Notices. Notice of closure—administrative appeal decision records

48,058 words·~218 min read·/register/2008/05/07/08-1213

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

BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Federal Consistency Appeals by Weaver's Cove Energy, LLC, and Mill River Pipeline, LLC AGENCY: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department of Commerce (Commerce). ACTION: Notice of closure—administrative appeal decision records. SUMMARY: This announcement provides notice that the decision records for two administrative appeals filed with the Department of Commerce by Weaver's Cove Energy, LLC, and Mill River Pipeline, LLC, have been closed.

DATES: The decision records for these two administrative appeals were closed on May 5, 2008. ADDRESSES: Materials from the appeal records are available at the Internet site *http://www.ogc.doc.gov/czma.htm* and at the Office of General Counsel for Ocean Services, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1305 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brett Grosko, Attorney-Advisor, Office of General Counsel for Ocean Services, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S.

Department of Commerce, via e-mail at *Brett.Grosko@noaa.gov,* or 301-713-7384. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 27, 2007, Weaver's Cove Energy, LLC, and Mill River Pipeline, LLC, separately filed notices of appeal with the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) pursuant to section 307(c)(3)(A) of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (CZMA), as amended, 16 U.S.C. 1451 *et seq.* , and the Department of Commerce's implementing regulations, 15 CFR part 930, subpart H. These appeals were taken from objections by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to the issuance of certain federal licenses necessary to construct and operate a liquefied natural gas terminal and two associated natural gas pipelines, to be located in Fall River, Massachusetts.

Both appeals request the Secretary override the State's objections on grounds the proposed project allegedly is consistent with the objectives of the CZMA, and necessary in the interest of national security. Decisions for CZMA administrative appeals are based on information contained in the decision record for the appeal. These two appeals have been consolidated for decision. Under the CZMA, the decision record for an appeal must close no later than 220 days after notice of the appeal was first published in the **Federal Register** . 16 U.S.C. 1465.

Notice of closure must be published in the **Federal Register** . Consistent with this requirement, notice is hereby provided that the decision records for these appeals were closed on May 5, 2008. No further information, briefs or comments will be considered in deciding these appeals. A final decision on these appeals must be issued no later than 60 days after the date of the publication of this notice. 16 U.S.C. 1465(c)(1). The deadline may be extended by publishing (within the 60-day period) a subsequent notice explaining why a decision cannot be issued within that time frame. 16 U.S.C. 1465(c)(1).

In this event, a final decision must be issued no later than 15 days after the date of publication of the subsequent notice. 16 U.S.C. 1465(c)(2). Additional information about these appeals and the CZMA appeals process is available from the Department of Commerce CZMA appeals Web site: *http://www.ogc.doc.gov/czma.htm.* [Federal Domestic Assistance Catalog No. 11.419 Coastal Zone Management Program Assistance.] Dated: May 1, 2008. Joel La Bissonniere, Assistant General Counsel for Ocean Services. [FR Doc.

E8-10012 Filed 5-6-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-08-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XH64 Endangered Species; File No. 1614-01 AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice; issuance of permit modification. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the NOAA Fisheries Northeast Region Protected Resources Division (Responsible Party: Mary Colligan), One Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930, has been issued a modification to scientific research Permit No. 1614.

ADDRESSES: The modification and related documents are available for review upon written request or by appointment in the following offices: Permits, Conservation and Education Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13705, Silver Spring, MD 20910; phone (301)713-2289; fax (301)427-2521; Northeast Region, NMFS, One Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA 01930-2298; phone (978)281-9300; fax (978)281-9394; and Southeast Region, NMFS, 263 13th Ave South, St.

Petersburg, FL 33701; phone (727)824-5312; fax (727)824-5309. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brandy Belmas or Jennifer Skidmore, (301)713-2289. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 25, 2008, notice was published in the **Federal Register** (73 FR 15741) that a modification of Permit No. 1614, issued February 28, 2008 (73 FR 11873), had been requested by the above-named organization. The requested modification has been granted under the authority of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 *et seq.* ) and the regulations governing the taking, importing, and exporting of endangered and threatened species (50 CFR 222-226).

In addition to all activities authorized under Permit No. 1614, this modification increases the number of dead, captive bred shortnose sturgeon ( *Acipenser brevirostrum* ) received from authorized U.S. facilities up to 350 individuals each year. Obtaining these additional sturgeon will aid researchers in meeting their research objectives, which include reviewing shortnose sturgeon research procedures and developing necropsy protocols. Issuance of this modification, as required by the ESA was based on a finding that such permit

(1)was applied for in good faith,

(2)will not operate to the disadvantage of such endangered or threatened species, and

(3)is consistent with the purposes and policies set forth in section 2 of the ESA. Dated: May 2, 2008. P. Michael Payne, Chief, Permits, Conservation and Education Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E8-10108 Filed 5-6-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XH71 Marine Mammals; File No. 540-1811 AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice; receipt of application for amendment. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that Mr. John Calambokidis, Cascadia Research Collective, Waterstreet Building, 218 1/2 West Fourth Avenue, Olympia, WA 89501, has requested an amendment to scientific research Permit No. 540-1811. DATES: Written, telefaxed, or e-mail comments must be received on or before June 6, 2008. ADDRESSES: The amendment request and related documents are available for review upon written request or by appointment: (See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION ). Written comments or requests for a public hearing on this request should be submitted to the Chief, Permits, Conservation and Education Division, F/PR1, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13705, Silver Spring, MD 20910. Those individuals requesting a hearing should set forth the specific reasons why a hearing on this particular amendment request would be appropriate. Comments may also be submitted by facsimile at (301)427-2521, provided the facsimile is confirmed by hard copy submitted by mail and postmarked no later than the closing date of the comment period. Comments may also be submitted by e-mail. The mailbox address for providing e-mail comments is *NMFS.Pr1Comments@noaa.gov* . Include in the subject line of the e-mail comment the following document identifier: File No. 731-1774. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Skidmore or Carrie Hubard, (301)713-2289. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The subject amendment to Permit No. 540-1811, issued on March 31, 2006, and most recently amended on June 16, 2006, is requested under the authority of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 *et seq.* ), the Regulations Governing the Taking and Importing of Marine Mammals (50 CFR part 216), the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 *et seq.* ), and the Regulations Governing the Taking, Importing, and Exporting of Endangered and Threatened Species (50 CFR 222-226). Permit No. 540-1811, issued to John Calambokidis, currently authorizes aerial and vessel surveys, photo-identification, behavioral observations, tagging (using suction-cup attached tags), biopsy, video and acoustic recording, and incidental harassment of all species of odontocetes and baleen whales in the North Pacific Ocean. The purpose of the modification is to enhance the examination of movements (for stock structure assessment) and habitat use of: blue ( *Balaenoptera musculus* ), fin ( *B. physalus* ), sei ( *B.a borealis* ), gray ( *Eschrichtius robustus* ), sperm ( *Physeter macrocephalus* ), Bryde's ( *B. edeni* ), humpback ( *Megaptera novaeangliae* ) and minke ( *B. acutorostrata* ) whales, Mesoplodon beaked whales ( *Mesoplodon* spp), Cuvier's ( *Ziphius cavirostris* ) and Baird's ( *Berardius bairdii* ) beaked whales, and bottlenose ( *Tursiops truncatus* ) and Risso's ( *Grampus griseus* ) dolphins via dart tagging. For each species, an addition of 20 takes by dart tagging are requested, with the exception of sei whales, where only 5 takes are requested. Additionally, an increase in the number of biopsy and suction-cup tagging takes (between 10 - 40 takes) for several cetacean species (fin, sperm, and short-finned pilot whales ( *Globicephala macrorhynchus* ) and Baird's, Cuvier's, and Mesoplodon beaked whales) are being requested in order to better increase understanding of stock structure and behavior. Takes by Level B harassment (e.g., incidental harassment of non-target animals) are already authorized under Permit No. 540-1811 and no additional Level B harassment takes are requested. Dart tagging will occur concurrently with already permitted activities (i.e., vessel surveys, photo-identification, suction-cup tagging etc), primarily in Californian waters, though some species may be tagged opportunistically elsewhere where activities are authorized (i.e., U.S. and international waters of the Pacific including Alaska, Washington, Oregon, and other U.S. territories). The amended permit, if issued, would be valid until the permit expires on April 14, 2011. Concurrent with the publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** , NMFS is forwarding copies of this application to the Marine Mammal Commission and its Committee of Scientific Advisors. Documents may be reviewed in the following locations: Permits, Conservation and Education Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13705, Silver Spring, MD 20910; phone (301)713-2289; fax (301)427-2521; Northwest Region, NMFS, 7600 Sand Point Way NE, BIN C15700, Bldg. 1, Seattle, WA 98115-0700; phone (206)526-6150; fax (206)526-6426; Alaska Region, NMFS, P.O. Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802-1668; phone (907)586-7221; fax (907)586-7249; and Southwest Region, NMFS, 501 West Ocean Blvd., Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802-4213; phone (562)980-4001; fax (562)980-4018. Dated: May 1, 2008. P. Michael Payne, Chief, Permits, Conservation and Education Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E8-10104 Filed 5-6-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION Concept Release on the Appropriate Regulatory Treatment of Event Contracts AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading Commission. ACTION: Request for Public Comment. SUMMARY: The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (Commission or CFTC) is soliciting comment on the appropriate regulatory treatment of financial agreements offered by markets commonly referred to as event, prediction, or information markets. 1 For ease of reference and to avoid classification issues, these financial agreements are referred to herein as event contracts. In general, event contracts are neither dependent on, nor do they necessarily relate to, market prices or broad-based measures of economic or commercial activity. 2 Rather, event contracts may be based on eventualities and measures as varied as the world's population in the year 2050, the results of political elections, or the outcome of particular entertainment events. 3 The Commission's staff has received a substantial number of requests for guidance on the propriety of trading various event contracts under the regulatory rubric of the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA or Act). Given the substantive and practical concerns that may arise from applying federal regulation to event contracts and markets, the Commission believes that it is appropriate to solicit and consider the public's comments in advance of issuing any definitive guidance. 1 *See* Michael Gorham, *Event Markets Campaign for Respect* , Futures Industry Magazine (Jan./Feb. 2004); Justin Wolfers and Eric W. Zitzewitz, *Prediction Markets* , 18 J. Econ. Persp. 107 (Spring 2004); Robert W. Hahn and Paul C. Tetlock, *Using Information Markets to Improve Public Decision Making* , AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies Working Paper 04-18 (March 2005); Hal R. Varian, *Can Markets Be Used to Help People Make Nonmarket Decisions?* , The New York Times (May 8, 2003). 2 The term event contract is not intended to encompass contracts that generate trading prices that predictably correlate with market prices or broad-based measures of economic or commercial activity, or contracts which substantially replicate other commodity derivatives contracts, such as binary options on exchange rates or the price of crude oil. The aforementioned contracts are unambiguously subject to CFTC regulation. 3 *See, e.g.* , Retired claims list at the Foresight Exchange, available at *http://www.ideosphere.com/fx-bin/ListClaims* . DATES: Comments must be received by July 7, 2008. ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street, NW., Washington, DC 20581, Attention: Office of the Secretariat. Comments may be sent by facsimile to 202.418.5521, or by e-mail to *secretary@cftc.gov* . Reference should be made to the “Concept Release on the Appropriate Regulatory Treatment of Event Contracts.” Comments may also be submitted through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at *http://www.regulations.gov* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bruce Fekrat, Special Counsel, Office of the Director (telephone 202.418.5578, e-mail *bfekrat@cftc.gov* ), Division of Market Oversight, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street, NW., Washington, DC 20581. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction A. Purpose of the Release Since 2005, the Commission's staff has received a substantial number of requests for guidance on the propriety of offering and trading financial agreements that may primarily function as information aggregation vehicles. These event contracts generally take the form of financial agreements linked to eventualities or measures that neither derive from, nor correlate with, market prices or broad economic or commercial measures. Event contracts have been based on a wide variety of interests including the results of presidential elections, the accomplishment of certain scientific advances, world population levels, the adoption of particular pieces of legislation, the outcome of corporate product sales, the declaration of war and the length of celebrity marriages. In response to the various requests for guidance, and to promote regulatory certainty, the Commission has commenced a comprehensive review of the Act's applicability to event contracts and markets. To further its review, the Commission is issuing this release to solicit the expertise of interested persons, including CFTC-registered markets, exempt markets, over-the-counter derivatives dealers, capital market participants, legal practitioners, state and federal regulatory authorities, academicians and research institutions with respect to the practical and regulatory issues relevant to regulating event contracts and markets. Broadly speaking, the Commission must determine: 1. Whether event contracts are within the Commission's jurisdiction and if so, why (or why not)? 2. If event contracts are within the Commission's jurisdiction, should there be exemptions or exclusions applied to them and if so, why (or why not)? 3. How should the Commission address the potential gaming aspects of some event contracts and the possible pre-emption of state gaming laws? The Commission urges interested persons to provide detailed and comprehensive comments that will assist the Commission in conducting its review and analysis of the Commission's regulatory purview over event contracts, the interests that may appropriately underlie Commission-regulated transactions, and the appropriate regulatory treatment of markets that may offer event contracts. B. CFTC Experience With Event Contracts The Iowa Electronic Markets (IEM), an electronic trading facility that functions as an experimental and academic program, is one of the better known and oft discussed real-money event markets currently in operation. 4 The IEM operates in part pursuant to a 1993 no-action letter issued by Commission staff which, without asserting jurisdiction or describing the potential parameters of the Commission's regulatory purview over the market, allows the IEM to list various event contracts subject to certain conditions and limitations for covered contracts. 5 4 The IEM is run by the University of Iowa Departments of Accounting and Economics and the University's College of Business Administration. 5 CFTC Staff Letter No. 93-66 [1992-1994 Transfer Binder] Comm. Fut. L. Rep.

