52825-A, HUD-52860-A, HUD-52861, HUD-53001-A, SF-424, SF-LLL, HUD-27061, HUD 27300, HUD 2880, HUD 96010, and HUD 96011. *Members of affected public:* Public Housing Agencies. *Estimation of the total number of hours needed to prepare the information collection including number of respondents, frequency of response, and hours of response:* For HOPE VI Revitalization Application: 30 respondents, once annually, 192 hours average per response results in a total annual reporting burden of 5,795.10 hours. For HOPE VI Demolition Applications: 34 respondents, once annually, 40.25 hours average per response results in a total annual reporting burden of 1,408.28 hours. For HOPE VI Main Street Applications: 15 respondents, once annually, 45 hours average per response results in a total annual reporting burden of 692.55 hours. For HOPE VI Revitalization Quarterly Reporting: 207 respondents, 4 times annually, 20 hours average per response results in a total annual reporting burden of 16,560 hours. Grand total: These information collections, along with other Non-NOFA information collection items required in connection with the HOPE VI program including budget updates, supportive services and relocation plans, and cost certificates result in an annual total reporting burden of 26,262.93 hours. *Status of the proposed information collection:* Extension of a Currently Approved Collection. Authority: Section 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended. Dated: February 7, 2008. Bessy M. Kong, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy, Program, and Legislative Initiatives. [FR Doc. E8-2677 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Office of the Secretary Privacy Act of 1974; Amendments to Existing Systems of Records AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Interior. ACTION: Proposed amendment of existing Privacy Act systems of records. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), the Office of the Secretary of the Department of the Interior is issuing public notice of its intent to amend 35 existing Privacy Act system of records notices to add a new routine use to authorize the disclosure of records to individuals involved in responding to a breach of Federal data. DATES: Comments must be received by March 24, 2008. ADDRESSES: Any persons interested in commenting on these proposed amendments may do so by submitting comments in writing to the Office of the Secretary Privacy Act Officer, Sue Ellen Sloca, U.S. Department of the Interior, MS-116 SIB, 1951 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20240, or by e-mail to *Sue_Ellen_Sloca@nbc.gov* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Office of the Secretary Privacy Act Officer, Sue Ellen Sloca, U.S. Department of the Interior, MS-116 SIB, 1951 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20240, or by e-mail to *Sue_Ellen_Sloca@nbc.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 22, 2007, in a memorandum for the heads of Executive Departments and Agencies entitled “Safeguarding Against and Responding to the Breach of Personally Identifiable Information,” the Office of Management and Budget directed agencies to develop and publish a routine use for disclosure of information in connection with response and remedial efforts in the event of a data breach. This routine use will serve to protect the interest of the individuals whose information is at issue by allowing agencies to take appropriate steps to facilitate a timely and effective response to the breach, thereby improving its ability to prevent, minimize or remedy any harm resulting from a compromise of data maintained in its systems of records. Accordingly, the Office of the Secretary of the Department of the Interior is proposing to add a new routine use to authorize disclosure to appropriate agencies, entities, and persons, of information maintained in the following systems in the event of a data breach. These amendments will be effective as proposed at the end of the comment period unless comments are received which would require a contrary determination. The Department will publish a revised notice if changes are made based upon a review of comments received. Sue Ellen Sloca, Office of the Secretary Privacy Act Officer. SYSTEM NAMES: Interior, OAS—01: “Official Pilot Folder.” (Published March 22, 1999, 64 FR 13809-13810) Interior, OAS—02: “Aircraft Services Administrative and Fiscal Records.” (Published April 7, 1999, 64 FR 16990-16991) Interior, DOI—01: “Interior Child Care Subsidy Program.” (Published February 14, 2001, 66 FR 10309-10311) Interior, OS—02: “Individual Indian Money

