Rules and Regulations. Proposed rule

73,566 words·~334 min read·/register/2008/05/09/08-1247

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

BILLING CODE 3510-22-S 73 91 Friday, May 9, 2008 Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 8 CFR Parts 214 and 248 [CIS No. 2429-07; DHS Docket No. USCIS-2007-0056] RIN 1615-AB64 Period of Admission and Stay for Canadian and Mexican Citizens Engaged in Professional Business Activities—TN Nonimmigrants AGENCY: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, DHS. ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: This rule affects certain Canadian and Mexican citizens who seek temporary entry as professionals to the United States pursuant to the TN classification, as established by the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA or Agreement).

TN nonimmigrants are Canadian or Mexican citizens who obtain temporary entry into the United States as business persons to engage in business activities at a professional level. This rule proposes to increase the maximum allowable period of admission for TN nonimmigrants from one year to three years, and allow otherwise eligible TN nonimmigrants to be granted an extension of stay in increments of up to three years instead of the current maximum of one year. TD nonimmigrants (“NAFTA Dependent”) are the spouses and unmarried minor children of TN nonimmigrants.

TD nonimmigrants who would otherwise be eligible for TD nonimmigrant status would be eligible to be admitted and seek extensions for the same period of time as the TN principal. The purpose of this narrow change is to remove certain administrative requirements on TN nonimmigrants and U.S. employers and U.S. entities, thereby making this nonimmigrant classification more attractive to eligible professionals and their U.S. employers. The rule also proposes to remove filing location requirements from the TN regulations and instead provides that such locations will be prescribed by form instructions in order to provide more flexibility in program administration, as well as making certain technical modifications to eliminate outdated references to prior requirements.

Finally, this rule proposes to revise the text of 8 CFR 214.1(a)(2) and (c)(1) and 8 CFR 248.3 by replacing the outdated term “TC” (the previous classification given to Canadian workers under the 1989 Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement) with “TN.” DATES: Written comments must be submitted on or before June 9, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by DHS Docket No. USCIS-2007-0056 by one of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov* .

Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • *E-mail:* You may submit comments directly to USCIS by e-mail at *rfs.regs@dhs.gov.* Include DHS Docket No. USCIS-2007-0056 in the subject line of the message. • *Mail:* Chief, Regulatory Management Division, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW., Suite 3008, Washington, DC 20529. To ensure proper handling, please reference DHS Docket No. USCIS-2007-0056 on your correspondence.

This mailing address may also be used for paper, disk, or CD-ROM submissions. • *Hand Delivery/Courier:* U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW., 3rd Floor, Washington, DC 20529. Contact Telephone Number is

(202)272-8377. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia Jepsen, Adjudications Officer, Business and Trade Services, Office of Service Center Operations, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW., 3rd Floor, Washington, DC 20529, telephone

(202)272-8410. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Public Participation Interested persons are invited to participate in this rulemaking by submitting written data, views, or arguments on all aspects of this proposed rule. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) also invites comments that relate to the economic, environmental, or federalism effects that might result from this proposed rule. Comments that will provide the most assistance to USCIS in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed rule, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include data, information, or authority that support such recommended change. *Instructions:* All submissions received must include the agency name and DHS Docket No. USCIS-2007-0056. All comments received will be posted without change to *http://www.regulations.gov* , including any personal information provided. *Docket:* For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to *http://www.regulations.gov* . Submitted comments may also be inspected at the Regulatory Management Division, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW., 3rd Floor, Washington, DC 20529. II. Background A. The North American Free Trade Agreement On December 17, 1992, the United States, Canada and Mexico signed the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA or Agreement). On December 8, 1993, the President signed into law the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, Public Law 103-182 (NAFTA Implementation Act). Among other things, the NAFTA Implementation Act created a new section 214(e) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended (INA), which created the TN classification for nonimmigrant professionals seeking admission to the United States under NAFTA. Almost immediately following the enactment of this law, on January 1, 1994, NAFTA went into effect, thereby creating one of the largest free trade areas in the world. Chapter 16 of NAFTA provides for the temporary entry of qualified business persons from each of the countries that are signatories to the Agreement. This chapter of NAFTA establishes four categories of business persons who may be allowed temporary entry into the territory of another NAFTA party. The four categories are:

(1)Business visitors;

(2)traders and investors;

(3)intra-company transferees; and

(4)professionals. As discussed below, this proposed regulation would change certain regulatory provisions dealing with the fourth category, NAFTA professionals, by amending 8 CFR 214.6. B. The TN Nonimmigrant Classification The TN nonimmigrant classification permits qualified Canadian and Mexican citizens to seek temporary entry into the United States as business persons to engage in business activities at a professional level. 8 CFR 214.6(a). The specific occupations which qualify for the TN classification are set forth in Chapter 16 of NAFTA, Annex 1603, Appendix 1603.D.1., and are reproduced at 8 CFR 214.6(c). Among the types of professionals who are eligible to seek admission as TN nonimmigrants are certain accountants, engineers, lawyers, pharmacists, scientists, and teachers. The spouses and unmarried minor children of TN nonimmigrants, if otherwise admissible, may be granted TD nonimmigrant classification. 8 CFR 214.6(j). Although neither the NAFTA Implementation Act nor the INA prescribes a maximum period of admission to the United States for TN nonimmigrants and their dependents, USCIS regulations currently provide that TN nonimmigrants may be admitted to the United States for a period not to exceed one year. 8 CFR 214.6(e). Currently, TN nonimmigrants generally may be readmitted to the United States for the remainder of the period authorized on their Form I-94, provided that the TN nonimmigrant's originally-intended professional activity and employer(s) have not changed. 8 CFR 214.6(g)(1) and (2). TN nonimmigrants also may apply to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) for admission for a period of time that extends beyond the date of their original terms of admission at any U.S. port-of-entry. 8 CFR 214.6(h)(2). TN professionals also may, upon application to USCIS, be granted extensions of stay for a maximum period of one year. 8 CFR 214.6(h)(1). The spouse and unmarried minor children of TN professionals, if otherwise eligible, may be admitted in TD classification for the period of time granted to the TN professional, and may seek extensions of stay for the same period as the TN professional. III. Changes Made by This Rule A. Increased Time of Admission, Extension of Stay, and Readmission at the Border TN nonimmigrants are not subject to any maximum period of stay, as long as they continue to be engaged in TN business activities for a U.S. employer or U.S. entity at a professional level, provided they maintain the requisite nonimmigrant intent to depart the United States at the conclusion of their authorized periods of stay. USCIS regulations, however, require that such persons, if they wish to remain in the United States beyond the period of their initial admission, either seek readmission in TN status or apply for an extension of stay no less frequently than annually. 8 CFR 214.6(h). This requirement involves, at a minimum, the annual submission of documentation and payment of the filing fees specified in 8 CFR 103.7. This proposed rule would ease administrative burdens on TN nonimmigrants (and their TD dependents) as well as on the U.S. employers and U.S. entities by increasing the period of time granted to a TN nonimmigrant upon admission, or pursuant to a timely filed request for extension of stay, from a maximum of one year to a maximum of three years. The proposed rule at 8 CFR 214.6(h)(2) would also permit a TN nonimmigrant to apply for admission at a designated port-of-entry for a period of time that extends beyond the date of original admission for up to three years. The proposed rule does not alter any otherwise applicable evidentiary requirements, change existing filing fee requirements as set forth in 8 CFR 103.7, expand the maximum period of stay in TN status which is already indefinite, or expand the principle of “dual intent” to TN nonimmigrants or their TD dependents. 1 Instead, the proposed changes would increase the initial period of admission, extension of stay, and readmission at the border; provide a cost and resource savings for employers and nonimmigrants alike; and reduce the potential for an interruption of employment due to foreign travel requirements or delays in processing times, thereby contributing to a more stable and predictable workforce. By reducing administrative costs and burdens, these changes are expected to make the TN nonimmigrant classification more attractive to professionals and their U.S. employers. In addition, by extending the initial period of admission, extension of stay, and readmission at the border from one year to three years, the TN nonimmigrant classification will mirror the periods of admission (or extension of stay) for other highly skilled nonimmigrant categories such as H-1B, thus making the TN nonimmigrant classification a workable alternative to those other high-skill categories for certain Canadian and Mexican professionals. Finally, this proposal may encourage other NAFTA signatories to reciprocate by effecting similar liberalizing measures with respect to citizens of the United States seeking admission to their countries under the NAFTA. 1 The dual intent doctrine holds that even though a nonimmigrant visa applicant has previously expressed a desire to enter the United States as an immigrant—and may still have such a desire—that does not of itself preclude the issuance of a nonimmigrant visa to him nor preclude his being a bona fide nonimmigrant. Matter of H-R-, 7 I&N Dec. 651, 654 (INS Reg. Comm'r 1958). See also INA *section* 214(h) (limiting dual intent to certain H, L, and V nonimmigrants); 8 U.S.C. 1184(h). B. Changes to TD Spouses and Unmarried Minor Children In a change from the current regulation, the proposed rule would explicitly state that spouses and unmarried minor children of TN professionals, if otherwise eligible, may be admitted or readmitted in TD classification for the period of time granted to the TN professional, and may seek extensions of stay or change of nonimmigrant status for the same period as the TN professional. An application for change of status or extension of stay for a TD spouse or unmarried minor child would be filed on Form I-539. C. Filing Location This rule also proposes to eliminate references to specific filing locations in current 8 CFR 214.6(h)(1). It is not necessary for USCIS to indicate in the Code of Federal Regulations where documents will be accepted. Further, fluctuations in volume, shifting workload needs, and benefits processing modifications may make variation of petition and application filing locations necessary in order to better use USCIS resources and serve customers. Codification of filing locations restricts USCIS' ability to address changed circumstances. Filing locations will still be found on USCIS forms and the USCIS Web site. Customers may also call the USCIS customer service line for information on where to file their documents, or may call the agency listing in the government resources pages of their local telephone directories. Moreover, as has been past practice, USCIS will provide the public with an adequate transition period to adapt to any changes to the current filing location (the Vermont Service Center), should USCIS, in the future, find it necessary to change the filing location(s) for TN applications. D. Clarification and Correction This rule also proposes to revise the text in 8 CFR 214.6(g) and

(h)to make them more readable and would revise the text of 8 CFR 214.1(a)(2) and (c)(1) and 8 CFR 248.3 by replacing the outdated term “TC” with “TN.” “TC” was the previous classification given to Canadian workers entering under the terms of the Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement, which went into effect on January 1, 1989 and was subsequently replaced by NAFTA. NAFTA created a new nonimmigrant classification, “TN,” which includes both Canadian and Mexican workers. In addition, USCIS proposes to delete paragraph (k)(2) from section 214.6. This paragraph relates to the now obsolete requirement of a petition for Mexican TN admissions. The sunset of this provision was announced in 69 FR 11287. The rule also proposes to add a phrase at the end of 214.6(k)(3) to make it clear that, although the Director may not deny a petition, suspend an approved petition, or deny entry to an applicant for TN status based upon a strike or labor dispute involving a work stoppage of workers in progress that has not been certified under (k)(1), the examining officer must consider all relevant facts in determining an alien's eligibility for TN classification. IV. Regulatory Requirements A. Regulatory Flexibility Act DHS has reviewed this proposed rule in accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), requires Federal agencies to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis which describes the impact of the proposed rule on small entities whenever an agency is publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553(b). A small entity may be a small business (defined as any independently owned and operated business not dominant in its field that qualifies as a small business per the Small Business Act); a small not-for-profit organization; or a small governmental jurisdiction (locality with fewer than 50,000 people). This rule will reduce compliance costs on the regulated industries. This rule will save the public in information collection costs, USCIS fees, and legal costs, because TN and TD status holders will not have to renew their status each year. There are no provisions in this rule that add compliance costs. Therefore, USCIS can certify that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. B. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 This rule will not result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year, and it will not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Therefore, no actions were deemed necessary under the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995. C. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 This rule is not a major rule as defined by section 804 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Act of 1996. This rule will not result in an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more; a major increase in costs or prices; or significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or on the ability of United States-based companies to compete with foreign-based companies in domestic and export markets. D. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) This rule has been designated as a “significant regulatory action” by the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)under Executive Order 12866, section 3(f), Regulatory Planning and Review. Accordingly, an analysis of the economic impacts of this rule has been prepared and submitted to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for review. DHS has determined that this rule decreases the costs imposed by the TN nonimmigrant program on the government as well as the public. The changes made by this rule will result in more satisfaction with the NAFTA professional program among the participating employers and the TN status holders by increasing program flexibility and loosening time and travel restrictions. The expected effect is an increase in the number of TN status petitions filed with and approved by USCIS. A small economic benefit may result from the increased availability of scarce workers for U.S. employers in particular fields and industries. This rule will result in fees collected by USCIS for filings associated with TN status decreasing by approximately $2.4 million per year as a result of this rule. In addition, total paperwork burden costs on the public will decrease by about 12,225 hours and $340,000 as a result of fewer required filings. Eventually, DOS and USCBP annual fee collections from TN nonimmigrants will also decrease as a result of this proposed rule. A copy of the complete analysis is available in the rulemaking docket for this rule at *http://www.regulations.gov* , under Docket No. USCIS-2007-0056, or by calling the information contact listed above. E. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) This rule would have no substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, this rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement. F. Paperwork Reduction Act Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13, 109 Stat. 163

(1995)(PRA), all Departments are required to submit to OMB, for review and approval, any reporting or recordkeeping requirements inherent in a rule. This rulemaking does not impose any new reporting or recordkeeping requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act. However, by requiring TN and TD status renewals every three years instead of every year, this rule will reduce the volume of Form I-129 filings, Form I-907, Request for Premium Processing Service, filings, and Form I-539, Application To Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status, filings per year and the aggregate paperwork burden on the public accordingly. When the rule is published as a final rule, USCIS will submit the appropriate requests for non-substantive change to OMB to reflect the reduced annual respondents and costs. List of Subjects 8 CFR Part 214 Administrative practice and procedure, Aliens, Employment, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 8 CFR Part 248 Aliens, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Accordingly, chapter I of title 8 of the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as follows: PART 214—NONIMMIGRANT CLASSES 1. The authority citation for part 214 continues to read as follows: Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1102, 1103, 1182, 1184, 1186a, 1187, 1221, 1258, 1281, 1282, 1301-1305 and 1372; sec. 643, Pub. L. 104-208, 110 Stat. 3009-708; section 141 of the Compacts of Free Association with the Federated States of Micronesia and the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and with the Government of Palau, 48 U.S.C. 1901 note, and 1931 note, respectively; 8 CFR part 2. § 214.1 [Amended] 2. Section 214.1 is amended by: a. Removing the designation “Cdn FTA, Professional” and “TC” from the list in paragraph (a)(2); b. Removing the term “TC” and adding “TN” in its place in the first sentence in paragraph (c)(1). 3. Section 214.6 is amended by: a. Revising the section heading and by revising paragraphs (e), (g), and (h); b. Redesignating paragraphs (j)(1), (j)(2) and (j)(3) as paragraphs (j)(2), (j)(3), and (j)(4), respectively; c. Adding a new paragraph (j)(1); d. Revising newly redesignated paragraphs (j)(2), (j)(3), and (j)(4); and by e. Revising paragraph (k); The addition and revisions read as follows: § 214.6 Citizens of Canada or Mexico seeking temporary entry under NAFTA to engage in business activities at a professional level.

(e)*Procedures for admission* . A citizen of Canada or Mexico who qualifies for admission under this section shall be provided confirming documentation (Form I-94) and shall be admitted under the classification symbol TN for a period not to exceed three years. Form I-94 shall bear the legend “multiple entry.” The fee prescribed under 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1) shall be remitted by Canadian Citizens upon admission to the United States pursuant to the terms and conditions of the NAFTA. Upon remittance of the prescribed fee, the TN applicant for admission shall be provided a Department-issued receipt (Form G-211, Form G-711, or Form I-797).

(g)*Readmission* .

(1)*With a Form I-94* . An alien may be readmitted to the United States in TN classification for the remainder of the period of TN admission authorized on Form I-94, without presentation of the letter or supporting documentation described in paragraph (d)(3) of this section and without the prescribed fee set forth in 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1), provided that the original intended professional activities and employer(s) have not changed, and the Form I-94 has not expired.

(2)*Without a valid I-94* . If the alien seeking readmission to the United States in TN classification is no longer in possession of a valid, unexpired Form I-94, and the period of initial admission in TN classification has not lapsed, a new Form I-94 may be issued for the period of validity that remains on the TN nonimmigrant's original Form I-94 with the legend “multiple entry” and the alien readmitted in TN status if the alien presents alternate evidence as follows:

(i)For Canadian citizens, alternate evidence may include, but is not limited to, a fee receipt for admission as a TN or a previously issued admission stamp as TN in a passport, and a confirming letter from the United States employer(s).

(ii)For Mexican citizens seeking readmission as TN nonimmigrants, alternate evidence shall consist of presentation of a valid TN visa and evidence of a previous admission.

(h)*Extension of stay* .

(1)*Filing* . A United States employer of a citizen of Canada or Mexico who is currently maintaining valid TN nonimmigrant status, or a United States entity (in the case of a citizen of Canada or Mexico who is currently maintaining valid TN nonimmigrant status and is employed by a foreign employer), may request an extension of stay, subject to the following conditions:

(i)An extension of stay must be requested by filing Form I-129 with the prescribed fee noted at 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1), in accordance with the form instructions.

(ii)The beneficiary must be physically present in the United States at the time of the filing of the Form I-129 requesting an extension of stay as a TN nonimmigrant. If the alien is required to leave the United States for any reason while the Form I-129 is pending, the petitioner may request USCIS to notify the consular office where the beneficiary is required to apply for a visa or, if visa exempt, a DHS-designated port-of-entry where the beneficiary will apply for admission to the United States, of the approval.

(iii)An extension of stay may be approved by USCIS for a maximum of three years.

(iv)There is no specific limit on the total period of time an alien may be in TN status provided the alien is continuing to be engaged in TN business activities for a U.S. employer or entity at a professional level and otherwise continues to properly maintain nonimmigrant TN status.

(2)*Readmission at the border* . Nothing in paragraph (h)(1) of this section shall preclude a citizen of Canada or Mexico who has previously been admitted to the United States in TN status, and has not violated such status while in the United States, from applying at a DHS-designated port-of-entry, prior to the expiration date of that period of admission, for a new period of admission not to exceed three years from the date of request for such new period of admission. The application for a new period of admission shall be supported by a new letter from the United States employer or the foreign employer, in the case of a citizen of Canada who is providing prearranged services to a United States entity, which meets the requirements of paragraph

(d)of this section, together with the appropriate filing fee noted at 8 CFR 103.7(b)(1). Citizens of Mexico must present a valid passport and nonimmigrant TN visa when applying for readmission, as outlined in paragraph (d)(1) of this section.

(j)* * *

(1)The spouse or unmarried minor children of a citizen of Canada or Mexico admitted in TN nonimmigrant status, if they are otherwise admissible, may be admitted initially, readmitted, or granted a change of nonimmigrant status or an extension of his or her period of stay for the same period of time granted to the TN nonimmigrant. Such spouse or unmarried minor children shall, upon approval of an application for admission, readmission, change of status or extension of stay be classified as TD nonimmigrants. A request for a change of status to TD or an extension of stay of a TD nonimmigrant may be made on Form I-539 together with appropriate filing fees and evidence of the principal alien's current TN status.

(2)The spouse or unmarried minor children of a citizen of Canada or Mexico admitted in TN nonimmigrant status shall be required to present a valid, unexpired nonimmigrant TD visa unless otherwise exempt under Sec. 212.1 of this chapter.

(3)The spouse and unmarried minor children of a citizen of Canada or Mexico admitted in TN nonimmigrant status shall be issued confirming documentation (Form I-94) bearing the legend “multiple entry”. There shall be no fee required for admission of the spouse and unmarried minor children.

(4)The spouse and unmarried minor children of a citizen of Canada or Mexico admitted in TN nonimmigrant status shall not accept employment in the United States unless otherwise authorized under the Act.

(k)*Effect of a strike* .

(1)If the Secretary of Labor certifies to or otherwise informs the Director of USCIS that a strike or other labor dispute involving a work stoppage of workers is in progress, and the temporary entry of a citizen of Mexico or Canada in TN nonimmigrant status may affect adversely the settlement of any labor dispute or the employment of any person who is involved in such dispute, the United States may refuse to issue an immigration document authorizing entry or employment to such alien.

(2)If the alien has already commenced employment in the United States and is participating in a strike or other labor dispute involving a work stoppage of workers, whether or not such strike or other labor dispute has been certified by the Department of Labor, or whether USCIS has been otherwise informed that such a strike or labor dispute is in progress, the alien shall not be deemed to be failing to maintain his or her status solely on account of past, present, or future participation in a strike or other labor dispute involving a work stoppage of workers, but is subject to the following terms and conditions:

(i)The alien shall remain subject to all applicable provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act and regulations promulgated in the same manner as all other TN nonimmigrants;

(ii)The status and authorized period of stay of such an alien is not modified or extended in any way by virtue of his or her participation in a strike or other labor dispute involving a work stoppage of workers; and

(iii)Although participation by a TN nonimmigrant alien in a strike or other labor dispute involving a work stoppage of workers will not constitute a ground for removal, any alien who violates his or her status or who remains in the United States after his or her authorized period of stay has expired will be subject to removal.

(3)If there is a strike or other labor dispute involving a work stoppage of workers in progress, but such strike or other labor dispute is not certified under paragraph (k)(1) of this section, or USCIS has not otherwise been informed by the Secretary that such a strike or labor dispute is in progress, the Director, USCIS, shall not deny a petition or deny entry to an applicant for TN status based upon such strike or other labor dispute. PART 248—CHANGE OF NONIMMIGRANT CLASSIFICATION 4. The authority citation for part 248 continues to read as follows: Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1184, 1258; 8 CFR part 2. § 248.3 [Amended] 5. Section 248.3 is amended by removing the term “TC” and adding “TN” in its place in the first sentence of paragraph (a)(1). Dated: May 2, 2008. Michael Chertoff, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-10343 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-97-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 9 CFR Part 2 [Docket No. APHIS-2006-0024] RIN 0579-AC14 Minimum Age Requirements for the Transport of Animals AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA. ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: We propose to amend the Animal Welfare Act regulations by adding minimum age requirements for the transport in commerce of animals. The regulations currently contain such requirements for dogs and cats, but no corresponding ones for other regulated animals, despite the risks associated with the early transport of these species. We also propose to amend the regulations to allow, provided certain conditions are met, for animals to be transported without their mothers for medical treatment and for scientific research before reaching the minimum age and weaning requirement. Establishing minimum age requirements for the transport in commerce of animals and providing for the transport of animals that have not met the minimum age requirements are necessary to help ensure the humane treatment of these animals. DATES: We will consider all comments that we receive on or before July 8, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by either of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal:* Go to *http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocketDetail&d=APHIS-2006-0024* to submit or view comments and to view supporting and related materials available electronically. • *Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery:* Please send two copies of your comment to Docket No. APHIS-2006-0024, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238. Please state that your comment refers to Docket No. APHIS-2006-0024. *Reading Room:* You may read any comments that we receive on this docket in our reading room. The reading room is located in Room 1141 of the USDA South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, please call

(202)690-2817 before coming. *Other Information:* Additional information about APHIS and its programs is available on the Internet at *http://www.aphis.usda.gov* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Barbara Kohn, Senior Staff Veterinarian, Animal Care, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 84, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231;

(301)734-7833. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The Animal Welfare Act (the Act) (7 U.S.C. 2131 *et seq.* ) authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to promulgate standards and other requirements governing the humane handling, care, treatment, and transportation of certain animals by dealers, research facilities, exhibitors, carriers, and intermediate handlers. The Secretary of Agriculture has delegated the responsibility of enforcing the Act to the Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). The regulations established under the Act are contained in title 9 of the Code of Federal Regulations (9 CFR), chapter I, subchapter A, parts 1, 2, and 3. The regulations in 9 CFR part 2 pertain to the safe and humane handling of animals. Section 2.130 sets forth minimum age requirements for dogs and cats to be transported in commerce. Under § 2.130, dogs and cats cannot be transported in commerce or delivered by any person unless they are 8 weeks of age and have been weaned, except if transported to a registered research facility. Currently, no such requirements exist for other regulated animals. It is our position that all animals should be afforded the same protections as provided for dogs and cats. We are currently developing standards for birds in a separate proposed rule; therefore, birds were not considered during the development of the proposed minimum age requirements in this rule. APHIS is proposing this rule to safeguard the welfare and well-being of regulated animals and to protect those not yet safeguarded from possible stress, distress, pain, suffering and/or death during the transport process. APHIS currently requires that all domestic dogs and cats transported for regulated purposes be at least 8 weeks of age and weaned prior to transport. These same protections should be afforded all regulated species. Longstanding experience and general veterinary medical experience and knowledge support the conclusion that shipping young animals increases the risk of illness and death in these animals. Unweaned animals and animals of many species under the age of 8 weeks are generally not yet able to eat and drink independently of their mothers and have an increased need for maternal or human intervention to provide nourishment and water frequently. By 8 weeks of age, most animals are able to digest solid foods and are no longer dependent on their mothers as their sole source of nutrition. The young of social species such as nonhuman primates need physical and social interactions for proper development, and a loss of role models and companionship from an animal of the same species can lead to lifetime behavioral and social problems. Review of past enforcement issues with the transport of young animals involve a wide variety of issues. While we can attribute certain injuries, illnesses, or deaths of some young animals to being transported before they were weaned and/or 8 weeks of age, it is difficult to determine exactly how many such incidents have occurred because there is currently no age restriction for transport. As such, the age of the animals involved is not always documented. In addition, incidents resulting in injury, illness, or death of young, unweaned animals may be underreported, as many may involve noncommercial transport agents and vehicles. Based on acknowledged animal care principles and physiology of infant and juvenile animals, any transport totaling more than 2 hours, especially if the animal is unweaned and not observed or handled during that time, would be stressful and possibly distressful because young animals need to be fed and may not be able to adequately control their body temperature. The risk of illness or death of the animal may increase if the animals are delayed from reaching their destinations on flights or ground transportation systems that are delayed. In addition, it is in the animal's best interest and welfare to be provided with consistent care during the critical period from birth to weaning by responsible, knowledgeable, and experienced people. Providing animals that are only a day or weeks old and/or unweaned to unqualified persons could result in the death of the animal in many instances. While it is beyond the scope of APHIS' regulatory authority to address the issue of private owner competence, providing a weaned and older animal reduces the risks of serious complications that could otherwise occur with an animal that is unweaned and/or under the age of 8 weeks. Therefore, we believe that it is necessary to amend the regulations to provide that animals under the age of 8 weeks and unweaned, not transported in the same enclosure as their mothers, may not be transported in commerce unless it is medically necessary for the health of the animal or the animal is destined for a registered research facility and needs to be acquired at this age to satisfy a specific research protocol approved by Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees (IACUC). While we are proposing to use 8 weeks as the minimum age standard in this document, we recognize that some species are naturally weaned at an earlier age. We welcome any comments or suggestions regarding particular species or circumstances in which it might be appropriate to have a minimum age requirement greater or less than 8 weeks. We propose to amend § 2.130 by adding a new paragraph

(a)to specify that no animal, other then birds, be delivered by any person to any carrier or intermediate handler for transportation in commerce, or be transported in commerce by any person unless the animal is with its mother or has been weaned and is at least 8 weeks of age. We recognize that situations may arise which require the transport of underage and/or unweaned animals and would provide the licensee or registrant with some flexibility. To accomplish this, we propose to add a new paragraph

(b)to provide an exception for animals that are less than 8 weeks of age and/or unweaned, to be transported to registered research facilities for use in specific IACUC-approved research protocols, provided a transportation plan is submitted to and approved by the appropriate Animal Care regional office. The transportation plan would have to be signed by the attending veterinarian and head of the animal caregiving staff and outline the reason for the transport (including the IACUC-approved protocol involved, if applicable), transportation specifics (including, but not limited to, dates, destination, intermediate carrier or handler to be used, mode of transportation, and enclosure size and design), food and water arrangements, attendants and/or monitoring plan, contact provisions in case of medical or other care needs, and, for nonhuman primates, how the special needs of the infant will be met during transportation. Our proposed rule would also allow for one transportation plan to be submitted for multiple animals being transported from one facility if the plan can show that the needs of all of the animals have been accommodated as determined by Animal Care. As noted previously, § 2.130 currently provides for underage/unweaned dogs and cats to be moved to a registered research facility, but does not require a transportation plan. Our proposal would require an APHIS-approved transportation plan and IACUC-approved protocols for all animals. By requiring research protocols to be IACUC-approved, we would ensure that unweaned animals and/or animals under the age of 8 weeks are needed for the specific research being conducted at the facility. Currently, § 2.33 provides that dogs and cats be given adequate medical care from the attending veterinarian, but § 2.130 does not specifically address the transportation of underage/unweaned dogs and cats for medical care. This proposed rule would amend the regulations to explicitly allow for all animals to be transported for medical treatment. Specifically, we would also provide in § 2.130, new paragraph (c), that persons may transport animals that have not been weaned and that are not at least 8 weeks of age to a licensed veterinarian for medical care. It is common practice to transport animals that have not been weaned and that are not at least 8 weeks of age for routine medical care. Therefore, we would not require a transportation plan for animals being transported for routine medical care (e.g., deworming or vaccinations) if the animal is returned to the licensed or registered facility from which it originated upon the completion of the medical care for which it was transported and no change of ownership is involved. If those conditions are not met, then a transportation plan would be required. As in the case of animals destined for registered research facilities, our proposed rule would allow for one transportation plan to be submitted for multiple animals being transported from one facility if the plan can show that the needs of all of the animals have been accommodated as determined by Animal Care. We would not require a transportation plan in the event that the animal requires emergency medical care because we do not believe that it would be in the best interest of the animal. This would ensure that the animal receives timely care. However, to the extent possible, appropriate care should be taken to ensure the humane treatment of the animal. The Animal Care regional office would accept requests made using e-mail and via facsimile in order to avoid delaying the transport of the animal. Requests made using e-mail or facsimile would have to include the transportation plan and the names, mailing addresses, and phone numbers of the attending veterinarian and head of the animal caregiving staff. The Animal Care regional office would contact the veterinarian and head of the animal caregiving staff to confirm their concurrence with the plan. In addition, a copy of the transportation plan signed by the attending veterinarian and head of the animal caregiving staff would have to be kept on file and made available for APHIS inspection. Written approval of the transportation plan by the APHIS regional office would have to be received before the animal(s) could be transported in commerce. We believe a transportation plan is necessary to ensure that the licensee or registrant understands and has taken into account the issues that might arise when transporting unweaned/underage animals (e.g., transportation will not be too long, there are adequate food and water resources along the way, etc.). In the past, unanticipated events (e.g., delays, misdirected shipments) have resulted in the deaths of animals. By ensuring proper planning on the part of the licensee or registrant, the occurrence of such incidents can be minimized. We welcome comments on the practical utility of the proposed transportation plan requirement and the specific elements that would have to be addressed in the plan, including how we might enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected and how we might reduce the paperwork burden that would be associated with the proposed transportation plan requirement, including the use of performance based criteria as a substitute for specific plan requirements, or some combination of the two. Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory Flexibility Act This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12866. The rule has been determined to be significant for the purposes of Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, has been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. For this proposed rule, we have prepared an economic analysis, which is set out below. The analysis considers the potential economic effects of the rule on small entities as required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act and the potential costs and benefits of the rule as required by Executive Order 12866. In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 603, we have performed an initial regulatory flexibility analysis, which is set out below, regarding the effects of this proposed rule on small entities. We do not currently have all the data necessary for a comprehensive analysis of the effects of this proposed rule on small entities. Therefore, we are inviting comments concerning potential effects. In particular, we are interested in determining:

(1)The number of entities that transport unweaned/underage animals for scientific purposes and/or medical treatment;

(2)the age at which these animals are being transported; and

(3)any additional information that may help us to determine the economic impact of the proposed minimum age requirements for animals. We propose to amend the Animal Welfare Act regulations by adding minimum age requirements for the transport in commerce of animals. The regulations currently contain such requirements for dogs and cats, but no corresponding ones for other regulated animals, despite the risks associated with the early transport of these species. We also propose to amend the regulations to allow, provided certain conditions are met, for animals to be transported without their mothers for medical treatment and for scientific research before reaching the minimum age and weaning requirement. Establishing minimum age requirements for the transport in commerce of animals and providing for the transport of animals that have not met the minimum age requirements are necessary to help ensure the humane treatment of these animals. Benefits and Costs of the Rule Transporting young, unweaned animals without their mothers increases the risk of them becoming sick or dying during transport. According to APHIS Animal Care, this risk may increase if the animals are delayed from reaching their destinations because of flights or ground transportation systems that are delayed. Unweaned animals and animals of many species under the age of 8 weeks are generally not yet able to eat and drink independently of their mothers and have an increased need for maternal or human intervention to provide nourishment and water frequently. The benefit of the proposed rule is the reduced risk of inhumane treatment of young and unweaned animals. A measure of this benefit, once the rule is enacted, would be the reduction in the frequency of illness and death of young animals while being transported. We believe that a reduction in illness and death for dogs and cats resulted when the same weaning and minimum age requirements were established for those species. As far as we know, the benefit for dogs and cats has not been documented, but general veterinary medical experience and knowledge support the conclusion that shipping young animals increases the risk of illness and death in these animals. Costs of the proposed rule would be incurred by entities that would otherwise transport animals unweaned and under 8 weeks of age, in terms of the additional time the infant animals would need to be maintained before transport. Direct costs of feeding and caring for these very young animals until they are weaned and 8 weeks of age would be minimal; care and sustenance would be provided by their mothers unless the mother and offspring have been separated. The additional cost of feeding animals ranges from less than $1 to $5 a day depending upon the species of animal. For example, the cost of feeding small mammals, such as ferrets and guinea pigs, is less than a $1 a day while the cost of feeding a chimpanzee ranges from $2 to $5 a day. There are generally no additional feeding costs for animals that are nursing as compared to those that are not; however, there may be additional costs associated with transporting animals that are nursing with their mothers. The amount of space required for one adult animal would generally be sufficient for unweaned cubs, puppies, and kittens. The unweaned young of big cats or nonhuman primates may require additional space when traveling with their mothers than what is currently required in the regulations for adults of these animals when traveling alone. The incorporation of larger cages would be a one-time investment, if necessary, and we anticipate that most facilities for exotics should be able to readily reconfigure current enclosures to accommodate any additional space at little or no additional cost. While APHIS is aware that some breeders and dealers transport unweaned animals before 8 weeks of age, the specific age at which these animals are transported is unknown. Without this information it is difficult to quantify the impacts to those entities currently transporting animals before 8 weeks of age or unweaned. A discussion with the industry representatives indicates that most responsible breeders and dealers do not transport animals until they have been weaned or are 8 weeks of age. This proposed rule would have little, if any, economic impact on those licensees. If the licensee does not already follow the minimum age requirements as outlined in this proposed rule, there would be an increased cost of care associated with the longer holding time for the animals. This increased cost is expected to be only a small percentage of the revenue from the animal's sale. The price of animals can vary from a few hundred dollars for a wild squirrel, to several thousand dollars for an adult monkey. For example, the price of some of the smallest animals, such as guinea pigs, is $30, while wild cats can range from $1,200 for single jungle cat to $15,000 for a single white tiger. The price of a baby chimpanzee can be as high as $50,000. 1 1 *http://www.monkeybreeder.com.* Another area of cost associated with the proposed rule would be the higher shipping charges that would be incurred, simply because a weaned animal that is at least 8 weeks of age would be larger than an animal of the same species that is not yet weaned and less than 8 weeks old. Table 1 shows live animal air cargo shipping rates by weight of the shipment. Table 1.—Live Animal Air Cargo Shipping Rates Weight Rate Security tax ($0.21 per lb) 0-9 lbs $109 $0—$1.89 10-50 lbs 189 2.10—10.50 51-70 lbs 239 10.71—14.70 71-100 lbs 299 14.91—21.00 101-150 lbs 359 21.21—31.50 151-200 lbs 459 31.71—42.00 The additional shipping costs are expected to be a small percentage of the animal's sale price. We would expect the additional costs of care and feeding of animals until they reach the minimum transport age would be offset, and maybe exceeded, by the improved welfare benefits to the animals in terms of enhanced safeguarding and decreased animal morbidity and mortality that could result from the transport in commerce of young animals. We expect the benefits of safeguarding animals that are under 8 weeks of age and/or unweaned to exceed the additional costs associated with care and feeding that would result from this rule. We welcome information that the public may offer that would allow the Agency to better evaluate benefits and costs of the proposed rule. We note that the Captive Wildlife Safety Act