(CCH)¶ 25,785 (June 18, 1993). This no-action letter superseded the operative terms of a more limited letter issued to the IEM in 1992. The 1993 letter's relief extends to IEM contracts based on political elections, economic indicators, and certain currency exchange rates. The letter requires that the IEM limit access to any one submarket to between 1,000 and 2,000 traders. The letter also sets the maximum amount that any single participant can risk in any one submarket at five hundred dollars. The letter makes clear that relief is premised on, among other factors, the IEM's representations concerning the market's specific manner of operation and academic purpose, and the assurance that the IEM will not receive any profit or other form of compensation from its activities. The IEM continues to be most recognized for its presidential election contracts. The IEM offers a vote share contract and a winner-take-all contract for the 2008 U.S. presidential election cycle. Its vote share contract is ultimately associated with the candidates that will be nominated by each party. Each vote share contract has a maximum value of $1 and a contract payout that is directly based on the percentage of the popular vote received by each of the two major party candidates. For instance, a contract for a candidate who receives 40% of the popular votes cast for both candidates will be worth $.40 at settlement. In contrast, the IEM's 2008 presidential election winner-take-all contract will have a value of either $1 or $0 at settlement. The IEM's winner-take-all-contract is also associated with a specific candidate, but instead of having a payout that is tied to a particular percentage of the popular vote received by each candidate, the contract will distribute a fixed payout of $1 to its holder if and only if the candidate referenced by the contract receives a greater percentage of the popular vote cast. Although the IEM's presidential election contracts are imperfect vehicles for the discovery of information, there is some consensus on the question of whether the IEM's contracts can function capably as predictive tools. 6 Indeed, trading data generated by some IEM presidential election contracts arguably have produced better predictive indicators than data obtained from professional polling organizations. 7 6 *See, e.g.* , Michael Abramowicz, *Information Markets, Administrative Decision Making, and Predictive Cost-Benefit Analysis* , 71 U. Chi. L. Rev. 933, 950 (2004). 7 *See* Cass R. Sunstein, *Group Judgments: Statistical Means, Deliberation, and Information Markets* , 80 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 962, 1029-31 (June 2005). II. Commodity Options and Futures and the Attributes of Event Contracts The Commission, with some exceptions, has exclusive jurisdiction over two relevant types of derivative instruments—commodity options and commodity futures contracts. Section 4c(b) of the Act gives the Commission plenary jurisdiction over commodity options, and provides that “[n]o person shall * * * enter into * * * any transaction involving any commodity regulated under this Act which is of the character of, or is commonly known to the trade as, an option * * * contrary to any rule, regulation or order of the Commission[.]” Section 2(a)(1)(A) of the Act provides that the Commission shall have exclusive jurisdiction with respect to accounts, agreements, and transactions (including options) involving contracts of sale of a commodity for future delivery. Event contracts, depending on their underlying interests, can be designed to exhibit the attributes of either options or futures contracts. A significant number of event contracts are structured as all-or-nothing binary transactions commonly described as binary options. 8 Binary event contracts typically pay out a fixed amount when an outcome either occurs or does not occur. The trading of such contracts can facilitate the discovery of information by assigning probabilities, through market-derived prices, to discrete eventualities. For example, a binary contract based on whether a particular person will run for the presidency in 2012, can pay a fixed $100 to its buyer if and only if that individual runs for the presidency in 2012. If the contract's traders believe that the likelihood of the individual's candidacy in 2012 is around 17 percent, the price of the contract will be around $17, and will approximate the market's consensus expectation of the individual's candidacy. 8 *See, e.g.* , Intrade Prediction Markets, Current Events Contracts at *http://www.intrade.com/jsp/intrade/contractSearch/* . In addition to binary event transactions, the term event contract has also been used to identify transactions, based on interests other than market prices, which resemble futures contracts. For instance, these types of event contracts can price consensus estimates of moving values, such as the number of hours the average U.S. resident spends in traffic or the share of votes that a particular candidate for political office may receive. Unlike binary transactions, and similar to any commodity futures contract, this type of contract creates continuous and ongoing obligations that are linked to moving measures or levels, as opposed to being dependent on the outcome of a single discrete occurrence. III. The Commission's Regulatory Purview As discussed above, with some limited exceptions, the regulatory purview of the Act extends to and includes transactions that are either structured as options or futures when such transactions involve interests that constitute commodities under the Act. Section 1a(4) of the Act defines commodity in two distinct ways. First, Section 1a(4) specifically enumerates certain articles or goods as commodities. 9 Second, Section 1a(4) defines the term commodity as including those articles or goods, and services, rights or interests, “in which contracts for future delivery are presently or in the future dealt in.” Therefore, an underlying interest that is not enumerated in Section 1a(4) may be a statutory commodity under the Act if it reasonably can underlie a futures contract on a forward looking basis. 10 9 7 U.S.C. 1a(4). Section 1a(4) of the Act enumerates the following commodities: wheat, cotton, rice, corn, oats, barley, rye, flaxseed, grain sorghums, mill feeds, butter, eggs, Solanum tuberosum (Irish potatoes), wool, wool tops, fats and oils (including lard, tallow, cottonseed oil, peanut oil, soybean oil, and all other fats and oils), cottonseed meal, cottonseed, peanuts, soybeans, soybean meal, livestock, livestock products, and frozen concentrated orange juice. 10 *See United States* v. *Valencia* , No. H-03-024, 2003 WL 23174749 at *8 (S.D. Tex Aug. 25, 2003) (noting that the determination of whether West Coast natural gas is “a commodity in which contracts for future delivery are presently or in the future dealt in,” is a fact question, and that “there is no evidence that West Coast gas could not in the future be traded on a futures exchange.”). In addition to Section 1a(4), Section 1a(13) of the Act identifies certain interests as excluded commodities and thereby gives further shape to the statutory definition of commodity. 11 The Section 1a(13) definition of excluded commodity is composed of four subsections. The third subsection defines the term to include any economic or commercial index that is based on prices, rates, values, or levels not within the control of any party to the relevant contract. The fourth subsection of Section 1a(13) provides that an excluded commodity includes an occurrence, extent of an occurrence, or contingency associated with a financial or economic consequence that is not within the control of the parties to the relevant transaction. 11 7 U.S.C. 1a(13). Section 1a(13) of the Act provides that: The term “excluded commodity” means—

(i)an interest rate, exchange rate, currency, security, security index, credit risk or measure, debt or equity instrument, index or measure of inflation, or other macroeconomic index or measure;

(ii)any other rate, differential, index, or measure of economic or commercial risk, return, or value that is—

(I)not based in substantial part on the value of a narrow group of commodities not described in clause (i); or

(II)based solely on one or more commodities that have no cash market;

(iii)any economic or commercial index based on prices, rates, values, or levels that are not within the control of any party to the relevant contract, agreement, or transaction; or

(iv)an occurrence, extent of an occurrence, or contingency (other than a change in the price, rate, value, or level of a commodity not described in clause (i)) that is—

(I)beyond the control of the parties to the relevant contract, agreement, or transaction; and

(II)associated with a financial, commercial, or economic consequence. For the purpose of discussion and analysis, the types of event contracts that Commission staff has reviewed can be categorized, albeit imperfectly, as contracts that are based on narrow commercial measures and events, contracts based on certain environmental measures and events, and contracts based upon general measures and events. Narrow commercial measures quantify and reflect the rate, value, or level of particularized commercial activity, such as a specific farmer's crop yield. Narrow commercial events, on the other hand, are events that might, in and of themselves, have commercial implications, such as changes in corporate officers or corporate asset purchases. Environmental measures can be characterized as quantifications of weather phenomena, such as the volatility of precipitation or temperature levels, that do not predictably correlate to commodity market prices or other measures of broad economic or commercial activity. By comparison, environmental events can include the formation of a specific type of storm, within an identifiable geographic region, the likelihood of which will not predictably correlate to commodity market prices or measures of broad economic or commercial activity. General measures can be described as measures that are not commercial or environmental measures. As such, general measures do not quantify the rate, value, or level of any commercial or environmental activity and can, for example, include the number of hours that U.S. residents spend in traffic annually or the vote-share of a particular presidential candidate. Similarly, general events, such as whether a Constitutional amendment will be adopted or whether two celebrities will decide to marry, can be described as events that do not reflect the occurrence of any commercial or environmental event. The category of general measures and events can be further divided into a multitude of subcategories, such as political or entertainment measures or events. Since 1992, Commission-regulated exchanges have listed for trading a variety of commodity futures and options contracts with payout terms based on interests other than price-based interests. These contracts involve interests as diverse as regional insured property losses, the count of bankruptcies, temperature volatilities, corporate mergers, and corporate credit events. 12 While not strictly price-based, the interests underlying these contracts have been viewed by Commission staff as having generally-accepted and predictable financial, commercial or economic consequences. In other words, unlike the interests that event contracts cover, these underlying interests have been viewed as measures and occurrences that reasonably could be expected to correlate to market prices or other broad-based commercial or economic measures or activities. 12 For example, the Chicago Board of Trade's catastrophe single event insurance option contracts (which are no longer listed) paid out a fixed amount if and only if insured property damage exceeded $10 billion for a specific region during a specified interval of time. IV. Further Statutory Background Federal regulations were initially applied to commodity derivatives trading in 1921. 13 At that time, Congress acknowledged that commodity futures markets could benefit commerce by facilitating the hedging of commercial risks and the discovery of reliable commodity prices. 14 The Grain Futures Act of 1922, the forerunner to the CEA, consequently was enacted to promote the financial vitality of futures trading by limiting price manipulations and other disturbances that were prevalent at the time and widely perceived to result from excessive speculation. 15 13 *See, e.g., Hearing on Futures Trading Before the House Committee on Agriculture* , 66th Cong., 3rd Sess. 1043 (1921); *Hearings on H.R. 5676 Before the Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry* , 67th Cong., 1st Sess. 452 (1921); *Hearings on Futures Trading Before the House Committee on Agriculture* , 67th Cong. 1st Sess. 7-9 (1921); 61 Cong. Rec. 4761