(IIM)Trust Funds.” (Published March 8, 2001, 66 FR 13945-13947) Interior, OS—03: “The Box Index Search System.” (Published July 29, 2005, 70 FR 43899-43900) Interior, DOI—04: “Employee Assistance Program Records.” (Published April 23, 1999, 64 FR 20011-20013) Interior, DOI—07: “Federal and Non-Federal Aviation Personnel, Equipment, and Mishap Information System.” (Published April 7, 1999, 64 FR 16981-16983) Interior, OS—09: “Hearings and Appeals Files.” (Published November 27, 2006, 71 FR 68633-68635) Interior, OS—10: “Electronic Email Archive System (EEAS).” (Published January 28, 2003, 68 FR 4220-4221) Interior, OS—14: “Take Pride in America System.” (Published July 3, 2003, 68 FR 39958-39959) Interior, DOI—16: “DOI LEARN (Department-wide Learning Management System.” (Published October 5, 2005, 70 FR 58230-58232) Interior, DOI—18: “Discrimination Complaints.” (Published April 14, 1999, 71 FR 18438-18440) Interior, OS—20: “Secretarial Controlled Correspondence File.” (Published April 23, 1999, 64 FR 20013-20014) Interior, OS—35: “Library Circulation Control System.” (Published April 7, 1999, 66 FR 16988-16989) Interior, OS—36: “Telephone Call Detail Records.” (Published February 15, 1994, FR Doc 94-3498) Interior, OS—46: “Secretarial Subject Files.” (Published April 7, 1999, 64 FR 16983-16984) Interior, OS—47: “Parking Assignment Records.” (Published April 7, 1999, 64 FR 16984-16985) Interior, OS—51: “Property Accountability and Control System.” (Published April 9, 1999, 64 FR 17404-17405) Interior, OS—52: “Passport and Visa Records.” (Published April 7, 1999, 64 FR 16981) Interior, DOI—57: “Privacy Act Files.” (Published March 24, 1999, 64 FR 14258-14259) Interior, DOI—58: “Employee Administrative Records.” (Published April 20, 1999, 64 FR 19384-19386) Interior, DOI—60: “Safety Management Information System.” (Published April 7, 1999, 64 FR 16991-16992) Interior, DOI—71: “Electronic FOIA Tracking System and FOIA Case Files.” (Published September 18, 2002, 67 FR 58817-58819) Interior, DOI—72: “FECA Chargeback Case Files.” (Published April 20, 1999, 64 FR 19380-19381) Interior, DOI—74: “Grievance Records.” (Published April 20, 64 FR 19381-19383) Interior, DOI—76: “Employee Training and Career Development Records.” (Published May 18, 1999, 64 FR 26999-27000) Interior, DOI—77: “Unfair Labor Practice Charges/Complaints Files.” (Published April 14, 1999, 64 FR 18434-18436) Interior, DOI—78: “Negotiated Grievance Files.” (Published April 20, 1999, 64 FR 19383-19384) Interior, DOI—79: “Interior Personnel Records.” (Published April 23, 1999, 64 FR 20010-20011) Interior, DOI—82: “Executive Development Program Files.” (Published April 23, 1999, 64 FR 20014-20015) Interior, OS—84: “Delinquent Debtor Files.” (Published April 14, 1999, 64 FR 18436-18437) Interior, DOI—85: “Payroll, Attendance, Retirement, and Leave Records.” (Published May 18, 1999, 64 FR 26997-26999) Interior, OS—86: “Accounts Receivable.” (Published April 7, 1999, 64 FR 16985-16986) Interior, OS—88: “Travel Management Records.” (Published April 9, 1999, 64 FR 17403-17404) Interior, DOI—90: “Federal Financial System.” (Published August 27, 1999, 64 FR 46930-46932) NEW ROUTINE USE: Disclosures outside the Department of the Interior may be made: To appropriate agencies, entities, and persons when:

(a)It is suspected or confirmed that the security or confidentiality of information in the system of records has been compromised; and

(b)The Department has determined that as a result of the suspected or confirmed compromise, there is a risk of harm to economic or property interest, identity theft or fraud, or harm to the security or integrity of this system or other systems or programs (whether maintained by the Department or another agency or entity) that rely upon the compromised information; and