(CWSA)prohibits interstate and foreign trade in exotic cats. Under this Act, it is illegal to import, export, transport, sell, receive, acquire, or purchase, in interstate or foreign commerce, live lions, tigers, leopards, snow leopards, cheetahs, jaguars, or cougars, or any hybrid combination of any of these species, except in certain cases. Thus, exotic cats covered under CWSA generally cannot be transported interstate, irrespective of whether they have been weaned and are at least 8 weeks of age. The proposed rule would still apply for circuses, zoos, wildlife rehabilitators and some other licensed facilities that are exempt from the CWSA regulations. Assessment of Alternatives One alternative would be to make no changes to the current regulations. However, transporting animals before they are 8 weeks of age or weaned increases the risk of those animals becoming sick or dying. In addition, we believe that certain circumstances may require the transport of animals before reaching the minimum age requirement, such as, transport to a medical facility for medical treatment. Such exceptions would make it necessary to ensure these animals are also transported safely. Therefore, doing nothing is not a viable option to safeguarding animals in commerce. Another alternative would be to allow the transport of weaned animals without an 8-week minimum age requirement. This would allow smaller animals that mature faster than larger animals to be transported before reaching 8 weeks of age. This alternative would also protect larger animals from being transported before they are weaned, as it is possible that some larger species of animals will not by weaned by 8 weeks of age. The problem with this alternative is that brokers and dealers could falsely state that the animal has been weaned in order to allow them to transport the animal prematurely. A third alternative would be to implement a two-tiered system. The system would compensate for smaller animals that are weaned before 8 weeks of age compared to larger animals that require more time to mature. Such a system could use adult weight as the determining factor for each tier and set an appropriate weight limit (e.g., 15 pounds). In the first tier, animals weighing less than 15 pounds could be transported when the animal is 4 weeks of age and weaned. In the second tier, animals larger than 15 pounds would need to be 8 weeks of age and weaned before transport. This alternative would benefit the entities that broker and breed small pets while continuing to safeguard the larger animals. However, APHIS believes this alternative could cause problems when classifying the animals under each tier. Each animal's life cycle is different and weight alone is not a good measure of when the animal will become weaned and ready for transport. We welcome public and industry comment on the potential impacts of a two-tiered system for classifying animals for transport, including specific criteria we should consider when classifying animals into tiers and timeframes for weaning that can be applied to each tier. For these reasons, we have determined that proposing minimum age and weaning requirements would best safeguard the health and welfare of larger animals. This proposed rule would also allow for the transport of animals to research facilities before meeting the minimum age requirement, provided that a transportation plan is submitted to and approved by the Animal Care regional office. We believe that allowing underage and unweaned research animals to be transported without a transportation plan subjects these animals to unnecessary risks, and that the plan is necessary to assure that these animals arrive safely at their destinations. This proposed rule would also allow for animals to be transported to a licensed veterinarian for medical care before meeting the minimum age requirement. Impact on Small Entities The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code of particular interest is 424990 (Other Miscellaneous Nondurable Goods Merchant Wholesalers), for which the small-entity size standard is 100 or fewer employees. This industry includes animal dealers and importers. According to APHIS Animal Care, there are approximately 5,060 licensed animal dealers. The proposed rule may also affect entities classified within NAICS codes 712130 (Zoos and Botanical Gardens) and 712190 (Nature Parks and Other Similar Institutions). A small enterprise classified within either of these codes is one having $6.5 million or less in annual receipts. Also of interest are businesses that breed animals, which fall within NAICS code 112990 (All Other Animal Production) and for which the small-entity definition is $750,000 or less in annual receipts. For facilities that deal in research with animals, the NAICS code is 541710 (Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences), and the small-entity definition is 500 or fewer employees. While only a fraction of the firms in each industry code group are expected to be directly affected by the proposed rule, we note that the majority of entities in each of these industry groups are small. 2 2 Based on data provided by the U.S. Census Bureau, Statistics of U.S. Businesses, to SBA, Office of Advocacy, small operations comprise more than 90 percent of animal dealers and/or independent importers, more than 70 percent of zoos and botanical gardens, more than 80 percent of nature parks and other similar institutions, and more than 90 percent of research facilities that could potentially handle the animals of concern. According to APHIS Animal Care, nearly all of the 5,060 animal dealers have annual receipts of less than $750,000, which classifies them as small entities under Small Business Administration criteria. APHIS does not have specific information regarding the 5,060 licensed animal dealers; however, we would expect that some would be considered small entities. It is unknown how many of these licensed animal dealers transport underage and unweaned animals. It is also unknown at what age these animals are being transported. Information is currently not available to identify the dog and cat dealers who transport underage and unweaned animals to approved research facilities. We welcome information that the public may offer that would allow the Agency to better determine the impact of the proposed 8-week minimum age requirement. Specifically, we welcome public comment on the number of establishments that could be affected, particularly ones classified within the industry groups identified in this analysis; the frequency with which they transport unweaned animals under 8 weeks of age, without their mothers; and the delays and associated costs that small entities may incur because of the proposed rule. This proposed rule contains certain reporting and recordkeeping requirements (See “Paperwork Reduction Act” below). With respect to exotic cats, the proposed rule is superseded by the Captive Wildlife Safety Act regulations (50 CFR Part 14, Subpart K), which prohibit the interstate transport of these animals other than by certain licensed facilities such as circuses, zoos, and wildlife rehabilitators. The licensed facilities would not be exempt from the proposed rule. Executive Order 12372 This program/activity is listed in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance under No. 10.025 and is subject to Executive Order 12372, which requires intergovernmental consultation with State and local officials. (See 7 CFR part 3015, subpart V.) Executive Order 12988 This proposed rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. It is not intended to have retroactive effect. This rule would not preempt any State or local laws, regulations, or policies, unless they present an irreconcilable conflict with this rule. The Act does not provide administrative procedures which must be exhausted prior to a judicial challenge to the provisions of this rule. Paperwork Reduction Act In accordance with section 3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ), the information collection or recordkeeping requirements included in this proposed rule have been submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Please send written comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attention: Desk Officer for APHIS, Washington, DC 20503. Please state that your comments refer to Docket No. APHIS-2006-0024. Please send a copy of your comments to:

(1)Docket No. APHIS-2006-0024, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238, and

(2)Clearance Officer, OCIO, USDA, room 404-W, 14th Street and Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250. A comment to OMB is best assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it within 30 days of publication of this proposed rule. To protect the health and well-being of young animals, we are proposing to require animals to be at least 8 weeks of age and weaned before they can be shipped in commerce. Also, a transportation plan would be required for transport to research facilities or for medical treatment for all animals that are less than 8 weeks of age and have been weaned. The transportation plan is required to be written, signed by the attending veterinarian and head of the animal caregiving staff, and submitted to APHIS for approval prior to the shipment. The plan must include the details of the transport and the justification for the transport. We are soliciting comments from the public (as well as affected agencies) concerning our proposed information collection and recordkeeping requirements. These comments will help us:

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

(2)Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

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

(4)Minimize the burden of the information collection on those who are to respond (such as through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology; *e.g.* , permitting electronic submission of responses). *Estimate of burden:* Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 0.5 hours per response. *Respondents:* Animal dealers and breeders who ship or transport animals. *Estimated annual number of respondents:* 1,000. *Estimated annual number of responses per respondent:* 4. *Estimated annual number of responses:* 4,000. *Estimated total annual burden on respondents:* 2,000 hours. (Due to averaging, the total annual burden hours may not equal the product of the annual number of responses multiplied by the reporting burden per response.) Copies of this information collection can be obtained from Mrs. Celeste Sickles, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at

(301)734-7477. E-Government Act Compliance The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service is committed to compliance with the E-Government Act to promote the use of the Internet and other information technologies, to provide increased opportunities for citizen access to Government information and services, and for other purposes. For information pertinent to E-Government Act compliance related to this proposed rule, please contact Mrs. Celeste Sickles, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at

(301)734-7477. List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 2 Animal welfare, Pets, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Research. Accordingly, we propose to amend 9 CFR part 2 as follows: PART 2—REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 2 continues to read as follows: Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2131-2159; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.7. 2. Section 2.130 is revised to read as follows: § 2.130 Minimum age requirements.

(a)Unless being transported in the same enclosure as its mother or documented surrogate mother, no animal, other than birds, except as provided in paragraphs

(b)and

(c)of this section, shall be delivered by any person to any carrier or intermediate handler for transportation in commerce, or be transported in commerce by any person unless such animal has been weaned and is at least 8 weeks of age. (b)(1) Persons wishing to transport an animal that has not been weaned and that is not at least 8 weeks of age without its mother or documented surrogate mother to a registered research facility for a specific protocol approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees (IACUC) must obtain prior written approval by the appropriate Animal Care regional office by submitting, in writing, a transportation plan signed by the attending veterinarian and head of the animal caregiving staff outlining the reason for the transport (including the IACUC-approved protocol involved, if applicable), transportation specifics (including, but not limited to, dates, destination, intermediate carrier or handler to be used, mode of transportation, and enclosure size and design), food and water arrangements, attendants and/or monitoring plan, contact provisions in case of medical or other care needs, and, for nonhuman primates, how the special needs of the infant will be met during transportation (in support of the requirements of § 3.81).

(2)One transportation plan may be submitted for multiple animals being transported from one facility if the plan can show that the needs of all of the animals have been accommodated as determined by Animal Care.

(3)Transportation plans submitted via e-mail or facsimile must also include the names, mailing addresses, and phone numbers of the attending veterinarian and head of the animal caregiving staff. Those submitting plans via e-mail or facsimile must also keep on file a copy of the transportation plan that is signed by the attending veterinarian and head of the animal caregiving staff and make the plan available to Animal Care upon request. (c)(1) Persons may transport an animal that has not been weaned and that is not at least 8 weeks of age without its mother or documented surrogate mother to a licensed veterinarian for routine medical care, provided the animal is returned to the licensed or registered facility from which it originated upon the completion of the medical care for which it was transported and no change of ownership is involved. If those conditions are not met, then persons wishing to transport animals that have not been weaned and that are not at least 8 weeks of age for routine medical care must obtain approval from the appropriate Animal Care regional office by submitting a transportation plan in accordance with paragraph

(b)of this section.

(3)Persons may transport animals that have not been weaned and that are not at least 8 weeks of age to a licensed veterinarian for emergency medical care without a transportation plan. Done in Washington, DC, this 5th day of May 2008. Bruce Knight, Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs. [FR Doc. E8-10400 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 10 CFR Part 50 [NRC-2008-0237] Regulation of Advanced Nuclear Power Plants; Draft Statement of Policy AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Issuance of draft policy statement and notice of opportunity for public comment. SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission

(NRC)is considering adopting a statement of policy to improve the licensing environment for advanced nuclear power reactors to minimize complexity and uncertainty in the regulatory process. This statement would provide the Commission's policy regarding the review of, and desired characteristics associated with, advanced reactors. This policy statement would be the second revision of the policy statement titled “Regulation of Advanced Nuclear Power Plants; Statement of Policy.” The purpose of this revision is to update the Commission's policy statement on advanced reactors to integrate the Commission's expectations for security and preparedness with the current expectations for safety. This draft policy statement is being issued for public comment. DATES: Comments on this document should be submitted by July 8, 2008. Comments received after that date will be considered to the extent practical. To ensure efficient and complete comment resolution, comments should include references to the section, page, and line numbers of the document to which the comment applies, if possible. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any one of the following methods. Comments submitted in writing or in electronic form will be made available for public inspection. Because your comments will not be edited to remove any identifying or contact information, the NRC cautions you against including any information in your submission that you do not want to be publicly disclosed. *Federal e-Rulemaking Portal:* Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* and search for documents filed under Docket ID [NRC-2008-0237]. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher 301-415-5905, e-mail *Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov.* *Mail comments to:* Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff. *E-mail comments to: Rulemaking.Comments@nrc.gov.* If you do not receive a reply e-mail confirming that we have received your comments, contact us directly at 301-415-1966. *Hand deliver comments to:* 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays. (Telephone 301-415-1966.) *Fax comments to:* Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission at 301-415-1101. You can access publicly available documents related to this document using the following methods: *NRC's Public Document Room (PDR):* The public may examine and have copied for a fee publicly available documents at the NRC's PDR, Public File Area O F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. *NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS):* Publicy available documents created or received at the NRC are available electronically at the NRC's electronic Reading Room at *http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.* From this page, the public can gain entry into ADAMS, which provides text and image files of NRC's public documents. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC's PDR reference staff at 1-899-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to *pdr.resources@nrc.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wesley H. Held, Office of New Reactors, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Telephone: 301-415-1583, e-mail: *Wesley.Held@nrc.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On July 8, 1986 (51 FR 24643), the Commission published a policy statement on regulation of advanced reactors in the **Federal Register** . The Commission's primary objectives in issuing the advanced reactor policy statement were as follows: • To maintain the earliest possible interaction of applicants, vendors, and government agencies with the NRC. • To provide all interested parties, including the public, with the Commission's views concerning the desired characteristics of advanced reactor designs. • To express the Commission's intent to issue timely comment on the implications of such designs for safety and the regulatory process. On July 12, 1994 (59 FR 35461), the Commission revised the 1986 advanced reactor policy statement by addressing the Commission's policy on metrication (57 FR 46202; October 7, 1992; as revised June 19, 1996 (61 FR 31169)). Since the events of September 11, 2001, the NRC has assessed potential threats and their possible impacts on the Nation's fleet of operating nuclear power reactors and has required upgrades of physical security measures and mitigative strategies through the issuance of a series of security orders and license conditions. For new nuclear power reactors, the Commission considers it prudent to provide expectations and guidance on security matters to prospective applicants so that they can use this information early in the design stage to identify potential mitigative measures and/or design features that provide a more robust and effective security posture. Therefore, the Commission decided to revise the advanced reactor policy statement to integrate these expectations for security and preparedness with the current expectations for safety. The NRC is seeking public comment in order to receive feedback from the widest range of interested parties and to ensure that all information relevant to developing this document is available to the NRC staff. This document is issued for comment only. The NRC will review public comments received on the document, incorporate suggested changes as necessary, and issue the final revision. Commission Policy Consistent with its legislative mandate, the Commission's policy with respect to regulating nuclear power reactors is to ensure adequate protection of the environment and public health and safety and common defense and security. Regarding advanced reactors, the Commission expects, as a minimum, at least the same degree of protection of the environment and public health and safety and the common defense and security, that is required for current-generation light-water reactors. Furthermore, the Commission expects that advanced reactors will provide enhanced margins of safety and/or use simplified, inherent, passive, or other innovative means to accomplish their safety and security functions. The Commission's expectation for advanced reactor designs that consider the effects of a large, commercial airplane impact is currently being addressed through rulemaking (Consideration of Aircraft Impacts for New Nuclear Power Reactor Designs—RIN AI19—ID Docket NRC-2007-0009). The Commission believes that reactors designed with potential aircraft impact considerations resulting from this rule would be more robust than if they were designed in the absence of this rule. Among the attributes that could assist in establishing the acceptability or licensability of a proposed advanced reactor design, and therefore should be considered in advanced designs, are: • Highly reliable and less complex shutdown and decay heat removal systems. The use of inherent or passive means to accomplish this objective is encouraged (negative temperature coefficient, natural circulation, etc.). • Longer time constants and sufficient instrumentation to allow for more diagnosis and management before reaching safety systems challenge and/or exposure of vital equipment to adverse conditions. • Simplified safety systems that, where possible, reduce required operator actions, equipment subjected to severe environmental conditions, and components needed for maintaining safe shutdown conditions. Such simplified systems should facilitate operator comprehension, reliable system function, and more straightforward engineering analysis. • Designs that minimize the potential for severe accidents and their consequences by providing sufficient inherent safety, reliability, redundancy, diversity, and independence in safety systems. • Designs that provide reliable equipment in the balance of plant

(BOP)(or safety-system independence from BOP) to reduce the number of challenges to safety systems. • Designs that provide easily maintainable equipment and components. • Designs that reduce potential radiation exposures to plant personnel. • Designs that incorporate the defense-in-depth philosophy by maintaining multiple barriers against radiation release, and by reducing the potential for, and consequences of, severe accidents. • Design features that can be proven by citation of existing technology, or that can be satisfactorily established by commitment to a suitable technology development program. • Designs that include considerations for safety and security requirements together in the design process such that security issues ( *e.g.* , newly identified threats of terrorist attacks) can be effectively resolved through facility design and engineered security features, and formulation of mitigation measures, with reduced reliance on human actions. • Designs with features to prevent a simultaneous loss of containment integrity (including situations where the containment is by-passed), and the ability to maintain core cooling as a result of an aircraft impact, or identification of system designs that would provide inherent delay in radiological releases (if prevention of release is not possible). • Designs with features to prevent loss of spent fuel pool integrity as a result of an aircraft impact. If specific advanced reactor designs with some or all of the previously mentioned attributes are brought to the NRC for comment and/or evaluation, the Commission can develop preliminary design safety evaluation and licensing criteria for their safety-related and security-related aspects. Incorporating the above attributes may promote more efficient and effective design reviews. However, the listing of a particular attribute does not necessarily mean that specific licensing criteria will attach to that attribute. Designs with some or all of these attributes are also likely to be more readily understood by the general public. Indeed, the number and nature of the regulatory requirements may depend on the extent to which an individual advanced reactor design incorporates general attributes such as those listed previously. In addition, the Commission expects that the safety features of these advanced reactor designs will be complemented by the operational program for Emergency Planning (EP). This EP operational program, in turn, must be demonstrated by inspections, tests, analyses, and acceptance criteria to ensure effective implementation of established measures. The Commission also expects that advanced reactor designs will comply with the Commission's safety goal policy statement (51 FR 28044; August 4, 1986 as corrected and republished at 51 FR 30028; August 21, 1986), and the policy statement on conversion to the metric measurement system (61 FR 31169; June 19, 1996). To provide for more timely and effective regulation of advanced reactors, the Commission encourages the earliest possible interaction of applicants, vendors, other government agencies, and the NRC to provide for early identification of regulatory requirements for advanced reactors and to provide all interested parties, including the public, with a timely, independent assessment of the safety and security characteristics of advanced reactor designs. Such licensing interaction and guidance early in the design process will contribute towards minimizing complexity and adding stability and predictability in the licensing and regulation of advanced reactors. While the NRC does not develop new designs, the Commission intends to develop the capability, when appropriate, for timely assessment and response to innovative and advanced designs that might be presented for NRC review. Prior experience has shown that new reactor designs—even variations of established designs—may involve technical problems that must be solved to ensure adequate protection of the public health and safety. The earlier these design problems are identified, the earlier satisfactory resolution can be achieved. Prospective applicants are reminded that, while the NRC will undertake to review and comment on new design concepts, the applicants are responsible for documentation and research necessary to support a specific application. Research activities would include testing of new safety or security features that differ from existing designs for operating reactors, or that use simplified, inherent, passive means to accomplish their safety or security function. The testing shall ensure that these new features will perform as predicted, provide collection of sufficient data to validate computer codes, and show that the effects of system interactions are acceptable. During the initial phase of advanced reactor development, the Commission particularly encourages design innovations that enhance safety, reliability, and security (such as those described previously) and that generally depend on technology that is either proven or can be demonstrated by a straightforward technology development program. In the absence of a significant history of operating experience on an advanced concept reactor, plans for innovative use of proven technology and/or new technology development programs should be presented to the NRC for review as early as possible, so that the NRC can assess how the proposed program might influence regulatory requirements. Finally, the NRC also believes that it will be in the interest of the public as well as the design vendors' and the prospective license applicants to address security issues early in the design stage to achieve a more robust and effective security posture for future nuclear power reactors. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 5th day of May 2008. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Annette L. Vietti-Cook, Secretary of the Commission. [FR Doc. E8-10443 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2008-0536; Directorate Identifier 2008-CE-030-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; APEX Aircraft Model CAP 10 B Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive

(AD)for the products listed above. This proposed AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information

(MCAI)originated by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as: It has been determined that the currently used values for Arms of front and rear fuel tanks, and luggage compartment from the CAP 10B Airplane Flight Manuals (AFM), must be rectified. If left uncorrected, these weight and balance data could lead to erroneous determination of the location of the Center of Gravity

(CG)and possibly cause operation with the CG outside the approved limits which may result in control difficulty. The proposed AD would require actions that are intended to address the unsafe condition described in the MCAI. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by June 9, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal:* Go to *http://www.regulations.gov.* Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • *Fax:*

(202)493-2251. • *Mail:* U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. • *Hand Delivery:* U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Examining the AD Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov;* or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone

(800)647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sarjapur Nagarajan, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone:

(816)329-4145; fax:

(816)329-4090. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2008-0536; Directorate Identifier 2008-CE-030-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD because of those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to *http://www.regulations.gov,* including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we receive about this proposed AD. Discussion The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued AD No. 2008-0071, dated April 15, 2008 (referred to after this as “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI states: It has been determined that the currently used values for Arms of front and rear fuel tanks, and luggage compartment from the CAP 10B Airplane Flight Manuals (AFM), must be rectified. If left uncorrected, these weight and balance data could lead to erroneous determination of the location of the Center of Gravity

(CG)and possibly cause operation with the CG outside the approved limits which may result in control difficulty. To prevent this condition, the present Airworthiness Directive

(AD)mandates revision of the AFM which introduces the corrected values and replaces the previous loading graphs by loading tables. You may obtain further information by examining the MCAI in the AD docket. Relevant Service Information APEX Aircraft has issued Service Bulletin No. 030502, dated April 11, 2008. The actions described in this service information are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI. FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, they have notified us of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all information and determined the unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design. Differences Between This Proposed AD and the MCAI or Service Information We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information provided in the MCAI and related service information. We might also have proposed different actions in this AD from those in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are highlighted in a Note within the proposed AD. Costs of Compliance We estimate that this proposed AD would affect 31 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it would take about 1 work-hour per product to comply with the basic requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $80 per work-hour. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $2,480, or $80 per product. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. “Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,” describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in “Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed regulation: 1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; 2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety. The Proposed Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new AD: **APEX Aircraft** : Docket No. FAA-2008-0536; Directorate Identifier 2008-CE-030-AD. Comments Due Date

(a)We must receive comments by June 9, 2008. Affected ADs

(b)None. Applicability

(c)This AD applies to CAP 10 B airplanes, all serial numbers up to and including 282, certificated in any category. Subject

(d)*Air Transport Association of America

(ATA)Code 08:* Leveling and Weighing. Reason

(e)The mandatory continuing airworthiness information

(MCAI)states: It has been determined that the currently used values for Arms of front and rear fuel tanks, and luggage compartment from the CAP 10B Airplane Flight Manuals (AFM), must be rectified. If left uncorrected, these weight and balance data could lead to erroneous determination of the location of the Center of Gravity

(CG)and possibly cause operation with the CG outside the approved limits which may result in control difficulty. To prevent this condition, the present Airworthiness Directive

(AD)mandates revision of the AFM which introduces the corrected values and replaces the previous loading graphs by loading tables. Actions and Compliance

(f)Unless already done, within the next 50 hours time-in-service

(TIS)after the effective date of this AD, incorporate Apex Aircraft AVION CAP 10 B Document Number 1000977 GB, Revision 8, dated February 2007 into the limitations section of the airplane flight manual as specified in APEX Aircraft Service Bulletin No. 030502, dated April 11, 2008. The owner/operator holding at least a private pilot certificate as authorized by section 43.7 of the Federal Aviation Regulations 14 CFR 43.7 may do this action. Make an entry in the aircraft records showing compliance with this portion of the AD following 14 CFR 43.9. FAA AD Differences *Note:* This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information as follows: No differences. Other FAA AD Provisions

(g)The following provisions also apply to this AD:

(1)*Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs):* The Manager, Standards Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Sarjapur Nagarajan, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone:

(816)329-4145; fax:

(816)329-4090. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector

(PI)in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.

(2)*Airworthy Product:* For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority (or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product is airworthy before it is returned to service.

(3)*Reporting Requirements:* For any reporting requirement in this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ), the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)has approved the information collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0056. Related Information

(h)Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency

(EASA)AD No. 2008-0071, dated April 15, 2008; and APEX Aircraft Service Bulletin No. 030502, dated April 11, 2008, for related information. Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on May 2, 2008. David R. Showers, Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E8-10348 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P POSTAL SERVICE 39 CFR Part 111 Revised Standards for Postage and Fee Refunds AGENCY: Postal Service TM . ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: This revised proposed rule will modify the *Mailing Standards of the United States Postal Service* , Domestic Mail Manual (DMM®) 604.9.0 to establish a minimum dollar amount for the issuance of checks by the USPS® for the refund of unused postage value in postage meters and PC Postage® accounts. In addition, we provide specific time frames and procedures for refunds of different types of postage produced by PC Postage and postage meter systems. DATES: Submit comments on or before June 9, 2008. ADDRESSES: Mail or deliver written comments to the Manager, Postage Technology Management, Postal Service, 475 L'Enfant Plaza, SW., NB Suite 4200, Washington, DC 20260-4200. Copies of all written comments will be available for inspection and photocopying between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, at the Postage Technology Management office. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel J. Lord, Manager, Postage Technology Management, U.S. Postal Service, at 202-268-4281. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The revised proposed rule establishes a $25.00 minimum for USPS issuance of individual customer refund checks for unused postage value in postage meters and PC Postage accounts. In addition, the revisions in the proposed rule provide a 60-day limit for submission of physical refunds for both PC Postage and postage meter indicia; specify a 10-day limit and procedures for requesting refunds processed electronically for items bearing a Product Identification Code

(PIC)produced by a PC Postage system; and establish refund procedures for unused, undated PC Postage indicia. The proposed revision of DMM 604.9.0 was published for comment in the **Federal Register** , September 12, 2007 (Vol. 72, No. 176, pages 52025-52027). In that publication the minimum for USPS issuance of individual refund checks was $5.00. The Postal Service received two written comments from postage providers after the closing date of October 12, 2007; and both were considered in our response. The Postal Service gave thorough consideration to the comments it received and modified the proposed rule as appropriate. Discussion of Comments Both commenters supported the proposed rule, except for provisions in DMM 604.9.3.1a and 604.9.3.1b concerning the $5.00 minimum for refund of unused postage. The intent of DMM 604.9.3.1a and 604.9.3.1b is to reduce the costly process of issuing checks by the USPS. In this context, the USPS defines “refund” as the check that is issued to customers when the account with their current provider is closed and the USPS must “refund” the amount left in their device. In the PC Postage model, providers refund unused money to their customers when an account is closed. They provide the USPS with documentation on refunds made to customers and request reimbursement from the USPS for the refunded postage. Following this model, customers are not refused any monies left unused in an account they no longer wish to have. One commenter recommended rephrasing the provision to make it clear this does not prohibit the provider from crediting a customer's account or transferring the customer's funds to another device. The Postal Service reviewed the suggestion and amended the wording of the provision to clarify this matter. Although we are exempt from the notice and comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553(b), (c)) regarding proposed rulemaking by 39 U.S.C. 410(a), we invite public comments on the following proposed revisions to Mailing Standards of the United States Postal Service, Domestic Mail Manual (DMM®), incorporated by reference in the Code of Federal Regulations. See 39 CFR 111.1. List of Subjects in 39 CFR Part 111 Administrative practice and procedure, Postal Service. Accordingly, 39 CFR Part 111 is proposed to be amended as follows: PART 111—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for 39 CFR Part 111 continues to read as follows: Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552(a); 39 U.S.C. 101, 401, 403, 404, 410, 414, 416, 3001-3011, 3201-3219, 3403-3406, 3621, 3626, 5001. 2. Revise the following sections of *Mailing Standards of the United States Postal Service* , Domestic Mail Manual (DMM), as follows: *Mailing Standards of the United States Postal Service* , Domestic Mail Manual

(DMM)600 Basic Standards for All Mailing Services 604 Postage Payment Methods 9.0 Refunds and Exchanges 9.2 Postage and Fee Refunds 9.2.8 Ruling on Refund Request Refund requests are decided based on the specific type of postage or mailing: *[Revise items b and c by changing “licensing post office” to “local post office” and changing “licensee” to “authorized user” as follows:]* b. Dated metered postage, except for PC Postage systems, under 9.3. The postmaster at the local post office grants or denies requests for refunds for dated metered postage under 9.3. The authorized user may appeal an adverse ruling within 30 days through the manager, Postage Technology Management, USPS Headquarters (see 608.8.0 for address), who issues the final agency decision. The original meter indicia must be submitted with the appeal. c. Undated metered postage under 9.3. The manager, business mail entry at the district post office overseeing the mailer's local post office, or designee authorized in writing, grants or denies requests for refunds for undated metered postage under 9.3. The authorized user may appeal an adverse ruling within 30 days through the manager, business mail entry, or designee, to the Pricing and Classification Service Center

(PCSC)manager who issues the final agency decision. The original meter indicia must be submitted with the appeal. *[Revise item d as follows:]* d. PC Postage systems under 9.3. The system provider grants or denies a request for a refund for indicia printed by PC Postage systems under 9.3 using established USPS criteria. The authorized user may appeal an adverse ruling within 30 days through the manager, Postage Technology Management, USPS Headquarters, who issues the final agency decision. The original indicia must be submitted with the appeal. 9.3 Refund Request for Postage Evidencing Systems and Metered Postage 9.3.1 Unused Postage Value in Postage Evidencing Systems *[Revise 9.3.1 to restrict refunds to amounts of $25.00 or more and to change “licensee” to “authorized user” as follows:]* The unused postage value remaining in a postage evidencing system when withdrawn from service may be refunded, depending upon the circumstance and the ability of the USPS to make a responsible determination of the actual or approximate amount of the unused postage value. If the postage evidencing system is withdrawn because of faulty operation, a final postage adjustment or refund will be withheld pending the system provider's report of the cause to the USPS and the USPS determination of whether or not a refund is appropriate and, if so, the amount of the refund. No refund is given for faulty operation caused by the authorized user. When a postage evidencing system that is damaged by fire, flood, or similar disaster is returned to the provider, postage may be refunded or transferred when the registers are legible and accurate, or the register values can be reconstructed by the provider based on adequate supporting documentation. When the damaged system is not available for return, postage may be refunded or transferred only if the provider can accurately determine the remaining postage value based on adequate supporting documentation. The authorized user may be required to provide a statement on the cause of the damage and to attest that there has not been reimbursement by insurance or otherwise, and that the authorized user will not seek such reimbursement. Refunds for unused postage value are granted for postage evidencing systems specified in 4.0 in accordance with the following procedures: a. All postage evidencing systems except for PC Postage systems. Authorized users must notify their provider to withdraw the system and to refund any unused postage value remaining on their system or account. The postage evidencing system must be examined to verify the amount before any funds are cleared from the meter. Based on what is found, a refund or credit is initiated for unused postage value, or additional money is collected to pay for postage value used. The provider forwards the refund request to the USPS for payment or may credit the amount to the authorized user's account. The USPS will not issue individual customer refund checks for unused postage value less than $25.00 remaining in a postage evidencing system. b. PC Postage systems. Authorized users must notify their provider to withdraw the system and to refund any unused postage value remaining in their account. The provider refunds the unused postage value remaining on the user's system on behalf of the USPS. The USPS will not issue individual customer refund checks for unused postage value less than $25.00 remaining in a postage evidencing system. 9.3.2 Unused, Dated Postage Evidencing System Indicia, Except PC Postage Indicia Unused, dated postage meter indicia are considered for refund only if complete, legible, and valid. PC Postage indicia refunds are processed under 9.3.3. All other metered postage refund requests must be submitted as follows: *[Revise items a through e only as follows:]* a. Authorized users must submit the request to their local post office. The refund request must include proof that the person or entity requesting the refund is the authorized user of the postage meter that printed the indicia. Acceptable proof includes a copy of the lease, rental agreement, or contract. b. Authorized users must include the items bearing the unused postage with their request to their local post office. The items must be sorted by meter used and then by postage value shown in the indicia, and must be properly faced and bundled in groups of 100 identical items when quantities allow. The request is processed by the USPS. The postmaster approves or denies the refund request. c. Authorized users must submit the refund request within 60 days of the date(s) shown in the indicia. d. When unused metered postage is affixed to a mailpiece, the refund request must be submitted with the entire envelope or wrapper. For those items with postage affixed to a large container (i.e., cardboard box), a sufficient portion of the container with the postage affixed must be included to validate that the item was never deposited with the USPS. The unused metered postage must not be removed from the mailpiece once applied. e. Indicia printed on labels or tapes not adhered to wrappers or envelopes must be submitted loose and must not be stapled together or attached to any paper or other medium. However, self-adhesive labels printed without a backing may be submitted on a plain sheet of paper. 9.3.3 Unused, Dated PC Postage Indicia Unused, dated PC Postage indicia are considered for refund only if complete, legible, and valid. The refund request must be submitted as follows: *[Revise 9.3.3 a, b, and c only as follows:]* a. Only authorized PC Postage users may request the refund. Users must submit the request to their system provider. The request is processed by the provider, not the USPS. b. Requests for refund of PC Postage indicia that contain a valid Postal Identification Code

(PIC)must be submitted by authorized users to their provider electronically in accordance with procedures available from their provider. Valid PICs include any form of Delivery Confirmation, Signature Confirmation, Express Mail, or Confirm Code service. Authorized users must initiate requests for electronic refunds within ten

(10)days of printing the indicia. Refunds for postage associated with a PIC may only be submitted electronically. Physical submissions are not permitted. c. Requests for refund of PC Postage indicia which do not have an associated PIC must be physically submitted by authorized users to their provider, along with the items bearing the unused postage, in accordance with procedures available from their provider. Authorized users must submit the refund request within sixty

(60)days of the date(s) shown in the indicia. The refund request must be submitted as required in 9.3.2d. through 9.3.2g. *[Revise title and items a and c only of 9.3.4 as follows:]* 9.3.4 Unused, Undated Metered Postage Unused, undated postage evidencing system indicia are considered for refund only if complete, legible, and valid. The refund request must be submitted as follows: a. Only the authorized user or the commercial entity that prepared the mailing for the authorized user may request the refund. The request must include a letter signed by the authorized user or the commercial entity that prepared the mailing explaining why the mailpieces were not mailed. c. The authorized user, or the commercial entity that prepared the mailing for the authorized user, must submit the request, along with the items bearing the unused postage and the required documentation, to the manager, business mail entry at the district post office overseeing the mailer's local post office, or to a designee authorized in writing. The manager or designee approves or denies the refund request. *[Renumber current 9.3.5 through 9.3.7 as new 9.3.6 through 9.3.8 and add new 9.3.5 as follows:]* 9.3.5 Unused, Undated PC Postage Indicia Refunds will not normally be provided for valid, undated, serialized PC Postage indicia containing commonly used postage values. If the authorized user believes there are extraordinary circumstances, requests for such refunds must be made by the authorized user in accordance with the procedures outlined in 9.3.3.c along with a detailed description of the extraordinary circumstances. Requests will be considered by the provider on a case by case basis. 9.3.6 Ineligible Metered Postage Items The following metered postage items are ineligible for refunds: *[Revise item d of renumbered 9.3.6 to change “licensing post office” to “local post office” as follows:]* d. Indicia lacking identification of the local post office or other required information. Neva R. Watson, Attorney, Legislative. [FR Doc. E8-10358 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710-12-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R09-OAR-2008-0237; FRL-8564-2] Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Ventura County Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern oxides of nitrogen (NO X ) emissions from stationary internal combustion engines. We are approving a local rule that regulates these emission sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final action. DATES: Any comments must arrive by *June 9, 2008.* ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-2008-0237, by one of the following methods: 1. *Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov.* Follow the on-line instructions. 2. *E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.* 3. *Mail or deliver:* Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901. *Instructions:* All comments will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information

(CBI)or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through *www.regulations.gov* or e-mail. *www.regulations.gov* is an “anonymous access” system, and EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the public comment. 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. *Docket:* The index to the docket for this action is available electronically at *www.regulations.gov* and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material), and some may not be publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Francisco Dóñez, EPA Region IX,

(415)972-3956, *Donez.Francisco@epa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, “we,” “us” and “our” refer to EPA. Table of Contents I. The State's Submittal A. What rule did the State submit? B. Are there other versions of this rule? C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revision? II. EPA's Evaluation and Action A. How is EPA evaluating the rule? B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria? C. EPA recommendations to further improve the rule D. Public Comment and Final Action III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. The State's Submittal A. What rule did the State submit? Table 1 shows the rule addressed by this proposal with the dates that it was adopted by the local air agency and submitted by the California Air Resources Board. Table 1.—Submitted Rule Local agency Rule No. Rule title Adopted Submitted VCAPCD 74.9 Stationary Internal Combustion Engines 11/08/05 03/10/06 On March 30, 2006, this rule submittal was found to meet the completeness criteria in 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review. B. Are there other versions of this rule? We approved a version of Rule 74.9 into the SIP on October 25, 2002 (67 FR 65501). C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions? NO X helps produce ground-level ozone, smog and particulate matter, which harm human health and the environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires States to submit regulations that control NO X emissions. Rule 74.9 regulates NO X and carbon monoxide

(CO)emissions from stationary internal combustion engines rated at 50 or more horsepower. The submitted rule contains three major revisions, originally suggested by EPA in the technical support document

(TSD)for the SIP-approved version. • The submitted rule requires biennial source tests and quarterly NO X screening tests with hand-held instrument, rather than relying exclusively on annual source testing. • The submitted rule requires the installation of non-resettable elapsed operating time meters in order to qualify for rule exemptions involving engine operating hours. • The requirement for biennial source testing to verify compliance with all emission limits has been clarified in the submitted rule. In addition, the revised rule includes a new limitation on CO emissions for new engines. CO emissions are limited to 2000 ppmv for all stationary engines installed after adoption of the amended rule. EPA's TSD has more information about this rule. II. EPA's Evaluation and Action A. How is EPA evaluating the rule? Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the Act), must require Reasonably Available Control Technology