(1921)(remarks of Senator Capper, the sponsor of the Senate bill which became the Futures Trading Act of 1921 (later restyled as the Grain Futures Act of 1922 when found to be unconstitutional for its use of taxation to penalize off-exchange futures trading)). 14 *See* S. Rep. No. 871 (August 23, 1922). The Congressional record is replete with discussion of the commercial importance of commodity futures trading. The record suggests that commercial interests must be able to look to properly functioning commodity futures markets for market information and products that facilitate the making of marketing, financing, and distribution decisions. S. Rep. No. 93-1131, at 12 (1974). The Congressional record also indicates that an initial purpose behind regulating commodity futures trading was to secure fair and orderly markets for producers and other commercial participants who used the markets for price basing and hedging. *Hearings on S. 2485, S. 2578, S. 2837 and H.R. 1311 before the Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry* , 93d Cong., 2d Sess. at 234 (1974); *see also* 80 Cong. Rec. 10739 (April 11, 1974). 15 *E.g.* , 61 Cong. Rec. 4761-4763

(1921)(remarks of Senator Capper); 61 Cong. Rec. 1379

(1921)(remarks of Rep. Bland); 61 Cong. Rec. 1313-1314 (remarks of Rep. Tincher, the sponsor of the House bill which became the 1921 Act); 61 Cong. Rec. 1376

(1921)(remarks of Rep. Gensman). In identifying the national public interests that render federal regulation necessary, the Act focuses on the commercial benefits that well-functioning derivatives markets can provide by broadly expressing their critical functions. Customarily, hedging and price basing have been identified as two critical functions of the commodity derivatives markets. 16 For instance, Section 3 of the Act, as amended by the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 (CFMA), 17 finds that transactions subject to the CEA are affected with the national public interest because they provide a means for “managing and assuming price risks.” Section 3 of the Act also identifies price discovery and price dissemination as separate public interests warranting Federal regulation. 18 16 Hedging occurs when positions acquired are economically appropriate to the reduction of risks in the conduct and management of a commercial enterprise. *See, e.g.* , 17 CFR 1.3(z) (definition of bona fide hedging). Price basing, a function of price discovery and dissemination, can occur when commercial entities enter into transactions in a particular commodity based upon commodity futures prices for that or a related commodity, oftentimes at a differential. 17 Appendix E, section 108, Pub. L. 106-554, 114 Stat. 2763. 18 The hedging and price basing purposes of commodity futures trading are emphasized in other provisions of the Act as well. *See, e.g.* , 7 U.S.C. 6a, 6b, and 6c. As a matter of background, the provision in the Grain Futures Act that was the forerunner of current CEA Section 3 provided that: Transactions in grain involving the sale thereof for future delivery as commonly conducted on boards of trade and known as “futures” are affected with a national public interest; that such transactions are carried on in large volume by the public generally and by persons engaged in the business of buying and selling grain and the products and by-products thereof in interstate commerce; that the prices involved in such transactions are generally quoted and disseminated throughout the United States and in foreign countries as a basis for determining the prices to the producer and the consumer of grain and the products and by-products thereof and to facilitate the movements thereof in interstate commerce; that such transactions are utilized by shippers, dealers, millers, and others engaged in handling grain and the products and by-products thereof in interstate commerce as a means of hedging themselves against possible loss through fluctuations in price; that the transactions and prices of grain on such boards of trade are susceptible to speculation, manipulation, or control, which are detrimental to the producer or the consumer and the persons handling grain and products and by-products thereof in interstate commerce, and that such fluctuations in prices are an obstruction to and a burden upon interstate commerce in grain and the products and by-products thereof and render regulation imperative for the protection of such commerce and the national public interest therein. Grain Futures Act, ch. 369, 42 Stat. 998 (Sept. 21, 1922). In 1936, Congress restyled the Grain Futures Act as the Commodity Exchange Act and amended this provision to substitute the word “commodity” for “grain.” Pub. L. 74-675, section 2, 49 Stat. 1491 (June 15, 1936). Although repealed by the CFMA, former Section 5(g) 19 of the Act may be relevant to analyzing the findings and purposes discussed in Section 3 of the Act. Former Section 5(g) provided that the Commission could not designate a board of trade as a contract market unless the board of trade demonstrated that transactions for future delivery in the commodity for which designation as a contract market was sought “will not be contrary to the public interest.” 20 The public interest test of Section 5(g) included an “economic purpose” test, subject to a final test of the public interest. 21 The economic purpose test applied under former Section 5(g) was used to prohibit the trading of certain contracts. Notably, the economic purpose test regarding contracts appropriate for trading on a futures exchange was not necessarily congruent with the scope of the Commission's jurisdiction. Accordingly, while futures contracts that failed the economic purpose test were prohibited from trading on futures exchanges and thus illegal because of the on-exchange trading requirement, they (and any instrument with identical terms) remained futures contracts, fully subject to the Commission's jurisdiction. 19 7 U.S.C. 7(g), *as amended* by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission Act of 1974, Pub. L. 93-463, 88 Stat. 1389 (1974). In 1992, Section 5(g) was redesignated Section 5(7) of the Act. *See* Futures Trading Practices Act of 1992, Pub. L. 102-546, 106 Stat. 3590 (1992). The CFMA repealed all of former Section 5 of the Act, including Section 5(g) (redesignated as Section 5(7)), and replaced it with current Section 5. Section 5 was radically restructured by the CFMA to provide for designation criteria and core principles with which a DCM must comply. Appendix E of Pub. L. 106-554, 114 Stat. 2763 (2000). 20 The House Committee on Agriculture stressed that contracts that could be expected to be used almost entirely for speculation would be against the public interest. H.R. Rep. No. 975, 93 Cong., 2d Sess. 29 (1974). 21 *See* H.R. Rep. No. 1383, 93d Cong., 2d Sess. 36 (1974). By enacting the CFMA, Congress sought “to promote innovation for futures and derivatives and to reduce systemic risk by enhancing legal certainty in the markets for certain futures and derivatives transactions[.]” 22 As demonstrated by the IEM, innovative event markets have the capacity to facilitate the discovery of information, and thereby provide potential benefits to the public. Subject to certain exceptions, Section 4(c)(1) of the Act gives the Commission the authority to “promote responsible economic or financial innovation and fair competition” by exempting any transaction or class of transactions from any of the provisions of the Act, including the requirement that they trade on Commission-regulated markets, where the Commission determines that such action would be consistent with the public interest. Pursuant to Section 4(c), Congress gave to “the Commission a means of providing certainty and stability to existing and emerging markets so that financial innovation and market development can proceed in an effective and competitive manner.” 23 Under Section 4(c), the Commission has the discretion to grant an exemption to certain classes of transactions without having to make a determination that such transactions are subject to the Act in the first instance. 24 Notably, the Commission can use its Section 4(c) exemptive authority not only on a case-by-case, or product-by-product basis, but may also use the authority to establish a set of regulatory provisions applicable to a defined class of products. 22 House Report No. 106-711(III) September 6, 2000. 23 House Conference Report 102-978, 1992 U.S.C.C.A.N. 3179, 3213. 24 With respect to the exercise of this discretion, the House-Senate Conference Committee responsible for the review of Section 4(c) stated that: The Conferees do not intend that the exercise of exemptive authority by the Commission would require any determination beforehand that the agreement, instrument, or transaction for which an exemption is sought is subject to the Act. Rather, this provision provides flexibility for the Commission to provide legal certainty to novel instruments where the determination as to jurisdiction is not straightforward. Rather than making a finding as to whether a product is or is not a futures contract, the Commission in appropriate cases may proceed directly to issuing an exemption. Conf. Report at 3214-3215. Although Section 4(c) only speaks to futures contracts, Section 4c(b) of the Act, the Commission's plenary authority to regulate transactions that involve commodity options, provides the Commission with comparable exemptive authority for options. V. Issues for Comment A. Request for Comment The following questions consider the Commission's regulatory purview over event contracts, the interests that may appropriately underlie Commission-regulated transactions, and the appropriate regulatory treatment of event contracts. The Commission encourages comments on the specific questions posed, as well as the broad range of issues raised in this concept release. In providing comments, please describe your relevant experience and discuss in detail the facts and legal provisions that support your conclusions. Furthermore, please consider the Commission's mandate to protect commodity futures and options markets and customers, and ensure the integrity of the commodity derivatives marketplace, as well as the expected effects of any Commission action on competition, efficiency, innovation and the financial integrity of transactions. Any recommendation with respect to the regulatory treatment of event contracts and markets should be consistent with and supported by the Act, practical, and amenable to effective and efficient implementation. B. Public Interest 1. What public interests are served by event contracts that are designed and will principally be traded for information aggregation purposes and not for commercial risk management or pricing purposes? 2. How are these interests consistent with the public interest goals embodied in the Act? 3. What calculations, analyses, variables, and factors could be used to objectively determine the social value of information to the general public that may be discovered through trading in event contracts? Should this be a factor in determining whether the Commission plays a role in regulating these markets? C. Jurisdictional Determinations 4. What characteristics or traits are common to or should be used to identify event contracts and event markets? 5. How do these characteristics and traits differ from those of commodity futures and options contracts that customarily have been regulated by the Commission? How are they similar? 6. Are there criteria based on the provisions of the Act that could be used to make jurisdictional determinations with respect to event contracts and markets? 7. Given the purposes and history of the Act, would it be appropriate for the Commission to apply a test premised on commercial risk management or pricing functions to demarcate the Commission's jurisdiction over particular contracts? If so, what factors could be used to make such a determination? 8. Given the purposes and history of the Act, would it be appropriate for the Commission to apply any test premised on the economic purpose of certain types of transactions to demarcate the Commission's jurisdiction over particular contracts? If so, what factors could be used to make such a determination? 9. What calculations, analyses, variables and factors would be appropriate in determining whether the impact of an occurrence or contingency will result in a financial, commercial or economic consequence that is identified in Section 1a(13) of the Act? 10. What calculations, analyses, variables, and factors would be appropriate in determining whether an economic or commercial index that is based on prices, rates, values, or levels should or should not qualify as an excluded commodity under Section 1a(13) of the Act? 11. What identifiable factors, statutorily based or otherwise, limit the events and measures that may underlie event contracts when such contracts are treated as Commission-regulated transactions? 12. What objective and readily identifiable factors, statutorily based or otherwise, could be used to distinguish event contracts that could appropriately be traded under Commission oversight from transactions that may be viewed as the functional equivalent of gambling? 13. The Commission notes that Section 12(e) of the Act generally provides that the CEA supersedes and preempts other laws, including state and local gaming and bucket shop laws, with respect to transactions executed on or subject to the rules of a Commission-regulated market, or with respect to transactions exempted from the Act pursuant to the Commission's exemptive authority under Section 4(c) of the Act. What are the implications of possibly preempting state gaming laws with respect to event contracts and markets that are treated as Commission-regulated or exempted transactions? 14. Should certain underlying events or measures—such as those based on assassinations or terrorist activities—be prohibited altogether due to the social perception and impact of such events? What statutory or other legal basis would support this treatment? 15. Are there event contracts, such as political event contracts, that should be prohibited from trading under the Act, or that deserve separate treatment or consideration, due to the nature and importance of their outcomes? What statutory or other legal basis would support this treatment? D. Legal Implementation 16. Is it appropriate for the Commission to direct certain or all event contracts onto markets that are regulated differently from and perhaps less stringently than DCMs? For example, it may be warranted or necessary to treat event markets that aggregate information solely for academic or research purposes, event markets set-up for internal corporate purposes, or event markets that offer exceedingly low notional value contracts to traders differently than markets that possess the attributes of traditional DCMs. 17. Is it appropriate for the Commission to use the Section 4(c) exemptive authority of the Act for implementing a regulatory scheme for event contracts and markets? In this regard, the Commission notes that it has the discretion to grant an exemption under Section 4(c) to certain classes of transactions without having to make a determination as to whether such transactions are subject to the Act in the first instance. 18. Is the issuance of staff no-action relief, such as the relief issued to the IEM, an appropriate or preferable means for establishing regulatory certainty for event contracts and markets? Is a policy statement appropriate or preferable? 19. What are the benefits and drawbacks of permitting certain event markets to operate pursuant to Commission established conditions that are similar to the conditions under which the IEM operates? E. Market Participants 20. Would it be appropriate to allow market participants, and in particular, retail customers, to trade on Commission-regulated event markets with the knowledge that the Commission may not be able to effectively monitor the measures or events that underlie certain event contracts? 21. What unique protections and prophylactic measures are appropriate or necessary for the protection of retail users of event contracts and markets? 22. What are the implications of permitting the intermediation of event contracts, including intermediation on behalf of retail market participants, both with respect to trade execution and clearing? 23. Are there any types of trader or intermediary conduct, peculiar to event contracts and markets, that should be prohibited or monitored closely by regulators? 24. What other factors could impact the Commission's ability, given its limited resources, to properly oversee or monitor trading in event contracts? Issued in Washington, DC, on May 1, 2008 by the Commission. David A. Stawick, Secretary of the Commission. [FR Doc. E8-9981 Filed 5-6-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6351-01-P DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary [Transmittal Nos. 08-49] 36(b)(1) Arms Sales Notification AGENCY: Department of Defense, Defense Security Cooperation Agency. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text of a section 36(b)(1) arms sales notification. This is published to fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated 21 July 1996. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. B. English, DSCAIDBO/CFM,