(c)The disclosure is made to such agencies, entities and persons who are reasonably necessary to assist in connection with the Department's efforts to respond to the suspected or confirmed compromise and prevent, minimize, or remedy such harm. [FR Doc. E8-2584 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-RK-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service Waccamaw National Wildlife Refuge AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of Interior. ACTION: Notice of availability of the Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment for Waccamaw National Wildlife Refuge. SUMMARY: The Fish and Wildlife Service announces that a Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment (Draft CCP/EA) for Waccamaw National Wildlife Refuge in Georgetown, Horry, and Marion Counties, South Carolina, is available for distribution. This Draft CCP/EA was prepared pursuant to the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1997, and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, and describes the Service's proposal for management of this refuge over the next 15 years. DATES: Written comments must be received at the postal address listed below no later than March 14, 2008. ADDRESSES: To provide written comments or to obtain a copy of the Draft CCP/EA, please write to: Mr. Craig Sasser, Refuge Manager, Waccamaw National Wildlife Refuge, 1601 North Fraser Street, Georgetown, SC 29440. The Draft CCP/EA may also be accessed and downloaded from the Service's Internet site: * http://southeast.fws.gov.planning.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Craig Sasser, Refuge Manager, at Telephone: 843-527-8069 or 843-509-1514; E-mail: *marshall_sasser@fws.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Public Availability of Comments:* Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment, including your personal identifying information, may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comments to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. *Background:* Waccamaw National Wildlife Refuge is currently 18,251 acres in size (within an approved acquisition boundary of 54,000 acres), and was established in 1997 for the following purposes:

(1)To protect and manage diverse habitat components within an important coastal river ecosystem for the benefit of threatened and endangered species, freshwater and anadromous fish, migratory birds, and forest wildlife, including a wide array of plants and animals associated with bottomland hardwood habitats; and