(RACT)for each category of sources covered by a Control Techniques Guidelines

(CTG)document as well as each major source in nonattainment areas (see sections 182(a)(2) and 182(f)), and must not relax existing requirements (see sections 110(l) and 193). The VCAPCD regulates an ozone nonattainment area (see 40 CFR part 81), so Rule 74.9 must fulfill RACT. Guidance and policy documents that we use to help evaluate enforceability and RACT requirements consistently include the following: 1. “State Implementation Plans; Nitrogen Oxides Supplement to the General Preamble; Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 Implementation of Title I; Proposed Rule,” (the NO X Supplement), 57 FR 55620, November 25, 1992. 2. “Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations,” EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook). 3. “Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies,” EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook). 4. “Determination of Reasonably Available Control Technology and Best Available Retrofit Control Technology for Stationary Spark-Ignited Internal Combustion Engines,” California Air Resources Board, November 2001. B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria? We believe this rule is consistent with the relevant policy and guidance regarding enforceability, RACT, and SIP relaxations. We note in the TSD that the revised rule (subsection D.5) exempts engines used in agricultural operations. Such an exemption is generally impermissible under the RACT requirements of CAA Sections 182(a)(2) and (f). However, the District submitted a convincing demonstration that there are no agricultural sources within the VCAPCD that meet the major source threshold for NO X emissions, and that therefore the agricultural exemption does not violate RACT requirements. The TSD has more information on our evaluation. C. EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the Rule The TSD describes additional rule revisions that do not affect EPA's current action but are recommended for the next time the local agency modifies the rule. D. Public Comment and Final Action Because EPA believes the submitted rule fulfills all relevant requirements, we are proposing to fully approve it as described in section 110(k)(3) of the Act. We will accept comments from the public on this proposal for the next 30 days. Unless we receive convincing new information during the comment period, we intend to publish a final approval action that will incorporate this rule into the federally enforceable SIP. III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action: • Is not a “significant regulatory action” subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993); • Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); • Is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.* ); • Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4); • Does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999); • Is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); • Is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); • Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; and • Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: April 22, 2008. Laura Yoshii, Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. [FR Doc. E8-10405 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P 73 91 Friday, May 9, 2008 Notices ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION Notice of Meeting AGENCY: Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation

(ACHP)will meet on Tuesday, May 13, 2008. The meeting will be held in Room M09 of the Old Post Office Building, 1100 Pennsylvania Ave, NW., Washington, DC at 8 a.m. The ACHP was established by the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470 et. seq.) to advise the President and Congress on national historic preservation policy and to comment upon Federal, federally assisted, and federally licensed undertakings having an effect upon properties listed in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. The ACHP's members are the Architect of the Capitol; the Secretaries of the Interior, Agriculture, Defense, Housing and Urban Development, Commerce, Education, Veterans Affairs, and Transportation; the Administrator of the General Services Administration; the Chairman of the National Trust for Historic Preservation; the President of the National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers; a Governor; a Mayor; a Native American; and eight non-Federal members appointed by the President. The agenda for the meeting includes the following: Call to Order—8 a.m. I. Chairman's Welcome II. Native American Activities A. Native American Advisory Group B. Native American Program Report III. Archaeology Task Force A. Proposed Policy Statement on Archaeology and Heritage Tourism IV. Chairman's Award Presentation V. Preserve America Program A. Preserve America Presidential Awards B. Preserve America Stewards Initiative C. Preserve America/Save America's Treasures Authorizing Legislation VI. Implementation of ACHP Recommendations from the Preserve America Summit A. Agency Progress B. Recommendations Implemented by the ACHP VII. Preservation Initiatives Committee A. Legislative Update B. Heritage Tourism Activities VIII. Federal Agency Programs Committee A. National Park Service Programmatic Agreement B. Bureau of Land Management Nationwide Programmatic Agreement C. Standard Treatments Update D. Section 106 Cases a. New Orleans Cases b. Navy Cases VIII. Communications, Education, and Outreach Committee A. ACHP Strategic Communications Plan IX. Chairman's Report A. ACHP Alumni Foundation B. ACHP FY 2009 Budget Request C. Transition to a New Administration X. Executive Director's Report XI. New Business XII. Adjourn Note: The meetings of the ACHP are open to the public. If you need special accommodations due to a disability, please contact the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Room 803, Washington, DC, 202-606-8503, at least seven

(7)days prior to the meeting. *For further information:* Additional information concerning the meeting is available from the Executive Director, Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., #803, Washington, DC 20004. Dated: May 5, 2008. John Fowler, Executive Director. [FR Doc. E8-10355 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-K6-M DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request May 6, 2008. The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments regarding

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

(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

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

(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology should be addressed to: Desk Officer for Agriculture, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), *OIRA_Submission@OMB.EOP.GOV* or fax

(202)395-5806 and to Departmental Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250-7602. Comments regarding these information collections are best assured of having their full effect if received within 30 days of this notification. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling

(202)720-8681. An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. National Agriculture Statistics Service *Title:* Childhood Injury and Adult Occupational Injury Survey of Minority Farm Population. *OMB Control Number:* 0535-0235. *Summary of Collection:* Primary function of the National Agricultural Statistics Services

(NASS)is to prepare and issue state and national estimates of crop and livestock production under the authority of 7 U.S.C. 2204. NASS will conduct a national childhood agricultural injury survey and an adult occupational farm injury survey focusing on the minority farm population. The study will provide estimates of annual childhood and adult nonfatal injury incidence rates, annual injury frequencies, and descriptive injury information for children under the age of 20 and farm operators and employees 20 years of age or older. *Need and Use of the Information:* Data from this survey will provide a source of consistent information that the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) can use to target funds appropriated by Congress for the prevention of childhood agricultural injuries and adult occupational injuries. No source of data on childhood injuries or adult occupational farm injuries exists that covers all aspects of the agricultural production sector. If this information is not collected, NIOSH's ability to track and evaluate the impact of its injury prevention efforts will decrease. *Description of Respondents:* Farms. *Number of Respondents:* 50,500. *Frequency of Responses:* Reporting: Other (One-Time). *Total Burden Hours:* 12,404. National Agricultural Statistics Service *Title:* Generic Clearance to Conduct Survey Research Studies. *OMB Control Number:* 0535-NEW. *Summary of Collection:* The primary objectives of the National Agricultural Statistics Service

(NASS)are to prepare and issue State and national estimates of crop and livestock production, economic statistics, and environmental statistics related to agriculture and to conduct the Census of Agriculture. The purpose of this generic clearance is to allow NASS to continue to develop, test, evaluate, adopt, and use state-of-the-art techniques to cover a broad range of topics designed to improve NASS' data collection on agriculture. *Need and Use of the Information:* NASS will use a number of survey improvement techniques, as appropriate to the individual project under investigation. These include focus groups, cognitive and usability laboratory and field techniques, exploratory interviews, behavior coding, respondent debriefing, pilot surveys and split-panel tests. The information gathered will be used mainly for questionnaire development and other research and evaluation. Additionally, NASS anticipates the benefit of increased response rates through improved survey design; a goal tied directly to addressing OMB requirements for higher response rates and measurement of non-response bias. *Description of Respondents:* Farms. *Number of Respondents:* 1,100. *Frequency of Responses:* Reporting: On occasion. *Total Burden Hours:* 1,650. Charlene Parker, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E8-10392 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-20-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request May 6, 2008. The Department of Agriculture has submitted the following information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Comments regarding

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

(b)the accuracy of the agency's estimate of burden including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

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

(202)720-8958. An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Farm Service Agency *Title:* Representations for CCC and FSA Loans and Authorization to File a Financing Statement. *OMB Control Number:* 0560-0215. *Summary of Collection:* The revised Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code deals with secured transaction for personal property. The revised Article 9 affects the manner in which the Commodity Credit Corporation

(CCC)and the Farm Service Agency (FSA), as well as any other creditor, perfect and liquidate security interests in collateral. FSA operates several loan programs that are affected by the revision to Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code. Each of the programs requires that loans be secured with collateral. The security interest is created and attaches to the collateral when:

(1)Value has been given,

(2)the debtor has rights in the collateral or the power to transfer rights in the collateral, and

(3)the debtor has authenticated a security agreement that provides a description of the collateral. FSA will collect information using form CCC-10. The information obtained on CCC-10 is needed to not only obtain authorization from loan applicants to file a financing statement without their signature, and to verify the name and location of the debtor. *Need and Use of the Information:* The information that FSA collects will be used to gather or verify basic data regarding the applicant which is required on a financing statement and to obtain permission to file a financing statement prior to the execution of a security agreement. Without obtaining the information from loan applicants, CCC and FSA would be unable to perfect a security interest in collateral used to secure loans. *Description of Respondents:* Farms; Individuals or households; Business or other for-profit. *Number of Respondents:* 55,500. *Frequency of Responses:* Reporting; On occasion. *Total Burden Hours:* 32,357. Ruth Brown, Departmental Information Collection Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. E8-10403 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-05-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service [Docket No. APHIS-2008-0058] Notice of Request for Extension of Approval of an Information Collection; Importation of Fruits and Vegetables AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA. ACTION: Extension of approval of an information collection; comment request. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice announces the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service's intention to request an extension of approval of an information collection associated with regulations for the importation of fruits and vegetables. DATES: We will consider all comments that we receive on or before July 8, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by either of the following methods: Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to *http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocketDetail&d=APHIS-2008-0058* to submit or view comments and to view supporting and related materials available electronically. *Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery:* Please send two copies of your comment to Docket No. APHIS-2008-0058, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road, Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238. Please state that your comment refers to Docket No. APHIS-2008-0058. *Reading Room:* You may read any comments that we receive on this docket in our reading room. The reading room is located in room 1141 of the USDA South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, please call

(202)690-2817 before coming. *Other Information:* Additional information about APHIS and its programs is available on the Internet at *http://www.aphis.usda.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information on regulations for the importation of fruits and vegetables, contact Ms. Donna L. West, Senior Import Specialist, Commodity Import Analysis and Operations, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road, Unit 133, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231;

(301)734-8758. For copies of more detailed information on the information collection, contact Mrs. Celeste Sickles, APHIS' Information Collection Coordinator, at

(301)734-7477. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title:* Importation of Fruits and Vegetables. *OMB Number:* 0579-0264. *Type of Request:* Extension of approval of an information collection. *Abstract:* As authorized by the Plant Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 7701 *et seq.* ) (PPA), the Secretary of Agriculture may prohibit or restrict the importation, entry, exportation, or movement in interstate commerce of any plant, plant product, biological control organism, noxious weed, means of conveyance, or other article if the Secretary determines that the prohibition or restriction is necessary to prevent a plant pest or noxious weed from being introduced into or disseminated within the United States. This authority has been delegated to the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), which administers regulations to implement the PPA. The regulations in Subpart—Fruits and Vegetables (7 CFR 319.56-1 through 319.56-47) allow a number of fruits and vegetables to be imported into the United States, under specified conditions, from certain parts of the world. Importation of a variety of fruits and vegetables from Central America, South America, Belgium, China, the Dominican Republic, Jamaica, Jerusalem, Mexico, the Netherlands, and Trinidad and Tobago requires the use of certain information collection activities, including phytosanitary certificates, fruit fly monitoring records, and cooperative agreements. We are asking the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)to approve our use of these information collection activities for an additional 3 years. The purpose of this notice is to solicit comments from the public (as well as affected agencies) concerning this information collection activity. These comments will help us:

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

(2)Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of the information collection, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

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

(4)Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, through use, as appropriate, of automated, electronic, mechanical, and other collection technologies, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. *Estimate of burden:* The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 0.2557172 hours per response. *Respondents:* Growers, shippers, and national plant protection organizations. *Estimated annual number of respondents:* 15. *Estimated annual number of responses per respondent:* 32.06666. *Estimated annual number of responses:* 481. *Estimated total annual burden on respondents:* 123 hours. (Due to averaging, the total annual burden hours may not equal the product of the annual number of responses multiplied by the reporting burden per response.) All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter of public record. Done in Washington, DC, this 5th day of May 2008. Kevin Shea, Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. [FR Doc. E8-10441 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service [Docket No. APHIS-2008-0065] Notice of Availability of a Pest Risk Analysis for Importation of Dragon Fruit From Vietnam Into the Continental United States AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: We are advising the public that we have prepared a pest risk analysis that evaluates the risks associated with the importation into the continental United States of dragon fruit from Vietnam. Based on that analysis, we believe that the application of one or more designated phytosanitary measures will be sufficient to mitigate the risks of introducing or disseminating plant pests or noxious weeds via the importation of dragon fruit from Vietnam. We are making the pest risk analysis available to the public for review and comment. DATES: We will consider all comments that we receive on or before July 8, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by either of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal:* Go to *http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main?main=DocketDetail&d=APHIS-2008-0065* to submit or view comments and to view supporting and related materials available electronically. • *Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery:* Please send two copies of your comment to Docket No. APHIS-2008-0065, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road, Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-1238. Please state that your comment refers to Docket No. APHIS-2008-0065. *Reading Room:* You may read any comments that we receive on this docket in our reading room. The reading room is located in Room 1141 of the USDA South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC. Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you, please call

(202)690-2817 before coming. *Other Information:* Additional information about APHIS and its programs is available on the Internet at *http://www.aphis.usda.gov.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Alex Belano, Import Specialist, Commodity Import Analysis and Operation Staff, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road, Unit 133, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231;

(301)734-5333. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Under the regulations in “Subpart-Fruits and Vegetables” (7 CFR 319.56 through 319.56-47, referred to below as the regulations), the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture prohibits or restricts the importation of fruits and vegetables into the United States from certain parts of the world to prevent plant pests from being introduced into and spread within the United States. Section 319.56-4 contains a performance-based process for approving the importation of commodities that, based on the findings of a pest risk analysis, can be safely imported subject to one or more of the designated phytosanitary measures listed in paragraph

(b)of that section. These measures are: • The fruits or vegetables are subject to inspection upon arrival in the United States and comply with all applicable provisions of § 319.56-3; • The fruits or vegetables are imported from a pest-free area in the country of origin that meets the requirements of § 319.56-5 for freedom from that pest and are accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate stating that the fruits or vegetables originated in a pest-free area in the country of origin; • The fruits or vegetables are treated in accordance with 7 CFR part 305; • The fruits or vegetables are inspected in the country of origin by an inspector or an official of the national plant protection organization of the exporting country, and have been found free of one or more specific quarantine pests identified by the risk analysis as likely to follow the import pathway; and/or • The fruits or vegetables are a commercial consignment. APHIS received a request from the Government of Vietnam to allow the importation of dragon fruit from Vietnam into the continental United States. We have completed a pest risk assessment to identify pests of quarantine significance that could follow the pathway of importation into the United States and, based on that pest risk assessment, have prepared a risk management analysis to identify phytosanitary measures that could be applied to the commodity to mitigate the pest risk. We have concluded that dragon fruit can be safely imported into the continental United States from Vietnam using one or more of the five designated phytosanitary measures listed in § 319.56-4(b). Therefore, in accordance with § 319.56-4(c), we are announcing the availability of our pest risk analysis for public review and comment. The pest risk analysis may be viewed on the Regulations.gov Web site or in our reading room (see ADDRESSES above for instructions for accessing Regulations.gov and information on the location and hours of the reading room). You may request paper copies of the pest risk analysis by calling or writing to the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . Please refer to the subject of the pest risk analysis when requesting copies. After reviewing the comments we receive, we will announce our decision regarding the import status of dragon fruit from Vietnam in a subsequent notice. If the overall conclusions of the analysis and the Administrator's determination of risk remain unchanged following our consideration of the comments, then we will begin issuing permits for importation of dragon fruit from Vietnam into the continental United States subject to the requirements specified in the risk management analysis. Authority: 7 U.S.C. 450, 7701-7772, and 7781-7786; 21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.3. Done in Washington, DC, this 5th day of May 2008. Cindy Smith, Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. [FR Doc. E8-10442 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-34-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Commodity Credit Corporation Natural Resources Conservation Service Conservation Security Program; Correction AGENCY: Natural Resources Conservation Service

(NRCS)and Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC), USDA. ACTION: Notice; Extension SUMMARY: NRCS and CCC published in the **Federal Register** on April 10, 2008, (73 FR 19456), a document stating “Notice of the Conservation Security Program, (CSP-08-01) sign up.” This notice extends the sign-up period end date from May 16, 2008, to May 30, 2008, in the SUMMARY and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION sections of the previously published document. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dwayne Howard, Branch Chief—Stewardship Programs, Financial Assistance Programs Division, NRCS, Post Office Box 2890, Washington, DC 20013-2890; telephone:

(202)720-1845; fax:

(202)720-4265. Submit via e-mail to: *dwayne.howard@wdc.usda.gov* , with subject line of “Attention: Conservation Security Program.” Signed in Washington, DC, on April 30, 2008. Arlen L. Lancaster, Chief, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Vice President, Commodity Credit Corporation. [FR Doc. E8-10360 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-16-P COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR SEVERELY DISABLED Procurement List; Additions and Deletions AGENCY: Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled. ACTION: Additions to and Deletions from the Procurement List. SUMMARY: This action adds to the Procurement List services to be furnished by nonprofit agencies employing persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities, and deletes from the Procurement List a service previously furnished by such agencies. EFFECTIVE DATE: June 8, 2008. ADDRESSES: Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled, Jefferson Plaza 2, Suite 10800, 1421 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, Virginia, 22202-3259. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kimberly M. Zeich, Telephone:

(703)603-7740, Fax:

(703)603-0655, or e-mail *CMTEFedReg@jwod.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Additions On March 14, 2008, the Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled published notice (73 FR13828) of proposed additions to the Procurement List. After consideration of the material presented to it concerning capability of qualified nonprofit agencies to provide the services and impact of the additions on the current or most recent contractors, the Committee has determined that the services listed below are suitable for procurement by the Federal Government under 41 U.S.C. 46-48c and 41 CFR 51-2.4. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification I certify that the following action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The major factors considered for this certification were: 1. The action will not result in any additional reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements for small entities other than the small organizations that will furnish the services to the Government. 2. The action will result in authorizing small entities to furnish the services to the Government. 3. There are no known regulatory alternatives which would accomplish the objectives of the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46-48c) in connection with the services proposed for addition to the Procurement List. End of Certification Accordingly, the following services are added to the Procurement List: Services *Service Type/Location:* Administrative Support Services, U.S. Custom House, 200 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, PA. *NPA:* Elwyn, Inc., Aston, PA. *Contracting Activity:* General Services Administration, Public Buildings Service, Mid Atlantic Region 3-P, Philadelphia, PA. *Service Type/Location:* Custodial Services, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Central Area Office, 5235 Grand Avenue, Davenport, IA. *NPA:* Goodwill Industries of Southeast Iowa, Iowa City, IA. *Contracting Activity:* U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Rock Island, IL. Deletion On March 14, 2008, the Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled published notice (73 FR13829) of proposed deletions to the Procurement List. After consideration of the relevant matter presented, the Committee has determined that the service listed below are no longer suitable for procurement by the Federal Government under 41 U.S.C. 46-48c and 41 CFR 51-2.4. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification I certify that the following action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The major factors considered for this certification were: 1. The action should not result in additional reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements for small entities. 2. The action may result in authorizing small entities to furnish the service to the Government. 3. There are no known regulatory alternatives which would accomplish the objectives of the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46-48c) in connection with the service deleted from the Procurement List. End of Certification Accordingly, the following service is deleted from the Procurement List: Service *Service Type/Location:* Janitorial/Custodial, U.S. Federal Building, Courthouse and Post Office, 301 West Main Street, Benton, IL. *NPA:* Franklin-Williamson Human Services, Inc., West Frankfort, IL. *Contracting Activity:* General Services Administration. Dennis Lockard, General Counsel. [FR Doc. E8-10374 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6353-01-P COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR SEVERELY DISABLED Procurement List; Proposed Additions and Deletion AGENCY: Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled. ACTION: Proposed Additions to and Deletions From the Procurement List. SUMMARY: The Committee is proposing to add to the Procurement List products and services to be furnished by nonprofit agencies employing persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities, and to delete a service previously furnished by such agencies. *Comments Must be Received on or Before:* June 8, 2008. ADDRESSES: Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled, Jefferson Plaza 2, Suite 10800, 1421 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, Virginia 22202-3259. *For Further Information or To Submit Comments Contact:* Kimberly M. Zeich, Telephone:

(703)603-7740, Fax:

(703)603-0655, or e-mail *CMTEFedReg@jwod.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice is published pursuant to 41 U.S.C. 47(a)(2) and 41 CFR 51-2.3. Its purpose is to provide interested persons an opportunity to submit comments on the proposed actions. Additions If the Committee approves the proposed additions, the entities of the Federal Government identified in this notice for each product or service will be required to procure the products and services listed below from nonprofit agencies employing persons who are blind or have other severe disabilities. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification I certify that the following action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The major factors considered for this certification were: 1. If approved, the action will not result in any additional reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements for small entities other than the small organizations that will furnish the products and services to the Government. 2. If approved, the action will result in authorizing small entities to furnish the products and services to the Government. 3. There are no known regulatory alternatives which would accomplish the objectives of the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46-48c) in connection with the products and services proposed for addition to the Procurement List. Comments on this certification are invited. Commenters should identify the statement(s) underlying the certification on which they are providing additional information. End of Certification The following products and services are proposed for addition to Procurement List for production by the nonprofit agencies listed: Products Aircraft Assembly Parts *NSN:* 1560-00-870-1656—Cover Access. *NSN:* 1560-00-875-6001—Support, Structural. *NSN:* 1560-01-114-0870—Bracket Assembly. *NSN:* 1560-01-153-9682—Weather Strip. *NSN:* 5365-00-159-3781—Shim. *NSN:* 5365-00-159-3792—Shim. *NPA:* The Lighthouse for the Blind, Inc. (Seattle Lighthouse), Seattle, WA. *Coverage:* C-List for the requirement of the Defense Supply Center Richmond, Richmond, VA. *Contracting Activity:* Defense Supply Center Richmond, Richmond, VA. Cap, Garrison, Unisex U.S. Navy *NSN:* 8405-01-539-5868—Size 6 3/8 . *NSN:* 8405-01-539-5869—Size 6 1/2 . *NSN:* 8405-01-539-5873—Size 6 5/8 . *NSN:* 8405-01-539-5887—Size 6 3/4 . *NSN:* 8405-01-539-5888—Size 6 7/8 . *NSN:* 8405-01-539-5889—Size 7. *NSN:* 8405-01-539-5891—Size 7 1/8 . *NSN:* 8405-01-539-5892—Size 7 1/4 . *NSN:* 8405-01-539-5894—Size 7 3/8 . *NSN:* 8405-01-539-5895—Size 7 1/2 . *NSN:* 8405-01-539-5897—Size 7 5/8 . *NSN:* 8405-01-539-5900—Size 7 3/4 . *NSN:* 8405-01-539-5934—Size 7 7/8 . *NSN:* 8405-01-539-5937—Size 8. *NSN:* 8405-01-539-5939—Size 8 1/8 . *NSN:* 8405-01-539-5962—Size 8 1/4 . *NSN:* 8405-01-539-5969—Size 8 3/8 . *NSN:* 8405-01-539-6335—Size 8 1/2 . *NPA:* Goodwill Industries of South Florida, Inc., Miami, FL. *Coverage:* C-List for 25% of the requirement of the Defense Supply Center Philadelphia. Philadelphia, PA. *Contracting Activity:* Defense Supply Center Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA. Services *Service Type/Location:* Mailroom Operations, Fort Stewart, 1042 William H. Wilson Avenue, Fort Stewart, GA. *NPA:* Abilities, Inc. of Florida, Clearwater, FL. *Contracting Activity:* Army Contracting Agency, Directorate of Contracting, Fort Stewart, GA. *Service Type/Location:* Mailroom Operations, Internal Revenue Service, 10715 David Taylor Drive, Charlotte, NC. *NPA:* Employment Source, Inc., Fayetteville, NC, *NPA:* ServiceSource, Inc., Alexandria, VA (PRIME CONTRACTOR). *Contracting Activity:* U.S. Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service Headquarters, Oxon Hill, MD. Deletion Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification I certify that the following action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. The major factors considered for this certification were: 1. If approved, the action should not result in additional reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements for small entities. 2. If approved, the action may result in authorizing small entities to furnish the services to the Government. 3. There are no known regulatory alternatives which would accomplish the objectives of the Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46-48c) in connection with the services proposed for deletion from the Procurement List. Comments on this certification are invited. Commenters should identify the statement(s) underlying the certification on which they are providing additional information. End of Certification The following service is proposed for deletion from the Procurement List: Service *Service Type/Location:* Janitorial/Custodial, Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Seattle, WA. *NPA:* Seattle Mental Health Institute, Inc., Seattle, WA. *Contracting Activity:* Department of Veterans Affairs, Seattle, WA. Dennis Lockard, General Counsel. [FR Doc. E8-10373 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6353-01-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration 2007 Calculation of Expected Non-Market Economy Wages AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. ACTION: Finalization and Effective Date of 2007 Expected Non-Market Economy Wage Calculation. SUMMARY: On April 11, 2008, the Department of Commerce (“Department”) published the preliminary 2007 expected non-market economy (“NME”) wages (the “2007 calculation”), and provided the public with an opportunity to comment on potential clerical errors. *See* Expected Non-Market Economy Wages: Request for Comments on 2007 Calculation, *73 FR 19812* (April 11, 2008). The 2007 calculation was based on 2005 data and the methodology described in the **Federal Register** notice entitled Antidumping Methodologies: Market Economy Inputs, Expected Non-Market Economy Wages, Duty Drawback; and Request for Comments, *71 FR 61716* , Oct. 19, 2006 (hereafter, the “Antidumping Methodologies notice”). The Department received two sets of comments in response to this notice and has made one change to its calculation, as described below, based on those comments. This notice constitutes the Department's announcement of the finalization and effective date of the 2007 calculation. DATES: These expected NME wage rates are finalized on the date of publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** and will be in effect for all antidumping proceedings for which the Department's final decision is due after the publication of this notice. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anthony Hill, Economist, Office of Policy, or Juanita Chen, Special Assistant to the Senior Enforcement Coordinator, China/ NME Group, Import Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone:

(202)482-1843 and

(202)482-1904, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Two parties commented that the Department used the incorrect exchange rate for Madagascar when converting wages reported for that country into U.S. dollars. They pointed out that Madagascar has two currencies, the ariary and the Malagasy franc (“FMG”), and that the International Labour Organization (“ILO”) reported wage data for Madagascar in FMG. However, they noted, it seems as though the exchange rate used by the Department was an ariary rate per U.S. dollar. They also pointed out that the rate of ariary to FMG was 1 to 5. Parties provided a source that showed an FMG per U.S. dollar exchange rate and argued that the Department should use this exchange rate to convert the ILO wage data reported for Madagascar into U.S. dollars. Two parties also argued that the Department should have excluded Indian and South Korean wage rates from the regression analysis because of subsidy programs in these countries. They contend that the Department's normal practice is to exclude surrogate data from countries with generally available subsidies and that India and South Korea are countries in which these subsidies are available. One party argued that the Ordinary Least Squares (“OLS”) regression analysis used by the Department will inherently lead to inaccurate results when applying it to the dataset used in the expected NME wages calculation because the dataset exhibits heteroscedasticity. They argue that the Department should use a Generalized Least Squares regression to predict NME wages because this method would give more reliable results. Department's Position With respect to the use of the incorrect exchange rate in converting Madagascar's labor rate, the Department agrees that this is a clerical error and will change the 2007 calculation. The ILO wage data for Madagascar are reported in FMG per hour. The International Financial Statistics (“IFS”) exchange rate data do not specify the name of the currency; however, the IFS does say that the exchange rates are reported in units of the national currency per U.S. dollar. Moreover, the International Monetary Fund's 2007 Annual Report on Exchange Arrangements and Exchange Restrictions (“IMF Report”) states that, “The currency of Madagascar is the ariary.” Instead of converting the ILO wage data reported for Madagascar directly into U.S. dollars using the exchange rate suggested by the parties, the Department converted the Madagascar wage data from FMG to ariary, and then from ariary to US dollars, using the ariary/FMG rate in the IMF Report and the IFS ariary/dollar rate. The IMF Report notes that Madagascar's two currencies are convertible at the rate of 1 ariary per 5 FMG. The suggestion that the wage rates from India and South Korea should be excluded from the expected NME wage rate analysis is a comment on the calculation methodology and not a clerical error. India and South Korea are countries for which the Department has reason to believe or suspect maintain generally available *export* subsidies; however, this practice has no bearing on the use of domestic prices, including labor rates, within these countries. The argument that the Department should use a Generalized Least Squares regression instead of an Ordinary Least Squares regression is also a comment on the methodology and not a clerical error. The specific issue of heteroscedasticity has been recently addressed by the court, which concluded that, given

(i)the inherent difficulties in identifying heteroscedasticity and

(ii)the fact that the OLS estimators remain unbiased and consistent even in the face of heteroscedasticity, the Department's decision not to account for the possibility of heteroscedasticity was reasonable. *See* Dorbest Ltd., et al. v. United States, Slip Op. 2008-24 (CIT feb. 27, 2008) at 4-19. Results Following the data compilation and regression methodology described in the Antidumping Methodologies notice, and using Gross National Income and wage data for 2005, the regression results are: Wage = 0.2721729 + 0.0004477* GNI. The final expected NME wage rates, as calculated with the above mentioned change, are shown in Attachment 1. Dated: May 6, 2008. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. Attachment 1 Country 2005 GNI (USD per annum) Expected NME wage rate (USD per hour) Armenia 1,470 0.93 Azerbaijan 1,270 0.84 Belarus 2,760 1.51 China 1,740 1.05 Georgia 1,300 0.85 Kyrgyz Republic 450 0.47 Moldova 960 0.70 Tajikistan 330 0.42 Uzbekistan 530 0.51 Vietnam 620 0.55 The World Bank did not publish a GNI for Turkmenistan. The final results and underlying data for the 2007 calculation have been posted on the Import Administration Web site at (http://ia.ita.doc.gov). [FR Doc. E8-10525 Filed 5-8-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Antidumping Methodologies for Proceedings that Involve Significant Cost Changes Throughout the Period of Investigation (POI)/Period of Review

(POR)that May Require Using Shorter Cost Averaging Periods; Request for Comment AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. ACTION: Request for comment. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (Department) seeks public comment on its development of a predictable methodology for determining when the use of shorter cost averaging periods is more appropriate than the established practice of using annual cost averages due to the occurrence of significant cost changes throughout the POI/POR. Although the Department maintains that the established practice of using annual cost averages is the most appropriate methodology to use in a majority of proceedings, it may be preferable to use an alternative methodology in certain cases. The Department now seeks comments from the public on the factors to consider, the tests to apply, and the thresholds to adhere to in determining whether or not shorter cost averaging periods ( *e.g.* , quarterly) are more appropriate. DATES: Comments must be submitted within thirty days from the publication of this notice. ADDRESSES: Written comments (original and six copies) should be sent to the Secretary of Commerce, Attn: Import Administration, APO/Dockets Unit, Room 1870, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street & Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20230. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Neal M. Halper, Director, Office of Accounting, or Taija A. Slaughter, Lead Accountant, Office of Accounting, Import Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone:

(202)482-2989 and

(202)482-3563, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The Department's methodology for calculating the cost of manufacture

(COM)of subject merchandise in less-than-fair-value investigations and antidumping administrative reviews is based on the cost over the entire POI or POR ( *i.e.* , on an annual basis). This yearly based methodology results in a normalized, weighted-average production cost that can then be compared to sales prices covering the same extended period of time. Therefore, the Department's questionnaire requests that all respondents report their costs of producing merchandise on an annual average basis over the entire POI or POR. *See, e.g., Certain Pasta from Italy: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review* , 65 FR 77852 (Dec. 13, 2000) ( *Pasta from Italy* ), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 18 and *Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review of Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Canada* , 71 FR 3822 (Jan. 24, 2006) ( *Wire Rod from Canada)* , and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 5 (explaining the Department's practice of computing a single weighted-average cost for the entire period). This methodology is predictable and generally applied consistently in all proceedings. The Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and the Department's regulations describe the role of the cost of production

(COP)in the Department's antidumping analysis. “Dumping” is defined in section 771(34) of the Act as the sale or likely sale of goods at less than normal value

(NV)in the United States. A “dumping margin,” as defined by section 771(35)(A) of the Act, is the amount by which the NV exceeds the export price

(EP)or constructed export price

(CEP)of the subject merchandise. In calculating NV, section 773(a)(1)(B) of the Act states that the Department will consider only those sales in the comparison market that are made in the “ordinary course of trade.” Section 771(15) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.102 explain that sales are generally made “in the ordinary course of trade” if they are sold under “conditions and practices which, for a reasonable period of time prior to the exportation of the subject merchandise, have been normal” for sales of the foreign like product. 1 None of these provisions provides guidance on the methodology which the Department should use in calculating a respondent's COP. 1 Section 773(b)(1) of the Act states that if no sales *made in the ordinary course of trade remain, the normal value shall be based on the constructed value

(CV)of the merchandise. See also* 19 CFR 351.405(a). CV is defined at section 773(e) of the Act as the cost of materials, plus fabrication expenses, selling, general and administrative expenses, profit and packing expenses. Furthermore, section 773(b)(1) of the Act and 19 C.F.R. 351. 406 provide that sales may be disregarded if they have been made at prices which represent less than the COP of that product. Section 773(b)(3) of the Act defines the COP as: an amount equal to the sum of-

(A)the cost of materials and of fabrication or other processing of any kind employed in producing the foreign like product, during a period which would ordinarily permit the production of that foreign like product in the ordinary course of business;

(B)an amount for selling, general, and administrative expenses based on actual data pertaining to production and sales of the foreign like product by the exporter in question; and

(C)the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature, and all other expenses incidental to placing the foreign like product in condition packed ready for shipment. Thus, although the Act states that the COP is calculated using a “period which would ordinarily permit the production” of the foreign like product, no guidance is given with regard to whether or not the Department should use only a single, weighted-average period of time, or multiple time periods within that “production period” for purposes of making comparisons and calculating a dumping margin. The Department has established a practice of using a single weighted-average COP that applies to the entire POI/POR, which it has applied in the vast majority of its investigations and reviews. Factors such as erratic production levels, the extent to which and how accurately monthly accruals are made, periodic maintenance, inventory valuation methods, etc. all impact the timing and accuracy of per-unit costing over short periods of time. Relying on an annual average cost tends to smooth out these short-term per-unit cost fluctuations resulting in a normalized average production cost to be compared to sales prices over the same extended period of time. *See Color Television Receivers from the Republic of Korea; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 55 FR 26225* , 26228 (June 27, 1990) (where the Department stated that the use of quarterly data would cause aberrations due to short-term cost fluctuations) and *Grey Portland Cement and Clinker From Mexico; Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review* , 58 FR 47253, 47257 (September 8, 1993) (where the Department explained that the annual period used for calculating costs accounts for any seasonal fluctuation which may occur as it accounts for a full operation cycle). The Department has, however, in a limited number of cases, deviated from its normal methodology of calculating costs on an annual average basis over the entire POI/POR and resorted to shorter cost averaging periods. Examples of instances where the Department departed from its standard cost averaging period include high technology products that experienced significant and consistent cost and price changes over a short period of time. *See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Static Random Access Memory Semiconductors from Taiwan* , 63 FR 8909, 8926 (Feb. 23, 1998) ( *SRAMS from Taiwan* ) (where the Department determined that quarterly, rather than annual, averages resulted in a more accurate comparison of pricing behavior during the period of investigation

(POI)given the significant decrease in the price and cost of static random access memory semiconductors throughout the POI) and *Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Erasable Programmable Read Only Memories from Japan* , 51 FR 39680, 39685 (Oct. 30, 1986) ( *EPROMS from Japan* ) (where the Department found that significant changes in the COP during a short period of time due to technological advancements and changes in the production process justified the use of quarterly weighted-average costs). The Department also found that shorter period averages resulted in a more accurate comparison of pricing behavior where the respondent's COM changed significantly throughout the cost reporting period. In * Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Determination Not to Revoke the Antidumping Duty Order: Brass Sheet and Strip from Netherlands * , 65 FR 742 (Jan. 6, 2000) ( *Brass Sheet and Strip from Netherlands* ), the Department was able to make a contemporaneous comparison of metal values and sales prices which resulted in a more accurate calculation of the dumping margin in that instance because the respondent treated the cost of the input metals as a pass-through to its customers in its normal books and records. *See* id. at 747-748. Accordingly, in *Brass Sheet and Strip from Netherlands* , the Department determined it appropriate to deviate from calculating cost on an annual average basis over the entire cost reporting period because record evidence showed that the cost of metal inputs represented a significant percentage of the total cost of producing brass sheet and strip, the cost of the metal inputs dropped consistently and significantly throughout the POR, and prices and costs for the shorter periods could be accurately matched. 2 2 The Department also deviated from its practice of using POR average costs in *Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Canned Pineapple Fruit From Thailand, 63 FR 7392 (Feb. 13, 1998). In this case the POR covered an 18-month period. For purposes of calculating the dumping margin,* the Department initially used the POR-wide weighted-average cost. However, the Department later matched the sales and costs by segregating the POR into two fiscal years for purposes of its dumping analysis. *See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to United States Court of International Trade Remand Order Thai Pineapple Canning Industry Corp. Ltd. And Mitsubishi International Corp. Ltd. v. United States, Court No. 98-03-00487 (CIT Feb. 5, 2002)* , dated May 31, 2002, at 3 found at http:// ia.ita.doc.gov. Although the Department matched sales prices to average costs for periods of time that were shorter than the span of the entire POR, it is important to note that the shorter averaging periods used were fiscal years, and not quarters or months. Issues of Concern In several recent proceedings, we have received requests from respondents to report costs using averaging periods of less than one year. *See Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from Turkey; Final Results, Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review in Part, and Determination To Revoke in Part* , 70 FR 67665 (November 8, 2005) (Rebar from Turkey), and accompanying Issues and Decision memorandum at Comment 1; *Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Canada* , 71 FR 3822 (January 24, 2006); and *Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils From France* , 71 FR 6269 (February 7, 2006). In these cases, we primarily relied on two factors in determining whether it was appropriate to deviate from our normal practice of using an annual average cost method:

(1)whether the cost changes throughout the POI/POR were significant, and

(2)whether sales during the shorter averaging periods could be accurately linked with the COP/CV during the same shorter averaging periods. In these recent proceedings, we analyzed the significance of the cost changes throughout the POI/POR by conducting a comparative COM analysis between the annual average cost method and the suggested shorter period average cost method ( *e.g.* , quarterly cost averaging period). *See, e.g., Rebar from Turkey* . In comparing the costs under the two methods, the Department examined the five most frequently sold models of the foreign like product ( *i.e.* , control numbers or “CONNUMs”) in the comparison market. For each of the five models, the Department compared the difference between the annual-average COM and the shorter period average COMs. 3 3 In each case, the analysis was conducted using the total COM and not the cost of an input or one element of the COM. In considering whether a shorter cost averaging period reflects a more accurate measure of dumping, we also explained in those proceedings that sales during the shorter averaging period must be closely linked with the COP of the shorter period. In certain cases there are various factors 4 which may affect the timing relationship between the purchase of the raw materials, the production of a product, and its subsequent sale. Therefore, arbitrarily relying on a shorter cost reporting period can create uncertainty as to how accurately the average costs during the shorter period relate to the sales that occurred during that same shorter period. Thus, we believe it is necessary for a respondent to provide evidence on the administrative record of a direct linkage between resulting costs and sales prices before we consider using a cost-averaging period that does not extend throughout the entire POI/POR. In the above-mentioned recent proceedings, in assessing whether sales can be accurately linked with the concurrent quarterly average costs, we analyzed the relationship of the cost and price trends throughout the POI/POR. 4 For example, factors such as: 1) the raw material inventory turnover period; 2) the inventory valuation method used by the company ( *e.g.* , last-in, first-out versus first-in, first-out versus weighted-average, etc.); 3) the extent to which raw materials are purchased pursuant to long-term contracts; 4) erratic production levels throughout the year; 5) sales made pursuant to long-term contracts; 6) the extent to which monthly accruals are made; and 7) year-end adjustments all affect the timing relationship between sales transactions and costs. In addition, in a recent remand redetermination, filed with the Court of International Trade, we assessed how closely sales prices and costs tracked each other during the shorter cost calculation periods by analyzing the consistency of the shorter cost averaging period profit percentages on comparison market sales. *See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Court Remand, Habas Sinai ve Tibbi Gazlar Istihsal ve Endustrisi A.S. v. United States, Court No. 05-00613, Slip Op. 07-167 (CIT Nov. 15, 2007)* , dated March 3, 2008 found at http://ia.ita.doc.gov. In that remand redetermination, to calculate the shorter cost averaging period profit percentages, we subtracted the shorter average cost of producing such sales from the shorter averaging period comparison market net sales revenue, and divided this figure by the same shorter average cost of producing such sales. Using this analysis, we concluded that the required linkage between sales and costs did not exist in that case such as to warrant using shorter time periods. Request for Comments We continue to regard our practice of using annual cost averages in proceedings as generally the most appropriate methodology, and we intend to deviate from this practice only under limited circumstances. The use of annual cost averages results in an approach that normally evens out swings in production costs that a respondent may have experienced over short periods ( *i.e.* , months or quarters) of time, and reasonably reflects the COP for sales made throughout the year. However, in certain cases, possible distortions may result when an annual-average cost method is used during a period of significant cost changes. Conversely, many factors, as noted above, may result in distortions when using shorter period average costs. Consequently, relying on a shorter cost reporting period can create uncertainty as to how accurately the average costs during the shorter period relate to the sales that occurred during that same shorter period. In light of these competing considerations, the Department requests comments and suggestions on the factors to consider, tests to apply, and thresholds to adhere to when deciding to rely on cost averaging periods of less than a year. Below is a list of specific questions we would like parties to comment on:

(i)Are there other factors relevant to the consideration of whether and when to rely on shorter cost averaging periods besides significant cost changes and the linking of sales and costs during the same shorter period? If so, identify the factor(s) and explain in detail why such factor(s) should be considered.