(703)601-3740. The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Transmittals 08-49 with attached transmittal, policy justification, and Sensitivity of Technology. Dated: April 29, 2008. Patricia L. Toppings, OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense. EN07MY08.000 EN07MY08.001 EN07MY08.002 EN07MY08.003 EN07MY08.004 EN07MY08.005 [FR Doc. E8-9827 Filed 5-6-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-C DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary [Transmittal Nos. 08-51] 36(b)(1) Arms Sales Notification AGENCY: Department of Defense, Defense Security Cooperation Agency. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text of a section 36(b)(1) arms sales notification. This is published to fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated 21 July 1996. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. B. English, DSCA/DBO/CFM,

(703)601-3740. The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Transmittals 08-51 with attached transmittal, policy justification, and Sensitivity of Technology. April 29, 2008. Patricia L. Toppings, OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense. BILLING CODE 5001-06-M EN07MY08.006 EN07MY08.007 EN07MY08.008 EN07MY08.009 [FR Doc. E8-9828 Filed 5-6-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-C DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary [Docket ID: DoD-2008-OS-0045] Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request AGENCY: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, DoD. ACTION: Notice. In compliance with Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Industrial Policy (ODUSD(IP)) announces a proposed information collection and seeks public comment on the provisions thereof. Comments are invited on:

(a)Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility;

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

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

(d)ways to minimize the burden of the information collection on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. DATES: Consideration will be given to all comments received by July 7, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by docket number and title, by any of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: *http://www.regulations.gov.* Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • Mail: Federal Docket Management System Office, 1160 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-1160. *Instructions:* All submissions received must include the agency name, docket number and title for this **Federal Register** document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov* as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers or contact information. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To request more information on this proposed information collection, please write to the Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Industrial Policy, 241 18th Street South, Crystal Square 4, Suite 501, ATTN: Dawn Vehmeier, Arlington, VA 22202, or e-mail us at *Industrial_Policy@osd.mil* . *Title, Associated Form, and OMB Number:* Foreign Sourcing for Defense Applications; OMB Number 0704-0419. *Needs and Uses:* The Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Industrial Policy) has been assigned responsibility to determine the extent of foreign sourcing and any relevant impact to on-going programs producing precision munitions, consumables and selected high interest force protection programs. *Affected Public:* Business or other for profit. *Number of Respondents:* 500. *Responses Per Respondent:* 1. *Annual Responses:* 500. *Average Burden Per Response:* 5 hours. *Annual Burden Hours:* 2,500. *Frequency:* On occasion. *Respondent's Obligation:* Voluntary. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Summary of Information Collection Specifically, ODUSD(IP) will evaluate the:

(1)Extent of foreign sourcing within a sampling of operationally-important products;

(2)impact of foreign sourcing on military readiness; and

(3)extent to which DoD actions encourage or discourage use of foreign sources. To ensure that it addresses emerging foreign sourcing issues, the Department of Defense

(DoD)will collect information from prime contractors and first and second tier subcontractors. Dated: May 1, 2008. Patricia L. Toppings, OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense. [FR Doc. E8-10073 Filed 5-6-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary [Docket ID: DoD-2008-HA-0046] Proposed New Collection, Comment Request AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, DoD. ACTION: Notice. In compliance with Section 3506 (c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Office the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs announces a proposed new information collection and seeks public comment on the provisions thereof. Comments are invited on:

(a)Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility;

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

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

(RIN)for this **Federal Register** document. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing on the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov* as they are received without change, including any personal identifiers of contact information. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To request more information on this proposed information collection or to obtain a copy of the proposal and associated collection instruments, please write to Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, Force Health Protection and Readiness, ATTN: Caroline Miner, 5113 Leesburg Pike, Suite 901, Falls Church, VA, 22041, or call

(703)575-2677. *Title; Associated Form; and OMB Number:* Researcher Responsibilities Form; OMB Number 0720-TBD. *Needs and Uses:* This collection instrument serves to document researcher's understanding and acceptance of the regulatory and ethical responsibilities for including humans as subjects in research. Principal and co-principal investigators must have the proposed, signed form on file before they may engage in research conducted, sponsored, or supported by entities under the purview of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness. *Affected Public:* Federal government; business or other for-profit; not-for-profit institutions. *Annual Burden Hours:* 293. *Number of Respondents:* 585. *Responses Per Respondent:* 1. *Average Burden Per Response:* .50. *Frequency:* On occasion; original document submitted one time per researcher. Once their document is on file, a researcher may reaffirm their commitment every three years electronically if they remain engaged in human subject research. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Summary of Information Collection Federal Government institutions wishing to conduct, sponsor, or support research on human subjects must first submit for approval to duly designated authorities an Assurance that they will comply with established guidelines in such research. Such Assurances are granted by components of DoD and by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). New DoD guidance now requires principal and co-principal investigators individually and explicitly to acknowledge that they understand and accept responsibility for protecting the rights and welfare of human research subjects. All principal and co-principal investigators engaged in research supported or conducted under the purview of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness must read and sign a document that attests to their commitment to abide by the provisions of:

(a)*The Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research;*

(b)the U.S. Department of Defense

(DoD)regulations for the protection of human subjects at Title 32, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 219 and DoD Directive 3216.02;

(c)the Assurance of the engaged institution; relevant institutional policies and procedures where appropriate; and other Federal, State, or local regulations where appropriate. The Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs announces the intent to establish and use a new document format for this purpose and seeks public comment on the provisions thereof. Respondents are professionals who have been designated as principal or co-principal investigators. When preparing to initiate work on their first human subject research protocol, each principal investigator and co-principal investigators must assure they have the proposed Researcher Responsibilities form on file with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness Component Designated Official Office. In the first year this may require new forms from approximately 585 investigators, most already doing research. After the first year, the burden will level off to approximately 85. The form is two pages in length including statements agreed to and half a page for respondent signature and contact information. Respondents generally will be required to have the signed form scanned and forwarded electronically. The form will be filed electronically and form completion will be logged into a database. After three years, if a researcher still is engaged in research with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, he/she will be asked to reaffirm his/her commitment electronically. This information collection does not involve sensitive personal information and requires no special confidentiality measures. Dated: May 1, 2008. Patricia L. Toppings, OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense. 1 [FR Doc. E8-10074 Filed 5-6-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary Threat Reduction Advisory Committee Closed Meeting AGENCY: Defense Threat Reduction Agency, Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology and Logistics); Department of Defense. ACTION: Federal Advisory Committee meeting notice; correction. SUMMARY: The Department of Defense published an announcement of a closed session of the Threat Reduction Advisory Committee on April 23, 2008 (73 FR 21920-21921). The meeting date was incorrect. This notice is being published to provide the correct meeting date of June 26, 2008. All other information in the previous notice remains the same. DATES: Thursday, June 26, 2008 (8 a.m. to 4 p.m.). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Contact Mr. Eric Wright, Defense Threat Reduction Agency/AST, 8725 John J. Kingman Road, MS 6201, Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-6201, Phone:

(703)767-5717, Fax:

(703)767-5701, E-mail: *eric.wright@dtra.mil.* Dated: May 1, 2008. Patricia L. Toppings, OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense. [FR Doc. E8-10070 Filed 5-6-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 5001-06-P DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement

(EIS)for Grow the Army

(GTA)Actions at Fort Carson, CO AGENCY: Department of the Army, DoD. ACTION: Notice of Intent (NOI). SUMMARY: As part of the GTA effort, the U. S. Army intends to prepare an EIS to analyze the environmental and socioeconomic impacts resulting from the decision to station a new Infantry Brigade Combat Team

(IBCT)at Fort Carson. The EIS will also analyze Fort Carson's Butts Army Airfield

(BAAF)as a potential location for stationing a Combat Aviation Brigade

(CAB)in the future. ADDRESSES: For questions regarding the EIS, please contact Ms. Deb Owings or Ms. Robin Renn, Fort Carson National Environmental Policy Act Coordinators, 1638 Elwell Street, Building 6236, Fort Carson, CO 80913-4000. Written comments may be mailed to that address or e-mailed to *CARSDECAMNEPA@conus.army.mil.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Dee McNuff, Fort Carson Public Affairs Office at

(719)526-1269, during normal business hours. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Fort Carson consists of approximately 137,000 acres of DOD-managed land south of Colorado Springs (east of the Rocky Mountain Front Range) and occupies portions of El Paso, Pueblo, and Fremont counties. The Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site

(PCMS)is the primary maneuver training area for Fort Carson. In addition to the units stationed there, Fort Carson and the PCMS also provide training to Reserve units and the National Guard. The PCMS is located approximately 150 miles southeast of Fort Carson and consists of approximately 235,000 acres. The stationing of additional BCTs and other force structure realignment actions across the Army was analyzed in the 2007 Final Programmatic EIS for Army Growth and Force Structure Realignment. The Record of Decision determined that Fort Carson would receive an additional IBCT contingent on site specific NEPA analysis. The Fort Carson GTA EIS will analyze environmental and socioeconomic impacts as a result of this decision. Also analyzed will be the potential stationing of a CAB and newly identified projects that would be required to support GTA actions. Implementing these requirements would involve constructing new facilities at Fort Carson to support an IBCT (approximately 4,500 additional Soldiers and their dependents), the potential stationing of a CAB (approximately 2,800 Soldiers and their dependents) and upgrading ranges. Increased use of live-fire training ranges and maneuver areas would occur at Fort Carson and the PCMS. The Fort Carson GTA EIS will analyze the impact of several alternatives including the No Action Alternative. Alternatives to be examined by the EIS may consist of alternative siting locations within Fort Carson for facility/utility construction projects, renovation and use of existing facilities. The EIS will also examine increases in land use intensity resulting from training activities connected with GTA stationing decisions. Under the No Action Alternative, the stationing of a new IBCT and CAB at Fort Carson would not be implemented. Impacts analyzed will include a wide range of environmental resource areas including, but not limited to, air quality, traffic, noise, water resources, biological resources, cultural resources, socioeconomics, utilities, land use, solid and hazardous materials/waste, and cumulative environmental effects. Additional resources and conditions may be identified as a result of the scoping process initiated by this NOI. The public will be invited to participate in the scoping process which includes several scoping meetings to provide input on the proposed actions and alternatives in the EIS. The public will also be invited to review and comment on the Draft EIS. These public involvement opportunities will be announced in the local news media. Comments from the public will be considered before any decision is made regarding implementing the proposed action at Fort Carson. Dated: May 1, 2008. Addison D. Davis, IV, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Environment, Safety and Occupational Health). [FR Doc. E8-10007 Filed 5-6-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3710-08-M DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers; Notice of Availability of Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Rio del Oro Specific Plan Project, in the City of Rancho Cordova, Sacramento County, CA AGENCY: Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DoD. ACTION: Notice of availability. SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Sacramento District published a notice in the **Federal Register** on December 8, 2006 (71 FR 71142-71143), informing the public of the availability of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement

(DEIS)for the Rio del Oro Specific Plan Project. USACE, Sacramento District has prepared a Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement (SDEIS) in response to new information. It is now available for review and comment. The SDEIS provides new information and additional analyses related to utilities and service systems (specifically, water supply) and biological resources. Like the 2006 DEIS, the SDEIS analyzes the potential effects of implementing each of five alternative scenarios for a mixed-use development in the approximately 3,828-acre Rio del Oro Specific Plan area, in the City of Rancho Cordova, Sacramento County, CA. The alternatives considered in detail in the SDEIS are:

(1)Proposed Project/Proposed Action (i.e., Proposed Project Alternative), the Applicants' Preferred Alternative;

(2)High Density (Increased Densities Consistent with Sacramento Area Council of Governments Blueprint);

(3)Impact Minimization;

(4)No Federal Action (No Section 404 of the Clean Water Act Permit); and

(5)No Project/No Action (No development). DATES: All written comments must be postmarked on or before July 6, 2008. A public hearing will be held on May 22, 2008 at 6 p.m. at the Rancho Cordova City Hall, located at 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Suite 220, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670. Oral and written comments will be accepted at the public hearing. Written and oral comments will be given equal weight and all comments received or postmarked by the date of the hearing, or by the above date in the absence of a hearing, will be considered by the Corps in preparing the Final EIS. Comments received or postmarked after the date of the hearing, or after the above date in the absence of a hearing, will be considered to the extent practicable. ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted in writing to: Kathleen Dadey, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Sacramento District, Regulatory Branch, 1325 J Street, Room 1480, Sacramento, CA 95814-2922, or via e-mail to *Kathleen.A.Dadey@usace.army.mil.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen Dadey at

(916)557-7253. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The environmental effects of five alternatives were evaluated in detail in the 2006 DEIS. Under the Proposed Project/Proposed Action (Proposed Project Alternative), buildout of the project would occur in five phases over 25-30 years. The project provides for construction of approximately 11,601 residential dwelling units in three residential land use classifications on 1,920 acres, along with commercial land uses, neighborhood parks, and other uses such as a landscape corridor and greenbelt, and several public schools. New utilities and communications infrastructure would be installed and new roadways and on- and off-site infrastructure improvements would be completed. The project designates a 507-acre wetland preserve area and two elderberry preserve areas on the site. The four alternatives to the Proposed Project/Proposed Action described in the 2006 DEIS are as follows:

(1)The High Density Alternative embraces the concept of “Smart Growth,” consistent with the Sacramento Area Council of Governments Regional Blueprint. Under Smart Growth principles, areas planned for development are developed at higher densities. Although these higher densities may result in greater localized impacts on resources, the overall area of disturbance is reduced by concentrating development in particular locations.

(2)The Impact Minimization Alternative would reconfigure project components to reduce impacts to waters of the United States, including wetlands and high-quality biological habitat.

(3)The No Federal Action Alternative was designed to allow some development of the project site while avoiding the placement of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States.

(4)The No Project/No Action Alternative would preclude development of the project; under this alternative, the majority of the project site would remain under the jurisdiction of the City of Rancho Cordova. After the 2006 DEIS was issued, USACE, Sacramento District determined that the water supply and biological resources portions of the DEIS should be supplemented, as described below. The SDEIS includes a revised water-supply analysis that describes the various sources of water for the project, including short-term sources for development of Phase 1 and long-term water supplies for all phases of development, and impacts associated with providing water to the project. The analysis addresses the following elements set forth in the case of *Vineyard Area Citizens for Responsible Growth, Inc.* v. *City of Rancho Cordova,* 40 Cal. 4th 412 (2007), which was decided after the 2006 DEIS was released: • Reasonable likelihood of the water sources proving available. • Identification and quantification of water demand from project and cumulative development. • Reasonable likelihood of identified water supply meeting the demands of project and cumulative development. • Analysis of alternative sources of water and project contingencies (including curtailment) if water-supply sources are not reasonably likely. • Impacts of water-supply infrastructure. The revised water-supply analysis in the SDEIS also includes consideration of potentially significant impacts that could result from constructing a new water conveyance pipeline and booster pump station, as well as potentially significant impacts that could occur from curtailment of development as a mitigation measure. These impacts were not discussed as part of the 2006 DEIS. The SDEIS also contains a revised biological resources section that incorporates information responding to comments raised during the DEIS public-review period to ensure that the analysis considers significant, relevant public comments. This section also contains new information related to additional biological resource studies that have been performed by the applicants since the DEIS was circulated, and some of the mitigation measures have been expanded or clarified. The expanded mitigation measures do not result in new significant impacts. The biological resources section also contains additional analysis of project consistency with the biological resources goals in the City of Rancho Cordova's general plan. USACE invites full public participation to promote open communication and better decision-making. All persons and organizations that have an interest in the Rio del Oro Specific Plan Project are urged to participate in the NEPA process. A public hearing will be held as described in the DATES section. This hearing will be announced in advance through notices, media news releases, and/or mailings. Copies of the SDEIS may be reviewed at the following locations: 1. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Sacramento District Web Site: *http://www.spk.usace.army.mil/;* 2. City of Rancho Cordova City Hall, 2729 Prospect Park Drive, Rancho Cordova, CA 95670; 3. City of Rancho Cordova Planning Department Web site: *http://www.cityofranchocordova.org/Index.aspx?page=128.* Dated: April 29, 2008. Christine Altendorf, Acting District Engineer. [FR Doc. E8-10216 Filed 5-6-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3710-EZ-P DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Elementary and Secondary Education; Overview Information; Advanced Placement Incentive Program; Notice Inviting Applications for New Awards for Fiscal Year

(FY)2008 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

(CFDA)Number: 84.330C. DATES: *Applications Available:* May 7, 2008. *Deadline for Notice of Intent To Apply:* June 6, 2008. *Deadline for Transmittal of Applications:* July 7, 2008. *Deadline for Intergovernmental Review:* September 4, 2008. Full Text of Announcement I. Funding Opportunity Description *Purpose of Program:* The Advanced Placement Incentive

(API)program awards competitive grants designed to increase the successful participation of low-income students in advanced placement courses and tests. The program expands opportunities for low-income students to take college-level classes and earn college credit while still in high school. The program also supports efforts to raise the rigor of the academic curriculum for all students attending high-poverty high schools. *Priority:* In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(iv), this priority is from section 1705(c) of the ESEA (20 U.S.C 6535(c)). *Absolute Priority:* For FY 2008 and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applicants from this competition, this priority is an absolute priority. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3) we consider only applications that meet this priority. This priority is: *Implementation of Advanced Placement Programs in High-Poverty Schools.* This priority supports projects that expand access for low-income individuals to advanced placement programs by:

(1)Developing, enhancing, or expanding advanced placement programs in English, mathematics, and science in high schools with a high concentration of low-income students and a pervasive need for access to advanced placement programs;

(2)Involving business and community organizations in the activities to be assisted; and

(3)Providing matching funds from State, local, or other sources to pay for the costs of activities to be assisted. *Note:* In order to meet this absolute priority, an application must identify the specific high schools that will receive project services, and provide evidence that those schools have a high concentration of low-income students. *Competitive Preference Priorities:* Within this absolute priority, we give competitive preference to applications that address the following priorities. *Competitive Preference Priority 1:* This priority is from the notice of final priorities for discretionary grant programs published in the **Federal Register** on October 11, 2006 (71 FR 60045). Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i) we award up to an additional 4 points to an application, depending on how well the application meets this priority. This priority is: *Critical-Need Languages.* This priority supports projects that support activities to enable students to achieve proficiency or advanced proficiency or to develop programs in one or more of the following less commonly taught languages: Arabic, Chinese, Korean, Japanese, Russian, and languages in the Indic, Iranian, and Turkic language families. *Competitive Preference Priority 2:* In accordance with 34 CFR 75.105(b)(2)(iv), this priority is from section 1705(c) of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 6535(c)). Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i) we award an additional 1 point to an application that meets this priority. This priority is: *On-Line Advanced Placement Courses.* This priority supports projects that demonstrate an intent to carry out activities to increase the availability of, and participation in, on-line advanced placement courses. Within this absolute priority, we are particularly interested in applications that address the following invitational priority. *Invitational Priority:* For FY 2008 and any subsequent year in which we make awards from the list of unfunded applicants from this competition, this priority is an invitational priority. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(1), we do not give an application that meets this invitational priority a competitive or absolute preference over other applications. This priority is: *Training and Incentives for Advanced Placement Teachers.* This priority supports projects that seek to increase the successful participation of low-income individuals in advanced placement courses and tests by:

(1)Compensating teachers of advanced placement courses for completing intensive professional development that enhances their knowledge of the advanced placement subjects they teach; and

(2)Providing financial incentives that reward teachers of advanced placement courses for the successful performance of their students on advanced placement tests. Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 6535-6537. *Applicable Regulations:*

(a)The Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 74, 75, 77, 79, 80, 81, 82, 84, 85, 97, 98, and 99.

(b)The notice of final priorities for discretionary grant programs published in the **Federal Register** on October 11, 2006 (71 FR 60045). II. Award Information *Type of Award:* Discretionary grants. *Estimated Available Funds:* $12,400,000. Contingent upon the availability of funds and the quality of applications, we may make additional awards in FY 2009 from the list of unfunded applicants from this competition. *Estimated Range of Awards:* $93,040-975,163. *Estimated Average Size of Awards:* $590,476. *Maximum Award:* We will reject any application that proposes a budget exceeding $1,000,000 for a single budget period of 12 months. The Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education may change the maximum amount through a notice published in the **Federal Register** . *Estimated Number of Awards:* 21. Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice. *Project Period:* Up to 36 months. III. Eligibility Information 1. *Eligible Applicants:*

(a)State educational agencies (SEAs);

(b)Local educational agencies (LEAs), including charter schools that are considered LEAs under State law; or

(c)National nonprofit educational entities with expertise in advanced placement services. Note: In the case of an eligible entity that is an SEA, the SEA may use API grant funds to award subgrants to LEAs to enable those LEAs to carry out authorized activities that support the absolute priority for this competition. 2. a. *Cost Sharing or Matching:* In order to meet the absolute priority for this competition, an applicant must provide matching funds from State, local, or other sources to pay for the costs of activities to be assisted. b. *Supplement-Not-Supplant:* Funds provided under this program must be used only to supplement, and not supplant, other non-Federal funds that are available to assist low-income individuals in paying advanced placement test fees or to expand access to advanced placement or pre-advanced placement courses (20 U.S.C. 6536). This restriction also has the effect of allowing projects to recover indirect costs only on the basis of a restricted indirect cost rate, according to the requirements in 34 CFR 75.563 and 34 CFR 76.564 through 76.569. 3. *Other:* *Definitions.* The following definitions are taken from the API program authorizing statute in Title I, Part G of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 6537). They are repeated in this application notice for the convenience of the applicant.

(a)The term *advanced placement test* means an advanced placement test administered by the College Board or approved by the Secretary. Note: The Department approves advanced placement tests administered by the International Baccalaureate Organization. As part of the grant application process, applicants may request approval of tests from other educational entities that provide comparable programs of rigorous academic courses and testing through which students may earn college credit.

(b)The term *high concentration of low-income students,* used with respect to a school, means a school that serves a student population 40 percent or more of whom are low-income individuals.