(2)to provide compatible wildlife-dependent recreational activities, including hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental education and interpretation. Significant issues raised by the public and addressed in the Draft CCP/EA include: conserving migratory waterfowl, neotropical migratory birds, and black bears; increasing opportunities for hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental education and interpretation; developing a new visitor center; acquiring parcels from willing sellers within the approved refuge acquisition boundary; restoring longleaf pine forests; developing partnerships with the State and non-governmental organizations, and protecting Bull Island as wilderness. The Service developed four alternatives for management of the refuge (Alternatives A, B, C, and D), with Alternative D as the Service's proposed alternative. Alternative A (Current Management) Under this alternative, Waccamaw Refuge would continue its current management. No active, direct management of waterfowl populations would occur. With regard to neotropical migratory birds, the refuge would continue to conduct informal surveys on swallow-tailed kites and Swainson's warblers on an occasional basis. Incidental observations of black bear on the refuge would be compiled. Threatened and endangered species would continue to be protected on appropriate refuge habitats. Each of the recreational uses as identified in the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 would continue. Alternative B (Habitat Restoration/Enhancements on Unit 1) Under this alternative, the refuge would focus on habitat restoration efforts and enhancements on Unit 1, which consists of 34,784 acres (including acreage within the acquisition boundary not owned by the refuge) and is made up entirely of alluvial and black water floodplain forested wetlands. The refuge would aim to improve wintering waterfowl habitat on approximately 600 acres on Unit 1 by restoring hydrology. With regard to neotropical migratory birds and black bears, Alternative B would be the same as Alternative A. With regard to threatened and endangered species, Alternative B's proposed hydrology restoration on Unit 1 would enhance its existing wood stork rookery. All existing recreational uses would be continued and additional wildlife-dependent public uses would be implemented. Alternative C (Habitat Restoration/Enhancement on All Units) Under this alternative, the refuge would focus habitat restoration efforts and enhancements on all units of the refuge—Units 1, 2, and 3. Unit 1 consists of 34,784 acres of alluvial and black water floodplain forested wetlands. Unit 2 consists of 12,046 acres, with approximately 6,362 acres of upland longleaf pine forest and tidal forested and emergent wetlands. Unit 3 consists of 2,902 acres and contains historic rice fields, many of which remain intact and are managed for wintering waterfowl. Management of migratory waterfowl and neotropical migratory birds would be the same as Alternatives A and B. Management of black bears would be more active under this alternative. Refuge acquisition and habitat restoration efforts within wetland corridors would be targeted to improve connectivity between bear populations. Management of threatened and endangered species would generally be the same as Alternative B, restoring the hydrology on Unit 1 to enhance the existing wood stork rookery. In addition, it would restore wood stork feeding areas on Unit 3 and red-cockaded woodpecker nesting and foraging habitat on Unit 2. Recreational use of the refuge would remain the same as Alternatives A and B, but would expand hunting opportunities. It would explore the potential for a youth waterfowl hunt on managed wetlands. In addition, opportunities for wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental education and interpretation would be expanded. Alternative D (Optimize Habitat Management and Visitor Services)—Proposed Alternative Under this alternative, habitat management and visitor services throughout the refuge would be optimized. Management of waterfowl and migratory birds would be the same as Alternatives B and C; however, management of black bears would be stepped up from that of the previous three alternatives. This alternative would conduct annual surveys of black bears and attempt to enlist public participation in gathering, recording, and compiling sightings. Management of threatened and endangered species would generally be the same as Alternative C—restoring the hydrology on Unit 1 to enhance the existing wood stork rookery, restoring wood stork feeding areas on Unit 3, and red-cockaded woodpecker nesting and foraging habitat on Unit 2. Recreational use of the refuge would continue. This alternative would expand on hunting opportunities for deer and hog by considering a hunt by mobility-impaired individuals. It would potentially include a youth waterfowl hunt on refuge management lands. Over the lifetime of the CCP, this alternative would call for reducing deer herd density to improve herd health and to improve habitat quality for other species. This alternative would identify the 4,600-acre Bull Island as a proposed Wilderness Study Area. The Service would maintain its wilderness character, and within 10 years of approval of the comprehensive conservation plan, would prepare a wilderness study report and additional NEPA documentation on whether Bull Island should be formally designated by Congress as a unit of the National Wilderness Preservation System. The refuge would prepare and implement a Visitor Services' Plan and expand most wildlife-dependent public uses in a number of ways. Authority: This notice is published under the authority of the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, Public Law 105-57. Dated: November 30, 2007. Cynthia K. Dohner, Acting Regional Director. [FR Doc. E8-2628 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-R8-ES-2008-N0022; 80221-1113-0000-F5] Endangered Species Recovery Permit Applications AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of receipt of permit applications; request for comment. SUMMARY: We invite the public to comment on the following applications to conduct certain activities with endangered species. DATES: Comments on these permit applications must be received on or before March 14, 2008. ADDRESSES: Written data or comments should be submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Endangered Species Program Manager, Region 8, 2800 Cottage Way, Room W-2606, Sacramento, CA, 95825 (telephone: 916-414-6464; fax: 916-414-6486). Please refer to the respective permit number for each application when submitting comments. All comments received, including names and addresses, will become part of the official administrative record and may be made available to the public. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel Marquez, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, see ADDRESSES , (telephone: 760-431-9440; fax: 760-431-9624). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following applicants have applied for scientific research permits to conduct certain activities with endangered species pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (“we”) solicits review and comment from local, State, and Federal agencies, and the public on the following permit requests. Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Permit No. TE-815214 *Applicant:* Oceano Dunes State Vehicular Recreation Area, Arroyo Grande, California. The applicant requests an amendment to take (salvage, replace, and transfer non-viable eggs) the California Least Tern ( *Sterna antillarum browni* ) in conjunction with surveys and population monitoring in San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara Counties, California, for the purpose of enhancing its survival. Permit No. TE-170381 *Applicant:* William F. Stagnaro, San Francisco, California. The applicant requests a permit to take (harass by survey, capture, mark, and monitor) the San Francisco garter snake ( *Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia* ), and the California tiger salamander ( *Ambystoma californiense* ) in conjunction with surveys and population monitoring activities throughout the range of each species in California, for the purpose of enhancing their survival. Permit No. TE-084606 *Applicant:* David F. Moskovitz, Diamond Bar, California. The applicant requests an amendment to take (capture, collect, and kill) the Conservancy fairy shrimp ( *Branchinecta conservatio* ), the longhorn fairy shrimp ( *Branchinecta longiantenna* ), the Riverside fairy shrimp ( *Streptocephalus wootoni* ), the San Diego fairy shrimp ( *Branchinecta sandiegonensis* ), and the vernal pool tadpole shrimp ( * Lepidurus packardi * ) in conjunction with surveys throughout the range of each species in California, for the purpose of enhancing their survival. Permit No. TE-170389 *Applicant:* Travis B. Cooper, San Juan Capistrano, California. The applicant requests a permit to take (harass by survey, and nest monitor) the least Bell's vireo ( *Vireo bellii pusillus* ), and the Southwestern willow flycatcher ( *Empidonax traillii extimus* ) in conjunction with surveys and monitoring throughout the range of each species in California, for the purpose of enhancing its survival. Permit No. TE-004939 *Applicant:* Gordon F. Pratt, Riverside, California. The applicant requests an amendment to take (capture, release, remove from the wild, and captive breed) the El Segundo Blue butterfly ( *Euphilotes battoides allyni* ) in conjunction with genetic research at Vandenberg Air Force base, Santa Barbara County, California, for the purposes of enhancing its survival. Permit No. TE-170403 *Applicant:* Melissa A. Amarello, Carbondale, California. The applicant requests a permit to take (harass by survey, capture, mark, and monitor) the San Francisco garter snake ( *Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia* ) in conjunction with population monitoring and research activities at the Cloverdale Ranch, San Mateo County, California, for the purpose of enhancing their survival. Permit No. TE-795930 *Applicant:* Helm Biological Consulting, Lincoln, California. The permittee requests an amendment to take (harass by survey, capture, handle, and release) the California tiger salamander ( *Ambystoma californiense* ) in conjunction with surveys throughout the range of the species in California, for the purpose of enhancing its survival. Permit No. TE-168282 *Applicant:* Normandeau Associates, Inc., Stevenson Washington. The permittee request a permit to take (harass by survey) the razorback sucker ( *Xyrauchen texanus* ) and bonytail chub ( *Gila elegans* ) in conjunction with surveys and backwater inventories along the lower Colorado river in Imperial County, California, for the purpose of enhancing their survival. Permit No. TE-170681 *Applicant:* Stanley C. Spencer, Riverside, California. The applicant requests an amendment to take (survey by pursuit) the Quino checkerspot butterfly ( *Euphydryas editha quino* ) and Delhi sands flower loving fly ( *Rhaphiomidas terminatus abdominalis* ), and take (capture, collect, and kill) the Conservancy fairy shrimp ( *Branchinecta conservatio* ), the longhorn fairy shrimp ( *Branchinecta longiantenna* ), the Riverside fairy shrimp ( *Streptocephalus wootoni* ), the San Diego fairy shrimp ( *Branchinecta sandiegonensis* ), and the vernal pool tadpole shrimp ( *Lepidurus packardi* ) in conjunction with surveys throughout the range of each species in California, for the purpose of enhancing their survival. Permit No. TE-053085 *Applicant:* Bureau of Reclamation, Boulder City, Navada. The permittee request a permit to take (harass by survey, electroshock, capture, collect, mark, transport, captive rear, captive propagate, reintroduce) the razorback sucker ( *Xyrauchen texanus* ) and bonytail chub ( *Gila elegans* ) in conjunction with surveys, population monitoring, and research along the Colorado river in Clark County, Nevada, and San Bernardino, Riverside, and Imperial County, California, for the purpose of enhancing their survival. We solicit public review and comment on each of these recovery permit applications. Comments and materials we receive will be available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the address listed in the ADDRESSES section of this notice. Dated: February 6, 2008. Michael Fris, Acting Regional Director, Region 8, Sacramento, California. [FR Doc. E8-2586 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service Recovery Plan for the Sierra Nevada Bighorn Sheep (Ovis canadensis californiana) AGENCY: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of document availability. SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the availability of the recovery plan for the Sierra Nevada bighorn sheep *(Ovis canadensis californiana).* The Sierra Nevada bighorn sheep occurs primarily on lands managed by the U.S. Forest Service (Inyo and Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forests) and the National Park Service (Yosemite National Park) in the Sierra Nevada in western Inyo and Mono Counties, California. This recovery plan describes the status, current management, recovery objectives and criteria, and specific actions needed to reclassify the Sierra Nevada bighorn sheep from endangered to threatened, and to ultimately delist it. ADDRESSES: You may obtain a copy of the plan by either of the following methods: *Internet:* Download a copy at *http://endangered.fws.gov/recovery/index.html#plans,* or *U.S. mail:* Send a request to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office, 2493 Portola Road, Suite B, Ventura, CA 93003. Printed copies of the recovery plan will be available for distribution in 4 to 6 weeks. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Croft, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, at the above address (telephone 951-697-5365). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Recovery of endangered or threatened animals and plants to the point where they are again secure, self-sustaining members of their ecosystems is a primary goal of our endangered species program. To help guide the recovery effort, we are working to prepare recovery plans for most listed species native to the United States. Recovery plans describe actions considered necessary for the conservation of the species, establish criteria for downlisting or delisting listed species, and estimate time and cost for implementing the recovery measures needed. The Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531, *et seq.* )