(ii)How should the significant cost changes factor be analyzed and what numeric threshold should we rely upon as a basis for resorting to shorter cost averaging periods? Provide the basis for your suggested threshold number. Should the nature of the industry ( *e.g.* , steel, consumer electronics, perishable products, etc.) affect the analysis? If so, explain in detail how the analysis would be affected.

(iii)How should the correlation between prices and shorter cost averaging periods be analyzed to reasonably assess that the prices and shorter period average costs are accurately linked?

(iv)Should it matter whether costs are trending consistently up, consistently down, or up and down throughout the POI/POR in the decision to use shorter cost averaging periods? Explain in detail why or why not.

(v)If shorter cost averaging periods are used based on the argument that it is distortive to rely on a single average cost when costs have changed significantly throughout the year, should the recovery of cost test be modified in any way? That is, should sales that are below the shorter cost averaging period still be considered to provide for the recovery of costs within a reasonable period time if they are above the annual average cost? *See* section 773(b)(2)(D) of the Act.

(vi)To what extent should the costs from the window periods 5 in reviews affect the overall analysis? 5 In administrative reviews of existing antidumping orders, the Department normally compares the export price (or constructed export price) of an individual U.S. sale to an average normal value for a contemporaneous month. The preferred month is the month in which the particular U.S. sale was made. If, during the preferred month, there are no sales in the foreign market of a foreign like product that is identical to the subject merchandise, the Department will then employ a six-month window period for the selection of contemporaneous sales. For each U.S. sale, the Department will calculate an average price for sales of identical merchandise in the most recent of the three months (90 days) *prior to* the month of the U.S. sale. If there are no such sales, the Department will use sales of identical merchandise in the earlier of the two months (60 days) *following* the month of the U.S. sale.

(vii)If we were to gather information at the outset of every segment of a proceeding in order to determine early on whether a respondent needed to provide cost information for shorter cost averaging periods, what information should we request? Provide specific questions that could be incorporated into the section A questionnaire.

(viii)Should shortening the cost averaging period affect price comparisons? For sales comparison purposes, should prices be compared across cost-averaging periods?

(ix)Are there other points you deem relevant to the issue at hand? Submission of Comments Persons wishing to comment should file a signed original and six copies of each set of comments by the date specified above. The Department will consider all comments received by the close of the comment period. Comments received after the end of the comment period will be considered, if possible, but their consideration cannot be assured. The Department will not accept comments accompanied by a request that a part or all of the material be treated confidentially due to business proprietary concerns or for any other reason. The Department will return such comments and materials to the persons submitting the comments and will not consider them in its development of a methodology for when it is appropriate to deviate from the annual average cost reporting method to shorter cost averaging periods. The Department requires that comments be submitted in written form. The Department also requests submission of comments in electronic form to accompany the required paper copies. Comments filed in electronic form should be submitted either by e-mail to the webmaster below, or on CD-ROM, as comments submitted on diskettes are likely to be damaged by postal radiation treatment Comments received in electronic form will be made available to the public in Portable Document Format

(PDF)on the Internet at the Import Administration website at the following address: http:/ia.ita.doc.gov. Any questions concerning file formatting, document conversion, access on the Internet, or other electronic filing issues should be addressed to Andrew Lee Beller, Import Administration Webmaster, at

(202)482-0866, email address: webmaster-support@ita.doc.gov. Dated: May 5, 2008. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E8-10527 Filed 5-8-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Clean Energy and Environment Trade Mission to China and India AGENCY: International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: Clean Energy and Environment Trade Mission to China and India. DATES: September 1-12, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian O'Hanlon at *brian.ohanlon@mail.doc.gov* or Debra Delay at *debra.delay@mail.doc.gov* or visit the mission Web site at *http://www.export.gov/cleanenergymission.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Mission Description:* The United States Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration, is organizing a Clean Energy and Environment Trade Mission to China and India, September 1-12, 2008. The trade mission will target a broad range of clean energy and environmental technologies such as renewable energy, biofuels, energy efficiency, clean coal, distributed generation, waste handling and treatment, wastewater treatment, packaging recycling, and drinking water treatment. The mission will make stops in Beijing, Jinan, and Shanghai, China as well as New Delhi, Hyderabad, and Mumbai, India. It will be led by Assistant Secretary of Commerce David Bohigian. Through this mission, ITA seeks to match participating U.S. companies with prescreened partners, agents, distributors, representatives, licensees, or retailers in each of these important sectors. In addition to one-on-one business meetings, the agenda will also include meetings with national and local government officials, networking opportunities, country briefings, seminars, and site visits. *Background:* This mission builds on two previous U.S. Clean Energy Technologies Trade Missions, which took place in April 2007 and January 2008. Each brought 17 U.S. companies to China and India. This trade mission takes place within the context of both the President's international framework on climate change, energy security, and economic growth involving the 15 major economies (the Global-15), as well as the Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate (APP). On May 31, 2007, President Bush announced an effort to develop and implement the Global-15 framework by 2012, which would complement the current United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and advance the APP. The APP is a public-private partnership in which member countries work together to facilitate commercial deployment of technologies that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and enhance energy security. The mission also builds on the work of the U.S.-China Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade. In December 2007, both countries committed to continued cooperation in the deployment of environmental technologies by launching the U.S.-China Environmental Industries Forum, an event sponsored by the China Association of Environmental Protection Industry. China China's rapid economic growth has been accompanied by widespread pollution and environmental degradation. This, combined with limited energy resources and inefficient use of energy, has caused the central government to make clean energy, environmental technologies, and energy efficiency a strategic priority. In the 11th Five-Year Plan (2005-2010), the government has set the targets of reducing energy intensity per unit of GDP by 20% and reducing emissions for major pollutants (e.g. carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxides) by 10%. The Chinese Government's recent passage of the new Renewable Energy Law has codified many of these mandates, including a renewable energy portfolio of at least 10 percent by 2020 (up from approximately 3 percent in 2003). This law is partly responsible for the increase in new renewable energy projects and offers U.S. producers an important opportunity to provide wind turbines, solar photovoltaics, waste-to-energy, biomass, geothermal, biofuels, and resource mapping technologies. Achieving the targets for wind energy alone (30 GW by 2020 from 1.2 GW in 2005) will require $21-28 billion in investment. China has already invested $12 billion in renewable energy capacity in 2007 and will most likely spend even more in 2008. In addition to renewable energy, China has a substantial need for energy and environmental products that will render energy production from coal cleaner. Coal accounts for 69% of China's energy use and thus the need to develop clean coal technologies provides a substantial opportunity for U.S. producers of combined heat and power, coal beneficiation products, coal mine methane extraction technologies, gas turbines, circulating fluidized bed boilers, pollution control technologies such as desulphurization technologies, and coal conversion technologies such as advanced pulverized coal gasifiers. In addition to air pollution and the need for cleaner, more efficient energy, water issues are among the top priorities of China's environmental protection plan. It is estimated that in the next five years, China will invest $175 billion in environmental protection, accounting for 1.3-1.4% of GDP. All these initiatives underscore China's intention to deploy cleaner and more efficient technologies. U.S. technology providers with accurate market information and a sound business strategy have the potential to take advantage of the growing Chinese market for clean energy and environment technologies. Beijing With a population of over 15 million, China's capital, Beijing, offers unparalleled access to Chinese policymakers and institutions including the National Development and Reform Commission and the newly-created Ministry of Environment. Since China's energy and environmental sectors are regulated by the central government, interaction with these officials can be critical to a company's success. There is also a strong local market for clean energy technologies in Beijing, due to its size, its political and economic importance, and the poor environmental conditions caused by development. Beijing is unique in China in its provincial status, which enables its municipal government to approve independent foreign investment projects up to a value of $30 million. This has positioned Beijing as an attractive location for foreign investment in China. Beijing is also developing its own renewable energy policy, partly as a way to combat the effects of the nearly 1,000 new cars per day driving on the city's roads. Jinan With a population of 5.9 million, Jinan is the capital of China's Shandong Province. Jinan boasts a highly skilled workforce, is home to ten universities, and has over two hundred research institutions, including ten national labs. The city is host to heavy industry, textiles, IT, bioengineering, home appliances, and transportation tools companies. Shandong Province's energy intensive economy and environmental needs offers an array of opportunities to U.S. companies. In recent years, the province has invested over $13 billion on environmental projects including water treatment, industrial monitoring, and pollution prevention. Jinan is also host to the 3rd International Exhibition on Green Industry and the Northeast Asia Environmental Protection Industry Fair, which brings together green technologies and buyers from across North Asia. Trade mission participants will receive special attention from the event's organizers as the first U.S. delegation to the exhibition. Shanghai Shanghai is known as the commercial and financial capital of China. With its strategic location at the mouth of China's longest river, the Yangtze, Shanghai also serves as the country's central transportation hub, offering a well-developed air, rail, sea, and road transportation infrastructure. In 2006, Shanghai registered 12 percent growth in its gross domestic product (GDP), the city's 15th consecutive year of double-digit growth. Its estimated population of 21 million people makes Shanghai the second largest city in China, after Chongqing. Per capita GDP is US$7,000, compared to the national average of US$2,800. Its strategic location, highly skilled workforce, and solid infrastructure make Shanghai a magnet for foreign direct investment (FDI). Contracted FDI for 2006 reached US$15 billion, up 5 percent from 2005, and realized FDI was US$7 billion. Shanghai hosts over 4,800 U.S.-invested firms, including GM, Intel, GE, Motorola, FedEx, and UPS. Shanghai faces the same severe energy and environmental challenges as many of China's other cities. According to the Shanghai Municipal Government, 80 percent of Shanghai's 22,000 waterways and lakes are contaminated by substances such as petrochemicals, cyanides, mercury, cadmium, arsenic, and lead. In 2007, domestic sewage discharge reached 1.8 billion cubic meters; however, only 49.4 percent was treated in urban areas. Only 20 percent of water supplied by local rivers is drinkable, limiting the water available to residents to 1,050 cubic meters per capita—60 percent less than China's national average. In an effort to reverse environmental degradation, Shanghai recently launched the multi-billion dollar Shanghai Urban Environment Plan, seeking to address urban planning and environmental needs for the city. The plan will require the Shanghai Water Authority to invest $725 million in the next few years, including a 1.3 million ton per day wastewater treatment plant, new pipe networks, pumping stations, and overall management and monitoring systems. Shanghai recently overhauled its Clean Air Act and now mandates desulfurization systems on all new power plants and industrial facilities located in designated sulfur dioxide and acid rain control zones. The city is embarking on an ambitious campaign to curb vehicle emissions by phasing out leaded gasoline, issuing new tailpipe standards, developing alternative fuel technologies, and investing in emissions control and inspection equipment. And the government is beginning to enforce its comprehensive solid and hazardous waste law. The Shanghai Municipal Government's energy strategy has focused on the diversification of energy supplies, increasing energy efficiency, and introducing clean energy technologies into the energy mix. Shanghai's energy demand has grown approximately 6-8% annually, while electricity demand has recently surged to over 10% a year. As a result, this focus is particularly reflected in the Shanghai's building codes have been changed to encourage energy efficient technologies and design. Shanghai's government is also considering a “100,000” roofs initiative to add solar panels to homes and businesses. China's power grid company is developing a fleet of electric-only vehicles and plans to create a network of charging stations for the Beijing Olympics and the 2010 World Expo in Shanghai. Shanghai also plans to have a fleet of electric buses in time for the 2010 World Expo. India India is experiencing dramatic economic growth and a rapidly increasing demand for energy. Currently the world's fourth largest energy consumer, India will be the third-largest by 2030. Both India's cities and villages lack adequate energy; there is therefore a need to add on-grid and off-grid power generation. The Government of India has specified renewable energy in its development plans and has developed numerous government incentives. The federal government has set a goal of electrifying 18,000 remote villages and meeting 10 percent of its energy demand with clean energy by 2012. The Indian market for clean energy is estimated at $600 million with an annual growth rate of 25 percent. The current 8,000 MW of installed capacity is expected to reach 20,000 MW by 2012. India is currently experiencing annual growth of energy demand of 9 percent a year. The clean energy market in India offers strong business prospects to U.S. companies, particularly in solar, biomass, gasification, wind, hydro, and solid and industrial waste-to-energy. The market for energy efficiency is estimated to be about $2 billion, concentrated especially in energy-intensive industries such as cement, aluminum, fertilizers, pulp and paper, petrochemicals, and steel. New Delhi New Delhi, India's capital, is not only the second largest city, but also the second-most favored foreign direct investment

(FDI)destination in the country. Key industries and business opportunities in New Delhi include environmental technologies, renewable energy, and energy efficiency. The total Indian market for these goods and services is expected to grow to $9 billion in 2010. New Delhi is also the principal end-user of clean technology, fulfilling the Government of India's

(GOI)directives on nation-wide deployment of environmental equipment and services. The size of New Delhi's need for energy and high pollution makes it an attractive market for large investments in clean technology projects, which is a key national priority. Hyderabad Hyderabad is the capital of the state of Andhra Pradesh and has a population of 7 million. Clean energy companies visiting Andhra Pradesh will find potential partners in the city's numerous energy intensive sectors including cement, steel, power plants, and defense industries. The state agency, Non-Conventional Energy Development Corporation of Andhra Pradesh Ltd., implements numerous programs to support clean energy. The Andhra Pradesh government provides subsidies to all renewable energy technologies including wind, solar, hydro, and biogas. Hyderabad is also the epicenter for the Green Business Building push in India. The Confederation of Indian Industry's Green Business Center is located in Hyderabad. This showcase for Clean Energy enjoys support from ongoing U.S.-India partnerships operated by USAID and the State Government of Andhra Pradesh. The Environment Protection Agency of India (EPTRI) is also located in Hyderabad, providing comprehensive training and research in environmental issues and concerns. The increasing population density and sustained efforts to improve the standard of living have created tremendous pressure on the environment. Approximately 10 percent of the geographical area and 19 percent of the cultivatable area of Andhra Pradesh requires environmental cleanup. Though there is domestic competition, Hyderabad therefore presents a tremendous opportunity for U.S. firms, which can provide a wide range of services. Mumbai Mumbai (formerly Bombay) is the capital of the state of Maharashtra and is home to over 16 million residents. As India's most industrialized state, Maharashtra leads India in energy consumption, produces sizeable quantities of pollutants, and has experienced frequent energy blackouts. A 5,000 MW energy shortfall has spurred innovative programs to promote clean energy. In fact, the Maharashtra Energy Development Agency is actively promoting additional power from solar, wind, biogas, and small hydro sources. One of India's premier research institutes, the Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, operates an active Energy Systems Engineering program with a particular focus on sustainable energy. Small-scale industrial firms dominate the environmental technologies sector but there are a few engineering companies offering services and equipment as part of turnkey consulting services. This sector is growing at 10-12 percent annually. There is a growing demand for the technologies for solid waste, water and wastewater treatment, vehicular pollution and air pollution. Some of the advanced equipment required for treatment of biomedical waste is not manufactured domestically and must be imported—an opportunity for U.S. exporters. Imports constitute nearly 40 percent of the total market. *Mission Goals:* The Trade Mission will facilitate market entry or increased sales into these significant markets for U.S. clean energy and environmental technologies and services firms, and will assist mission participants in gaining first-hand market information and access to key government officials and potential business partners. *Mission Scenario:* In China and India, the International Trade Administration will: • Provide a market briefing highlighting opportunities in the clean energy technologies sectors. • Schedule one-on-one appointments with potential business partners for each participant. • Provide a venue for the one-on-one appointments and provide interpreters as needed. • Provide networking opportunities with the private and public sectors. • Organize relevant site visits. Summary of Results Expected From the Mission • Increased U.S. clean energy and environmental technologies exports to China and India. • Progress on addressing market access barriers to trade in clean energy and environmental technologies and services in China and India. • Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions per unit of economic growth and the improvement of environmental conditions in China and India. • Increased awareness of the President's new international climate change framework (“the Global-15”) and the Asia Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate, and of ITA's trade policy and promotion programs. Proposed Mission Timetable Monday, September 1, 2008 Arrive in Beijing. Welcome Reception. Tuesday, September 2, 2008 Embassy Briefing. U.S.-China Clean Energy and Environmental Technologies Forum. Meeting with China's National Development and Reform Commission. One-on-One Business Meetings. Networking Reception. Wednesday, September 3, 2008 Depart Beijing. Arrive Jinan. Participate in the Shandong International Exposition of Green Industry. Government/Business Meetings. Networking Reception. Thursday, September 4, 2008 One-on-One Business Meetings. Depart Jinan. Arrive Shanghai. Networking Dinner. Friday, September 5, 2008 Consulate Briefing. Government/Business Meetings. One-on-One Business Meetings. Networking Reception. Saturday, September 6, 2008 Depart Shanghai. Sunday, September 7, 2008 Arrive New Delhi. Monday, September 8, 2008 Embassy Briefing. Government/Business Meetings. One-on-One Business Meetings. Networking Reception. Tuesday, September 9, 2008 Depart New Delhi. Arrive Hyderabad. Local Market Briefing. One-on-One Business Meetings. Networking Reception. Wednesday, September 10, 2008 Depart Hyderabad. Arrive Mumbai. Government/Business Meetings. One-on-One Business Meetings. Networking Reception. Thursday, September 11, 2008 Government/Business Meetings. One-on-One Business Meetings. Site Visit. Friday, September 12, 2008 Depart Mumbai. Participation Requirements All parties interested in participating in this mission must complete and submit an application package for consideration by the Department of Commerce. All applicants will be evaluated on their ability to meet certain conditions and best satisfy the selection criteria as outlined below. No more than 25 companies will be selected to participate in the mission from the applicant pool. Fees and Expenses After a company has been selected to participate on the mission, a payment to the Department of Commerce in the form of a participation fee is required. The participation fee will be $5,400 per firm, which includes one principal representative. The fee for each additional firm representative is $1,000. For companies who wish to only participate in mission activities for one country the participation fee will be $3,500 per firm, which includes one principal representative. The fee for each additional firm representative is $750. Expenses for travel, lodging, some meals, and incidentals will be the responsibility of each mission participant. Conditions for Participation • An applicant must submit a completed and signed mission application and supplemental application materials, including adequate information on the company's: Products and/or services, primary market objectives, and goals for participation no later than July 21, 2008. If we receive an incomplete application, we reserve the right to either reject the application or take the lack of information into account when evaluating the applications. A mission application may be found at *http://www.export.gov/cleanenergymission.* • Each applicant must also: —Certify that the products or services it seeks to export through the mission are either produced in the United States, or, if not, marketed under the name of a U.S. firm and have at least fifty-one percent U.S. content; —Certify that the export of the products or services that it wishes to export through the mission would be in compliance with U.S. export controls and regulations; —Certify that it has identified to the Department of Commerce for its evaluation any business pending before the Department of Commerce that may present either a conflict of interest or the appearance of a conflict of interest; —Certify that it has identified any pending litigation (including any administrative proceedings) to which it is a party that involves the Department of Commerce; and —Sign and submit an agreement that it and its affiliates

(1)have not and will not engage in the bribery of foreign officials in connection with the company's/participant's involvement in this mission, and

(2)maintain and enforce a policy that prohibits the bribery of foreign officials. *Selection Criteria for Participation:* Selection will be based on the following criteria in decreasing order of importance. • Relevance of the company's business line to the mission scope and goals; • Potential for business in the selected markets; • Demonstrated export experience in China and/or India and/or globally; • Participation in both the China and India portions of the mission; • Rank/seniority of the designated company representative; and • Diversity of sector participation. Additional factors, such as diversity of company size, type, location, demographics, and traditional under-representation in business, may also be considered during the review process. Invited companies must submit the trade mission participation fee and completed participation agreement within two weeks of receipt of their invitation in order to secure their place in the mission. After that time other companies may be invited to fill their spot. Applications received after the closing date will be considered only if space and scheduling constraints permit. Referrals from political organizations and any documents, including the application, containing references to partisan political activities (including political contributions) will be removed from an applicant's submission and not considered during the selection process. The mission will be promoted through the following venues: ITA's Export Assistance Centers; the Energy Team; the Environment Team; the Asia Pacific Team; the Africa, Near East, and South Asia Team; Global Trade Programs; the Trade Events List *http://www.export.gov;* industry newsletters; the **Federal Register** ; the Asia-Pacific Partnership for Clean Development and Climate; relevant trade publications; relevant trade associations; past Commerce trade mission participants; various in-house and purchased industry lists; the Commerce Department trade missions calendar: *http://www.ita.doc.gov/doctm/tmcal.html;* and the Web: *http://www.export.gov/cleanenergymission.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian O'Hanlon, Office of Energy and Environment, U.S. Department of Commerce, E-mail: *cleanenergymission@mail.doc.gov,* Telephone: 202-482-3492. Debra Delay, Global Environmental Technologies Deputy Team Leader, Boston U.S. Export Assistance Center, U.S. Department of Commerce, E-mail: *debra.delay@mail.doc.gov,* Telephone: 617-565-4302. Mission Web site: *http://www.export.gov/cleanenergymission.* Dated: May 6, 2008. Stephen Jacobs, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Market Access and Compliance. [FR Doc. E8-10450 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DR-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration Proposed Methodology for Identifying and Analyzing Targeted Dumping in Antidumping Investigations; Request for Comment AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (“the Department”) seeks public comment on its proposed targeted dumping methodology (described below) and related issues. DATES: Comments must be submitted within 30 days from the publication of this notice. ADDRESSES: Written comments (original and six copies) should be sent to David Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Central Records Unit, Room 1870, 14th Street & Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20230. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anthony Hill, International Economist, Office of Policy, or Michael Rill, Director, Antidumping Policy, Import Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: 202-482-1843 or 202-482-3058, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Pursuant to section 777A(d)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (the “Act”), the Department normally will calculate dumping margins in investigations by comparing weighted-average export prices to weighted-average normal values or transaction-specific export prices to transaction-specific normal values. Section 777A(d)(1)(B) of the Act allows the Department to use, under certain circumstances, an alternative methodology for determining the extent of dumping in an investigation. The alternative methodology is a comparison of transaction-specific export prices to weighted-average normal values. In order to use this alternative methodology, the Act requires the Department to find that there is a pattern of export prices (or constructed export prices) that differ significantly among purchasers, regions, or periods of time. *See* section 777A(d)(1)(B)(i) of the Act. In addition, the Act requires the Department to explain why the differences cannot be taken into account using one of the normal calculation methodologies. *See* section 777A(d)(1)(B)(ii) of the Act. The Department’s experience with regard to analyzing targeted dumping claims is limited and to date, no standard targeted dumping test for general application has been adopted. In response to a 1999 remand in the antidumping investigation of certain pasta from Italy, the Department created and utilized a targeted dumping test (the “Pasta Test”) to analyze U.S. price data in that case, and found no targeted dumping. *See Borden, Inc. v. U.S.* , 1999 WL 397968, *2 (CIT June 4, 1999) (“ *Borden Remand* ”) (citing Department's Remand Redetermination at 17 (“ *Remand Redetermination* ”)). The Department noted that it reserved the discretion to alter its methodology in future cases. *See Borden Remand* , 1999 WL at *1 (citing *Remand Redetermination* at 15). In the antidumping investigation of coated free sheet paper from the Republic of Korea (“CFS paper”), the Department accepted petitioner's allegation for purposes of undertaking a targeted dumping analysis in that proceeding. Based on that allegation, the Department found that there was a pattern of prices that differed significantly among purchasers and regions and that those differences could not be taken into account using the average-to-average or transaction-to-transaction methodology. *See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Coated Free Sheet Paper from the Republic of Korea* , 72 FR 60630 (October 25, 2007), accompanied by Issues and Decision Memorandum, Comments 2, 4, and 5. Again, the Department also acknowledged that it had not yet established a general set of standards for accepting and analyzing a targeted dumping allegation. *See* Memorandum to David M. Spooner entitled “Antidumping Duty Investigation of Coated Free Sheet Paper from the Republic of Korea—Targeted Dumping,” from Stephen J. Claeys, dated September 7, 2007. More recently, in the preliminary determinations in the antidumping investigations of certain steel nails from the United Arab Emirates and the People's Republic of China, the Department preliminarily accepted petitioner’s targeted dumping allegations but noted that it was still in the process of developing a new test. *See Certain Steel Nails from the United Arab Emirates: Notice of Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Postponement of Final Determination* , 73 FR 3945 (January 23, 2008) and *Certain Steel Nails from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Partial Affirmative Determination of Critical Circumstances and Postponement of Final Determination* , 73 FR 3928 (January 23, 2008). In order to establish a standard test for general application in analyzing a targeted dumping allegation, the Department solicited and received a first round of comments on the principles and standards that should be employed as part of a targeted dumping test. *See Targeted Dumping in Antidumping Investigations; Request for Comment* , 72 FR 60651 (October 25, 2007). The Department received nineteen sets of comments in response to that request. Proposed Methodology In the recent post-preliminary determination memorandum in the antidumping investigations of certain steel nails from the United Arab Emirates and from the People's Republic of China, the Department announced and applied a new targeted dumping standard and methodology for analyzing a targeted dumping allegation. *See* Memorandum to David M. Spooner entitled “Post-Preliminary Determinations on Targeted Dumping,” from Stephen J. Claeys, dated April 21, 2008. For future investigations, the Department proposes to adopt this new methodology for determining whether targeted dumping exists. The methodology involves a two-stage test: the first of which addresses the pattern requirement and the second addresses the significant difference requirement. All price comparisons would be done on the basis of identical merchandise. The test procedures described below are the same for customer, region or time-period targeting, even though the example given below involves customer targeting. The first stage of the test, referred to as the “standard deviation test,” would provide that the Department determine, on an exporter-specific basis, the share of the allegedly targeted customer's purchases of subject merchandise, by sales value, that are at prices more than one standard deviation below the weighted-average price to all customers of that exporter, targeted and non-targeted. If that share exceeds 33 percent of the total value of the exporter's sales of subject merchandise to the allegedly targeted customer, then the pattern requirement is met. The calculation of the standard deviation would be done product-by-product ( *i.e.* , “control number” by “control number”) using period of investigation (“POI”)-wide average prices (weighted by sales value) for each allegedly targeted customer and each distinct non-targeted customer. If the first test is met, in the second stage, the Department would examine all the sales of identical merchandise by that exporter to the allegedly targeted customer for which the standard deviation requirement is met and determine the total sales value for which the difference between

(i)the sales-weighted average price to the allegedly targeted customer and

(ii)the next higher sales-weighted average price to a non-targeted customer exceeds the average price gap (weighted by sales value) for the non-targeted group. Each of the price gaps in the non-targeted group would be weighted by the combined sales associated with the pair of prices to non-targeted customers that make up the gap. If the share of the sales that meet this test exceeds 5 percent of the total value of sales of subject merchandise to the allegedly 1 targeted customer, the significant difference requirement is met and the Department would determine that customer targeting has occurred. 1 For example: If non-target A's weighted-average price is $1.00 with total value of $100 and non-target B's weighted-average price is $.95 with total value of $120, then the difference of $.05 ($1.00-.95) would be weighted by $220 ($100 + 120). Request for Comments In addition to comments on the methodology described above, the Department requests comments on appropriate criteria and standards for the definitions of “region” and “time period.” Please comment on the extent to which the definitions for region and time period in a targeted dumping allegation should be reflective of the industry and commercial market in the United States. Also, as the statute allows targeted dumping allegations with respect to customers, regions, or time periods, the Department requests comment on how it should handle multiple allegations made with respect to one respondent, ( *i.e.* a respondent is allegedly targeting certain customers and certain regions). For example, when calculating non-targeted customer weighted-average sales prices in the second stage (the gap test), should the Department exclude sales to an allegedly targeted region? Please also comment on what standards, if any, the Department should adopt for accepting an allegation of targeted dumping. For example, should some type of *de minimis* threshold apply to the sales on which an allegation is based, either in terms of the quantity of control numbers or share of sales covered? Finally, the Department requests comment on the application of the alternative calculation methodology (average-to-transaction comparison) and the conditions, if any, under which the alternative methodology should apply to *all* sales to the target even if some sales of a control number do not pass the targeted dumping test. Submission of Comments Persons wishing to comment should file a signed original and six copies of each set of comments within 30 days of publication of this notice. The Department will consider all comments received by the close of the comment period. Comments received after the end of the comment period will be considered, if possible, but their consideration cannot be assured. The Department will not accept comments accompanied by a request that a part or all of the material be treated confidentially because of its business proprietary nature or for any other reason. The Department will return such comments and materials to the persons submitting the comments and will not consider them in its development of a targeted dumping analysis. The Department requires that comments be submitted in written form. The Department also requests submission of comments in electronic form to accompany the required paper copies. Comments filed in electronic form should be submitted either by e-mail to the webmaster below, or on CD-ROM, as comments submitted on diskettes are likely to be damaged by postal radiation treatment. Comments received in electronic form will be made available to the public in Portable Document Format

(202)482-0866, email address: webmaster-support@ita.doc.gov. Dated: May 6, 2008. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E8-10528 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XH31 Taking and Importing of Marine Mammals AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice; affirmative finding renewal. SUMMARY: The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NMFS, (Assistant Administrator) has renewed the affirmative finding for the Government of Mexico under the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). This affirmative finding will allow yellowfin tuna harvested in the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean

(ETP)in compliance with the International Dolphin Conservation Program

(IDCP)by Mexican-flag purse seine vessels or purse seine vessels operating under Mexican jurisdiction to be imported into the United States. The affirmative finding was based on review of documentary evidence submitted by the Government of Mexico and obtained from the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC) and the U.S. Department of State. DATES: Effective April 1, 2008, through March 31, 2009. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Regional Administrator, Southwest Region, NMFS, 501 West Ocean Boulevard, Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802-4213; phone 562-980-4000; fax 562-980-4018. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The MMPA, 16 U.S.C. 1361 *et seq.* , allows the entry into the United States of yellowfin tuna harvested by purse seine vessels in the ETP under certain conditions. If requested by the harvesting nation, the Assistant Administrator will determine whether to make an affirmative finding based upon documentary evidence provided by the government of the harvesting nation, the IATTC, or the Department of State. The affirmative finding process requires that the harvesting nation is meeting its obligations under the IDCP and obligations of membership in the IATTC. Every 5 years, the government of the harvesting nation must request an affirmative finding and submit the required documentary evidence directly to the Assistant Administrator. On an annual basis, NMFS will review the affirmative finding and determine whether the harvesting nation continues to meet the requirements. A nation may provide information related to compliance with IDCP and IATTC measures directly to NMFS on an annual basis or may authorize the IATTC to release the information to NMFS to annually renew an affirmative finding determination without an application from the harvesting nation. An affirmative finding will be terminated, in consultation with the Secretary of State, if the Assistant Administrator determines that the requirements of 50 CFR 216.24(f) are no longer being met or that a nation is consistently failing to take enforcement actions on violations, thereby diminishing the effectiveness of the IDCP. As a part of the affirmative finding process set forth in 50 CFR 216.24(f), the Assistant Administrator considered documentary evidence submitted by the Government of Mexico or obtained from the IATTC and the Department of State and has determined that Mexico has met the MMPA's requirements to receive an annual affirmative finding renewal. After consultation with the Department of State, the Assistant Administrator issued the Government of Mexico's annual affirmative finding renewal, allowing the continued importation into the United States of yellowfin tuna and products derived from yellowfin tuna harvested in the ETP by Mexican-flag purse seine vessels or purse seine vessels operating under Mexican jurisdiction. Mexico's current affirmative finding remains valid through March 31, 2010, subject to subsequent annual reviews by NMFS. Dated: May 5, 2008. James W. Balsiger, Acting Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E8-10378 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XG04 Taking and Importing of Marine Mammals AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice; affirmative finding renewal. SUMMARY: The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NMFS, (Assistant Administrator) has renewed the affirmative finding for the Government of Spain under the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). This affirmative finding will allow yellowfin tuna harvested in the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean

(ETP)in compliance with the International Dolphin Conservation Program

(IDCP)by Spanish-flag purse seine vessels or purse seine vessels operating under Spanish jurisdiction to be imported into the United States. The affirmative finding was based on review of documentary evidence submitted by the Government of Spain and obtained from the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC) and the U.S. Department of State. DATES: The renewal is effective from April 1, 2008, through March 31, 2009. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Regional Administrator, Southwest Region, NMFS, 501 West Ocean Boulevard, Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802-4213; phone 562-980-4000; fax 562-980-4018. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The MMPA, 16 U.S.C. 1361 *et seq.* , allows the entry into the United States of yellowfin tuna harvested by purse seine vessels in the ETP under certain conditions. If requested by the harvesting nation, the Assistant Administrator will determine whether to make an affirmative finding based upon documentary evidence provided by the government of the harvesting nation, the IATTC, or the Department of State. The affirmative finding process requires that the harvesting nation is meeting its obligations under the IDCP and obligations of membership in the IATTC. Every 5 years, the government of the harvesting nation must request an affirmative finding and submit the required documentary evidence directly to the Assistant Administrator. If granted, NMFS will review the affirmative finding on an annual basis and determine whether the harvesting nation continues to meet the requirements. A nation may provide information related to compliance with IDCP and IATTC measures directly to NMFS on an annual basis or may authorize the IATTC to release the information to NMFS to annually renew an affirmative finding determination without an application from the harvesting nation. An affirmative finding will be terminated, in consultation with the Secretary of State, if the Assistant Administrator determines that the requirements of 50 CFR 216.24(f) are no longer being met or that a nation is consistently failing to take enforcement actions on violations, thereby diminishing the effectiveness of the IDCP. As a part of the affirmative finding process set forth in 50 CFR 216.24(f), the Assistant Administrator considered documentary evidence submitted by the Government of Spain or obtained from the IATTC and the Department of State and has determined that Spain has met the MMPA's requirements to receive an annual affirmative finding renewal. Spain's current 5-year affirmative finding request remains valid through March 31, 2010, subject to annual review by NMFS. After consultation with the Department of State, the Assistant Administrator issued the Government of Spain's annual affirmative finding renewal, allowing the continued importation into the United States of yellowfin tuna and products derived from yellowfin tuna harvested in the ETP by Spanish-flag purse seine vessels or purse seine vessels operating under Spanish jurisdiction. Dated: May 5, 2008. James W. Balsiger, Acting Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E8-10379 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XG42 Taking and Importing of Marine Mammals AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice; affirmative finding renewal. SUMMARY: The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NMFS, (Assistant Administrator) has renewed the affirmative finding for the Republic of Ecuador under the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). This affirmative finding will allow yellowfin tuna harvested in the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean

(ETP)in compliance with the International Dolphin Conservation Program

(IDCP)by Ecuadorian-flag purse seine vessels or purse seine vessels operating under Ecuadorian jurisdiction to be imported into the United States. The affirmative finding was based on review of documentary evidence submitted by the Republic of Ecuador and obtained from the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC) and the U.S. Department of State. DATES: The renewal is effective from April 1, 2008, through March 31, 2009. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Regional Administrator, Southwest Region, NMFS, 501 West Ocean Boulevard, Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802-4213; phone 562-980-4000; fax 562-980-4018. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The MMPA, 16 U.S.C. 1361 *et seq.* , allows the entry into the United States of yellowfin tuna harvested by purse seine vessels in the ETP under certain conditions. If requested by the harvesting nation, the Assistant Administrator will determine whether to make an affirmative finding based upon documentary evidence provided by the government of the harvesting nation, the IATTC, or the Department of State. The affirmative finding process requires that the harvesting nation is meeting its obligations under the IDCP and obligations of membership in the IATTC. Every 5 years, the government of the harvesting nation must request an affirmative finding and submit the required documentary evidence directly to the Assistant Administrator. On an annual basis, NMFS will review the affirmative finding and determine whether the harvesting nation continues to meet the requirements. A nation may provide information related to compliance with IDCP and IATTC measures directly to NMFS on an annual basis or may authorize the IATTC to release the information to NMFS to annually renew an affirmative finding determination without an application from the harvesting nation. An affirmative finding will be terminated, in consultation with the Secretary of State, if the Assistant Administrator determines that the requirements of 50 CFR 216.24(f) are no longer being met or that a nation is consistently failing to take enforcement actions on violations, thereby diminishing the effectiveness of the IDCP. As a part of the affirmative finding process set forth in 50 CFR 216.24(f), the Assistant Administrator considered documentary evidence submitted by the Republic of Ecuador or obtained from the IATTC and the Department of State and has determined that Ecuador has met the MMPA's requirements to receive an annual affirmative finding renewal. After consultation with the Department of State, the Assistant Administrator issued the Republic of Ecuador's annual affirmative finding renewal, allowing the continued importation into the United States of yellowfin tuna and products derived from yellowfin tuna harvested in the ETP by Ecuadorian-flag purse seine vessels or purse seine vessels operating under Ecuadorian jurisdiction. Ecuador's affirmative finding will remain valid through March 31, 2010, subject to subsequent annual reviews by NMFS. Dated: May 5, 2008. James W. Balsiger, Acting Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E8-10380 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XH74 Endangered and Threatened Species; Take of Anadromous Fish AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice of availability and request for comment. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that NMFS has received an application from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife

(WDFW)for an incidental take permit pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA). This document serves to notify the public of the availability for comment of a revised draft environmental assessment

(EA)before a final decision on whether to issue a Finding of No Significant Impact and the permit is made by NMFS. The draft EA is revised to reflect a permit extension from five years to ten years. All comments received will become part of the public record and will be available for review pursuant to section 10(c) of the ESA. DATES: Written comments on the application and draft EA must be received at the appropriate address or fax number (see ADDRESSES ) no later than 5 p.m. Pacific time on May 23, 2008. ADDRESSES: Written comments on the application should be sent to Kristine Petersen, Salmon Recovery Division, 1201 N.E. Lloyd Boulevard, Suite 1100, Portland, OR 97232. Comments may also be submitted by e-mail to: *UCRFisheriesEA.nwr@noaa.gov* . Include in the subject line of the e-mail comment the following identifier: Comments on UCR recreational fisheries. Comments may also be sent via facsimile

(fax)to

(503)872-2737. Requests for copies of the permit application should be directed to the Salmon Recovery Division, 1201 NE Lloyd Boulevard, Suite 1100, Portland, OR 97232. The documents are also available on the Internet at *www.nwr.noaa.gov* . Comments received will also be available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours by calling

(503)230-5409. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristine Petersen at

(503)230-5409. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice is relevant to the following species and evolutionarily significant units

(ESUs)or distinct population segments (DPSs): Steelhead ( *Oncorhynchus mykiss* ): endangered, naturally produced and artificially propagated Upper Columbia River

(UCR)and threatened Middle Columbia River. Chinook salmon ( *O. tshawytscha* ): endangered Upper Columbia River spring-run and threatened Snake River fall-run. Background Section 9 of the ESA and Federal regulations prohibit the “taking” of a species listed as endangered or threatened. The term “take” is defined under the ESA to mean harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct. NMFS may issue permits to non-Federal entities to take ESA-listed species if such taking is incidental to, and not the purpose of, carrying out an otherwise lawful activity, under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the ESA. NMFS regulations governing permits for threatened and endangered species are promulgated at 50 CFR 222.307. NEPA requires Federal agencies to conduct an environmental analysis of their proposed actions to determine if the actions may affect the human environment. NMFS expects to take action on an ESA section 10(a)(1)(B) submittal received from the WDFW and is seeking public input to extend the WDFW's permit term from five years to ten years. On September 12, 2005, the WDFW submitted an application to NMFS for an ESA section 10(a)(1)(B) permit for incidental take of ESA-listed anadromous fish species associated with recreational fishery programs in the upper Columbia River and its tributaries for a five-year period (70 FR 71087). On September 12, 2007, the draft NEPA analysis of the action was made available for public comment (72 FR 52085). All comments were subsequently addressed, and no comments were received regarding the permit term. However, a final EA and final ESA determination were not prepared because, since the draft EA public comment period, NMFS has determined that issuing the proposed permit for ten years, rather than five years, is reasonable. NMFS believes that these fisheries pose a low risk of deviating from the assessed impacts over time. Permit 1554 as proposed, and as previously described, would maintain or strengthen monitoring and compliance enforcement activities and, therefore, the level of confidence in the effects analysis and the impacts. Additionally, permit 1554 would include an annual reporting requirement and identify an annual renewal process. If impacts exceed the authorized take or new information on the impacts of the activities arises, NMFS could re-initiate consultation. The proposed fisheries would target non-listed anadromous salmon and steelhead and resident game fish species. No fisheries that would target listed species are proposed. Implementation of these fisheries would allow fishing for recreational purposes and would provide economic opportunities for local communities through the sale of licenses and equipment, and the conduct of other business and services related to recreational fisheries. This notice is provided pursuant to section 10(c) of the ESA. NMFS requests comments on the ten-year permit period and will evaluate comments submitted to determine whether the application meets the requirements of section 10(a)(1)(A) of the ESA. If it is determined that the requirements are met, a final EA and Finding of No Significant Impact will be prepared, and a permit will be issued to the WDFW for the purpose of carrying out the fisheries management activities. NMFS will publish a record of its final action in the **Federal Register** . Dated: May 6, 2008. Marta Nammack, Acting Chief, Endangered Species Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E8-10390 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN 0648-XH76 Public Meetings on the Makah Tribe's Request To Hunt Eastern North Pacific Gray Whales AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: We are issuing this notice to advise the public that NMFS has prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Statement

(DEIS)in response to the Makah Tribe's request that NMFS waive the take moratorium of the Marine Mammal Protection Act

(MMPA)to allow for treaty right hunting of eastern North Pacific

(ENP)gray whales in usual and accustomed grounds off the coast of Washington State. We are requesting written comments on the DEIS and announcing the dates and locations of three public meetings regarding the DEIS. DATES: Three public meetings will be held as follows:

(1)May 28, 2008, Port Angeles, Washington;

(2)June 2, 2008, Seattle, Washington; and

(3)June 5, 2008, Silver Spring, Maryland. Specific times and locations for each of these meetings is included in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION . Written or electronic comments on the DEIS from all interested parties are encouraged and must be received no later than 5 p.m. PDT on July 8, 2008. All comments and material received, including names and addresses, will become part of the administrative record and may be released to the public. ADDRESSES: All comments concerning the DEIS should be addressed to: Steve Stone, NMFS Northwest Region, 1201 NE Lloyd Blvd., Suite 1100, Portland, OR 97232. Comments may also be submitted via fax

(503)230-5441, Attn: 2008 Makah DEIS, or by e-mail to *MakahDEIS.nwr@noaa.gov* with a subject line containing the document identifier: 2008 Makah DEIS. The DEIS is available in electronic form on the Internet at the following address: *http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/Marine-Mammals/Whales-Dolphins-Porpoise/Gray-Whales/* . The DEIS also may be viewed at various libraries identified at this Internet address or at the following NMFS offices:

(1)NMFS Protected Resources Division, 1201 NE Lloyd Blvd., Suite 1100, Portland, OR 97232. Contact Steve Stone at 503-231-2317; and

(2)NMFS, Protected Resources Division, 7600 Sand Point Way, NE, Building 1, Seattle, WA 98115-6349. Contact Josephine Evans at 206-526-6150. In addition, copies of the DEIS are available on CD by contacting Steve Stone (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT ). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Stone, NMFS Northwest Region,

(503)231-2317, or Tom Eagle, Office of Protected Resources,

(301)713-2322, ext. 105. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Meeting Information Dates, times, and addresses for the public meetings are as follows:

(1)May 28, 2008, 6:30 p.m.-9:30 p.m., Vern Burton Memorial Community Center, 308 East 4th Street, Port Angeles, WA;

(2)June 2, 2008, 6:30 p.m.-9:30 p.m., Lake Union Park Armory-Great Hall, Seattle, 860 Terry Avenue North, Washington; and

(3)June 5, 2008, 10 a.m.-1 p.m., NOAA Auditorium, 1301 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, Maryland. Background On May 9, 2008, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced the availability of NMFS' DEIS concerning the Makah Indian Tribe's February 2005 request to resume limited hunting of ENP gray whales in the coastal portion of the Tribe's usual and accustomed fishing grounds, off the coast of Washington State, for ceremonial and subsistence purposes. The Tribe's proposed action stems from the 1855 Treaty of Neah Bay, which expressly secures the Makah Tribe's right to hunt whales. To exercise that right, the Tribe is seeking authorization from NMFS under the MMPA and the Whaling Convention Act. The release of this DEIS is one of several steps NMFS will undertake to evaluate the Tribe's request. The DEIS, prepared pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act, considers various alternatives to the Tribe's proposed action. To develop the full range of action alternatives—five in total—we considered the principal components associated with a hunt, including: the time when whale hunting would occur; the area where whale hunting would occur; the annual and five-year limits on the number of whales harvested, struck, and struck and lost; cessation of whale hunting if a predetermined number of identified whales (i.e., included in a photographic catalog of whales from the Pacific Coast Feeding Aggregation area) were harvested; and the method of hunting. We developed these alternatives with input from NMFS staff, the applicant, the cooperating agency (i.e., Bureau of Indian Affairs), and oral and written comments from the public. This DEIS addresses a number of resources identified for review during both internal and public scoping, including: water quality, marine habitat and species, ENP gray whales, other wildlife species, economics, environmental justice, social environment, cultural resources, ceremonial and subsistence resources, noise, aesthetics, transportation, public services, public safety, and human health. The DEIS provides an important opportunity for the public to formally comment on the Tribe's proposal and the various alternatives. These comments, in conjunction with considerations described in the DEIS, will provide key information to assist NMFS with its final decision on the Tribe's request. Access to Government Building For access to a Federal government building, the Department of Commerce Office of Security at NOAA has advised that all attendees must register for the meeting and must have a valid government-issued identification (e.g, driver's license or passport) with a photograph. Therefore, prospective attendees for the public meeting in the NOAA Auditorium, Silver Spring, MD, should submit their first and last names and affiliation, if appropriate, by telephone or e-mail to Tom Eagle (See FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT ) by 4 p.m. EDT on June 2, 2008. Reasonable Accommodation Persons needing reasonable accommodations to attend and participate in the public meetings should contact Steve Stone (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT ). To allow sufficient time to process requests, please call at least 5 business days prior to the relevant meeting(s). Dated: May 5, 2008. Barbara A. Schroeder, Acting Chief, Marine Mammal and Sea Turtle Conservation Division, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E8-10377 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army; Corps of Engineers Notice of Availability for the Recirculated Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report for the Berths 97-109 [China Shipping] Container Terminal Project, Los Angeles County, CA AGENCY: Department of the Army—U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DoD. ACTION: Notice of Availability. SUMMARY: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District (Regulatory Division), in coordination with the Port of Los Angeles, has completed and is re-circulating the Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) for the Berths 97-109 [China Shipping] Container Terminal Project. The Port of Los Angeles requires authorization pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Section 10 of the River and Harbor Act to construct new wharves at Berths 100 and 102; dredge (41,000 cubic yards [yd3] of sediments) and dispose of that material at the upland Port Anchorage Road Disposal Site; develop backlands, including construction of terminal buildings, on 142 acres; install 10 new A-frame cranes at Berths 100 and 102; construct transportation infrastructure improvements in the vicinity of the existing terminal entrance (shared by the Berths 97-109 terminal and the Berths 121-131 terminal); construct two new bridge structures connecting Berths 97-109 terminal and Berths 121-131 terminal across the Southwest Slip; and relocate the Catalina Terminal to south of the Vincent Thomas Bridge at Berth 95. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Questions or comments concerning the recirculated Draft EIS/EIR should be directed to Dr. Spencer D. MacNeil, North Coast Branch, Regulatory Division, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, P.O. Box 532711, Los Angeles, CA 90053-2325,

(805)585-2152. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Port of Los Angeles and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers originally released the Berths 97-109 [China Shipping] Container Terminal Project Draft EIS/EIR in August 2006. Based on comments received on the Draft EIS/EIR, the Port of Los Angeles and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers decided to re-circulate the document. The April 2008 Draft EIS/EIR is a full recirculation of the original Draft EIS/EIR and addresses comments received on the August 2006 document. The Port of Los Angeles and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will jointly hold a public meeting on June 5, 2008 at Banning's Landing Community Center in Wilmington, California, to receive public comments and assess public concerns regarding this recirculated Draft EIS/EIR and proposed terminal project. Written comments will be accepted until the close of the public review period on June 30, 2008. Mark Durham, Acting Chief, Regulatory Division, Los Angeles District. [FR Doc. E8-10280 Filed 5-7-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3710-KF-P DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request AGENCY: Department of Education. SUMMARY: The IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of Management invites comments on the submission for OMB review as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. DATES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before June 9, 2008. ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention: Education Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW., Room 10222, Washington, DC 20503. Commenters are encouraged to submit responses electronically by e-mail to *oira_submission@omb.eop.gov* or via fax to

(202)395-6974. Commenters should include the following subject line in their response: “Comment: [insert OMB number], [insert abbreviated collection name, e.g., “Upward Bound Evaluation”]”. Persons submitting comments electronically should not submit paper copies. 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. Dated: May 5, 2008. Angela C. Arrington, IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of Management. Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services *Type of Review:* New. *Title:* Special Education Individual Reporting on Regulatory Compliance Related to the Personnel Development Program's Service Obligation and the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA). *Frequency:* On Occasion; Biennially. *Affected Public:* Individuals or household; Businesses or other for-profit; Not-for-profit institutions; Federal Government; State, Local, or Tribal Gov't; SEAs or LEAs. *Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour Burden:* *Responses:* 15,000. *Burden Hours:* 6,688. *Abstract:* The data collection under this request is governed by sections 304.23-304.30 of the June 5, 2006, regulations that implement section 662

(h)of the IDEA Amendments of 2004, which require that individuals who receive a scholarship through the Personnel Development Program funded under the Act subsequently provide special education and related services to children with disabilities for a period of two years for every year for which assistance was received. Scholarship recipients who do not satisfy the requirements of the regulations must repay all or part of the cost of assistance, in accordance with regulations issued by the Secretary. These regulations implement requirements governing, among other things, the service obligation for scholars, reporting requirements by grantees, and repayment of scholarships by scholars. In order for the federal government to ensure that the goals of the program are achieved, certain data collection, recordkeeping, and documentation are necessary. In addition, this data collection is governed by the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA). GPRA requires Federal agencies to establish performance measures for all programs, and the Office of Special Education Programs

(OSEP)has established performance measures for the Personnel Development Program. Data collection from scholars who have received scholarships under the Personnel Development Program is necessary to evaluate these measures. Requests for copies of the information collection submission for OMB review may be accessed from *http://edicsweb.ed.gov,* by selecting the “Browse Pending Collections” link and by clicking on link number 3572. 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)at1-800-877-8339. [FR Doc. E8-10447 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Privacy Act of 1974; Computer Matching Program AGENCY: Department of Education. ACTION: Notice—Computer Matching between the Department of Education and the Department of Justice. SUMMARY: Section 421(a)(1) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 862(a)(1)) includes provisions regarding the judicial denial of Federal benefits. Section 421 of the Controlled Substances Act, which was originally enacted as section 5301, of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988, was amended and redesignated as section 421 of the Controlled Substances Act by section 1002(d) of the Crime Control Act of 1990, Public Law 101-647 (hereinafter referred to as “section 5301”) authorizes Federal and State judges to deny certain Federal benefits (including student financial assistance under Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA)) to individuals convicted of drug trafficking or possession. In order to ensure that Title IV, HEA student financial assistance is not awarded to individuals subject to denial of benefits under court orders issued pursuant to section 5301, the Department of Justice and the Department of Education implemented a computer matching program. The 18-month computer matching agreement

(CMA)was recertified for an additional 12 months on June 18, 2007. The 12-month recertification of the CMA will automatically expire on June 18, 2008. The Department of Education must continue to obtain from the Department of Justice identifying information regarding individuals who are the subject of section 5301 denial of benefits court orders. The purpose of this notice is to announce the continued operation of the computer matching program and to provide certain required information concerning the computer matching program. In accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended by the Computer Matching and Privacy Protection Act of 1988 (Pub. L. 100-503) and Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)Guidelines on the Conduct of Matching Programs (54 FR 25818, June 19, 1989), and OMB Circular A-130, the following information is provided: 1. *Names of Participating Agencies.* The Department of Education (ED)(recipient agency) and the Department of Justice (DOJ)(source agency). 2. *Purpose of the Match.* The purpose of this matching program is to ensure that the requirements of section 421 of the Controlled Substances Act (originally enacted as section 5301 of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988, Pub. L. 100-690, 21 U.S.C. 853a, which was amended and redesignated as section 421 of the Controlled Substances Act by section 1002(d) of the Crime Control Act of 1990, Pub. L. 101-647) (hereinafter referred to as “section 5301”) are met. DOJ is the lead contact agency for information related to section 5301 violations and, as such, provides this data to ED. ED (recipient agency) seeks access to the information contained in the DOJ (source agency) Denial of Federal Benefits Clearinghouse System

(DFB)database that is authorized under section 5301 for the purpose of ensuring that Title IV, HEA student financial assistance is not awarded to individuals subject to denial of benefits under court orders issued pursuant to the Denial of Federal Benefits Program. 3. *Authority for Conducting the Matching Program.* Under section 5301, ED must deny Federal benefits to any individual upon whom a Federal or State court order has imposed a penalty denying eligibility for those benefits. Student financial assistance under Title IV of the HEA is a Federal benefit under section 5301, and ED must, in order to meet its obligations under the HEA, have access to information about individuals who have been declared ineligible under section 5301. While DOJ provides information about section 5301 individuals who are ineligible for Federal benefits to the General Services Administration

(GSA)for inclusion in GSA's List of Parties Excluded from Federal Procurements and Nonprocurement Programs, DOJ and ED have determined that matching against the DOJ database is more efficient and effective than access to the GSA List. The DOJ database has specific information about the Title IV, HEA programs for which individuals are ineligible as well as the expiration of the debarment period, making the DOJ database more complete than the GSA List. Both of these elements are essential for a successful match. 4. *Categories of Records and Individuals Covered by the Match.* ED will submit, for verification, records from its Central Processing System files (Federal Student Aid Application File (18-11-01)), the social security number

(SSN)and other identifying information for each applicant for Title IV, HEA student financial assistance. ED will use the SSN, date of birth, and the first two letters of an applicant's last name for the match. The DOJ DFB (OJP-0013) contains the names, SSNs, dates of birth, and other identifying information regarding individuals convicted of Federal or State offenses involving drug trafficking or possession of a controlled substance who have been denied Federal benefits by Federal or State courts. This system of records also contains information concerning the specific program or programs for which benefits have been denied, as well as the duration of the period of ineligibility. DOJ will make available for the matching program the records of only those individuals who have been denied Federal benefits under one or more of the Title IV, HEA programs. 5. *Effective Dates of the Matching Program* . The matching program will be effective on the last of the following dates:

(1)June 19, 2008, the day after the expiration of the current CMA;

(2)thirty

(30)days after notice of the matching program has been published in the **Federal Register** ; or

(3)forty

(40)days after a report concerning the matching program has been transmitted to OMB and transmitted to the Congress along with a copy of this agreement, unless OMB waives 10 days of this 40-day period for compelling reasons shown, in which case, 30 days after transmission of the report to OMB and Congress. The matching program will continue for 18 months after the effective date of the CMA and may be extended for an additional 12 months thereafter, if the conditions specified in 5 U.S.C.552a(o)(2)(D) have been met. 6. *Address for Receipt of Public Comments or Inquiries* . Marya Dennis, Management and Program Analyst, U.S. Department of Education, Federal Student Aid, Union Center Plaza, 830 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20202-5454. Telephone:

(202)377-3385. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), you may call the Federal Relay Service

(FRS)at 1-800-877-8339. Individuals with disabilities may obtain this document in an alternative format ( *e.g.* , Braille, large print, audiotape or computer diskette) on request to the contact person listed in the preceding paragraph. Electronic Access to This Document You may view this document, as well as all other Department of Education documents 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* . Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552(a); 21 U.S.C. 862(a)(1). Dated: May 6, 2008. Lawrence A. Warder, Acting Chief Operating Officer, Federal Student Aid. [FR Doc. E8-10433 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY [OE Docket No. EA-232-B] Application to Export Electric Energy; OGE Energy Resources, Inc. AGENCY: Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, DOE. ACTION: Notice of application. SUMMARY: OGE Energy Resources, Inc.

(OGE)has applied to renew its authority to transmit electric energy from the United States to Canada pursuant to section 202(e) of the Federal Power Act (FPA). DATES: Comments, protests or requests to intervene must be submitted on or before June 9, 2008. ADDRESSES: Comments, protests or requests to intervene should be addressed as follows: Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, Mail Code: OE-20, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0350 (FAX 202-586-8008). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Russell (Program Office) 202-586-9624 or Michael Skinker (Program Attorney) 202-586-2793. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Exports of electricity from the United States to a foreign country are regulated by the Department of Energy

(DOE)issued Order No. EA-232 authorizing OGE to transmit electric energy from the United States to Canada for a two-year term. That authority was renewed for a five-year term on August 13, 2003, in Order No. EA-232-A and will expire on August 13, 2008. On April 30, 2008, OGE filed an application with DOE to renew the export authority contained in Order No. EA-232-A for an additional five-year term. OGE will arrange for the delivery of exports to Canada over the international transmission facilities currently owned by Basin Electric Power Cooperative, Bonneville Power Administration, Eastern Maine Electric Cooperative, International Transmission Co., Joint Owners of the Highgate Project, Long Sault, Inc., Maine Electric Power Company, Maine Public Service Company, Minnesota Power, Inc., Minnkota Power Cooperative, Inc., New York Power Authority, Niagara Mohawk Power Corp., Northern States Power Company, and Vermont Electric Transmission Co. The construction, operation, maintenance, and connection of each of the international transmission facilities to be utilized by OGE has previously been authorized by a Presidential permit issued pursuant to Executive Order 10485, as amended. *Procedural Matters:* Any person desiring to become a party to this proceeding or to be heard by filing comments or protests to this application should file a petition to intervene, comment or protest at the address provided above in accordance with §§ 385.211 or 385.214 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedures (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Fifteen copies of each petition and protest should be filed with DOE on or before the date listed above. Comments on the OGE application to export electric energy to Canada should be clearly marked with Docket No. EA-232-B. Additional copies are to be filed directly with Cary Metz, Senior Contracts Coordinator, and J. Brent Hagy, Senior Counsel, OGE Energy Resources, Inc., 515 Central Park Drive, E460, Oklahoma City, OK 73034. A final decision will be made on this application after the environmental impacts have been evaluated pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, and a determination is made by the DOE that the proposed action will not adversely impact on the reliability of the U.S. electric power supply system. Copies of this application will be made available, upon request, for public inspection and copying at the address provided above or by accessing the program's Home Page at *http://oe.energy.gov/permits.htm.* Issued in Washington, DC, on May 6, 2008. Anthony J. Como, Director, Permitting and Siting, Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability. [FR Doc. E8-10366 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY [OE Docket No. EA-340] Application to Export Electric Energy; Saracen Energy Partners, LP AGENCY: Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, DOE. ACTION: Notice of application. SUMMARY: Saracen Energy Partners, LP

(SEP)has applied for authority to transmit electric energy from the United States to Canada pursuant to section 202(e) of the Federal Power Act. DATES: Comments, protests, or requests to intervene must be submitted on or before June 9, 2008. ADDRESSES: Comments, protests, or requests to intervene should be addressed as follows: Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, Mail Code: OE-20, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0350 (FAX 202-586-5860). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Russell (Program Office) 202-586-9624 or Michael Skinker (Program Attorney) 202-586-2793. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Exports of electricity from the United States to a foreign country are regulated by the Department of Energy

(DOE)pursuant to sections 301(b) and 402(f) of the Department of Energy Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7151(b), 7172(f)) and require authorization under section 202(e) of the FPA (16 U.S.C. 824a(e)). On May 1, 2008, DOE received an application from SEP for authority to transmit electric energy from the United States to Canada as a power marketer. SEP has requested an electricity export authorization with a 5-year term. SEP does not own any electric transmission facilities nor does it hold a franchised service area. The electric energy which SEP proposes to export to Canada would be surplus energy purchased from electric utilities, Federal power marketing agencies, and other entities within the United States. SEP proposes to export electric energy to Canada and to arrange for the delivery of those exports over the international transmission facilities presently owned by Basin Electric Power Cooperative, Bonneville Power Administration, Eastern Maine Electric Cooperative, International Transmission Co., Joint Owners of the Highgate Project, Long Sault, Inc., Maine Electric Power Company, Maine Public Service Company, Minnesota Power, Inc., Minnkota Power Cooperative, Inc., New York Power Authority, Niagara Mohawk Power Corp., Northern States Power Company, Vermont Electric Power Company, and Vermont Electric Transmission Company. The construction, operation, maintenance, and connection of each of the international transmission facilities to be utilized by SEP was previously authorized by a Presidential permit issued pursuant to Executive Order 10485, as amended. *Procedural Matters:* Any person desiring to become a party to these proceedings or to be heard by filing comments or protests to this application should file a petition to intervene, comment, or protest at the address provided above in accordance with §§ 385.211 or 385.214 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedures (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Fifteen copies of each comment, petition, and protest should be filed with DOE on or before the dates listed above. All filings in this proceeding should be clearly marked with Docket No. EA-340. Additional copies are to be filed directly with Allison P. Duensing, Assistant General Counsel, The Saracen Group of Companies, Five Greenway Plaza, Suite 1310, Houston, TX 77040 and Daniel E. Frank, Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP, 1275 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20004-2415. A final decision will be made on this application after the environmental impacts have been evaluated pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, and a determination is made by DOE that the proposed action will not adversely impact on the reliability of the U.S. electric power supply system. Copies of these applications will be made available, upon request, for public inspection and copying at the address provided above, by accessing the program Web site at *http://oe.energy.gov/permits.htm,* or by e-mailing Odessa Hopkins at *odessa.hopkins@hq.doe.gov.* Issued in Washington, DC, on May 6, 2008. Anthony J. Como, Director, Permitting and Siting, Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability. [FR Doc. E8-10368 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Bonneville Power Administration Columbia Basin Fish Accords AGENCY: Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), Department of Energy (DOE). ACTION: Notice of availability of Record of Decision (ROD). SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of the ROD for the 2008 Columbia Basin Fish Accords (Accords) consistent with and tiered to the Fish and Wildlife Implementation Plan Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0312, April 2003) and ROD (October 31, 2003). BPA has decided to enter into these agreements to help mitigate the impacts of the Federal Columbia River Power System on fish species, particularly salmon and steelhead listed under the Endangered Species Act with projects that are expected to produce significant and measurable biological effects. Projects will be implemented throughout the states of Idaho, Montana, Oregon, and Washington. The Accords are 10-year agreements with four tribes, two states, and two other federal agencies. The Accords will provide greater certainty and stability to BPA's mitigation funding commitments and help BPA manage its financial risks. The Accords will also resolve some of the outstanding issues regarding BPA's compliance with its fish and wildlife mitigation and recovery responsibilities. The Accords will also help BPA meet its treaty and trust responsibilities to the tribes. ADDRESSES: Copies of the ROD may be obtained by calling BPA's toll-free document request line, 1-800-622-4520. The ROD is also available on the BPA Web site, *http://www.bpa.gov/corporate/pubs/rods/2008/MOA_ROD.pdf* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sandra Ackley, Bonneville Power Administration—KEC-4, P.O. Box 3621, Portland, Oregon 97208-3621; toll-free telephone number 1-800-282-3713; fax number 503-230-5699; or e-mail *sjackley@bpa.gov* . Issued in Portland, Oregon, on May 2, 2008. Stephen J. Wright, Administrator, and Chief Executive Officer. [FR Doc. E8-10435 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 13014-000] Agency Valley Hydro, LLC ; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Motions To Intervene, Protests, and Comments May 2, 2008. Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection: a. *Type of Application:* Preliminary Permit. b. *Project No.:* 13014-000. c. *Date filed:* August 31, 2007. d. *Applicant:* Agency Valley Hydro, LLC. e. *Name of Project:* Agency Valley Dam Hydroelectric Project. f. *Location:* Malheur River in Malheur County, Oregon. It would use the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation's Agency Valley Dam. g. *Filed Pursuant to:* Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r). h. *Applicant Contact:* Mr. Brent L. Smith, COO, Symbiotics, LLC, P.O. Box 535, Rigby, ID 83442,

(208)745-0834. i. *FERC Contact:* Robert Bell,

(202)502-4126. j. *Deadline for filing comments, protests, and motions to intervene:* 60 days from the issuance date of this notice. All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. Please include the project number (P-13014-000) on any comments or motions filed. The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person in the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. k. *Description of Project:* The proposed project using the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation's Agency Valley Dam and operated in a run-of-river mode would consist of:

(1)One 223-foot-long, 72-inch-diameter steel penstock;

(2)a new powerhouse and switchyard;

(3)one turbine/generator unit with an installed capacity of 2 megawatts;

(4)a new 0.04-mile-long above ground 12.5-kilovolt transmission line extending from the switchyard to an interconnection point with the utility distribution system owned by Harney Electric Coop; and

(5)appurtenant facilities. The proposed Agency Valley Dam Project would have an average annual generation of 4 gigawatt-hours. l. This filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3676 or e-mail *FERCONLINESUPPORT@FERC.GOV.* For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item h above. m. *Competing Preliminary Permit* —Anyone desiring to file a competing application for preliminary permit for a proposed project must submit the competing application itself, or a notice of intent to file such an application, to the Commission on or before the specified comment date for the particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36). Submission of a timely notice of intent allows an interested person to file the competing preliminary permit application no later than 30 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing preliminary permit application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30 and 4.36. n. *Competing Development Application* —Any qualified development applicant desiring to file a competing development application must submit to the Commission, on or before a specified comment date for the particular application, either a competing development application or a notice of intent to file such an application. Submission of a timely notice of intent to file a development application allows an interested person to file the competing application no later than 120 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing license application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30 and 4.36. o. *Notice of Intent* —A notice of intent must specify the exact name, business address, and telephone number of the prospective applicant, and must include an unequivocal statement of intent to submit, if such an application may be filed, either a preliminary permit application or a development application (specify which type of application). A notice of intent must be served on the applicant(s) named in this public notice. p. *Proposed Scope of Studies Under Permit* —A preliminary permit, if issued, does not authorize construction. The term of the proposed preliminary permit would be 36 months. The work proposed under the preliminary permit would include economic analysis, preparation of preliminary engineering plans, and a study of environmental impacts. Based on the results of these studies, the Applicant would decide whether to proceed with the preparation of a development application to construct and operate the project. q. *Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene* —Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application. r. *Filing and Service of Responsive Documents* —Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION”, “COMPETING APPLICATION”, “PROTEST”, and “MOTION TO INTERVENE”, as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing refers. Any of the above-named documents must be filed by providing the original and the number of copies provided by the Commission's regulations to: The Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. An additional copy must be sent to Director, Division of Hydropower Administration and Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, at the above-mentioned address. A copy of any notice of intent, competing application or motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application. s. *Agency Comments* —Federal, state, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described application. A copy of the application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-10301 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 13022-000] Barren River Lake Hydro, LLC; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Motions To Intervene, Protests, and Comments May 2, 2008. Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection: a. *Type of Application:* Preliminary Permit. b. *Project No.:* 13022-000. c. *Date filed:* September 14, 2007. d. *Applicant:* Barren River Lake Hydro, LLC. e. *Name of Project:* Barren River Lake Dam Hydroelectric Project. f. *Location:* Barren River in Barren County, Kentucky. It would use the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Barren River Lake Dam. g. *Filed Pursuant to:* Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r). h. *Applicant Contact:* Mr. Brent L. Smith, COO, Symbiotics, LLC, P.O. Box 535, Rigby, ID 83442,

(208)745-0834. i. *FERC Contact:* Robert Bell,

(202)502-4126. j. *Deadline for filing comments, protests, and motions to intervene:* 60 days from the issuance date of this notice. All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. Please include the project number (P-13022-000) on any comments or motions filed. The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person in the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. k. *Description of Project:* The proposed project using the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Barren River Lake Dam and operated in a run-of-river mode would consist of:

(1)One 168-foot-long, 144-inch-diameter steel penstock;

(2)a new powerhouse and switchyard;

(3)two turbine/generator units with a combined installed capacity of 13 megawatts;

(4)a new 1-mile-long above ground 25-kilovolt transmission line extending from the switchyard to an interconnection point with the local utility's distribution system; and

(5)appurtenant facilities. The proposed Barren River Lake Dam Project would have an average annual generation of 31 gigawatt-hours. l. This filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3676 or e-mail *FERCONLINESUPPORT@FERC.GOV* . For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item h above. m. *Competing Preliminary Permit* —Anyone desiring to file a competing application for preliminary permit for a proposed project must submit the competing application itself, or a notice of intent to file such an application, to the Commission on or before the specified comment date for the particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36). Submission of a timely notice of intent allows an interested person to file the competing preliminary permit application no later than 30 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing preliminary permit application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30 and 4.36. n. *Competing Development Application* —Any qualified development applicant desiring to file a competing development application must submit to the Commission, on or before a specified comment date for the particular application, either a competing development application or a notice of intent to file such an application. Submission of a timely notice of intent to file a development application allows an interested person to file the competing application no later than 120 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing license application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30 and 4.36. o. *Notice of Intent* —A notice of intent must specify the exact name, business address, and telephone number of the prospective applicant, and must include an unequivocal statement of intent to submit, if such an application may be filed, either a preliminary permit application or a development application (specify which type of application). A notice of intent must be served on the applicant(s) named in this public notice. p. *Proposed Scope of Studies Under Permit* —A preliminary permit, if issued, does not authorize construction. The term of the proposed preliminary permit would be 36 months. The work proposed under the preliminary permit would include economic analysis, preparation of preliminary engineering plans, and a study of environmental impacts. Based on the results of these studies, the Applicant would decide whether to proceed with the preparation of a development application to construct and operate the project. q. *Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene* —Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application. r. *Filing and Service of Responsive Documents* —Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION”, “COMPETING APPLICATION”, “PROTEST”, and “MOTION TO INTERVENE”, as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing refers. Any of the above-named documents must be filed by providing the original and the number of copies provided by the Commission's regulations to: The Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. An additional copy must be sent to Director, Division of Hydropower Administration and Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, at the above-mentioned address. A copy of any notice of intent, competing application or motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application. s. *Agency Comments* —Federal, state, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described application. A copy of the application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-10302 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 785-018] Consumers Energy Company; Notice of Application Tendered for Filing With the Commission, Soliciting Additional Study Requests, and Establishing Procedural Schedule for Relicensing and a Deadline for Submission of Final Amendments May 2, 2008. Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection. a. *Type of Application:* New License. b. *Project No.:* 785-018. c. *Date Filed:* April 4, 2008. d. *Applicant:* Consumers Energy Company. e. *Name of Project:* Calkins Bridge Hydroelectric Project. f. *Location:* On the Kalamazoo River in Allegan County, Michigan. The project does not occupy federal lands. g. *Filed Pursuant to:* Federal Power Act 16 U.S.C. 791 (a)-825(r). h. *Applicant Contact:* James R. Coddington, Consumers Energy Company, One Energy Plaza, Jackson, MI 49201,

(517)788-2455. i. *FERC Contact:* Timothy Konnert,

(202)502-6359 or *timothy.konnert@ferc.gov* . j. *Cooperating agencies:* We are asking Federal, state, and local agencies and Indian tribes with jurisdiction and/or special expertise with respect to environmental issues to cooperate with us in the preparation of the environmental document. Agencies who would like to request cooperating status should follow the instructions for filing comments described in item l below. k. Pursuant to section 4.32(b)(7) of 18 CFR of the Commission's regulations, if any resource agency, Indian Tribe, or person believes that an additional scientific study should be conducted in order to form an adequate factual basis for a complete analysis of the application on its merit, the resource agency, Indian Tribe, or person must file a request for a study with the Commission not later than 60 days from the date of filing of the application, and serve a copy of the request on the applicant. l. Deadline for filing additional study requests and requests for cooperating agency status: June 3, 2008. All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Additional study requests and requests for cooperating agency status may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site ( *http://www.ferc.gov* ) under the “eFiling” link. m. This application is not ready for environmental analysis at this time. n. The existing Calkins Bridge Project consists of a 42-foot-high, 1,330-foot-long dam, consisting of 1,100 feet of earth embankment and a 230-foot concrete integral powerhouse-spillway section, creating an 8.5-mile-long, 1,550 acre reservoir with a normal water surface elevation of 615.0 feet msl, a powerhouse containing three generating units with a total installed capacity of 2,550 kW, and appurtenant facilities. o. A copy of the application is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* or toll-free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,