(c)The term *low-income individual* means an individual who is determined by an SEA or LEA to be a child, ages 5 through 19, from a low-income family on the basis of data used by the Secretary to determine allocations under section 1124 of the ESEA, data on children eligible for free or reduced-price lunches under the National School Lunch Act, data on children in families receiving assistance under Part A of Title IV of the Social Security Act, or data on children eligible to receive medical assistance under the Medicaid program under Title XIX of the Social Security Act, or through an alternate method that combines or extrapolates from those data. IV. Application and Submission Information 1. *Address to Request Application Package:* You can obtain an application package via the Internet, or from the program office. To obtain a copy via the Internet, use the following address: *http://www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/grantapps/index.html.* To obtain a copy from the program office, contact: Ivonne Jaime, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., LBJ Building, Room 3W246, Washington, DC 20202-6200. Telephone:

(202)260-1519 or by e-mail: *AdvancedPlacementProgram@ed.gov.* If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal Relay Service (FRS), toll free, at: 1-800-877-8339. Individuals with disabilities can obtain a copy of the application package in an alternative format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer diskette) by contacting the person or team listed under *Alternative Format* in section VIII of this notice. 2. *Content and Form of Application Submission:* Requirements concerning the content of an application, together with the forms you must submit, are in the application package for this program. *Page Limit:* The application narrative is where you, the applicant, address the selection criteria that reviewers use to evaluate your application. We encourage you to limit the narrative to the equivalent of no more than 40 pages and suggest that you use the following standards: • A “page” is 8.5″ × 11″, on one side only, with 1″ margins at the top, bottom, and both sides. • Double space (no more than three lines per vertical inch) all text in the application narrative. Titles, headings, footnotes, quotations, references, and captions, as well as text in charts, tables, figures, and graphs, can be single spaced. • Use a font that is either 12 point or larger or no smaller than 10 pitch (characters per inch). • *Use one of the following fonts:* Times New Roman, Courier, Courier New, or Arial. • Number all pages consecutively using the style 1 of 40, 2 of 40, and so forth. • Include a Table of Contents with page references. The suggested page limit does not apply to the Table of Contents; forms; the budget section, including the narrative budget justification; the assurances and certifications; the one-page abstract; the resumes; or letters of support. However, the suggested page limit does apply to all of the application narrative section. We further encourage applicants to limit to no more than 20 pages any attachments or appendices that are not resumes or letters of support. 3. *Submission Dates and Times* : *Applications Available* : May 7, 2008. *Deadline for Notice of Intent to Apply:* June 6, 2008. We will be able to develop a more efficient process for reviewing grant applications if we have a better understanding of the number of entities that intend to apply for funding. Therefore, we strongly encourage each potential applicant to send a notification of its intent to apply for funding to *AdvancedPlacementProgram@ed.gov* by June 6, 2008. The notification of intent to apply for funding is optional. Applicants that do not supply this e-mail notification may still apply for funding. *Deadline for Transmittal of Applications:* July 7, 2008. Applications for grants under this competition must be submitted electronically using the Grants.gov Apply site (Grants.gov). For information (including dates and times) about how to submit your application electronically, or in paper format by mail or hand delivery if you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, please refer to section IV. 6. *Other Submission Requirements* in this notice. We do not consider an application that does not comply with the deadline requirements. Individuals with disabilities who need an accommodation or auxiliary aid in connection with the application process should contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in section VII in this notice. If the Department provides an accommodation or auxiliary aid to an individual with a disability in connection with the application process, the individual's application remains subject to all other requirements and limitations in this notice. *Deadline for Intergovernmental Review:* September 4, 2008. 4. *Intergovernmental Review* : This program is subject to Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. Information about Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs under Executive Order 12372 is in the application package for this competition. 5. *Funding Restrictions* : We reference regulations outlining funding restrictions in the *Applicable Regulations* section in this notice. 6. *Other Submission Requirements:* Applications for grants under this competition must be submitted electronically unless you qualify for an exception to this requirement in accordance with the instructions in this section. a. *Electronic Submission of Applications.* Applications for grants under the Advanced Placement Incentive Program, CFDA Number 84.330C, must be submitted electronically using the Governmentwide Grants.gov Apply site at *http://www.Grants.gov.* Through this site, you will be able to download a copy of the application package, complete it offline, and then upload and submit your application. You may not e-mail an electronic copy of a grant application to us. We will reject your application if you submit it in paper format unless, as described elsewhere in this section, you qualify for one of the exceptions to the electronic submission requirement and submit, no later than two weeks before the application deadline date, a written statement to the Department that you qualify for one of these exceptions. Further information regarding calculation of the date that is two weeks before the application deadline date is provided later in this section under *Exception to Electronic Submission Requirement.* You may access the electronic grant application for the Advanced Placement Incentive Program at *http://www.Grants.gov.* You must search for the downloadable application package for this competition by the CFDA number. Do not include the CFDA number's alpha suffix in your search (e.g., search for 84.330, not 84.330C). Please note the following: • When you enter the Grants.gov site, you will find information about submitting an application electronically through the site, as well as the hours of operation. • Applications received by Grants.gov are date and time stamped. Your application must be fully uploaded and submitted and must be date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system no later than 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. Except as otherwise noted in this section, we will not consider your application if it is date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system later than 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. When we retrieve your application from Grants.gov, we will notify you if we are rejecting your application because it was date and time stamped by the Grants.gov system after 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. • The amount of time it can take to upload an application will vary depending on a variety of factors, including the size of the application and the speed of your Internet connection. Therefore, we strongly recommend that you do not wait until the application deadline date to begin the submission process through Grants.gov. • You should review and follow the Education Submission Procedures for submitting an application through Grants.gov that are included in the application package for this competition to ensure that you submit your application in a timely manner to the Grants.gov system. You can also find the Education Submission Procedures pertaining to Grants.gov at *http://e-Grants.ed.gov/help/GrantsgovSubmissionProcedures.pdf.* • To submit your application via Grants.gov, you must complete all steps in the Grants.gov registration process (see *http://www.grants.gov/applicants/get_registered.jsp * ). These steps include

(1)registering your organization, a multi-part process that includes registration with the Central Contractor Registry (CCR);

(2)registering yourself as an Authorized Organization Representative (AOR); and

(3)getting authorized as an AOR by your organization. Details on these steps are outlined in the Grants.gov 3-Step Registration Guide (see *http://www.grants.gov/section910/Grants.govRegistrationBrochure.pdf).* You also must provide on your application the same D-U-N-S Number used with this registration. Please note that the registration process may take five or more business days to complete, and you must have completed all registration steps to allow you to submit successfully an application via Grants.gov. In addition you will need to update your CCR registration on an annual basis. This may take three or more business days to complete. • You will not receive additional point value because you submit your application in electronic format, nor will we penalize you if you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, as described elsewhere in this section, and submit your application in paper format. • You must submit all documents electronically, including all information you typically provide on the following forms: Application for Federal Assistance (SF 424), the Department of Education Supplemental Information for SF 424, Budget Information—Non-Construction Programs (ED 524), and all necessary assurances and certifications. Please note that two of these forms—the SF 424 and the Department of Education Supplemental Information for SF 424—have replaced the ED 424 (Application for Federal Education Assistance). • You must attach any narrative sections of your application as files in a .DOC (document), .RTF (rich text), or .PDF (Portable Document) format. If you upload a file type other than the three file types specified in this paragraph or submit a password-protected file, we will not review that material. • Your electronic application must comply with any page-limit requirements described in this notice. • After you electronically submit your application, you will receive from Grants.gov an automatic notification of receipt that contains a Grants.gov tracking number. (This notification indicates receipt by Grants.gov only, not receipt by the Department.) The Department then will retrieve your application from Grants.gov and send a second notification to you by e-mail. This second notification indicates that the Department has received your application and has assigned your application a PR/Award number (an ED-specified identifying number unique to your application). • We may request that you provide us original signatures on forms at a later date. *Application Deadline Date Extension in Case of Technical Issues with the Grants.gov System:* If you are experiencing problems submitting your application through Grants.gov, please contact the Grants.gov Support Desk, toll free, at 1-800-518-4726. You must obtain a Grants.gov Support Desk Case Number and must keep a record of it. If you are prevented from electronically submitting your application on the application deadline date because of technical problems with the Grants.gov system, we will grant you an extension until 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, the following business day to enable you to transmit your application electronically or by hand delivery. You also may mail your application by following the mailing instructions described elsewhere in this notice. If you submit an application after 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date, please contact the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in section VII in this notice and provide an explanation of the technical problem you experienced with Grants.gov, along with the Grants.gov Support Desk Case Number. We will accept your application if we can confirm that a technical problem occurred with the Grants.gov system and that that problem affected your ability to submit your application by 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. The Department will contact you after a determination is made on whether your application will be accepted. Note: The extensions to which we refer in this section apply only to the unavailability of, or technical problems with, the Grants.gov system. We will not grant you an extension if you failed to fully register to submit your application to Grants.gov before the application deadline date and time or if the technical problem you experienced is unrelated to the Grants.gov system. *Exception to Electronic Submission Requirement* : You qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, and may submit your application in paper format, if you are unable to submit an application through the Grants.gov system because— • You do not have access to the Internet; or • You do not have the capacity to upload large documents to the Grants.gov system; and • No later than two weeks before the application deadline date (14 calendar days or, if the fourteenth calendar day before the application deadline date falls on a Federal holiday, the next business day following the Federal holiday), you mail or fax a written statement to the Department, explaining which of the two grounds for an exception prevent you from using the Internet to submit your application. If you mail your written statement to the Department, it must be postmarked no later than two weeks before the application deadline date. If you fax your written statement to the Department, we must receive the faxed statement no later than two weeks before the application deadline date. Address and mail or fax your statement to: Ivonne Jaime, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., LBJ Building, Room 3W246, Washington, DC 20202-6200. FAX:

(202)205-4921. Your paper application must be submitted in accordance with the mail or hand delivery instructions described in this notice. b. *Submission of Paper Applications by Mail.* If you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, you may mail (through the U.S. Postal Service or a commercial carrier) your application to the Department. You must mail the original and two copies of your application, on or before the application deadline date, to the Department at the applicable following address: *By mail through the U.S. Postal Service:* U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention: (CFDA Number 84.330C), 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20202-4260 or *By mail through a commercial carrier:* U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, Stop 4260, Attention: (CFDA Number 84.330C), 7100 Old Landover Road, Landover, MD 20785-1506. Regardless of which address you use, you must show proof of mailing consisting of one of the following:

(1)A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service postmark.

(2)A legible mail receipt with the date of mailing stamped by the U.S. Postal Service.

(3)A dated shipping label, invoice, or receipt from a commercial carrier.

(4)Any other proof of mailing acceptable to the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education. If you mail your application through the U.S. Postal Service, we do not accept either of the following as proof of mailing:

(1)A private metered postmark.

(2)A mail receipt that is not dated by the U.S. Postal Service. If your application is postmarked after the application deadline date, we will not consider your application. Note: The U.S. Postal Service does not uniformly provide a dated postmark. Before relying on this method, you should check with your local post office. c. *Submission of Paper Applications by Hand Delivery.* If you qualify for an exception to the electronic submission requirement, you (or a courier service) may deliver your paper application to the Department by hand. You must deliver the original and two copies of your application by hand, on or before the application deadline date, to the Department at the following address: U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention: (CFDA Number 84.330C), 550 12th Street, SW., Room 7041, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-4260. The Application Control Center accepts hand deliveries daily between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, except Saturdays, Sundays, and Federal holidays. Note for Mail or Hand Delivery of Paper Applications: If you mail or hand deliver your application to the Department—

(1)You must indicate on the envelope and—if not provided by the Department—in Item 11 of the SF 424 the CFDA number, including suffix letter, if any, of the competition under which you are submitting your application; and

(2)The Application Control Center will mail to you a notification of receipt of your grant application. If you do not receive this notification within 15 business days from the application deadline date, you should call the U.S. Department of Education Application Control Center at

(202)245-6288. V. Application Review Information *Selection Criteria:* The selection criteria for this competition are from 34 CFR 75.210 and, where otherwise noted, sections 1702 and 1705 of the ESEA (20 U.S.C. 6532 and 6535). Note: The maximum score for all selection criteria is 95 points. The points or weights assigned to each criterion or subcriterion are indicated in parentheses. Need for the Project In determining need for the proposed project, we will consider the following factors:

(1)The extent to which the application demonstrates a pervasive need for access to advanced placement incentive programs by low-income individuals (5 points) (20 U.S.C. 6535(c)(1)); and

(2)The extent to which specific gaps or weaknesses in services, infrastructure, or opportunities have been identified and will be addressed by the proposed project, including the nature and magnitude of those gaps or weaknesses (10 points). Quality of Project Design In determining the quality of the design of the proposed project, we will consider the following factors:

(1)The extent to which the goals, objectives, and outcomes to be achieved by the proposed project are clearly specified and measurable (5 points);

(2)The extent to which the proposed project will increase the rate at which secondary school students participate in advanced placement courses and increase the numbers of students who receive advanced placement test scores for which college academic credit is awarded (20 points) (20 U.S.C. 6532(7));