(Act)requires us to develop recovery plans for listed species unless such a plan would not promote the conservation of a particular species. Section 4(f) of the Act requires us to provide public notice and an opportunity for public review and comment during recovery plan development. We made the draft recovery plan for the Sierra Nevada bighorn sheep available for public comment from July 30, 2003, through September 29, 2003 (68 FR 44808), and again from October 9, 2003, through December 8, 2003 (68 FR 58355). We considered information we received during these public comment periods and information from peer reviewers in our preparation of this final recovery plan, and also summarized that information in Appendix J of the recovery plan. We will forward substantive comments regarding recovery plan implementation to appropriate Federal and State agencies or other entities so they can consider these comments during the course of implementing recovery actions. We developed this recovery plan with input from the Sierra Nevada Bighorn Sheep Recovery Team, including a science team and a stakeholder team. We also coordinated with the California Department of Fish and Game. We listed the Sierra Nevada bighorn sheep as an endangered distinct population segment

(DPS)on January 3, 2000 (65 FR 20), following initial emergency listing on April 20, 1999 (64 FR 19300). At the time of listing, the Sierra Nevada bighorn sheep population consisted of about 125 adults, known to exist among 5 geographic areas, with little probability of interchange among those areas. In 2000, on the basis of concurrence between genetic and morphometric data, Wehausen and Ramey

(2000)reassigned populations of California bighorn outside of the Sierra Nevada to other subspecies, leaving bighorn sheep in the Sierra Nevada as their own subspecies. By the rules of zoological nomenclature, they again assume Grinnell's

(1912)subspecies name *sierrae* (Wehausen *et al.* 2005). With that nomenclature change, the California bighorn subspecies was terminated. Concurrent with the proposed designation of critical habitat for Sierra Nevada bighorn, on July 25, 2007, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service formally proposed a taxonomic revision to amend the final listing rule from DPS to subspecies, * Ovis canadensis sierrae.* The Sierra Nevada bighorn sheep is threatened primarily by mountain lion predation, small population size, and the potential for disease transmission due to contact with domestic sheep and goats. Key elements for immediate action are:

(1)Predator management;

(2)augmentation of small herds with sheep from larger ones; and

(3)elimination of the threat of a pneumonia epizootic resulting from contact with domestic sheep or goats. Actions needed to recover the bighorn sheep include:

(1)Protection, maintenance, and enhancement of bighorn sheep habitat;

(2)enhancing survivorship and reproductive output of bighorn sheep in order to the increase population;

(3)increasing the use of low-elevation winter ranges;

(4)increasing the numbers of herds, and thereby the number of bighorn sheep;

(5)developing and implementing a genetic management plan to maintain genetic diversity;

(6)developing sources of translocation stock;

(7)developing and implementing a captive breeding program, if necessary;

(8)monitoring status and trends of bighorn sheep herds and their habitat;

(9)research; and

(10)providing information to and working with the public. Authority: The authority for this action is section 4(f) of the Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. 1533(f). Dated: February 6, 2008. Ken McDermond, Acting Regional Director, Region 8, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. [FR Doc. E8-2627 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Geological Survey Office of the Secretary; Notice of Renewal of the Advisory Committee on Water Information Charter. AGENCY: United States Geological Survey. ACTION: Notice of Renewal of the Advisory Committee on Water Information Charter SUMMARY: Following consultation with the General Services Administration, notice is hereby given that the Secretary of the Interior is renewing the Advisory Committee on Water Information (ACWI). The ACWI has been established under the authority of Office of Management and Budget Memorandum No. M-92-01 and the Federal Advisory Committee act. The purpose of this Presidential Committee is to represent the interests of water-information users and professionals in advising the Federal Government on Federal water-information programs and their effectiveness in meeting the Nation's water-information needs. Member organizations help to foster communications between the Federal and non-Federal sectors of sharing water information. Membership represents a wide range of water resources interests and functions. Representation on the ACWI includes all levels of government, academia, private industry, and professional and technical societies. Member organizations designate their representatives and alternates. Membership is limited to a maximum of 35 organization. The Committee will function solely as an advisory body, and in compliance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. The Charter will be filed under the Act, 15 days from the date of publication of this notice. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Toni M. Johnson (Executive Secretary), Chief, Water Information Coordination Program, U.S. Geological Survey, 12201 Sunrise Valley Drive, MS 417, Reston, Virginia 20192. Telephone: 703-648-6810; Fax: 703-648-5644. Dated: February 1, 2008. Dirk Kempthorne, Secretary of the Interior. [FR Doc. 08-612 Filed 2-12-08; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 14

Traces to 14 documents

U.S. Code