(202)502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item h above. You may also register online at *http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp* to be notified via e-mail of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support. p. With this notice, we are initiating consultation with the Michigan State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), as required by section 106, National Historic Preservation Act, and the regulations of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, 36 CFR 800.4. q. *Procedural schedule and final amendments:* The application will be processed according to the following Hydro Licensing Schedule. Revisions to the schedule will be made as appropriate. The Commission staff proposes to issue one environmental assessment rather than issue a draft and final EA. Comments, terms and conditions, recommendations, prescriptions, and reply comments, if any, will be addressed in an EA. Staff intends to give at least 30 days for entities to comment on the EA, and will take into consideration all comments received on the EA before final action is taken on the license application. Issue Acceptance or Deficiency Letter—June 2008 Issue Scoping Document—November 2008 Notice of application is ready for environmental analysis—March 2009 Notice of the availability of the EA—September 2009 Final amendments to the application must be filed with the Commission no later than 30 days from the issuance date of the notice of ready for environmental analysis. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-10305 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 2552-081] FPL Energy Maine Hydro LLC; Notice of Application to Amend License and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests May 2, 2008. Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection: a. *Application Type:* Request for Approval of Full Dam Removal in Lieu of Partial Removal. b. *Project No.:* 2552-081. c. *Date Filed:* April 17, 2008. d. *Applicant:* FPL Energy Maine Hydro LLC. e. *Name of Project:* Fort Halifax Hydroelectric Project. f. *Location:* The project is located on the Sebasticook River in Kennebec County, Maine. g. *Filed Pursuant to:* Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r. h. *Applicant Contact:* Dave Dominie, TRC Companies, Inc., 249 Western Avenue, Augusta, ME 04330, Tel:

(207)621-7084. i. *FERC Contact:* Andrea Claros, Tel:

(202)502-8171, and e-mail: *andrea.claros@ferc.gov* . j. *Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and protest:* June 2, 2008. All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all interveners filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person whose name appears on the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervener files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy of any motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application. k. *Description of Request:* On January 23, 2004, the Commission approved FPL Energy's application for surrender of license for the Fort Halifax Hydroelectric Project and ordered that the dam be partially removed. As a result of discussions with the Town of Winslow, Maine, FPL Energy is now requesting Commission approval to remove the entirety of the existing dam spillway, including all spillway bays, totaling approximately 330 linear feet, using mechanical demolition methods, in lieu of the approved partial removal. In order to facilitate the full removal process, the pre-breach drawdown period will be extended to two weeks and the post-breach drawdown period will be extended to one week. Given that the Commission has already issued a final decision on the surrender of the Fort Halifax Project and ordered partial removal, the issue before the Commission with regard to this filing is the proposed full removal of the dam as opposed to the approved partial removal of the dam. l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public Reference Room, located at 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426, or by calling

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

(202)502-8659. m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission. n. *Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene:* Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application. o. Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “PROTEST”, or “MOTION TO INTERVENE”, as applicable, and the Project Number (P-2552-081) of the particular application to which the filing refers. p. *Agency Comments:* Federal, state, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described application. A copy of the application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives. q. Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* under the “e-Filing” link. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-10304 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 13010-000] Mississippi 8 Hydro, LLC; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Motions To Intervene, Protests, and Comments May 2, 2008. Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection: a. *Type of Application:* Preliminary Permit. b. *Project No.:* 13010-000. c. *Date filed:* September 7, 2007. d. *Applicant:* Mississippi 8 Hydro, LLC. e. *Name of Project:* Mississippi River Lock and Dam #8 Hydroelectric Project. f. *Location:* Mississippi River in Vernon County, Wisconsin. It would use the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Mississippi River Lock and Dam #8. g. *Filed Pursuant to:* Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r). h. *Applicant Contact:* Mr. Brent L. Smith, COO, Symbiotics, LLC, P.O. Box 535, Rigby, ID 83442,

(208)745-0834. i. *FERC Contact:* Robert Bell,

(202)502-4126. j. *Deadline for filing comments, protests, and motions to intervene:* 60 days from the issuance date of this notice. All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. Please include the project number (P-13010-000) on any comments or motions filed. The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person in the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. k. Description of Project: The proposed project using the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Mississippi River Lock and Dam #8 and operated in a run-of-river mode would consist of:

(1)A new powerhouse and switchyard;

(2)four turbine/generator units with a combined installed capacity of 35 megawatts;

(3)a new 3-mile-long above ground 69-kilovolt transmission line extending from the switchyard to an interconnection point with the local utility's distribution system; and

(4)appurtenant facilities. The proposed Lock and Dam #8 Project would have an average annual generation of 140 gigawatt-hours. l. This filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3676 or e-mail *FERCONLINESUPPORT@FERC.GOV.* For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item h above. m. *Competing Preliminary Permit* —Anyone desiring to file a competing application for preliminary permit for a proposed project must submit the competing application itself, or a notice of intent to file such an application, to the Commission on or before the specified comment date for the particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36). Submission of a timely notice of intent allows an interested person to file the competing preliminary permit application no later than 30 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing preliminary permit application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30 and 4.36. n. *Competing Development Application* —Any qualified development applicant desiring to file a competing development application must submit to the Commission, on or before a specified comment date for the particular application, either a competing development application or a notice of intent to file such an application. Submission of a timely notice of intent to file a development application allows an interested person to file the competing application no later than 120 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing license application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30 and 4.36. o. *Notice of Intent* —A notice of intent must specify the exact name, business address, and telephone number of the prospective applicant, and must include an unequivocal statement of intent to submit, if such an application may be filed, either a preliminary permit application or a development application (specify which type of application). A notice of intent must be served on the applicant(s) named in this public notice. p. *Proposed Scope of Studies Under Permit* —A preliminary permit, if issued, does not authorize construction. The term of the proposed preliminary permit would be 36 months. The work proposed under the preliminary permit would include economic analysis, preparation of preliminary engineering plans, and a study of environmental impacts. Based on the results of these studies, the Applicant would decide whether to proceed with the preparation of a development application to construct and operate the project. q. *Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene* —Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application. r. *Filing and Service of Responsive Documents* —Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION”, “COMPETING APPLICATION”, “PROTEST”, and “MOTION TO INTERVENE”, as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing refers. Any of the above-named documents must be filed by providing the original and the number of copies provided by the Commission's regulations to: The Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. An additional copy must be sent to Director, Division of Hydropower Administration and Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, at the above-mentioned address. A copy of any notice of intent, competing application or motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application. s. *Agency Comments* —Federal, state, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described application. A copy of the application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-10299 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 13027-000] Stennis Hydro, LLC; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Motions To Intervene, Protests, and Comments May 2, 2008. Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection: a. *Type of Application:* Preliminary Permit. b. *Project No.:* 13027-000. c. *Date filed:* September 20, 2007. d. *Applicant:* Stennis Hydro, LLC. e. *Name of Project:* Stennis Lock and Dam Hydroelectric Project. f. *Location:* Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway in Lowndes County, Mississippi. It would use the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Stennis Lock and Dam. g. *Filed Pursuant to:* Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r). h. *Applicant Contact:* Mr. Brent L. Smith, COO, Symbiotics, LLC, P.O. Box 535, Rigby, ID 83442,

(208)745-0834. i. *FERC Contact:* Robert Bell,

(202)502-4126. j. *Deadline for filing comments, protests, and motions to intervene:* 60 days from the issuance date of this notice. All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. Please include the project number (P-13027-000) on any comments or motions filed. The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person in the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. k. Description of Project: The proposed project using the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Stennis Lock and Dam and operated in a run-of-river mode would consist of:

(1)A new powerhouse and switchyard;

(2)three turbine/generator units with a combined installed capacity of 19 megawatts;

(3)a new 2-mile-long above ground 46-kilovolt transmission line extending from the switchyard to an interconnection point with the local utility's distribution system; and

(4)appurtenant facilities. The proposed Stennis Lock and Dam Project would have an average annual generation of 58 gigawatt-hours. l. This filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3676 or e-mail *FERCONLINESUPPORT@FERC.GOV* . For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item h above. m. *Competing Preliminary Permit* —Anyone desiring to file a competing application for preliminary permit for a proposed project must submit the competing application itself, or a notice of intent to file such an application, to the Commission on or before the specified comment date for the particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36). Submission of a timely notice of intent allows an interested person to file the competing preliminary permit application no later than 30 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing preliminary permit application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30 and 4.36. n. *Competing Development Application* —Any qualified development applicant desiring to file a competing development application must submit to the Commission, on or before a specified comment date for the particular application, either a competing development application or a notice of intent to file such an application. Submission of a timely notice of intent to file a development application allows an interested person to file the competing application no later than 120 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing license application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30 and 4.36. o. *Notice of Intent* —A notice of intent must specify the exact name, business address, and telephone number of the prospective applicant, and must include an unequivocal statement of intent to submit, if such an application may be filed, either a preliminary permit application or a development application (specify which type of application). A notice of intent must be served on the applicant(s) named in this public notice. p. *Proposed Scope of Studies Under Permit* —A preliminary permit, if issued, does not authorize construction. The term of the proposed preliminary permit would be 36 months. The work proposed under the preliminary permit would include economic analysis, preparation of preliminary engineering plans, and a study of environmental impacts. Based on the results of these studies, the Applicant would decide whether to proceed with the preparation of a development application to construct and operate the project. q. *Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene* —Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application. r. *Filing and Service of Responsive Documents* —Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION”, “COMPETING APPLICATION”, “PROTEST”, and “MOTION TO INTERVENE”, as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing refers. Any of the above-named documents must be filed by providing the original and the number of copies provided by the Commission's regulations to: The Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. An additional copy must be sent to Director, Division of Hydropower Administration and Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, at the above-mentioned address. A copy of any notice of intent, competing application or motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application. s. *Agency Comments* —Federal, state, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described application. A copy of the application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-10303 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP08-165-000] Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company; Notice of Application May 2, 2008. Take notice that on April 21, 2008, Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company (Tennessee), 1001 Louisiana, Houston, Texas 77002, filed in Docket No. CP08-165-000, an application pursuant to section 7(b) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA), for authorization to abandon, by sale, to PSI Midstream Partners, L.P.

(PSI)an offshore and off system supply pipeline designated as Line No. 823X-2200. This pipeline segment extends from an interconnection with an interstate transmission system in East Cameron Block 227 to West Cameron Block 498. This application is being filed concurrently with PSI's application that seeks the Commission's declaratory order designating the pipeline as a gathering facility. This filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “e-Library” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC at FERCOnlineSupport or call toll-free,

(866)208-3676, or for TTY,

(202)502-8659. Any questions regarding this application should be directed to Jay V. Allen, Senior Counsel, 1001 Louisiana, Houston, Texas 77002, at

(713)420-5589. Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9, within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either: complete its environmental assessment

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

(FEIS)or EA for this proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA. There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must submit 14 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the proceeding. However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project. The Commission will consider these comments in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly involved in the protest. Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings associated with the Commission's environmental review process. Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentors will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court review of the Commission's final order. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments protests and interventions via the internet in lieu of paper. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web ( *http://www.ferc.gov* ) site under the “e-Filing” link. *Comment Date:* May 23, 3008. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-10292 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 13013-000] Warrior Hydro, LLC; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Motions To Intervene, Protests, and Comments May 2, 2008. Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection: a. *Type of Application:* Preliminary Permit. b. *Project No.:* 13013-000. c. *Date filed:* September 7, 2007. d. *Applicant:* Warrior Hydro, LLC. e. *Name of Project:* A. I. Selden Lock and Dam Hydroelectric Project. f. *Location:* Black Warrior River in Hale County, Alabama. It would use the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' A. I. Selden Lock and Dam. g. *Filed Pursuant to:* Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r). h. *Applicant Contact:* Mr. Brent L. Smith, COO, Symbiotics, LLC, P.O. Box 535, Rigby, ID 83442,

(208)745-0834. i. *FERC Contact:* Robert Bell,

(202)502-4126. j. *Deadline for filing comments, protests, and motions to intervene:* 60 days from the issuance date of this notice. All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's web site under the “e-Filing” link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. Please include the project number (P-13013-000) on any comments or motions filed. The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person in the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. k. *Description of Project:* The proposed project using the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' A. I. Selden Lock and Dam and operated in a run-of-river mode would consist of:

(1)A new powerhouse and switchyard;

(2)three turbine/generator units with a combined installed capacity of 20 megawatts;

(3)a new 3-mile-long above ground 46-kilovolt transmission line extending from the switchyard to an interconnection point with the utility distribution system owned by Black Warrior Electric Membership Corporation; and

(4)appurtenant facilities. The proposed A. I. Selden Lock and Dam Project would have an average annual generation of 70 gigawatt-hours. l. This filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3676 or e-mail *FERCONLINESUPPORT@FERC.GOV.* For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item h above. m. *Competing Preliminary Permit* —Anyone desiring to file a competing application for preliminary permit for a proposed project must submit the competing application itself, or a notice of intent to file such an application, to the Commission on or before the specified comment date for the particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36). Submission of a timely notice of intent allows an interested person to file the competing preliminary permit application no later than 30 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing preliminary permit application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30 and 4.36. n. *Competing Development Application* —Any qualified development applicant desiring to file a competing development application must submit to the Commission, on or before a specified comment date for the particular application, either a competing development application or a notice of intent to file such an application. Submission of a timely notice of intent to file a development application allows an interested person to file the competing application no later than 120 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing license application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30 and 4.36. o. *Notice of Intent* —A notice of intent must specify the exact name, business address, and telephone number of the prospective applicant, and must include an unequivocal statement of intent to submit, if such an application may be filed, either a preliminary permit application or a development application (specify which type of application). A notice of intent must be served on the applicant(s) named in this public notice. p. *Proposed Scope of Studies Under Permit* —A preliminary permit, if issued, does not authorize construction. The term of the proposed preliminary permit would be 36 months. The work proposed under the preliminary permit would include economic analysis, preparation of preliminary engineering plans, and a study of environmental impacts. Based on the results of these studies, the Applicant would decide whether to proceed with the preparation of a development application to construct and operate the project. q. *Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene* —Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application. r. *Filing and Service of Responsive Documents* —Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION”, “COMPETING APPLICATION”, “PROTEST”, and “MOTION TO INTERVENE”, as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing refers. Any of the above-named documents must be filed by providing the original and the number of copies provided by the Commission's regulations to: The Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. An additional copy must be sent to Director, Division of Hydropower Administration and Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, at the above-mentioned address. A copy of any notice of intent, competing application or motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application. s. *Agency Comments* —Federal, state, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described application. A copy of the application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-10300 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket Nos. ER99-2948-012; ER00-2918-011; ER00-2917-011; ER97-2261-022; ER01-556-010; ER01-1654-013; ER02-2567-011; ER02-699-005; ER04-485-008; ER07-247-003; ER07-245-003; ER07-244-003] Baltimore Gas and Electric Company; Constellation Power Source Generation, Inc.; Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Inc.; Constellation Energy Commodities Group, Inc.; Handsome Lake Energy, LLC; Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, LLC; Constellation NewEnergy, Inc.; Constellation Energy Commodities Group Maine, LLC; R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, LLC; Raven One, LLC; Raven Two, LLC; Raven Three, LLC; Notice of Filing May 2, 2008. Take notice that on April 21, 2008, the above-captioned entities (collective, the Constellation MBR Enitities) filed their joint market-power analysis update for the Northeast region and certain amendments to their market-based rate tariffs in compliance with Order No. 697. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this proceeding. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov* . Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible on-line at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* , or call

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

(202)502-8659. Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on May 12, 2008. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-10294 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Notice of Filing May 2, 2008. PSEG Energy Resources & Trade LLC ER99-3151-008 Public Service Electric and Gas Company ER97-837-007 PSEG Power Connecticut LLC ER03-327-002 PSEG Fossil LLC ER08-447-000 PSEG Nuclear LLC ER08-448-000 PPL Electric Utilities Corporation ER00-1712-008 Lower Mount Bethel Energy, LLC ER02-2408-003 PPL Brunner Island, LLC ER00-744-006 PPL Holtwood, LLC PPL Martins Creek, LLC PPL Montour, LLC PPL Susquehanna, LLC PPL University Park, LLC ER02-1327-005 PPL EnergyPlus, LLC ER00-1703-003 PPL Edgewood Energy, LLC ER02-1749-003 PPL Shoreham Energy, LLC ER02-1747-003 PPL Great Works, LLC ER99-4503-005 PPL Maine, LLC ER00-2186-003 PPL Wallingford Energy LLC ER01-1559-004 Atlantic City Electric Company ER96-1361-013 Delmarva Power & Light ER99-2781-011 Potomac Electric Power Company ER98-4138-009 Conectiv Energy Supply, Inc. ER00-1770-019 Conectiv Bethlehem, LLC ER02-453-010 Pepco Energy Services, Inc. ER98-3096-015 Bethlehem Renewable Energy, LLC ER07-903-002 Eastern Landfill Gas, LLC ER05-1054-003 Potomac Power Resources, LLC ER01-202-008 Fauquier Landfill Gas, LLC ER04-472-007 Dominion Energy Marketing, Inc. ER01-468-008 Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. ER00-3621-009 Dominion Nuclear Marketing III, LLC ER00-3746-009 Dominion Energy Kewaunee, Inc. ER04-318-004 Dominion Energy Brayton Point, LLC ER05-36-005 Dominion Energy Manchester Street, Inc. ER05-37-005 Dominion Energy New England, Inc. ER05-34-005 Dominion Energy Salem ER05-35-005 Dominion Retail, Inc. ER04-249-005 Elwood Energy, LLC ER99-1695-010 Fairless Energy, LLC ER02-23-011 Kincaid Generation, LLC ER97-30-006 State Line Energy, LLC ER96-2869-013 Virginia Electric and Power Company ER97-3561-005 ER00-1737-011 Baltimore Gas and Electric Company ER99-2948-012 Constellation Power Source Generation, Inc. ER00-2918-011 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Inc. ER00-2917-011 Constellation Energy Commodities Group, Inc. ER97-2261-022 Handsome Lake Energy, LLC ER01-556-010 Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, LLC ER01-1654-013 Constellation NewEnergy, Inc. ER02-2567-011 Constellation Energy Commodities Group Maine, LLC ER02-699-005 R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant ER04-485-008 Raven One, LLC ER07-247-003 Raven Two, LLC ER07-245-003 Raven Three, LLC ER07-244-003 Exelon Generation Company, LLC ER00-3251-015 AmerGen Energy Company, LLC ER99-754-016 Commonwealth Edison Company ER98-1734-014 Exelon Energy Company ER01-1919-011 PECO Energy Company ER01-1147-006 Exelon West Medway, LLC ER01-513-021 Exelon New Boston, LLC Exelon Framingham, LLC Exelon Wyman, LLC Exelon New England Power Marketing, L.P. ER99-2404-011 FirstEnergy Operating Companies ER01-1403-006 Pennsylvania Power Company, *et al.* ER06-1443-002 Jersey Central Power & Light Company ER04-366-005 FirstEnergy Solutions Corp. ER01-2968-007 FirstEnergy Generation Corporation ER01-845-006 FirstEnergy Nuclear Generating Corporation ER05-1122-004 FirstEnergy Generating Mansfield Unit 1 Corp. (collectively PJM RTO Filers) ER08-107-001 Take notice that on April 30, 2008, The PJM RTO filers filed a partial compliance filing, pursuant to the Commission's April 4, 2008 Letter Order, requesting addition information related to PJM RTO filer's upated market power analyses. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this proceeding. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov.* Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible on-line at *http://www.ferc.gov,* using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov,* or call

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

(202)502-8659. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on May 20, 2008. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-10295 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 11910-002 Oregon] Applegate Dam; Notice of Availability of Final Environmental Assessment May 2, 2008. In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) regulations, 18 CFR Part 380 (Order No. 486, 52 FR 47897), Office of Energy Projects staff have reviewed Symbiotics, LLC's application for the proposed Applegate Dam Project and prepared this final environmental assessment (FEA). The proposed project would be located at the existing U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' (Corps) Applegate dam located at river mile 45.7 on the Applegate River, near the town of Medford, in Jackson County, Oregon. The proposed project facilities would occupy 7.1 acres of federal land administered by the Corps below and adjacent to the dam. In addition, the project boundary would include 2.32 acres of National Forest System land and 0.66 acre of U.S. Bureau of Land Management land. This FEA contains the Commission staff's analysis of the potential future environmental effects of the project. Staff has concluded that licensing the project, with appropriate environmental protective measures, would not constitute a major federal action that would significantly affect the quality of the human environment. A copy of the FEA is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* or toll-free at

(866)208-3676, or for TTY,

(202)502-8659. You may also register online at *http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp* to be notified via e-mail of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support. Please contact Tim Looney by telephone at

(202)502-6096 or by e-mail at *Timothy.Looney@ferc.gov* if you have any questions. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-10297 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 12455-004 (PA)] Borough of Lehighton, PA; Notice of Availability of Environmental Assessment May 2, 2008. In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA)of 1969 and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) regulations, 18 CFR part 380 (Order No. 486, 52 FR 47879), the Office of Energy Projects has reviewed the application for an original license for the Beltzville Hydroelectric Project (project), to be located on Pohopoco Creek in Carbon County, Pennsylvania, and has prepared an Environmental Assessment

(EA)in cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps of Engineers) and the Delaware River Basin Commission (Basin Commission). In the EA, Commission staff analyze the potential environmental effects of licensing the project and conclude that issuing a license for the project, with appropriate environmental measures, would not constitute a major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. A copy of the EA is on file with the Commission and is available for public inspection. The EA may also be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* or toll-free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,

(202)502-8659. Any comments should be filed within 30 days from the issuance date of this notice, and should be addressed to the Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Room 1-A, Washington, DC 20426. Please affix “Beltzville Hydroelectric Project No. 12455-004” to all comments. Comments may be filed electronically via Internet in lieu of paper. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings (See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “eFiling” link). For further information, contact John Ramer at

(202)502-8969. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-10298 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. AC08-57-000] Trans Union Interstate Pipeline, L.P.; Notice of Filing May 2, 2008. Take notice that on April 15, 2008 Trans Union Interstate Pipeline, L.P. submitted a request for waiver of the FERC Form No. 2-A under Section 260.2 of the Commission's regulations. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov.* Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible on-line at *http://www.ferc.gov,* using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov,* or call

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

(202)502-8659. Comment Date: June 1, 2008. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-10306 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ID-3824-005] William H. Spence; Notice of Filing May 2, 2008. Take notice that on April 23, 2008, William H. Spence tendered for filing an application to hold interlocking positions pursuant to section 305(b) of the Federal Power Act. On April 24, 2008, Attachment A was submitted, which was inadvertently omitted from the April 23, 2008 application. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this proceeding. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov* . Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible on-line at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* , or call

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

(202)502-8659. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on May 14, 2008. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-10296 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP08-183-000] PSI Midstream Partners, L.P.; Notice of Petition for a Declaratory Order May 2, 2008. Take notice that on April 24, 2008, PSI Midstream Partners, L.P. (PSI), filed pursuant to Rule 207(a)(2) of the Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, a petition for a declaratory order. In its petition, PSI requests the Commission to issue an order declaring that certain facilities to be acquired by PSI, non-jurisdictional gathering facilities pursuant to section 1(b) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA). The facilities to be acquired by PSI consist of a natural gas lateral pipeline, which extends from West Cameron Block 498 to an interconnection with a pipeline owned and operated by Texas Eastern Transmission Company (TETCO) in East Cameron B lock 227. Tennessee is filing contemporaneously with PSI's petition an application pursuant to section 7(b) of the NGA to abandon and convey the lateral pipeline to PSI. This filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “e-Library” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC at FERCOnlineSupport or call toll-free,

(866)208-3676, or for TTY,

(202)502-8659. Any questions regarding this application should be directed to Matthew M. Schreck, counsel to PSI, 9525 Katy Freeway, Suite 420, Houston, Texas 77024, at

(713)444-6689 or *matt@airmail.net* . Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9, within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either: Complete its environmental assessment

(FEIS)or EA for this proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA. There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must submit 14 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the proceeding. However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project. The Commission will consider these comments in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly involved in the protest. Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings associated with the Commission's environmental review process. Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentors will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court review of the Commission's final order. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments protests and interventions via the internet in lieu of paper. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web ( *http://www.ferc.gov* ) site under the “e-Filing” link. *Comment Date:* May 23, 2008. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-10293 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [ Docket No. RM98-1-000] Records Governing Off-the-Record Communications; Public Notice May 2, 2008. This constitutes notice, in accordance with 18 CFR 385.2201(b), of the receipt of prohibited and exempt off-the-record communications. Order No. 607 (64 FR 51222, September 22, 1999) requires Commission decisional employees, who make or receive a prohibited or exempt off-the-record communication relevant to the merits of a contested proceeding, to deliver to the Secretary of the Commission, a copy of the communication, if written, or a summary of the substance of any oral communication. Prohibited communications are included in a public, non-decisional file associated with, but not a part of, the decisional record of the proceeding. Unless the Commission determines that the prohibited communication and any responses thereto should become a part of the decisional record, the prohibited off-the-record communication will not be considered by the Commission in reaching its decision. Parties to a proceeding may seek the opportunity to respond to any facts or contentions made in a prohibited off-the-record communication, and may request that the Commission place the prohibited communication and responses thereto in the decisional record. The Commission will grant such a request only when it determines that fairness so requires. Any person identified below as having made a prohibited off-the-record communication shall serve the document on all parties listed on the official service list for the applicable proceeding in accordance with Rule 2010, 18 CFR 385.2010. Exempt off-the-record communications are included in the decisional record of the proceeding, unless the communication was with a cooperating agency as described by 40 CFR 1501.6, made under 18 CFR 385.2201(e)

(1)(v). The following is a list of off-the-record communications recently received by the Secretary of the Commission. The communications listed are grouped by docket numbers in ascending order. These filings are available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number, excluding the last three digits, in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, please contact FERC, Online Support at *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* or toll free at

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

(202)502-8659. Docket No. Date received Presenter or requester Prohibited CP07-208-000 4-28-08 Michael L. Carey. Exempt 1. CP07-62-000 4-29-08 Hon. Barbara A. Mikulski. Hon. Benjamin L. Cardin. Hon. Elijah E. Cummings. Hon. C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger. Hon. John P. Sarbanes. 2. CP07-208-000 4-25-08 Hon. George V. Voinovich. 3. EL08-39-000 4-14-08 Hon. RoAnn M. Destito. 4. EL08-44-000 4-22-08 Hon. Matthew E. Baker. 5. Project No. 2197-000 4-10-08 Hon. Philip E. Berger. 6. Project No. 10395-000 4-22-08 Hon. Sherrod Brown. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-10291 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-6698-7] Environmental Impact Statements and Regulations; Availability of EPA Comments Availability of EPA comments prepared pursuant to the Environmental Review Process (ERP), under section 309 of the Clean Air Act and Section 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental Policy Act as amended. Requests for copies of EPA comments can be directed to the Office of Federal Activities at 202-564-7167. An explanation of the ratings assigned to draft environmental impact statements

(EISs)was published in FR dated April 11, 2008 (73 FR 19833). Draft EISs EIS No. 20070436, ERP No. D-FHW-B40339-ME, Wiscasset Route 1 Corridor Study Project, To Relieve Traffic Congestion and Improve Safety, US Army COE Section 404 Permit, Wiscasset and Edgecomb Counties, ME. *Summary:* EPA expressed environmental concerns about wetland, water, and air quality impacts. EPA also requested analysis of cumulative impacts. Rating EC2. EIS No. 20080019, ERP No. D-MMS-B09802-00, Cape Wind Energy Project, Construction, Operation and Maintenance, and Decommissioning of an Electric Generation Facility, Barnstable, Nantucket and Duke County, MA and Washington County, RI. *Summary:* EPA's comments highlighted the need for renewable energy sources in the region and underscored the importance of a comprehensive consideration of alternatives, impacts and appropriate mitigation. Rating EC2. EIS No. 20080050, ERP No. D-FRA-C50016-NJ, Portal Bridge Capacity Enhancement Project, To Replace the nearly 100-Year-Old Portal Bridge and Eliminate Capacity Constraints on the Northeast Corridor between Swift Interlocking and Secaucus Transfer Station, Funding, U.S. Army Corp Section 10 and 404 Permits, Hackensack River, Hudson County, NJ. *Summary:* EPA expressed environmental concerns about air quality and wetland impacts, and requested that a general conformity determination, wetlands mitigation, noise mitigation and a cumulative impacts discussion be included in the Final EIS. Rating EC2. EIS No. 20080053, ERP No. D-FHW-D40341-DC, South Capitol Street Project, Replacement of the Fredrick Douglas Memorial Bridge, from Firth Sterling Avenue, SE., to Independence Avenue and the Suitland Parkway from Martin Luther King, Jr. Avenue, SE., to South Capitol Street, Washington, District of Columbia. *Summary:* EPA expressed environmental concerns about air quality impacts and requested additional PM2.5 hot spot analysis. Rating EC2. EIS No. 20080074, ERP No. D-IBR-K91014-CA, American Basin Fish Screen and Habitat Improvement Project, Construction and Operation of one or two Positive-Barrier Fish Screen Diversion Facilities, Funding and U.S. Army COE Section 10 and 404 Permits, Natomas Mutual, Sacramento and Sutter Counties, CA. *Summary:* While EPA has no objections to the proposed action, it did request clarification on resource conservation issues, canal modifications, costs, fisheries, and pumping design limits. Rating LO. EIS No. 20080090, ERP No. D-BIA-K60040-CA, Enterprise Rancheria Gaming Facility and Hotel Fee-To-Trust Acquisition Project, Implementation, Federal Trust, Estom Yumeka Maida Tribe, Yuba County, CA. *Summary:* EPA does not object to the proposed project, but suggested additional mitigation measures to further reduce environmental impacts. Rating LO. EIS No. 20080112, ERP No. DS-NOA-K90031-CA, Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary Management Plan, Supplement/Replace Information, Implementation, Santa Barbara and Ventura Counties, CA. *Summary:* EPA does not object to the proposed project. Rating LO. Final EISs EIS No. 20070525, ERP No. F-NPS-K65324-CA, Big Lagoon Wetland and Creek Restoration Project, To Restore a Functional, Self-Sustaining Ecosystem, including Wetland, Riparian, and Aquatic Components, Golden Gate National Area, Muir Beach, Marin County, CA. *Summary:* No formal comment letter was sent to the preparing agency. EIS No. 20080034, ERP No. F-FHW-B40097-NH, Spaulding Turnpike Improvements Project, Reconstruction and Widening of a 3.5-mile Section from U.S. Route 4 and NH Route 16, US Coast Guard Bridge Permit, NPDES Permit and US Army COE Section 404 Permit, Town of Newington, City of Dover, Strafford and Rockingham Counties, NH. *Summary:* EPA had no outstanding objections to the project, but continued to encourage NHDOT/FHWA to commit to mitigation to address anticipated air quality impacts. EIS No. 20080058, ERP No. F-BOP-E81040-AL, Aliceville, Alabama Area, Proposed Federal Correctional Complex, To Address the Growing Federal Inmate Population, Pickens County, AL. *Summary:* EPA continues to have environmental concerns about aquatic resource impacts, and requested commitments to mitigate those impacts in the Record of Decision. EIS No. 20080065, ERP No. F-BLM-L65513-ID, Snake River Birds of Prey National Conservation Area, Resource Management Plan, Implementation, Ada, Canyon, Elmore, Owyhee Counties, ID. *Summary:* EPA supports the goals and objectives of the Resources Management Plan; however, we still have concerns with potential environmental impacts from grazing. EIS No. 20080066, ERP No. F-BLM-L65471-ID, Fire, Fuels and Related Vegetation Management Direction Plan Amendment, Upper Snake River District (The District), Amending 12 Existing Land Use Plans, Several Counties, ID. *Summary:* EPA supports protecting sagebrush steppe ecosystems and associated wildlife species. However, we continue to express concerns with potential impacts to air quality, from prescribed fire use allowed under Alternative E. We believe that additional siting information for fire treatments and air quality monitoring should be considered. EIS No. 20080089, ERP No. F-BLM-K65305-CA, United States Gypsum Expansion/Modernization Project, Expand and Upgrade Plaster City Plant to Increase Wallboard Production Capacity with Related increases in Water Supply, Right-of-Way Grant, Imperial County, CA. *Summary:* EPA continues to expressed environmental concerns about potential impacts to groundwater quality and quantity and waters of the U.S., and recommended the Bureau of Land Management address these issues prior to issuing Record of Decision the mining permit. EIS No. 20080097, ERP No. F-FRC-K05065-CA, Upper American River Hydroelectric FERC NO. 2101-084, El Dorado and Sacramento Counties, CA and Chili Bar Hydroelectric FERC No. 2155-024, El Dorado County, CA, Issuance of a New License for the Existing and Proposed Hydropower Projects. *Summary:* No formal comment letter was sent to the preparing agency. EIS No. 20080101, ERP No. F-FHW-L40229-ID, ID-75 Timmerman to Ketchum—US-20 to Saddle Road, Preferred Alternative is 2, Increase Roadway and Transportation Safety, Cities of Bellevue, Hailey, Ketchum and the City of Sun Valley, Blaine County, ID. *Summary:* EPA continues to recommend that construction mitigation measures are augmented to further release minimize air toxics and diesel particulate matter emissions. EIS No. 20080110, ERP No. F-BIA-K65299-CA, Scotts Valley Band of Pomo Indians, Proposed 29.87 Acre Fee-to-Trust Transfer and Casino Project, Contra Costa County. *Summary:* EPA's concerns were addressed in the Final EIS; therefore, EPA does not object to the proposed project. EIS No. 20080116, ERP No. F-FRC-G03035-00r, Gulf Crossing Project, Construction and Operation of Natural Gas Pipeline to Facilitate the Transport of up to 1.73 Billion Cubic Feet Per Day of Natural Gas, Locate in various Counties and Parishes in OK, TX, LA and MS. *Summary:* EPA continues to have environmental concerns about air quality impacts. EIS No. 20080132, ERP No. F-USN-D11042-VA, Marine Corps Base Quantico

(MCBQ)Virginia Project, Proposes Development of the Westside of MCBQ and the 2005 Base Realignment and Closure Action at MCBQ, Implementation, Quantico, VA. *Summary:* EPA has determined that the U.S. Marine Corps has adequately addressed its comments within the FEIS; therefore, EPA does not object to the proposed project. EIS No. 20080098, ERP No. FS-COE-G39044-TX, Central City Project, Proposed Modification to the Authorized Projects which provides Flood Damage Reduction, Habitat Improvement, Recreation and Urban Revitalization, Upper Trinity River Central City, Upper Trinity River Basin, Trinity River, Fort Worth, TX. *Summary:* No formal comment letter was sent to the preparing agency. Dated: May 6, 2008. Robert W. Hargrove, Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities. [FR Doc. E8-10401 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [ER-FRL-6698-6] Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability *Responsible Agency:* Office of Federal Activities, General Information

(202)564-7167 or *http://www.epa.gov/compliance/neap/.* Weekly Receipt of Environmental Impact Statements Filed 04/28/2008 Through 05/02/2008 Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9. *EIS No. 20080166, Revised Draft EIS, AFS, WI,* Cayuga Project, New Information Regarding American Marten, Regional Forester Sensitive Species (RFSS), Changed Condition on the Landscape from Spruce Decline and New Non-Native Invasive Species Survey Information, Chequamegon-Nicolet National Forest, Great Divide Ranger District, Ashland County, WI, *Comment Period Ends:* 06/23/2008, *Contact:* Patty Beyer 906-226-1499. *EIS No. 20080167, Draft EIS, COE, CO,* Northern Integrated Supply Project, Construction and Operation a Regional Water Supply to Serve the Current and Future Water Needs of 12 Towns and Water District, Approval of Section 404 Permit Application, Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District, Larimer and Weld Counties, CO, *Comment Period Ends:* 06/30/2008, *Contact:* Chandler J. Peter 303-979-4120. *EIS No. 20080168, Final EIS, AFS, AK,* Iyouktug Timber Sales, Proposes Harvesting Timber, Implementation, Hoonah Ranger District, Tongass National Forest, Hoonah, AK, *Wait Period Ends:* 06/09/2008, *Contact:* Richard Jennings 907-945-3631. *EIS No. 20080169, Revised Draft EIS, COE, CA,* Berth 97-109 (China Shipping) Container Terminal Project, Construction and Operation, Issuance of Section 404