(3)The extent to which the proposed activities constitute a coherent, sustained program of training in the field (15 points); and

(4)The extent to which there is effective coordination and articulation between grade levels to prepare students for academic achievement in advanced placement courses (15 points) (20 U.S.C. 6535(d)(C)). Quality of the Management Plan In determining the quality of the management plan for the proposed project, we will consider the following factors:

(1)The adequacy of the management plan to achieve the objectives of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly defined responsibilities, timelines, and milestones for accomplishing project tasks (8 points);

(2)The extent to which the time commitments of the project director and principal investigator and other key project personnel are appropriate and adequate to meet the objectives of the proposed project (5 points); and

(3)The extent to which the applicant demonstrates that it will have the capacity to report annually the data required by section 1705(f) of the ESEA (4 points). Adequacy of Resources In determining the adequacy of resources for the proposed project, we will consider the extent to which the applicant assures the availability of matching funds from State, local, or other sources to pay for the cost of activities to be assisted by the proposed project (20 U.S.C. 6535(c)(3))(8 points). VI. Award Administration Information 1. *Award Notices:* If your application is successful, we notify your U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators and send you a Grant Award Notification (GAN). We may notify you informally, also. If your application is not evaluated or not selected for funding, we notify you. 2. *Administrative and National Policy Requirements:* We identify administrative and national policy requirements in the application package and reference these and other requirements in the *Applicable Regulations* section in this notice. We reference the regulations outlining the terms and conditions of an award in the *Applicable Regulations* section in this notice and include these and other specific conditions in the GAN. The GAN also incorporates your approved application as part of your binding commitments under the grant. 3. *Grant Administration:* Applicants should budget for a two-day meeting for project directors to be held annually in Washington, DC. In addition to setting aside funds for travel, hotel, and per diem costs for these meetings, applicants should budget for an estimated $500 per participant for the costs of materials and technical assistance products and services that will be delivered during these meetings. 4. *Reporting:* At the end of your project period, you must submit a final performance report, including financial information, as directed by the Secretary. If you receive a multi-year award, you must submit an annual performance report that provides the most current performance and financial expenditure information as directed by the Secretary under 34 CFR 75.118. The Secretary may also require more frequent performance reports under 34 CFR 75.720(c). For specific requirements on reporting, please go to: *http://www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/appforms/appforms.html.* 5. *Performance Measures:* The Department has established six performance measures for assessing the effectiveness of the API program in improving the successful participation in advanced placement courses and tests by students attending public high schools served by API grants. These measures are:

(1)The number of students who enrolled in an advanced placement course at each school served by an API grant, disaggregated by subject.

(2)The number of low-income individuals who enrolled in an advanced placement course at each school served by an API grant, disaggregated by subject.

(3)The number of advanced placement tests taken by students at each school served by an API grant, disaggregated by subject, divided by the number of seniors enrolled in each school at or around October 1.

(4)The number of advanced placement tests taken by low-income individuals at each school served by an API grant, disaggregated by subject.

(5)The scores students at each school served by an API grant earned on advanced placement tests, disaggregated by subject.

(6)The scores low-income individuals at each school served by an API earned on advanced placement tests, disaggregated by subject. These measures constitute the Department's measures of success for this program. Consequently, applicants for a grant under this program are advised to give careful consideration to these measures in identifying their goals and objectives and conceptualizing the approach and evaluation of their proposed projects. If funded, applicants will be asked to collect and report data in their performance and final reports about progress toward these measures. VII. Agency Contact FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ivonne Jaime, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., LBJ Building, Room 3W246, Washington, DC 20202-6200. Telephone:

(202)260-1519 or by e-mail: *AdvancedPlacementProgram@ed.gov.* If you use a TDD, call the FRS, toll free, at 1-800-877-8339. VIII. Other Information *Alternative Format:* Individuals with disabilities can obtain this document and a copy of the application package in an alternative format (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer diskette) on request to the program contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in section VII in this notice. *Electronic Access to This Document:* You can view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the **Federal Register** , in text or Adobe Portable Document Format

(PDF)on the Internet at the following site: *http://www.ed.gov/news/fedregister.* To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at this site. If you have questions about using PDF, call the U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at 1-888-293-6498; or in the Washington, DC, area at

(202)512-1530. Note: The official version of this document is the document published in the **Federal Register** . Free Internet access to the official edition of the **Federal Register** and the Code of Federal Regulations is available on GPO Access at: *http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/index.html.* Dated: May 2, 2008. Kerri L. Briggs, Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education. [FR Doc. E8-10106 Filed 5-6-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Notice of Proposed Information Collection Requests AGENCY: Department of Education SUMMARY: The IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of Management, invites comments on the proposed information collection requests as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. DATES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before July 7, 2008. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires that the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)provide interested Federal agencies and the public an early opportunity to comment on information collection requests. OMB may amend or waive the requirement for public consultation to the extent that public participation in the approval process would defeat the purpose of the information collection, violate State or Federal law, or substantially interfere with any agency's ability to perform its statutory obligations. The IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of Management, publishes that notice containing proposed information collection requests prior to submission of these requests to OMB. Each proposed information collection, grouped by office, contains the following:

(1)Type of review requested, *e.g.* new, revision, extension, existing or reinstatement;

(2)Title;

(3)Summary of the collection;

(4)Description of the need for, and proposed use of, the information;

(5)Respondents and frequency of collection; and

(6)Reporting and/or Recordkeeping burden. OMB invites public comment. The Department of Education is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues:

(1)Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department;

(2)will this information be processed and used in a timely manner;

(3)is the estimate of burden accurate;

(4)how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(5)how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Dated: May 1, 2008. Angela C. Arrington, IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of Management. Institute of Education Sciences *Type of Review:* New. *Title:* High School Graduation Confirmation Study. *Frequency:* One Time. *Affected Public:* Individuals or household; State, Local, or Tribal Gov't, SEAs or LEAs. *Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour Burden:* *Responses:* 5,130. *Burden Hours:* 1,845. *Abstract:* This study will be conducted as a part of the October Current Population Survey October education supplement. The purpose is to confirm the accuracy of reporting by household respondents of high school graduation status of household members by contacting reported school from which household members ages 18 to 24 were reported graduating. Requests for copies of the proposed information collection request may be accessed from *http://edicsweb.ed.gov* , by selecting the “Browse Pending Collections” link and by clicking on link number 3678. When you access the information collection, click on “Download Attachments” to view. Written requests for information should be addressed to U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., LBJ, Washington, DC 20202-4537. Requests may also be electronically mailed to *ICDocketMgr@ed.gov* or faxed to 202-401-0920. Please specify the complete title of the information collection when making your request. Comments regarding burden and/or the collection activity requirements should be electronically mailed to *ICDocketMgr@ed.gov.* Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf

(TDD)may call the Federal Information Relay Service

(FIRS)at 1-800-877-8339. [FR Doc. E8-10087 Filed 5-6-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board, Hanford AGENCY: Department of Energy. ACTION: Notice of Open Meeting. SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Environmental Management Site-Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB), Hanford. The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of this meeting be announced in the **Federal Register** . DATES: Thursday, June 5, 2008, 9 a.m.-5 p.m.; Friday, June 6, 2008, 8:30 a.m.-4 p.m. ADDRESSES: Red Lion Hotel Hanford House, 802 George Washington Way, Richland, Washington 99352, Phone:

(509)946-7611, Fax:

(509)943-8564. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erik Olds, Federal Coordinator, Department of Energy Richland Operations Office, 2440 Stevens Drive, P.O. Box 450, H6-60, Richland, WA 99352; Phone:

(509)372-8656; or E-mail: *Theodore_E_Erik_Olds@orp.doe.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Purpose of the Board:* The purpose of the Board is to make recommendations to DOE in the areas of environmental restoration, waste management, and related activities. Tentative Agenda • State of Columbia River; • Uniform Safety Systems throughout Hanford; • Configuration Control of Critical Assumptions; • Rattlesnake Mountain; • Update on Office of River Protection's Integrated System Plan; • Update on Tri-Party Agreement Negotiations; • Update from Hanford Advisory Board Leadership Retreat and Board work priorities; • Science and Technology Roadmap; • Update on Nuclear Regulatory Commission and their review of the regulatory processes of the Waste Treatment Plant; • Recap of EM SSAB Chairs Meeting held on April 23-24, 2008 in Richland, Washington; • Committee Updates including: Tank Waste Committee; River and Plateau Committee; Health, Safety and Environmental Protection Committee; Public Involvement Committee; and Budgets and Contracts Committee. *Public Participation:* The meeting is open to the public. Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or after the meeting. Individuals who wish to make oral statements pertaining to agenda items should contact Erik Olds' office at the address or telephone number listed above. Requests must be received five days prior to the meeting and reasonable provision will be made to include the presentation in the agenda. The Deputy Designated Federal Officer is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. Individuals wishing to make public comment will be provided a maximum of five minutes to present their comments. *Minutes:* Minutes will be available by writing or calling Erik Olds' office at the address or phone number listed above. Minutes will also be available at the following Web site: *http://www.hanford.gov/?page=413&parent=397.* Issued at Washington, DC, on May 1, 2008. Rachel Samuel, Deputy Committee Management Officer. [FR Doc. E8-10098 Filed 5-6-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy State Energy Advisory Board AGENCY: Department of Energy. ACTION: Notice of Open Teleconference. SUMMARY: This notice announces a teleconference of the State Energy Advisory Board (STEAB). The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463; 86 Stat. 770) requires that public notice of these teleconferences be announced in the **Federal Register** . DATES: May 15, 2008 from 2 p.m. to 3 p.m. EDT. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary Burch, STEAB Designated Federal Officer, Acting Assistant Manager, Office of Commercialization and Project Management, Golden Field Office, U.S. Department of Energy, 1617 Cole Boulevard, Golden, CO 80401, Telephone 303/275-4801. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Purpose of the Board:* To make recommendations to the Assistant Secretary for the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy regarding goals and objectives, programmatic and administrative policies, and to otherwise carry out the Board's responsibilities as designated in the State Energy Efficiency Programs Improvement Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-440). *Tentative Agenda:* Update members on routine business matters. *Public Participation:* The teleconference is open to the public. Written statements may be filed with the Board either before or after the meeting. Members of the public who wish to make oral statements pertaining to agenda items should contact Gary Burch at the address or telephone number listed above. Reasonable provision will be made to include requested topic(s) on the agenda. The Chair of the Board is empowered to conduct the call in a fashion that will facilitate the orderly conduct of business. This notice is being published less than 15 days before the date of the meeting due to programmatic issues. *Notes:* The notes of the teleconference will be available for public review and copying within 60 days on the STEAB Web site, *http://www.steab.org.* Issued at Washington, DC, on May 2, 2008. Rachel Samuel, Deputy Committee Management Officer. [FR Doc. E8-10096 Filed 5-6-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-R09-OAR-2008-0325; FRL-8562-4] Adequacy Status of Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in Submitted Coachella Valley 8-hour Ozone Early Progress Plan for Transportation Conformity Purposes; California AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice of Adequacy. SUMMARY: In this notice, EPA is notifying the public that the Agency has found that the motor vehicle emissions budgets for 8-hour ozone in the Coachella Valley 8-hour Ozone Early Progress Plan are adequate for transportation conformity purposes. The Coachella Valley 8-hour Ozone Early Progress Plan was submitted to EPA on March 24, 2008 by the California Air Resources Board as a revision to the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). As a result of our adequacy findings, the Southern California Association of Governments and the U.S. Department of Transportation must use these budgets in future conformity analyses once the finding becomes effective. DATES: This finding is effective May 22, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rebecca Rosen, U.S. EPA, Region IX, Air Division AIR-2, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901;