(CWA)and Section 10 Rivers and Harbor Act Permits, Port of Los Angeles, Los Angeles County, CA, *Comment Period Ends:* 06/30/2008, *Contact:* Dr. Spencer D. MacNeil 805-585-2152. *EIS No. 20080170, Final EIS, AFS, MT,* Young Dodge Project, Proposed Timber Harvest and Associate Activities, Prescribed Burning, Road and Recreation Management, Kootenai National Forest, Rexford Ranger District, Lincoln County, MT, *Wait Period Ends:* 06/09/2008, *Contact:* Pat Price 406-296-7163. *EIS No. 20080171, Draft EIS, NOA, WA,* Makah Whale Hunt Project, Proposed Authorization to Makah Indiana Tribe's the Right to Hunt Whales (Gray Whales (Eschrichtius robustus) under the 1855 Treaty of Neah Bay, WA, *Comment Period Ends:* 07/07/2008, *Contact:* Donna Darm 206-526-6150. *EIS No. 20080172, Draft Supplement, COE, CA,* Rio del Oro Specific Plan Project, New Information on Biological Resource and Water Supply, City of Rancho Cordova, Sacramento County, CA, *Comment Period Ends:* 07/07/2008, *Contact:* Kathleen Dadey, Ph.D 916-557-7253. *EIS No. 20080173, Final Supplement, FTA, TX,* North Corridor Fixed Guideway Project, Updated/Additional Information on the Locally Preferred Alternative, Proposed Transit Improvements from University of Houston (UH)-Downtown Station to Northline Mall, Harris County, TX, *Wait Period Ends:* 06/09/2008, *Contact:* Timothy Lidiak 817-978-0550. *EIS No. 20080174, Final EIS, AFS, OR,* Crawford Project and Proposed Nonsignificant Forest Plan Amendments, Commercial Timber Harvest, Prescribed Burning, Adjustments to Dedicated Old Growth Areas, and Road Closure and Decommissioning Activities, Implementation, Blue Mountain Ranger District, Malheur National Forest, Grant County, OR, *Wait Period Ends:* 06/09/2008, *Contact:* Ryan Falk 541-820-3800. *EIS No. 20080175, Final EIS, AFS, 00,* Sage Steppe Ecosystem Restoration Strategy, Implementation, Modoc National Forest, Modoc, Lassen, Shasta Counties, CA and Washoe County, NV, *Wait Period Ends:* 06/09/2008, *Contact:* Rob Jeffers 530-233-8816. *EIS No. 20080176, Final EIS, AFS, CA,* North 49 Forest Health Recovery Project, Restore Fire Adapted Forest System, Located in the Red (MA-16) and Logan (MA-45) Management Areas, Hat Creek Ranger District, Lassen National Forest, Shasta County, CA, *Wait Period Ends:* 06/09/2008, *Contact:* Kit Mullen 530-336-5521. *EIS No. 20080177, Final EIS, USN, HI,* Hawaii Range Complex

(HRC)Project, Preferred Alternative is 3, To Support and Maintain Navy Pacific Fleet Training, and Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E) Operations, Kauai, Honolulu, Maui and Hawaii Counties, HI, *Wait Period Ends:* 06/09/2008, *Contact:* Tom Clements 866-767-3347. *EIS No. 20080178, Final EIS, AFS, UT,* Big Creek Vegetation Treatment Project, Preferred Alternative is 1, To Treat 4,800 Acres of Aspen Conifer and Sagebrush Communities, Ogden Ranger District, Wasatch-Cache National Forest, Rich County, UT, *Wait Period Ends:* 06/09/2008, *Contact:* Chip Sibbernsen 801-625-5112. *EIS No. 20080179, Final Supplement, FTA, TX,* Southeast Corridor Project, Preferred Alternative is the Light Rail Alternative, Proposed Fixed-Guideway Transit System, Funding, Metropolitan Transit Authority (METRO) of Harris County, Houston, Harris County, TX, *Wait Period Ends:* 06/11/2008, *Contact:* Timothy Lidiak 817-978-0550. *EIS No. 20080180, Fourth Draft Supplement, FTA, 00,* South Corridor Portland-Milwaukie Light Rail Project, Proposal to Develop Light Rail Transit in Final Segment, Connecting downtown Portland, OR, the City of Milwaukie and north Clackamas and Multnomah, OR and Clark County, WA, *Comment Period Ends:* 06/23/2008, *Contact:* Mark Turpel 206-220-7954. Amended Notices *EIS No. 20080067, Draft EIS, FHW, MI,* Detroit River International Crossing Study, Proposed Border Crossing System between the International Border Cities of Detroit, Michigan and Windsor, Ontario, Wayne County, MI, *Comment Period Ends:* 05/29/2008, *Contact:* David T. Williams 517-702-1820. Revision of FR Notice Published 02/29/2008: Extending Comment Period from 04/29/2008 to 05/29/2008. *EIS No. 20080103, Draft EIS, USN, FL,* Mayport Naval Station Project, Proposed Homeporting of Additional Surface Ships, Several Permits, Mayport, FL, *Comment Period Ends:* 05/27/2008, *Contact:* William Sloger 874-820-5797. Revision to FR Published 03/28/2008: Extending Comment Period from 05/12/2008 to 05/27/20008. Dated: May 6, 2008. Robert W. Hargrove, Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities. [FR Doc. E8-10402 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Sunshine Act Meeting Agency Holding the Meeting: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Date And Time: Tuesday, May 13, 2008, 10 a.m. Eastern Time. Place: Clarence M. Mitchell, Jr. Conference Room on the Ninth Floor of the EEOC Office Building, 1801 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20507. Status: The meeting will be open to the public. Matters to be Considered: Open Session: 1. Announcement of Notation Votes, 2. Change to EEOC Order 110.002, Reorganization of Administrative Judge Function and Creation of the Office of Federal Sector Programs, and 3. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking—Federal Sector Regulations, 29 CFR part 1614. Note: In accordance with the Sunshine Act, the meeting will be open to public observation of the Commission's deliberations and voting. (In addition to publishing notices on EEOC Commission meetings in the **Federal Register** , the Commission also provides a recorded announcement a full week in advance on future Commission sessions.) Please telephone

(202)663-7100 (voice) and

(202)663-4074

(TTY)at any time for information on these meetings. The EEOC provides sign language interpretation at Commission meetings for the hearing impaired. Requests for other reasonable accommodations may be made by using the voice and TTY numbers listed above. *Contact Person for More Information:* Stephen Llewellyn, Executive Officer on

(202)663-4070. Dated: May 2, 2008. Stephen Llewellyn, Executive Officer, Executive Secretariat. This Notice Issued May 2, 2008. [FR Doc. E8-10134 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6570-01-M FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Notice of Public Information Collection(s) Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission, Comments Requested May 5, 2008. SUMMARY: The Federal Communications Commission, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to

(PRA)of 1995 (PRA), Public Law No. 104-13. An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. Subject to the PRA, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information that does not display a valid control number. Comments are requested concerning

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

(b)the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate;

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

(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. DATES: Written PRA comments should be submitted on or before July 8, 2008. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contact listed below as soon as possible. ADDRESSES: Interested parties may submit all PRA comments by e-mail or U.S. post mail. To submit your comments by e-mail, send them to *PRA@fcc.gov* and/or *Cathy.Williams@fcc.gov.* To submit your comments by U.S. mail, mark them to the attention of Cathy Williams, Federal Communications Commission, Room 1-C823, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information about the information collection(s), contact Cathy Williams at

(202)418-2918 or send an e-mail to *PRA@fcc.gov* and/or *Cathy.Williams@fcc.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *OMB Control Number:* 3060-0854. *Title:* Truth-in-Billing Format, CC Docket No. 98-170 and CG Docket No. 04-208. *Form Number:* Not Applicable. *Type of Review:* Extension of a currently approved collection. *Respondents:* Business or other for-profit entities. *Number of Respondents and Responses:* 5,309 respondents; 34,866 responses. *Estimated Time per Response:* 5 to 465 hours. *Frequency of Response:* On occasion reporting requirement; Third party disclosure. *Total Annual Burden:* 4,636,942 hours. *Total Annual Cost:* $15,418,000. *Obligation to Respond:* Required to obtain or retain benefits. The statutory authority for this obligation is found at Section 201(b) of the Communications Act of 1934 [47 U.S.C. 201(b)] Service and Charges, codified at 47 CFR 64.2401, Truth-in-Billing Requirements, and Section 258 of the Communications Act of 1934 [47 U.S.C. 258] Illegal Changes in Subscriber Carrier Selections, Public Law 104-104, 110 Stat. 56. *Nature and Extent of Confidentiality:* An assurance of confidentiality is not offered because this information collection does not require the collection of personally identifiable information

(PII)from individuals. *Privacy Impact Assessment:* No impact(s). *Needs and Uses:* On March 18, 2005, the Commission released a *Second Report and Order, and Declaratory Ruling,* FCC 05-55, which determined that Commercial Mobile Radio Service

(CMRS)providers no longer should be exempted from 47 CFR 64.2401(b), which requires billing descriptions to be brief, clear, non-misleading and in plain language. Also, in conjunction with the *Second Report and Order, and Declaratory Ruling,* the Commission released a *Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking* which proposed and sought comment on measures to enhance the ability of consumers to make informed choices among competitive telecommunications providers. Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-10371 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Notice of Public Information Collection Requirements Being Submitted to OMB for Emergency Review and Approval, Comments Requested March 6, 2008. SUMMARY: As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burden and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act

(PRA)of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Federal Communications Commission invites the general public and other Federal agencies to comment on the following information collection(s). Comments are requested concerning

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

(b)the accuracy of the Commission's burden estimate;

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

(d)ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act that does not display a valid OMB control number. DATES: Written PRA comments should be submitted on or before May 15, 2008. If you anticipate that you will be submitting comments, but find it difficult to do so within the period of time allowed by this notice, you should advise the contact listed below as soon as possible. ADDRESSES: Direct all PRA comments to Nicholas A. Fraser, Office of Management and Budget, via Internet at *Nicholas_A._Fraser@omb.eop.gov* or via fax at

(202)395-5167 and to Cathy Williams, Federal Communications Commission, Room 1-C823, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC or via Internet at *PRA@fcc.gov.* To view a copy of this information collection request

(ICR)submitted to OMB:

(1)Go to the Web page *http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain,*

(2)look for the section of the Web page called “Currently Under Review,”

(3)click on the downward-pointing arrow in the “Select Agency” box below the “Currently Under Review” heading,

(4)select “Federal Communications Commission” from the list of agencies presented in the “Select Agency” box,

(5)click the “Submit” button to the right of the “Select Agency” box,

(6)when the list of FCC ICRs currently under review appears, look for the title of this ICR (or its OMB control number, if there is one) and then click on the ICR Reference Number to view detailed information about this ICR. You may submit all PRA comments by email or U.S. post mail. To submit your comments by e-mail, send them to *PRA@fcc.gov.* To submit your comments by U.S. mail, mark them to the attention of Cathy Williams, Federal Communications Commission, Room 1-C823, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20554. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information about the information collection(s), contact Cathy Williams at

(202)418-2918 or send an e-mail to *PRA@fcc.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission is requesting emergency OMB processing of the information collection requirements contained in this notice and has requested OMB approval by May 22, 2008. *OMB Control Number:* 3060-1115. *Title:* DTV Consumer Education Initiative; Sections 15.124, 27.20, 54.418, 73.674, and 76.1630. *Form Number:* FCC Form 388. *Type of Review:* Revision of a currently approved collection. *Respondents:* Business or other for-profit entities; Not-for-profit institutions, State, local or tribal governments. *Number of Respondents/Responses:* 11,022 respondents; 70,026 responses. *Estimated Time per Response:* 0.50 hours-85 hours. *Frequency of Response:* On occasion reporting requirement; Monthly reporting requirement; Quarterly reporting requirement; Third party disclosure requirement. *Obligation to Respond:* Required to obtain benefits—Statutory authority for this collection of information is contained in Sections 4(i), 303(r), 335, and 336 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i), 303(r), 335, and 336. *Total Annual Burden:* 155,646 hours. *Total Annual Cost:* None. *Confidentiality:* No need for confidentiality required. *Privacy Impact Assessment:* No impact(s). *Needs and Uses:* The Commission adopted on April 23, 2008, an Order of Reconsideration, In the Matter of DTV Consumer Education Initiative, MB Docket 07-148, FCC 08-119. In this Order, we modify our requirements regarding the timing, scope, and content of manufacturer notices and the method of delivery of eligible telecommunications carriers

(ETC)notices, and clarify other manufacturer requirements. The revised requirements are as follows: *a. Consumer Electronics Manufacturer Notices (47 CFR 15.124).* The “responsible party,” as defined in the Commission's rules, has to include a notice about the digital television

(DTV)transition on television receivers and related devices manufactured between May 30, 2008 and March 31, 2009. The notices themselves must include the Commission's contact information (rather than the manufacturer's), convey information about the DTV transition, and must be included with covered devices. *b. Eligible Telecommunications Carriers

(ETCs)Federal Universal Service Low-Income Program Participant Notices (47 CFR 54.418).* ETCs that receive federal universal service funds shall provide their Lifeline or Link-up customers (low-income customers) with notices about the transition for over-the-air full power broadcasting from analog to digital service (the “DTV Transition”) in monthly bills, bill notices, or as a monthly stand-alone mailer (e.g., postcard, brochure), beginning May 30, 2008 through March 31, 2009. These information collection requirements are also apart of this information collection: *(1) Broadcaster Education and Reporting (47 CFR 73.674).* *(a) On-Air Education.* Broadcasters must provide on-air DTV Transition consumer education information (e.g., via Public Service Announcements (PSAs), information crawls, snipes or tickers) to their viewers. Broadcasters must comply with one of three alternative sets of rules as provided in the Report and Order. *(b) DTV Consumer Education Quarterly Activity Report, FCC Form 388.* Broadcasters must electronically file a report about its DTV Transition consumer education efforts to the Commission on a quarterly basis. Broadcasters must begin filing these quarterly reports no later than April 10, 2008. In addition, if the broadcaster has a public Web site, they must post these reports on that Web site. *(2) Multichannel Video Programming Distributor

(Mvpd)Customer Bill Notices (47 CFR 76.1630).* MVPDs must provide monthly notices about the DTV transition in their customer billing statements. They include (but are not limited to), for example: cable operators, direct broadcast satellite

(DBS)carriers, open video system operators, and private cable operators. *(3) DTV.Gov Partner Consumer Education Reporting.* DTV.gov Transition Partners must report their consumer education efforts, as a condition of continuing Partner status. They must begin filing these quarterly reports no later than April 10, 2008. *(4) 700 Mhz Wireless Service Licensee/Permitees Consumer Education Reporting (47 CFR 27.20).* Winners of the 700 MHz spectrum auction must report their consumer education efforts to the Commission on a quarterly basis. These parties must file the first by the tenth day of the first calendar quarter following the initial grant of the license authorization that the entity holds. Federal Communications Commission. Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-10375 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 *et seq.* ) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part 225), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, including the companies listed below. The applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The applications also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States. Additional information on all bank holding companies may be obtained from the National Information Center website at *www.ffiec.gov/nic/* . Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than June 2, 2008. **A. Federal Reserve Bank of Boston** (Richard Walker, Community Affairs Officer) P.O. Box 55882, Boston, Massachusetts 02106-2204: *1. Greenfield Bancorp, MHC* ; to become a bank holding company by acquiring 100 percent of the voting shares of Greenfield Cooperative Bank, both of Greenfield, Massachusetts, in connection with the reorganization of Applicant from mutual to stock form. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, May 5, 2008. Robert deV. Frierson, Deputy Secretary of the Board. [FR Doc. E8-10282 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-S FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding Companies The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 *et seq.* ) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part 225), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, including the companies listed below. The applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The applications also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States. Additional information on all bank holding companies may be obtained from the National Information Center website at *www.ffiec.gov/nic/* . Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than June 5, 2008. **A. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis** (Jacqueline G. King, Community Affairs Officer) 90 Hennepin Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55480-0291: *1. Hatton Bancshares, Inc.* , Hatton, North Dakota; to merge with and thereby acquire 100 percent of the voting shares of Mahnomen Bancshares, and thereby indirectly acquire First National Bank in Mahnomen, both of Mahnomen, Minnesota. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, May 6, 2008. Robert deV. Frierson, Deputy Secretary of the Board. [FR Doc.E8-10351 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6210-01-S DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Center on Minority Health and Health Disparities; Notice of Meeting Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of a meeting of the National Advisory Council on Minority Health and Health Disparities. The meeting will be open to the public as indicated below, with attendance limited to space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting. The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and/or contract proposals and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications and/or contract proposals, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. *Name of Committee:* National Advisory Council on Minority Health and Health Disparities. *Date:* June 10, 2008. *Closed:* 8 a.m. to 9:30 a.m. *Agenda:* To review and evaluate grant applications. *Place:* Bethesda Marriott Suites, 6711 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20817. *Open:* 9:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. *Agenda:* The agenda will include Opening Remarks, Administrative Matters, Director's Report, NCMHD Health Disparities Update, Scientific Program Highlights, and other business of the Council. *Place:* Bethesda Marriott Suites, 6711 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20817. *Contact Person:* Donna Brooks, Asst. Director for Administration, National Center on Minority Health and Health Disparities, National Institutes of Health, 6707 Democracy Blvd., Suite 800, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-2135, *brooksd@ncmhd.nih.gov.* Any member of the public interested in presenting oral comments to the committee may notify the Contact Person listed on this notice at least 10 days in advance of the meeting. Interested individuals and representatives of organizations may submit a letter of intent, a brief description of the organization represented, and a short description of the oral presentation. Only one representative of an organization may be allowed to present oral comments and if accepted by the committee, presentations may be limited to five minutes. Both printed and electronic copies are requested for the record. In addition, any interested person may file written comments with the committee by forwarding their statement to the Contact Person listed on this notice. The statement should include the name, address, telephone number and when applicable, the business or professional affiliation of the interested person. Dated: May 2, 2008. Jennifer Spaeth, Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy. [FR Doc. E8-10329 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-M DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Committee on Vital and Health Statistics: Meeting Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the Department of Health and Human Services

(HHS)announces the following advisory committee meeting. *Name:* National Committee on Vital and Health Statistics (NC VHS). *Time and Date:* May 21, 2008, 9 a.m.-3 p.m.; May 22, 2008, 10 a.m.-2 p.m. *Place:* Renaissance Washington DC Hotel, 999 9th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20001, Tel: 202 898 9000. *Status:* Open. *Purpose:* At this meeting the Committee will hear presentations and hold discussions on several health data policy topics. On the first day the Committee will hear updates from the Department by the Data Council and the HHS Office of the National Coordinator (ONC). They will also discuss letters to the HHS Secretary on hospital surge capacity and e-prescribing standards and long term care. Later in the afternoon there will be an update on classification issues in healthcare terminology. On the morning of the second day the Committee will continue the discussions on the letters on surge capacity and e-prescribing standards. The remainder of the time will be spent discussing future agenda items and Committee administrative operations. The times shown above are for the full Committee meeting. Subcommittee breakout sessions can be scheduled for late in the afternoon of the first day and in the morning prior to the full Committee meeting on the second day. Agendas for these breakout sessions will be posted on the NCVHS Web site (URL below) when available. *Contact Person for More Information:* Substantive program information as well as summaries of meetings and a roster of committee members may be obtained from Marjorie S. Greenberg, Executive Secretary, NCVHS, National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 3311 Toledo Road, Room 2402, Hyattsville, Maryland 20782, telephone

(301)458-4245. Information also is available on the NC VHS home page of the HHS Web site: *http://www.ncvhs.hhs.gov/* , where further information including an agenda will be posted when available. Should you require reasonable accommodation, please contact the CDC Office of Equal Employment Opportunity on

(301)458-4EEO

(4336)as soon as possible. Dated: April 21, 2008. James Scanlon, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (SDP), Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation. [FR Doc. E8-10322 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4151-05-M DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services [Document Identifier: CMS-10123 and 10124, and CMS-216-94] Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Department of Health and Human Services. In compliance with the requirement of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), Department of Health and Human Services, is publishing the following summary of proposed collections for public comment. Interested persons are invited to send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including any of the following subjects:

(1)The necessity and utility of the proposed information collection for the proper performance of the Agency's function;

(2)the accuracy of the estimated burden;

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

(4)the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology to minimize the information collection burden. 1. *Type of Information Collection Request:* Revision of a currently approved collection; *Title of Information Collection:* Notice of Provider Non-Coverage (CMS-10123) and Detailed Explanation of Non-Coverage (CMS-10124); *Use:* The Notice of Medicare Provider Non-Coverage (CMS-10123) is used to inform fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries of the determination that their provider services will end, and of their right to an expedited review of that determination. The Detailed Explanation of Non-Coverage (CMS-10124) is used to provide beneficiaries who request an expedited determination with detailed information of why the services should end. The revised Notice of Provider Non-Coverage and Detailed Explanation of Provider Non-Coverage will no longer require use of the beneficiary's Medicare number as a patient identifier. Instead, when applicable, providers may use a number that helps to link the notice with a related claim. *Form Number:* CMS-10123 and 10124 (OMB# 0938-0953); *Frequency:* Occasionally; *Affected Public:* Business or other for-profit, not- for-profit institutions, and individuals or households; *Number of Respondents:* 3,115,637; *Total Annual Responses:* 3,115,637; *Total Annual Hours:* 522,138. 2. *Type of Information Collection Request:* Extension of a currently approved collection; *Title of Information Collection:* Organ Procurement Organization/Histocompatibility Laboratory Statement of Reimbursable Costs, manual instructions and supporting regulations contained in 42 CFR 413.20 and 413.24; *Use:* This form is required by the statute and regulation for participation in the Medicare program. The information is used to determine payment for Medicare. Organ Procurement Organizations and Histocompatibility Laboratories are the users. *Form Number:* CMS-216-94 (OMB# 0938-0102); *Frequency:* Yearly; *Affected Public:* Business or other for-profit, not-for-profit institutions; *Number of Respondents:* 108; *Total Annual Responses:* 108; *Total Annual Hours:* 4,860. To obtain copies of the supporting statement and any related forms for the proposed paperwork collections referenced above, access CMS Web Site address at *http://www.cms.hhs.gov/PaperworkReductionActof1995* , or E-mail your request, including your address, phone number, OMB number, and CMS document identifier, to *Paperwork@cms.hhs.gov* , or call the Reports Clearance Office on

(410)786-1326. To be assured consideration, comments and recommendations for the proposed information collections must be received by the OMB desk officer at the address below, no later than 5 p.m. on *June 9, 2008* . OMB Human Resources and Housing Branch, Attention: Carolyn Raffaelli, New Executive Office Building, Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503, Fax Number:

(202)395-6974. Dated: May 1, 2008. Michelle Shortt, Director, Regulations Development Group, Office of Strategic Operations and Regulatory Affairs. [FR Doc. E8-10285 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4120-01-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Indian Health Service Office of Urban Indian Health Programs; Announcement Type: Targeted Solicitation *Funding Opportunity Number:* HHS-2008-JHS-UIHP-0001. *Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Number:* 93.193. *Key Dates:* *Application Deadline Date:* May 21, 2008. *Review Date:* June 13, 2008. *Earliest Anticipated Start Date:* July 1, 2008. I. Funding Opportunity Description The Indian Health Service (IHS), Office of Urban Indian Health Programs (OUIHP) announces a targeted solicitation for the 4-in-1 Title V grants to make health care services more accessible for American Indians and Alaska Natives (AI/AN) residing in urban areas. This program is authorized under the authority of the Snyder Act and 25 U.S.C. 1652 and 1653 and Title V of the Indian Health Care Improvement Act (IHCIA), Public Law 94-437, as amended. This program is described at 93.193 in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA). Under this grant opportunity, the IHS proposes to award grants to 34 Urban Indian organizations that have existing IHS contracts awarded in accordance with 25 U.S.C. 1653(c)(d)(e)(f). This grant announcement seeks to ensure the highest possible health status for AI/ANs. Funding will be used to continue the 34 Urban Indian organizations' successful implementation of the Department of Health and Human Services

(HHS)priorities, GPRA reporting, collaborative activities with the Veterans Health Administration (VA), and four health programs that make health services more accessible to AI/ANs living in urban areas. The four health services programs are:

(1)Health Promotion/Disease Prevention (HP/DP) services,

(2)Immunizations, and Behavioral Health Services consisting of

(3)Alcohol/Substance Abuse services, and

(4)Mental Health Prevention and Treatment services. These programs are integral components of the IHS chronic care initiative and the strategic objective focused on improving safety, quality, affordability, and accessibility of health care. II. Award Information: *Type of Award:* Targeted Solicitation Grants. *Estimated Funds Available:* The IHS intends to commit approximately $8.5 million each year. The total project period is 2 years and 9 months in duration. The award that is issued under this announcement is subject to availability of funds. *Anticipated Number of Awards:* 34 grants. *Project Period:* July 1, 2008-March 31, 2011. The 2008-2009 budget period will run nine months, July 1, 2008 through March 31, 2009. The 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 budget periods will run 12 months each. *Award Amount:* FY 2008 amounts for the 9-month budget period July 1, 2008 through March 31, 2009 are identified in the application transmittal letter. All future support is subject to the availability of funds. III. Eligibility Information 1. *Eligible Applicants:* Urban Indian organizations, as defined by 25 U.S.C. 1603(h). 2. *Cost Sharing or matching* —This program does not require matching funds or cost sharing. IV. Application and Submission Information 1. An applicant package may be found in Grants.gov ( *http://www.grants.gov* ) or at: *http://www.ihs.gov/NonMedicalPrograms/gogp/gogp_funding.asp* . Information regarding the electronic application process may be directed to Michelle G. Bulls, Chief Grants Management Officer, Director, Division of Grants Policy, at

(301)443-6290. 2. Content and Form of Application Submission • Be single spaced. • Be typewritten. • Have consecutively numbered pages. • Use black type not smaller than 12 characters per one inch. • Contain a narrative that does not exceed 55 typed pages that includes the other submission requirements below. The 55 page narrative does not include the work plan, standard forms, table of contents, budget, budget justifications, narratives, and/or other appendix items. *Public Policy Requirements:* All Federal-wide public policies apply to IHS grants with the exception of the Lobbying and Discrimination public policy. 3. Submission Dates and Times The application from each Urban Indian Health Organization

(UIHO)must be submitted electronically through Grants.gov by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Standard Time

(EST)on May 21, 2008. If technical challenges arise and the UIHO is unable to successfully complete the electronic application process, each organization must contact Michelle G. Bulls, Grants Policy Staff, fifteen days prior to the application deadline and advise of the difficulties that they are experiencing. Each organization must obtain prior approval, in writing (e-mails are acceptable), from Ms. Bulls allowing the paper submission. If submission of a paper application is requested and approved, the original and two copies must be sent to the appropriate grants contact that is listed in Section IV.1 above. Applications not submitted through Grants.gov, without an approved waiver, may be returned to the organizations without review or consideration. A late application will be returned to the organization without review or consideration. 4. *Intergovernmental Review:* Executive Order 12372 requiring intergovernmental review is not applicable to this program. 5. Funding Restrictions: A. Pre-award costs are allowable pending prior approval from the awarding agency. However, in accordance with 45 CFR Part 74, all pre-award costs are incurred at the recipient's risk. The awarding office is under no obligation to reimburse such costs if for any reason any of the UIHO do not receive an award or if the award to the recipient is less than anticipated. B. The available funds are inclusive of direct and appropriate indirect costs. C. Only one grant supplement will be awarded to each organization. D. IHS will acknowledge receipt of the application. 6. Other Submission Requirements: Electronic Submission—Each UIHO must submit through Grants.gov. However, should any technical challenges arise regarding the submission, please contact Grants.gov Customer Support at 1-800-518-4726 or *support@grants.gov* . The Contact Center hours of operation are Monday-Friday from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. EST. If you require additional assistance please call

(301)443-6290, and identify the need for assistance regarding your Grants.gov application. Your call will be transferred to the appropriate grants staff member. Each organization must seek assistance at least fifteen days prior to the application deadline. If each organization doesn't adhere to the timelines for Central Contractor Registry (CCR), Grants.gov registration and request timely assistance with technical issues, the paper application submission may not be granted. To submit an application electronically, please use the Grants.gov Web site. Download a copy of the application package on the Grants.gov Web site, complete it offline and then upload and submit the application via the Grants.gov site. You may not e-mail an electronic copy of a grant application to IHS. Please be reminded of the following: • Under the new IHS application submission requirements, paper applications are not the preferred method. However, if any UIHO has technical problems submitting the application on-line, please contact Grants.gov Customer Support directly at: *http://www.grants.gov/CustomerSupport.* • Upon contacting Grants.gov, obtain a Grants.gov tracking number as proof of contact. The tracking number is helpful if there are technical issues that cannot be resolved and a waiver request from Grants Policy Staff

(GPS)must be obtained. If any of the organizations are still unable to successfully submit the application on-line, please contact Michelle G. Bulls, GPS, at

(301)443-6290 at least fifteen days prior to the application deadline to advise her of the difficulties you have experienced. • If it is determined that a formal waiver is necessary, each organization must submit a request, in writing (e-mails are acceptable), to *Michelle.Bulls@ihs.gov* providing a justification for the need to deviate from the standard electronic submission process. Upon receipt of approval, a hard-copy application package must be downloaded from Grants.gov, and sent directly to the Division of Grants Operations (DGO), 801 Thompson Avenue, TMP 360, Rockville, MD 20852 by May 1,2008. • Upon entering the Grants.gov Web site, there is information available that outlines the requirements to each UIHO regarding electronic submission of application and hours of operation. We strongly encourage each organization to not wait until the deadline date to begin the application process as the registration process for CCR and Grants.gov could take up to fifteen working days. • To use Grants.gov, each UIHO must obtain a Data Universal Numbering System

(DUNS)and register in the CCR. Each organization should allow a minimum often working days to complete CCR registration. See below on how to apply. • Each organization must submit all documents electronically, including all information typically included on the SF-424 and all necessary assurances and certifications. • Please use the optional attachment feature in Grants.gov to attach additional documentation that may be requested by IHS. • Each organization must comply with any page limitation requirements described in the program announcement. • After you electronically submit your application, you will receive an automatic acknowledgment from Grants.gov that contains a Grants.gov tracking number. The DGO will retrieve your application from Grants.gov. The DGO will notify each organization that the application has been received. • You may access the electronic application for this program on Grants.gov. • You may search for the downloadable application package using either the CFDA number or the Funding Opportunity Number. Both numbers are identified in the heading of this announcement. • To receive an application package, each UIHO must provide the Funding Opportunity Number: HHS-2008-IHS-UIHP-0001. E-mail applications will not be accepted under this announcement. DUNS Number Applicants are required to have a DUNS number to apply for a grant or cooperative agreement from the Federal Government. The DUNS number is a nine-digit identification number, which uniquely identifies business entities. Obtaining a DUNS number is easy and there is no charge. To obtain a DUNS number, access *http://www.dunandbradstreet.com* or call 1-866-705-5711. Interested parties may wish to obtain their DUNS number by phone to expedite the process. Applications submitted electronically must also be registered with the CCR. A DUNS number is required before CCR registration can be completed. Many organizations may already have a DUNS number. Please use the number listed above to investigate whether or not your organization has a DUNS number. Registration with the CCR is free of charge. Applicants may register by calling 1-888-227-2423. Please review and complete the CCR “Registration Worksheet” located on *http://www.grants.gov/CCR_Register* . Sections V and VI which contain more detailed information regarding these registration processes can be found at Grants.gov. VII. Agency Contacts For program-related information: Phyllis S. Wolfe, Director, Office of Urban Indian Health Programs, 801 Thompson Avenue, Suite 200, Rockville, Maryland 20852,

(301)443-4680 or *phyllis.wolfe@ihs.gov.* For general information regarding this announcement: Danielle Steward, Health Systems Specialist, Office of Urban Indian Health Programs, 801 Thompson Avenue, Room 200, Rockville, MD 20852,

(301)443-4680 or *danielle.steward@ihs.gov.* For specific grant-related and business management information: Pallop Chareonvootitam, Grants Management Specialist, 801 Thompson Avenue, TMP 360, Rockville, MD 20852,

(301)443-5204 or *pallop.chareonvootitam@ihs.gov.* Dated: May 1, 2008. Robert G. McSwain, Acting Director, Indian Health Service. [FR Doc. E8-10218 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4165-16-M DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Center for Scientific Review; Amended Notice of Meeting Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the Molecular and Integrative Signal Transduction Study Section, June 3, 2008, 8 a.m. to June 4, 2008, 5 p.m., One Washington Circle Hotel, One Washington Circle, Washington, DC 20037 which was published in the **Federal Register** on April 4, 2008, 73 FR 18539-18542. The meeting will be held one day only June 3, 2008. The meeting time and location remain the same. The meeting is closed to the public. Dated: May 2, 2008. Jennifer Spaeth, Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy. [FR Doc. E8-10321 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-M DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed Meeting Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following meeting. The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. *Name of Committee:* Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis Panel, Vector Biology Member Conflicts. *Date:* May 12, 2008. *Time:* 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. *Agenda:* To review and evaluate grant applications. *Place:* National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892. (Telephone Conference Call.) *Contact Person:* Rossana Berti, PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 3191, MSC 7846, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-402-6411, *bertiroscsr.nih.gov.* This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research; 93.306, 93.333, 93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Institutes of Health, HHS) Dated: April 30, 2008. Jennifer Spaeth, Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy. [FR Doc. E8-10327 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-M DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Center on Minority Health and Health Disparities; Notice of Closed Meeting Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following meeting. The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. *Name of Committee:* National Center on Minority Health and Health Disparities Special Emphasis Panel; Loan Repayment Program for Health Disparities Research-Panel C. *Date:* June 2, 2008. *Time:* 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. *Agenda:* To review and evaluate grant applications. *Place:* National Institutes of Health, Two Democracy Plaza, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Suite 800, Bethesda, MD 20892, (Virtual Meeting). *Contact Person:* Lorrita Watson, Ph.D., National Center on Minority Health and Health Disparities, National Institutes of Health, 6707 Democracy Blvd., Suite 800, Bethesda, MD 20892-5465,

(301)402-1366, *watsonl@mail.nih.gov* . Dated: May 1, 2008. Jennifer Spaeth, Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy. [FR Doc. E8-10320 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-M DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Notice of Closed Meeting Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following meeting. The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The contract proposals and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. *Name of Committee:* National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Special Emphasis Panel, Risks of Developing Coronary Artery Disease. *Date:* May 29, 2008. *Time:* 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. *Agenda:* To review and evaluate contract proposals. *Place:* Hyatt Regency Bethesda, One Bethesda Metro Center, 7400 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814. *Contact Person:* Holly Patton, PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, Review Branch/DERA, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 7188, Bethesda, MD 20892-7924, 301-435-0280, *pattonh@nhlbi.nih.gov.* (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.233, National Center for Sleep Disorders Research; 93.837, Heart and Vascular Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung Diseases Research; 93.839, Blood Diseases and Resources Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS) Dated: May 1, 2008. Jennifer Spaeth, Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy. [FR Doc. E8-10328 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-M DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Mental Health; Notice of Closed Meetings Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following meetings. The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. *Name of Committee:* National Institute of Mental Health Initial Review Group; Interventions Committee for Disorders Involving Children and Their Families. *Date:* June 10-11, 2008. *Time:* 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. *Agenda:* To review and evaluate grant applications. *Place:* Crystal City Marriott, 1999 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA 22202. *Contact Person:* Christopher S. Sarampote, PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute of Mental Health, NIH, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Blvd., Room 6148, MSC 9608, Bethesda, MD 20892-9608, 301-443-1959, *csarampo@mail.nih.gov.* *Name of Committee:* National Institute of Mental Health Initial Review Group, Mental Health Services in Non-Specialty Settings. *Date:* June 10, 2008. *Time:* 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. *Agenda:* To review and evaluate grant applications. *Place:* Crystal City Marriott, 1999 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA 22202. *Contact Person:* Aileen Schulte, PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute of Mental Health, NIH, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Blvd, Room 6140, MSC 9608, Bethesda, MD 20892-9608, 301-443-1225, *aschultemail.nih.gov.* *Name of Committee:* National Institute of Mental Health Initial Review Group, Mental Health Services in MH Specialty Settings. *Date:* June 10, 2008. *Time:* 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. *Agenda:* To review and evaluate grant applications. *Place:* Crystal City Marriott, 1999 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA 22202. *Contact Person:* Marina Broitman, PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute of Mental Health, NIH, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Blvd., Room 6153, MSC 9608, Bethesda, MD 20892-9608, 301-402-8152, *mbroitma@mail.nih.gov.* *Name of Committee:* National Institute of Mental Health Initial Review Group, Interventions Committee for Disorders Related to Schizophrenia, Late Life, or Personality. *Date:* June 10, 2008. *Time:* 9 a.m. to 2 p.m. *Agenda:* To review and evaluate grant applications. *Place:* Crystal City Marriott, 1999 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA 22202. *Contact Person:* Serena P. Chu, PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute of Mental Health, NIH, Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Blvd., Room 6154, MSC 9609, Rockville, MD 20892, 301-443-0004, *sechumail.nih.gov.* *Name of Committee:* National Institute of Mental Health Initial Review Group, Interventions Committee for Adult Mood and Anxiety Disorders. *Date:* June 10, 2008. *Time:* 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. *Agenda:* To review and evaluate grant applications. *Place:* Crystal City Marriott, 1999 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA 22202. *Contact Person:* David I. Sommers, PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, Division of Extramural Activities, National Institute of Mental Health, National Institutes of Health, 6001 Executive Blvd., Room 6154, MSC 9609, Bethesda, MD 20892-9606, 301-443-7861, *dsommersmail.nih.gov.* (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.242, Mental Health Research Grants; 93.281, Scientist Development Award, Scientist Development Award for Clinicians, and Research Scientist Award; 93.282, Mental Health National Research Service Awards for Research Training, National Institutes of Health, HHS) Dated: May 1, 2008. Jennifer Spaeth, Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy. [FR Doc. E8-10313 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-M DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Dental & Craniofacial Research; Amended Notice of Meeting Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the National Advisory Dental and Craniofacial Research Council, June 23, 2008, 8:30 a.m. to June 23, 2008, 4:30 p.m., National Institutes of Health, Building 31, 31 Center Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 which was published in the **Federal Register** on December 26, 2007, 72 FR 73037. The meeting has moved to the Natcher Conference Center on the NIH Campus. The closed session will be in the morning and the open session in the afternoon. A scientific symposium will be held on June 24. The meeting is partially Closed to the public. Dated: May 1, 2008. Jennifer Spaeth, Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy. [FR Doc. E8-10317 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-M DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute on Drug Abuse; Notice of Closed Meeting Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following meeting. The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The contract proposals and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. *Name of Committee:* National Institute on Drug Abuse Special Emphasis Panel. *Date:* May 28, 2008. *Time:* 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. *Agenda:* To review and evaluate contract proposals. *Place:* Hyatt Regency Bethesda, One Bethesda Metro Center, 7400 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814. *Contact Person:* Kristen V Huntley, PhD, Scientific Review Administrator, Office of Extramural Affairs, National Institute on Drug Abuse, NIH, DHHS, Room 220, MSC 8401, 6101 Executive Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892-8401, 301-435-1433, *huntleyk@mail.nih.gov.* (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.279, Drug Abuse and Addiction Research Programs, National Institutes of Health, HHS) Dated: May 2, 2008. Jennifer Spaeth, Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy. [FR Doc. E8-10323 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-M DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences; Notice of Meeting Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of a meeting of the National Advisory Environmental Health Sciences Council. The meeting will be open to the public as indicated below, with attendance limited to space available. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance, such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, should notify the Contact Person listed below in advance of the meeting. The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. *Name of Committee:* National Advisory Environmental Health Sciences Council. *Date:* May 29-30, 2008. *Open:* May 29, 2008, 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. *Agenda:* Discussion of program policies and issues. *Place:* Nat. Inst. of Environmental Health Sciences, Building 101, Rodbell Auditorium, 111 T. W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. *Closed:* May 30, 2008, 8:30 a.m. to 12 p.m. *Agenda:* To review and evaluate grant applications. *Place:* Nat. Inst. of Environmental Health Sciences, Building 101, Rodbell Auditorium, 111 T. W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. *Contact Person:* Dennis R Lang, PhD, Acting Director, Division of Extramural Research and Training, Nat. Inst. of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, P.O. Box 12233/EC-3431, 79 Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709,