(415)947-4154 or *rosen.rebecca@epa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, whenever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, we mean EPA. Today's notice is simply an announcement of a finding that we have already made. EPA Region IX sent a letter to the California Air Resources Board on April 16, 2008 stating that the motor vehicle emissions budgets in the submitted Coachella Valley 8-hour Ozone Early Progress Plan for 2012 are adequate. The finding is available at EPA's conformity Web site: *http://www.epa.gov/otag/stateresources/transconf/adequacy.htm.* The adequate motor vehicle emissions budgets are provided in the following table: Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Budget year Volatile organic compounds 1 (tons per day) Nitrogen oxides (tons per day) 2012 7 26 1 The plan uses a comparable State term, reactive organic gases (ROG). Transportation conformity is required by Clean Air Act section 176(c). EPA's conformity rule requires that transportation plans, transportation improvement programs, and projects conform to state air quality implementation plans

(SIPs)and establishes the criteria and procedures for determining whether or not they do. Conformity to a SIP means that transportation activities will not produce new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the national ambient air quality standards. The criteria by which we determine whether a SIP's motor vehicle emission budgets are adequate for conformity purposes are outlined in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). We have described our process for determining the adequacy of submitted SIP budgets in our July 1, 2004 preamble starting at 69 FR 40038 and we used the information in these resources in making our adequacy determination. Please note that an adequacy review is separate from EPA's completeness review, and should not be used to prejudge EPA's ultimate approval action for the SIP. Even if we find a budget adequate, the SIP could later be disapproved. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 *et seq.* Dated: April 16, 2008. Laura Yoshii, Deputy Regional Administrator, Region IX. [FR Doc. E8-9959 Filed 5-6-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-M ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-8563-8] EPA Science Advisory Board; Notification of a Public Teleconference Meeting of the Chartered Science Advisory Board AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA)Science Advisory Board

(SAB)Staff Office announces a public teleconference meeting of the Chartered EPA Science Advisory Board to review a draft report from the SAB's Radiation Advisory Committee Augmented for the review of the draft Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Assessment of Materials and Equipment (MARSAME) Manual. DATES: The SAB will hold the public teleconference on May 29, 2008. The teleconference will be held from 1:30 p.m. to 3 p.m. (Eastern Time). ADDRESSES: The meeting will be conducted by telephone conference only. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Any member of the public wishing to obtain general information concerning this public teleconference or meeting should contact Mr. Thomas O. Miller, Designated Federal Officer (DFO), EPA Science Advisory Board (1400F), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460; via telephone/voice mail:

(202)343-9982; fax:

(202)233-0643; or e-mail at: *miller.tom@epa.gov.* General information concerning the EPA Science Advisory Board can be found on the SAB Web Site at: *http://www.epa.gov./sab.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The SAB was established by 42 U.S.C. 4365 to provide independent scientific and technical advice to the Administrator on the technical basis for Agency positions and regulations. The SAB is a Federal Advisory Committee chartered under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), as amended, 5 U.S.C., App. The SAB will comply with the provisions of FACA and all appropriate SAB Staff Office procedural policies. Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-463, notice is hereby given that the EPA SAB will hold a public teleconference meeting to conduct a quality review the SAB Panel's draft *Report on EPA's Draft Entitled “Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Assessment of Materials and Equipment (MARSAME) Manual,”* of December 2006. *Background:* The EPA SAB Radiation Advisory Committee (RAC), augmented with additional experts, reviewed the *“Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Assessment of Materials and Equipment (MARSAME) Manual,” Draft Report for Comment, December 2006.* A multi-agency work group with participation by staff from the U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, U.S. Department of Defense and U.S. EPA prepared the manual. The multi-agency work group has been active since 1995 and prepares radiological guidance documents. The draft MARSAME manual complements MARSSIM (a surficial soils radiation survey manual) by providing a process for surveying potentially radioactive material and equipment (M&E). It provides guidance to determine whether M&E are sufficiently free of radionuclide contamination to be admitted to or removed from a site. Additional information on this review can be obtained on the EPA SAB Web Site at: *http://yosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabpeople.nsf/WebCommitteesSubcommittees/Radiation%20Advisory%20Committee* and in the **Federal Register** at 72 FR 11356-11358 on the Web at: *http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-SAB/2007/March/Day-13/sab4562.htm* . The purpose of this upcoming teleconference is for the Chartered SAB to conduct a quality review of the draft Panel report. *Availability of Materials:* The draft agenda and other materials will be posted on the SAB Web Site at *http://www.epa.gov/sab* prior to the meeting. For questions and information concerning the Agency's draft document on this topic please contact Dr. Mary E. Clark of the U.S. EPA, ORIA by telephone at

(202)343-9348, fax at

(202)243-2395, or e-mail at: *clark.marye@epa.gov.* *Procedures for Providing Public Input:* Interested members of the public may submit relevant written or oral information for the Chartered SAB's consideration during this quality review meeting. *Oral Statements:* In general, individuals or groups requesting an oral presentation at a public SAB teleconference will be limited to three minutes per speaker, with no more than a total of one-half hour for all speakers. At face-to-face meetings, presentations will be limited to five minutes, with no more than a total of one hour for all speakers. To be placed on the public speaker list, interested parties should contact Mr. Thomas O. Miller, DFO, in writing (preferably via e-mail), by May 21, 2008, at the contact information noted above. *Written Statements:* Written statements should be received in the SAB Staff Office by May 21, 2008, so that the information may be made available to the SAB for their consideration prior to the teleconference meeting. Written statements should be supplied to the DFO via e-mail to *miller.tom@epa.gov* (acceptable file format: Adobe Acrobat PDF, WordPerfect, MS Word, MS PowerPoint, or Rich Text files in IBM-PC/Windows 98/2000/XP format). *Accessibility:* For information on access or services for individuals with disabilities, please contact Mr. Thomas O. Miller at

(202)343-9982 or *miller.tom@epa.gov.* To request accommodation of a disability, please contact Mr. Miller preferably at least ten days prior to the meeting, to give EPA as much time as possible to process your request. Dated: April 30, 2008. Anthony F. Maciorowski, Deputy Director, EPA Science Advisory Board Staff Office. [FR Doc. E8-10138 Filed 5-6-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-8563-4] Meeting of the Total Coliform Rule Distribution System Advisory Committee—Notice of Public Meeting AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: Under section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the United States Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA)is giving notice of a meeting of the Total Coliform Rule Distribution System Advisory Committee (TCRDSAC). The purpose of this meeting is to discuss the Total Coliform Rule

(TCR)revision and information about distribution systems issues that may impact water quality. The TCRDSAC advises and makes recommendations to the Agency on revisions to the TCR, and on what information should be collected, research conducted, and/or risk management strategies evaluated to better inform distribution system contaminant occurrence and associated public health risks. Topics to be discussed in the meeting include options for revising the Total Coliform Rule, for example, rule construct, monitoring provisions, system categories, action levels, investigation and follow-up, public notification, and other related topics. In addition, the Committee will discuss possible recommendations for research and information collection needs concerning distribution systems and topics for upcoming TCRDSAC meetings. DATES: The public meeting will be held on Wednesday, May 21, 2008 (8:30 a.m. to 6 p.m., Eastern Time (ET)) and Thursday, May 22, 2008 (8 a.m. to 3 p.m., ET). Attendees should register for the meeting by calling Kate Zimmer at

(202)965-6387 or by e-mail to *kzimmer@resolv.org* no later than May 16, 2008. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at The Churchill Hotel, 1914 Connecticut Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20009. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information, contact Kate Zimmer of RESOLVE at

(202)965-6387. For technical inquiries, contact Sean Conley ( *conley.sean@epa.gov,*

(202)564-1781), Standards and Risk Management Division, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water (MC 4607M), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; fax number:

(202)564-3767. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The meeting is open to the public. The Committee encourages the public's input and will take public comment starting at 5:30 p.m. on May 21, 2008, for this purpose. It is preferred that only one person present the statement on behalf of a group or organization. To ensure adequate time for public involvement, individuals interested in presenting an oral statement may notify Crystal Rodgers-Jenkins, the Designated Federal Officer, by telephone at

(202)564-5275, no later than May 16, 2008. Any person who wishes to file a written statement can do so before or after a Committee meeting. Written statements received by May 16, 2008, will be distributed to all members before any final discussion or vote is completed. Any statements received on May 19, 2008, or after the meeting will become part of the permanent meeting file and will be forwarded to the members for their information. Special Accommodations For information on access or accommodations for individuals with disabilities, please contact Crystal Rodgers-Jenkins at

(202)564-5275 or by e-mail at *rodgers-jenkins.crystal@ epa.gov.* Please allow at least 10 days prior to the meeting to give EPA as much time to process your request. Dated: May 1, 2008. Cynthia C. Dougherty, Director, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water. [FR Doc. E8-10118 Filed 5-6-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPPT-2008-0358; FRL-8364-5] Certain New Chemicals; Receipt and Status Information AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: Section 5 of the Toxic Substances Control Act

(TSCA)requires any person who intends to manufacture (defined by statute to include import) a new chemical (i.e., a chemical not on the TSCA Inventory) to notify EPA and comply with the statutory provisions pertaining to the manufacture of new chemicals. Under sections 5(d)(2) and 5(d)(3) of TSCA, EPA is required to publish a notice of receipt of a premanufacture notice

(PMN)or an application for a test marketing exemption (TME), and to publish periodic status reports on the chemicals under review and the receipt of notices of commencement to manufacture those chemicals. This status report, which covers the period from March 24, 2008 through April 11, 2008, consists of the PMNs pending or expired, and the notices of commencement to manufacture a new chemical that the Agency has received under TSCA section 5 during this time period. DATES: Comments identified by the specific PMN number or TME number, must be received on or before June 6, 2008. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification

(ID)number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2007-0358, by one of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal* : *http://www.regulations.gov* . Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. • *Mail* : Document Control Office (7407M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001. • *Hand Delivery* : OPPT Document Control Office (DCO), EPA East Bldg., Rm. 6428, 1201 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. Attention: Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2009-0358. The DCO is open from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the DCO is

(202)564-8930. Such deliveries are only accepted during the DCO's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. *Instructions* : Direct your comments to docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2008-0358. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the docket without change and may be made available on-line at *http://www.regulations.gov* , including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information

(CBI)or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-mail. The regulations.gov website is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at *http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm* . *Docket* : All documents in the docket are listed in the docket index available in regulations.gov. To access the electronic docket, go to *http://www.regulations.gov* , select “Advanced Search,” then “Docket Search.” Insert the docket ID number where indicated and select the “Submit” button. Follow the instructions on the regulations.gov website to view the docket index or access available documents. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available electronically at *http://www.regulations.gov* , or, if only available in hard copy, at the OPPT Docket. The OPPT Docket is located in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC) at Rm. 3334, EPA West Bldg., 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room hours of operation are 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays. The telephone number of the EPA/DC Public Reading Room is

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

(202)566-0280. Docket visitors are required to show photographic identification, pass through a metal detector, and sign the EPA visitor log. All visitor bags are processed through an X-ray machine and subject to search. Visitors will be provided an EPA/DC badge that must be visible at all times in the building and returned upon departure. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Colby Lintner, Regulatory Coordinator, Environmental Assistance Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (7408M), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:

(202)554-1404; e-mail address: *TSCA-Hotline@epa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me? This action is directed to the public in general. As such, the Agency has not attempted to describe the specific entities that this action may apply to. Although others may be affected, this action applies directly to the submitter of the premanufacture notices addressed in the action. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA? 1. *Submitting CBI* . Do not submit this information to EPA through regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. 2. *Tips for preparing your comments* . When submitting comments, remember to: i. Identify the document by docket ID number and other identifying information (subject heading, **Federal Register** date and page number). ii. Follow directions. The Agency may ask you to respond to specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal Regulations

(G)Additive for plastics

(G)Hexanedioic acid, polymer with diol and a monohydric alcohol P-08-0316 03/21/08 06/18/08 CBI

(G)Color dispersant

(G)Polyether polyphosphate ester P-08-0317 03/21/08 06/18/08 CBI

(G)Color dispersant

(G)Polyether polyalcohol derivative P-08-0318 03/24/08 06/21/08 CBI

(G)Crystal stabilizer in pigment

(G)3-hydroxy-4-[(4-methyl-3-substituted)azo]-2-naphthalenecarboxylic acid, calcium salt (1:1) P-08-0319 03/24/08 06/21/08 CBI