(919)541-7729, *lang4@niehs.nih.gov.* Any interested person may file written comments with the committee by forwarding the statement to the Contact Person listed on this notice. The statement should include the name, address, telephone number and when applicable, the business or professional affiliation of the interested person. In the interest of security, NIH has instituted stringent procedures for entrance onto the NIH campus. All visitor vehicles, including taxicabs, hotel, and airport shuttles will be inspected before being allowed on campus. Visitors will be asked to show one form of identification (for example, a government-issued photo ID, driver's license, or passport) and to state the purpose of their visit. Information is also available on the Institute's/Center's home page: *http://www.niehs.nih.gov/dertlc-agenda.htm,* where an agenda and any additional information for the meeting will be posted when available. (Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.115, Biometry and Risk Estimation—Health Risks from Environmental Exposures; 93.142, NIEHS Hazardous Waste Worker Health and Safety Training; 93.143, NIEHS Superfund Hazardous Substances—Basic Research and Education; 93.894, Resources and Manpower Development in the Environmental Health Sciences; 93.113, Biological Response to Environmental Health Hazards; 93.114, Applied Toxicological Research and Testing, National Institutes of Health, HHS) Dated: May 2, 2008. Jennifer Spaeth, Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy. [FR Doc. E8-10326 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4140-01-M DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Federal Emergency Management Agency [Docket ID: FEMA-2008-0008] National Incident Management System—FEMA 501 AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS. ACTION: Notice of availability; request for comments. SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency

(FEMA)is accepting comments on the draft National Incident Management System

(NIMS)document. NIMS provides a consistent nationwide template to enable Federal, State, tribal, and local governments, the private sector, and nongovernmental organizations to work together to prevent, protect against, respond to, recover from, and mitigate the effects of incidents, regardless of cause, size, location, or complexity. DATES: Comments must be received by June 2, 2008. ADDRESSES: The draft NIMS document is available online at *www.regulations.gov,* in Docket ID FEMA-2008-0008. You may also view hard copies at the Office of Chief Counsel, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Room 835, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472. You may submit comments on the draft NIMS document, identified by Docket ID FEMA-2008-0008, by one of the following methods: *Federal eRulemaking Portal:* *http://www.regulations.gov.* Follow the instructions for submitting comments. *E-mail: FEMA-POLICY@dhs.gov* . Include Docket ID FEMA-2008-0008 in the subject line of the message. *Fax:* 866-466-5370. *Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier:* Regulation & Policy Team, Office of Chief Counsel, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Room 835, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472. *Instructions:* All Submissions received must include the agency name and docket ID. Regardless of the method used for submitting comments or material, all submissions will be posted, without change, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal at *http://www.regulations.gov,* and will include any personal information you provide. Therefore, submitting this information makes it public. You may wish to read the Privacy Act notice that is available on the Privacy and Use Notice link on the Administration Navigation Bar of *www.regulations.gov.* FEMA has also provided a form, available in the docket at *www.regulations.gov.* Due to the large number of comments that are expected, FEMA asks that comments be submitted using this form. *Docket:* For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal at *http://www.regulations.gov* and search for Docket ID FEMA-2008-0008. Submitted comments may also be inspected at FEMA, Office of Chief Counsel, Room 835, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Murphy, Policy Advisor to the Deputy Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, NW., Washington, DC 20472, 202-646-3100. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On February 28, 2003, the President issued Homeland Security Presidential Directive-5 (HSPD-5), Management of Domestic Incidents, which directed the Secretary of Homeland Security to develop and administer a National Incident Management System (NIMS). This system provides a consistent nationwide template to enable Federal, State, tribal, and local governments, the private sector, and nongovernmental organizations to work together to prevent, protect against, respond to, recover from, and mitigate the effects of incidents, regardless of cause, size, location, or complexity in order to reduce the loss of life and property, and the harm to the environment. This consistency provides the foundation for utilization of NIMS for all incidents, ranging from daily occurrences to incidents requiring a coordinated Federal response. NIMS represents a core set of doctrines, concepts, principles, terminology, and organizational processes that enables effective, efficient, and collaborative incident management. Building on the foundation provided by existing emergency management and incident response systems used by jurisdictions, organizations, and functional disciplines at all levels, the NIMS document integrates best practices into a comprehensive framework for use by emergency management/response personnel in an all-hazards context nationwide. These best practices lay the groundwork for the components of NIMS and provide the mechanisms for the further development and refinement of supporting national standards, guidelines, protocols, systems, and technologies. NIMS fosters the development of specialized technologies that facilitate emergency management and incident response activities and allows for the adoption of new approaches that will enable continuous refinement of NIMS over time. The changes reflected in the revised document are not substantively dramatic, and do not alter the basic NIMS doctrine published in the 2004 version. The Department is providing the current draft of the NIMS for public comment; this draft document does not necessarily reflect the final policy of the Administration. Authority: Homeland Security Act of 2002, as amended, 6 U.S.C. 101 *et seq.* , Homeland Security Presidential Directive-5, Management of Domestic Incidents. Dated: May 5, 2008. R. David Paulison, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency. [FR Doc. E8-10449 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-21-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Transportation Security Administration Intent To Request Renewal From OMB of One Current Public Collection of Information: TSA Customer Comment Card AGENCY: Transportation Security Administration, DHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Transportation Security Administration

(TSA)invites public comment on one currently approved information collection requirement abstracted below that we will submit to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for renewal in compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. This collection allows customers to provide feedback to TSA about their experiences with TSA's airport security process and procedures while traveling. DATES: Send your comments by July 8, 2008. ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed or delivered to Joanna Johnson, Communications Branch, Business Management Office, Operational Process and Technology, TSA-11, Transportation Security Administration, 601 South 12th Street, Arlington, VA 22202-4220. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joanna Johnson at the above address, or by telephone

(571)227-3651 or facsimile

(703)603-0822. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ), an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number. The Information Collection Request documentation is available at *www.reginfo.gov* . Therefore, in preparation for OMB review and approval of the following information collection, TSA is soliciting comments to—

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

(2)Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden;

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

(4)Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including using appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Information Collection Requirement *1652-0030; TSA Customer Comment Card* . This collection continues a voluntary program for airport passengers to provide feedback to TSA regarding their experiences with TSA security procedures. This collection of information allows TSA to evaluate and address customer concerns about security procedures and policies. TSA Customer Comment Cards will collect feedback and the passenger's contact information if voluntarily provided. TSA may use the contact information to respond to the passenger's comments. For passengers who deposit their cards in the designated drop-boxes, TSA staff at airports will collect the cards, categorize comments, enter the results into an online system for reporting, and respond to passengers as appropriate. Passengers also have the option to mail the cards directly the address provided on the comment card which will vary by airport. The TSA Contact Center will continue to be available for passengers to make comments independently of airport involvement. TSA estimates the number of respondents to be 1,783,800, with an estimated number of 150,880 annual burden hours. Issued in Arlington, Virginia, on May 5, 2008. Fran Lozito, Director, Business Management Office, Operational Process and Technology. [FR Doc. E8-10359 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110-05-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Agency Information Collection Activities: Form I-140, Extension of a Currently Approved Information Collection; Comment Request ACTION: 60-Day Notice of Information Collection Under Review: Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker; OMB Control Number 1615-0015. The Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), has submitted the following information collection request for review and clearance in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The information collection is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies. Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for sixty days until July 8, 2008. Written comments and suggestions regarding items contained in this notice, and especially with regard to the estimated public burden and associated response time should be directed to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), USCIS, Chief, Regulatory Management Division, Clearance Office, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW., 3rd Floor, Suite 3008, Washington, DC 20529. Comments may also be submitted to DHS via facsimile to 202-272-8352, or via e-mail at *rfs.regs@dhs.gov.* When submitting comments by e-mail, please add the OMB Control Number 1615-0015 in the subject box. During this 60-day period USCIS will be evaluating whether to revise the Form I-140. Should USCIS decide to revise the Form I-140 it will advise the public when it publishes the 30-day notice in the **Federal Register** in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. The public will then have 30-days to comment on any revisions to the Form I-140. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the collection of information should address one or more of the following four points:

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

(2)Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

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

(4)Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, *e.g.* , permitting electronic submission of responses. Overview of this Information Collection

(1)*Type of Information Collection:* Extension of a currently approved information collection.

(2)*Title of the Form/Collection:* Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker.

(3)*Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department of Homeland Security sponsoring the collection:* Form I-140, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

(4)*Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Primary:* U.S. Employers. The information furnished on Form I-140 will be used by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to classify aliens under section 203(b)(1), 203(b)(2) or 203(b)(3) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (Act).

(5)*An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond:* 96,000 responses at 60 minutes (1 hour) per response.

(6)*An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection:* 96,000 annual burden hours. If you have additional comments, suggestions, or need a copy of the information collection instrument, please visit: *http://www.regulations.gov/search/index.jsp.* We may also be contacted at: USCIS, Regulatory Management Division, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW., Suite 3008, Washington, DC 20529, telephone number 202-272-8377. Dated: May 6, 2008. Stephen Tarragon, Acting Chief, Regulatory Management Division, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security. [FR Doc. E8-10363 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-97-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Agency Information Collection Activities: Form N-600, Extension of a Currently Approved Information Collection; Comment Request ACTION: 60-Day Notice of Information Collection Under Review: Form N-600, Application for Certificate of Citizenship; OMB Control Number 1615-0057. The Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), has submitted the following information collection request for review and clearance in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The information collection is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies. Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for sixty days until July 8, 2008. Written comments and suggestions regarding items contained in this notice, and especially with regard to the estimated public burden and associated response time should be directed to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), USCIS, Chief, Regulatory Management Division, Clearance Office, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW., 3rd Floor, Suite 3008, Washington, DC 20529. Comments may also be submitted to DHS via facsimile to 202-272-8352, or via e-mail at *rfs.regs@dhs.gov.* When submitting comments by e-mail, please add the OMB Control Number 1615-0057 in the subject box. During this 60-day period USCIS will be evaluating whether to revise the Form N-600. Should USCIS decide to revise the Form N-600 it will advise the public when it publishes the 30-day notice in the **Federal Register** in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act. The public will then have 30 days to comment on any revisions to the Form N-600. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the collection of information should address one or more of the following four points:

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

(2)Evaluate the accuracy of the agencies estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

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

(1)*Type of Information Collection:* Extension of a currently approved information collection.

(2)*Title of the Form/Collection:* Application for Certificate of Citizenship.

(3)*Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department of Homeland Security sponsoring the collection:* Form N-600, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

(4)*Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Primary:* Individuals or households. USCIS uses the information on the form to make a determination that the citizenship eligibility requirements and conditions are met by the applicant.

(5)*An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond:* 88,500 responses at 1 hour and 35 minutes (1.583 hours) per response.

(6)*An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection:* 140,095 annual burden hours. If you have additional comments, suggestions, or need a copy of the information collection instrument, please visit: *http://www.regulations.gov/search/index.jsp.* *We may also be contacted at:* USCIS, Regulatory Management Division, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW., Suite 3008, Washington, DC 20529, telephone number 202-272-8377. Dated: May 6, 2008. Stephen Tarragon, Acting Chief, Regulatory Management Division, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security. [FR Doc. E8-10367 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-97-P DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT [Docket No. FR-5186-N-19] Federal Property Suitable as Facilities To Assist the Homeless AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development, HUD. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This Notice identifies unutilized, underutilized, excess, and surplus Federal property reviewed by HUD for suitability for possible use to assist the homeless. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathy Ezzell, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW., Room 7266, Washington, DC 20410; telephone

(202)708-1234; TTY number for the hearing- and speech-impaired

(202)708-2565 (these telephone numbers are not toll-free), or call the toll-free Title V information line at 800-927-7588. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with 24 CFR part 581 and section 501 of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11411), as amended, HUD is publishing this Notice to identify Federal buildings and other real property that HUD has reviewed for suitability for use to assist the homeless. The properties were reviewed using information provided to HUD by Federal landholding agencies regarding unutilized and underutilized buildings and real property controlled by such agencies or by GSA regarding its inventory of excess or surplus Federal property. This Notice is also published in order to comply with the December 12, 1988 Court Order in *National Coalition for the Homeless* v. *Veterans Administration* , No. 88-2503-OG (D.D.C.). Properties reviewed are listed in this Notice according to the following categories: Suitable/available, suitable/unavailable, suitable/to be excess, and unsuitable. The properties listed in the three suitable categories have been reviewed by the landholding agencies, and each agency has transmitted to HUD:

(1)Its intention to make the property available for use to assist the homeless,

(2)its intention to declare the property excess to the agency's needs, or

(3)a statement of the reasons that the property cannot be declared excess or made available for use as facilities to assist the homeless. Properties listed as suitable/available will be available exclusively for homeless use for a period of 60 days from the date of this Notice. Where property is described as for “off-site use only” recipients of the property will be required to relocate the building to their own site at their own expense. Homeless assistance providers interested in any such property should send a written expression of interest to HHS, addressed to John Hicks, Division of Property Management, Program Support Center, HHS, room 5B-17, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857;

(301)443-2265. (This is not a toll-free number.) HHS will mail to the interested provider an application packet, which will include instructions for completing the application. In order to maximize the opportunity to utilize a suitable property, providers should submit their written expressions of interest as soon as possible. For complete details concerning the processing of applications, the reader is encouraged to refer to the interim rule governing this program, 24 CFR part 581. For properties listed as suitable/to be excess, that property may, if subsequently accepted as excess by GSA, be made available for use by the homeless in accordance with applicable law, subject to screening for other Federal use. At the appropriate time, HUD will publish the property in a Notice showing it as either suitable/available or suitable/unavailable. For properties listed as suitable/unavailable, the landholding agency has decided that the property cannot be declared excess or made available for use to assist the homeless, and the property will not be available. Properties listed as unsuitable will not be made available for any other purpose for 20 days from the date of this Notice. Homeless assistance providers interested in a review by HUD of the determination of unsuitability should call the toll free information line at 1-800-927-7588 for detailed instructions or write a letter to Mark Johnston at the address listed at the beginning of this Notice. Included in the request for review should be the property address (including zip code), the date of publication in the **Federal Register** , the landholding agency, and the property number. For more information regarding particular properties identified in this Notice ( *i.e.* , acreage, floor plan, existing sanitary facilities, exact street address), providers should contact the appropriate landholding agencies at the following addresses: *Army:* Ms. Veronica Rines, Headquarters, Department of the Army, Office of the Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation Management, 2511 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA 22202;

(703)601-2545; *Energy:* Mr. Mark Price, Department of Energy, Office of Engineering & Construction Management, MA-50, 1000 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20585:

(202)586-0072; *GSA:* Mr. John Smith, Deputy Assistant Commissioner, General Services Administration, Office of Property Disposal, 18th & F Streets, NW., Washington, DC 20405;

(202)501-0084; *Navy:* Mrs. Mary Arndt, Acting Director, Department of the Navy, Real Estate Services, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Washington Navy Yard, 1322 Patterson Ave., SE., Suite 1000, Washington, DC 20374-5065;

(202)685-9305; (These are not toll-free numbers). Dated: May 1, 2008. Mark R. Johnston, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Special Needs. Title V, Federal Surplus Property Program Federal Register Report for 05/09/2008 Suitable/Available Properties Building New York Federal Building Brinkerhoff/Margaret Streets Plattsburgh NY 12901 *Landholding Agency:* GSA *Property Number:* 54200820005 *Status:* Surplus *GSA Number:* 1-G-NY-0898-1A *Comments:* 13,833 sq. ft., eligible for National Register of Historic Places w/National Ranking of 5, most recent use—office, federal tenants to relocate in August 2008 Oregon Air Center Bldg. 1740 SE Ochoco Way Redmond OR 97756 *Landholding Agency:* GSA *Property Number:* 54200820006 *Status:* Surplus *GSA Number:* 9-A-OR-766 *Comments:* 1728 sq. ft., most recent use—office 20 acres Cow Hollow Park Nyssa OR 97913 *Landholding Agency:* GSA *Property Number:* 54200820007 *Status:* Excess *GSA Number:* 9-I-OR-769 *Comments:* 20 acres w/shower/restroom, eligible for listing on Historic Register Unsuitable Properties Building California Bldgs. 51, 51A Lawrence Berkeley Natl Lab Berkeley CA 94720 *Landholding Agency:* Energy *Property Number:* 41200820002 *Status:* Excess *Reasons:* Extensive deterioration Bldg. PH1230 Naval Base Port Hueneme CA 93043 *Landholding Agency:* Navy *Property Number:* 77200820021 *Status:* Unutilized *Reasons:* Extensive deterioration Missouri Bldgs. 0071B, 0072 Lake City Army Ammo Plant Independence MO 64056 *Landholding Agency:* Army *Property Number:* 21200820001 *Status:* Unutilized *Reasons:* Within 2000 ft. of flammable or explosive material, Secured Area, Extensive deterioration Oregon 5 Bldgs. Keeney Camp Malhear National Forest John Day Co: Sherman OR 97845 *Landholding Agency:* GSA *Property Number:* 54200820008 *Status:* Surplus *GSA Number:* 9-A-OR-76,7 *Reasons:* Extensive deterioration Rhode Island Bldg. 1A-CC Naval Station Newport RI 02841 *Landholding Agency:* Navy *Property Number:* 77200820022 *Status:* Excess *Reasons:* Secured Area [FR Doc. E8-10009 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210-67-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-R4-ES-2008-N0077; ABC Code: F2] Expansion of a Young Men's Christian Association Facility in Volusia County, FL AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice: Receipt of application for an incidental take permit; request for comments. SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the availability of an Incidental Take Permit

(ITP)Application and Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP). The Deltona Young Men's Christian Association Facility (Deltona YMCA) (applicant) requests an ITP for a 2-year duration under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). The applicant anticipates taking approximately 0.30 acre of Florida scrub-jay ( *Alphelocoma coerulescens* )—occupied habitat incidental to expansion of an already existing YMCA facility in Volusia County, Florida (project). The applicant's HCP describes the mitigation and minimization measures the applicant proposes to address the effects of the project to the scrub-jay. DATES: We must receive any written comments on the ITP application and HCP on or before June 9, 2008. ADDRESSES: If you wish to review the application and HCP, you may write the Field Supervisor at our Jacksonville Field Office, 6620 Southpoint Drive South, Suite 310, Jacksonville, FL 32216, or make an appointment to visit during normal business hours. If you wish to comment, you may mail or hand deliver comments to the Jacksonville Field Office, or you may e-mail comments to *paula_sisson@fws.gov.* For more information on reviewing documents and public comments and submitting comments, see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paula Sisson, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, Jacksonville Field Office (see ADDRESSES ); telephone: 904/232-2580, ext. 126. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Public Availability of Comments Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Please reference permit number TE176788-0 for Deltona YMCA in all requests or comments. Please include your name and return address in your e-mail message. If you do not receive a confirmation from us that we have received your e-mail message, contact us directly at the telephone number listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . Background The Florida scrub-jay (scrub-jay) is found exclusively in peninsular Florida and is restricted to xeric upland communities (predominately in oak-dominated scrub with open canopies) of the interior and Atlantic coast sand ridges. Increasing urban and agricultural development has resulted in habitat loss and fragmentation, which have adversely affected the distribution and numbers of scrub-jays. Remaining habitat is largely degraded due to the exclusion of fire, which is needed to maintain xeric uplands in conditions suitable for scrub-jays. The total estimated population is between 7,000 and 11,000 individuals. Applicant's Proposal The applicant is requesting take of approximately 0.30 ac of occupied scrub-jay habitat incidental to the project. The 10-ac project is located within Section 08, Township 18 South, Range 31 East, Volusia County. The proposed project currently includes the expansion of the existing YMCA facility to include a new child care facility, administrative offices, exercise room, indoor basketball courts, and additional parking. The applicant proposes to mitigate for the take of the Florida scrub-jay by protecting and managing 1.3 ac of onsite habitat and creating a public education area within the preserve to serve the surrounding community. As minimization for impacts to the species, clearing activities during project construction will occur outside the scrub-jay nesting season (March 1-June 30) if active nests are found onsite. We have determined that the applicant's proposal, including the proposed mitigation and minimization measures, would have minor or negligible effects on the species covered in the HCP. Therefore, the ITP is a “low-effect” project and qualifies for categorical exclusions under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), as provided by the Department of the Interior Manual (516 DM 2 Appendix 1 and 516 DM 6 Appendix 1). This preliminary information may be revised based on our review of public comments that we receive in response to this notice. A low-effect HCP is one involving

(1)minor or negligible effects on federally listed or candidate species and their habitats, and

(2)minor or negligible effects on other environmental values or resources. We will evaluate the HCP and comments submitted thereon to determine whether the application meets the requirements of section 10(a) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 *et seq.* ). If we determine that the application meets those requirements, we will issue the ITP for incidental take of the scrub-jay. We will also evaluate whether issuance of the section 10(a)(1)(B) ITP complies with section 7 of the Act by conducting an intra-Service section 7 consultation. We will use the results of this consultation, in combination with the above findings, in the final analysis to determine whether or not to issue the ITP. Authority: We provide this notice under Section 10 of the Act and NEPA regulations (40 CFR 1506.6). Dated: April 24, 2008. David L. Hankla, Field Supervisor, Jacksonville Field Office. [FR Doc. E8-10361 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [ES-930-5420-FR-M131; ARES 54992] Notice of Application for Recordable Disclaimer of Interest in Lands; Searcy County, Arkansas AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: An application has been filed with the Bureau of Land Management

(BLM)by Robert G. Hooper for a Recordable Disclaimer of Interest from the United States for certain land in Searcy County, Arkansas. This notice is intended to inform the public of the pending application. DATES: Comments on this action should be received by August 7, 2008. ADDRESSES: Comments must be filed with Steven R. Wells, Deputy State Director, Division of Natural Resources, BLM—Eastern States, 7450 Boston Boulevard, Springfield, Virginia 22153. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ida V. Doup, Chief, Branch of Lands and Realty, at the above stated address or at 703-440-1541. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to Section 315 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1745), the surface owner, Robert G. Hooper, filed an application for a Disclaimer of Interest for the land described as follows: Fifth Principal Meridian T. 16 N., R. 17 W., Sec. 1, NE 1/4 NW 1/4 . The area described contains 43.57 acres, more or less, in Searcy County. The BLM—Eastern States' review of the land status records indicates that a patent was issued to R.B. Weaver, E.S. Weaver, R.F. King, H.C. King, and R.D. Ailly for the Eureka Placer Mine, Buffalo District, Final Certificate Number 24, dated November 28, 1893. A copy of the land patent certificate cannot be located. All available land status records indicate a patent has been issued and title has transferred into private ownership. It is the opinion of this office that the Federal Government no longer has an interest in this 43.57-acre tract. Robert G. Hooper, surface owner, is seeking to clear title to demonstrate that the United States has transferred ownership to the original patentee. All persons who wish to present comments, suggestions, or objections in connection with the pending application and proposed disclaimer may do so by writing to Stephen R. Wells, Deputy Assistant Director, Division of Natural Resources at the above address. Comments, including names and street addresses of commentors, will be available for public review at the BLM-Eastern States Office (see address above), during regular business hours, Monday through Friday, except holidays. Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. If no valid objection is received, this action will be approved and will clear a cloud on the title by stating that the United States does not have a valid interest in this land. Authority: 43 CFR 1864.2(a). Terry Lewis, Acting State Director, Eastern States. [FR Doc. E8-10365 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-GJ-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management National Park Service [AZ-100-07-1610-DR-241E] Notice of Availability of Four Records of Decision and Three Approved Resource Management Plans for the Arizona Strip Field Office, Vermilion Cliffs National Monument, and Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument (BLM Portion), and Approved General Management Plan for Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument (NPS Portion), Arizona AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior. National Park Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of availability. SUMMARY: In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act, the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, and the National Park and Recreation Act of 1978, and Bureau of Land Management

(BLM)and National Park Service

(NPS)policies, the BLM and NPS announce the availability of the two Records of Decision

(RODs)for the Approved Resource Management Plan/General Management Plan for the jointly-managed Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument (Parashant), located in Mohave County, Arizona. Separate RODs for the BLM and NPS decisions in the Approved Resource Management Plan/General Management Plan have been signed by the BLM Arizona State Director, and by the NPS Pacific West Regional Director, respectively, for each agency's decisions contained in the Approved Resource Management Plan/General Management Plan. The BLM also announces the availability of the ROD/Approved Resource Management Plan for the Vermilion Cliffs National Monument (Vermilion) and the ROD/Approved Resource Management Plan for the Arizona Strip Field Office (ASFO), located in Mohave and Coconino Counties, Arizona. Both of these areas are managed solely by the BLM. ADDRESSES: The RODs/Approved Plans and associated documents or information may be viewed and downloaded at *http://www.blm.gov/az/LUP/strip/strip_plan.htm* or at *http://www.nps.gov/lame/parkmgmt/docs.htm* . Copies of the BLM and NPS RODs are available upon request from the Arizona Strip District Office, Bureau of Land Management, or the National Park Service, both located at 345 East Riverside Drive, St. George, Utah 84790. Copies of the three Approved Plans are also available at the same address. Please indicate which ROD/Approved Plan you are requesting. Reference copies of each ROD/Approved Plan are available for review during regular business hours at the following locations: Lake Mead National Recreation Area Office, 601 Nevada Highway, Boulder City, Nevada 89005; BLM Arizona State Office (AZ-931), One North Central, Suite 800, Phoenix, Arizona 85004-4427; Boulder City Library, 701 Adams Blvd, Boulder City, Nevada 89005; Flagstaff Public Library, 300 West Aspen, Flagstaff, Arizona 86001; Fredonia Town Library, 130 North Main, Fredonia, Arizona 86022; Kanab City Library, 374 North Main Street, Kanab, Utah 84741; Mohave County Library, 3269 North Burbank Street, Kingman, Arizona 86401; Page City Library, 697 Vista Avenue, Page, Arizona 86040; and Washington County Library, 88 West 100 South, St. George, Utah 84770. Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: District Manager, Arizona Strip District or Superintendent, Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument, 345 East Riverside Drive, St. George, Utah 84790; telephone 435-688-3200; e-mail *Arizona_Strip@blm.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Parashant was established by Presidential Proclamation on January 11, 2000. The Parashant is cooperatively managed by the BLM and the NPS. It encompasses 1,048,325 acres in Mohave County, Arizona, of which 808,744 acres are administered by the BLM and 208,447 acres are administered by the NPS. The Vermilion was established by Presidential Proclamation on November 9, 2000. The Vermilion covers 293,689 acres in Coconino County, Arizona, and is administered solely by the BLM. The remainder of the BLM-administered lands is in the ASFO, which encompass approximately 1,981,000 acres located in Mohave and Coconino Counties, Arizona, north of the Grand Canyon and is situated almost entirely between the two National Monuments. Ten Cooperating Agencies assisted the BLM and the NPS in this planning effort: Arizona Game and Fish Department; Arizona Department of Transportation; Coconino County, Arizona; Mohave County, Arizona; Kane County, Utah; Washington County, Utah; Kaibab Paiute Tribe; Town of Colorado City, Arizona; Town of Fredonia, Arizona; and the Federal Highway Administration. The RODs/Approved Plans were developed with broad public and Cooperating Agency participation through a 5-year collaborative planning process. These RODs/Approved Plans address management on approximately 2,768,247 acres of BLM-administered land and 208,447 acres of NPS-administered land. The RODs/Approved Plans contain both land use planning decisions and implementing decisions, to achieve desired future conditions and to provide planning structure to facilitate the management of the Parashant, Vermilion, and ASFO. Major resources and activities addressed by the BLM in their RODs/Approved Resource Management Plans include travel management; wilderness characteristics areas; cultural resources; geological resources; recreation and environmental education including interpretation; visual resources; vegetation management including ponderosa pine restoration; livestock grazing; areas of critical environmental concern; special status species; and wildlife management. Major resources and activities addressed by the NPS in its ROD/Approved General Management Plan include travel management; wilderness characteristics areas; cultural resources; geological resources; recreation and environmental education including interpretation; visual resources and cultural landscapes; soundscapes; vegetation management; control of non-native invasive species; livestock grazing; special status species; and wildlife management. As noted in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS), the NPS determined that none of the actions proposed would lead to impairment of park resources. The Approved Plans are essentially the same decisions as contained in Alternative E in the Arizona Strip Proposed Plan/FEIS, published in February 2007. The BLM received seven protests on BLM land use plan decisions in the Proposed Plan/FEIS. After careful consideration of all points raised in those protests, the BLM Director concluded that the BLM Arizona State Director and the Arizona Strip District Manager followed all applicable planning procedures, laws, regulations, and policies, and considered all relevant resource information and public input in developing the proposed plan. None of the protests to BLM raised salient points pertaining to NPS decisions for lands and resources in Parashant. No inconsistencies with State or local plans, policies, or programs were identified during the Governor's consistency review of the Proposed Plan/FEIS. As a result, only minor editorial modifications were made in preparing the RODs/Approved Plans. The decisions identifying designated routes of travel for motorized vehicles on BLM-administered lands are implementation decisions appealable under 43 CFR Part 4, subpart E. Any party adversely affected by the BLM's decision(s) to identify, evaluate, define, delineate and/or select specific routes as available for motorized use within designated areas in either the Parashant or Vermilion Management Plans may appeal within 30 days of publication of this Notice of Availability pursuant to 43 CFR, part 4, subpart E. The appeal should state the specific BLM route(s), as identified in the Approved Plans for the Parashant or Vermilion, on which the decision is being appealed. The appeal must be filed with the Arizona Strip District Manager at the above listed address. Please consult 43 CFR part 4 for further information on the IBLA appeals process. There is no appeal process for NPS decisions in the NPS ROD and Parashant Approved Resource Management Plan/General Management Plan. Implementation of NPS decisions may begin upon publication of this Notice of Availability for the Parashant NPS ROD/Approved Plan in the **Federal Register** . Helen M. Hankins, Associate State Director, BLM Arizona. Jonathan B. Jarvis, Regional Director, NPS Pacific West Region. [FR Doc. E8-10376 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-84-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [CA-110] Meeting of the Central California Resource Advisory Council ACTION: Notice of Public Meeting. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (FACA), the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management

(BLM)Central California Resource Advisory Council

(RAC)will meet as indicated below. DATES: The meetings will be held Friday and Saturday, June 13 and 14, 2008, at the El Dorado Hills Fire Department, 1050 Wilson Blvd., El Dorado Hills, California. On June 13, the RAC will convene at 8 a.m. for a business meeting, followed by a field trip to Pine Hill Preserve in El Dorado County beginning at noon. Members of the public are welcome to attend the tour and meeting. Field tour participants must provide their own transportation and lunch. The RAC will resume its meeting at 8:30 a.m. on June 14 in the El Dorado Hills Fire Department meeting room. Time for public comment is reserved from 9:30 a.m. to 10:30 a.m. on June 14. The public comment time may be extended if needed. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: BLM Folsom Field Office Manager Bill Haigh or BLM Central California Public Affairs Officer David Christy, both at

(916)985-4474. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The twelve-member Central California RAC advises the Secretary of the Interior, through the BLM, on a variety of public land issues associated with public land management in the Central California. At this meeting, agenda items include discussion of issues regarding the wildland-urban interface at Pine Hill Preserve. The RAC will also hear status reports from BLM managers for the Folsom, Hollister, Bakersfield and Bishop field offices. The meeting is open to the public. The public may present written comments to the RAC, and time will be allocated for hearing public comments. Depending on the number of persons wishing to comment and the time available, the time for individual oral comments may be limited. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations should contact the BLM as indicated above. *Charge Code:* CA 110-1820-XX Dated: May 1, 2008. David Christy, Public Affairs Officer. [FR Doc. E8-10338 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-HC-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [UT-910-08-1150-PH-24-1A] Notice of Utah's Resource Advisory Committee Meeting AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Department of Interior. ACTION: Notice of Utah's Resource Advisory Committee

(RAC)Meeting. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) and The Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (FACA), the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management's

(BLM)Utah Resource Advisory Committee

(RAC)will meet as indicated below. DATES: The Utah Resource Advisory Committee

(RAC)will meet June 26 (8:30 a.m.-5 p.m.) and June 27, 2008, (8 a.m.-Noon) in Salt Lake City, Utah. ADDRESSES: On June 26, the RAC will meet at the BLM's Salt Lake Field Office, 2370 South 2300 West, Salt Lake City, Utah, for a briefing and field tour of 5-Mile Pass. On June 27, the RAC will meet at the BLM's Utah State Office, Monument Conference Room, 440 West 200 South, Suite 500, Salt Lake City, Utah, for a business meeting. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: Contact Sherry Foot, Special Programs Coordinator, Utah State Office, Bureau of Land Management, P.O. Box 45155, Salt Lake City, Utah, 84145-0155; phone

(801)539-4195. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 15-member Council advises the Secretary of the Interior, through the Bureau of Land Management, on a variety of planning and management issues associated with public land management in Utah. On June 26 (8:30 a.m.-5 p.m.), the Resource Advisory Committee will meet at the Salt Lake Field Office for a field tour of the 5-Mile Pass area looking at management concerns, discuss the State Parks partnership, draft plan amendment, and rural and urban interface issues. On June 27 (8 a.m.-Noon), the Council will conduct a business meeting at the BLM Utah State Office, Monument Conference Room, Suite 500. Topics of discussion include a follow up session on the field tour; RMP updates; oil and gas updates (as it relates to impacts to recreation and cultural resources); and recreational user-purchased insurance coverage. On June 27, a half-hour public comment period is scheduled to begin from 11:15 a.m.-11:45 a.m. Written comments may be sent to the Bureau of Land Management addressed listed above. All meetings are open to the public; however, transportation, lodging, and meals are the responsibility of the participating public. Dated: May 5, 2008. Selma Sierra, State Director. [FR Doc. E8-10364 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-DQ-P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Reclamation Quarterly Status Report of Water Service, Repayment, and Other Water-Related Contract Negotiations AGENCY: Bureau of Reclamation, Interior. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of contractual actions that have been proposed to the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) and are new, modified, discontinued, or completed since the last publication of this notice on March 4, 2008. This notice is one of a variety of means used to inform the public about proposed contractual actions for capital recovery and management of project resources and facilities consistent with section 9(f) of the Reclamation Project Act of 1939. Additional announcements of individual contract actions may be published in the **Federal Register** and in newspapers of general circulation in the areas determined by Reclamation to be affected by the proposed action. ADDRESSES: The identity of the approving officer and other information pertaining to a specific contract proposal may be obtained by calling or writing the appropriate regional office at the address and telephone number given for each region in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michelle Kelly, Contract Services Office, Bureau of Reclamation, PO Box 25007, Denver, Colorado 80225-0007; telephone 303-445-2888. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Consistent with section 9(f) of the Reclamation Project Act of 1939 and the rules and regulations published in 52 FR 11954, April 13, 1987 (43 CFR 426.22), Reclamation will publish notice of proposed or amendatory contract actions for any contract for the delivery of project water for authorized uses in newspapers of general circulation in the affected area at least 60 days prior to contract execution. Announcements may be in the form of news releases, legal notices, official letters, memorandums, or other forms of written material. Meetings, workshops, and/or hearings may also be used, as appropriate, to provide local publicity. The public participation procedures do not apply to proposed contracts for the sale of surplus or interim irrigation water for a term of 1 year or less. Either of the contracting parties may invite the public to observe contract proceedings. All public participation procedures will be coordinated with those involved in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act. Pursuant to the “Final Revised Public Participation Procedures” for water resource-related contract negotiations, published in 47 FR 7763, February 22, 1982, a tabulation is provided of all proposed contractual actions in each of the five Reclamation regions. When contract negotiations are completed, and prior to execution, each proposed contract form must be approved by the Secretary of the Interior, or pursuant to delegated or redelegated authority, the Commissioner of Reclamation or one of the regional directors. In some instances, congressional review and approval of a report, water rate, or other terms and conditions of the contract may be involved. Public participation in and receipt of comments on contract proposals will be facilitated by adherence to the following procedures: 1. Only persons authorized to act on behalf of the contracting entities may negotiate the terms and conditions of a specific contract proposal. 2. Advance notice of meetings or hearings will be furnished to those parties that have made a timely written request for such notice to the appropriate regional or project office of Reclamation. 3. Written correspondence regarding proposed contracts may be made available to the general public pursuant to the terms and procedures of the Freedom of Information Act, as amended. 4. Written comments on a proposed contract or contract action must be submitted to the appropriate regional officials at the locations and within the time limits set forth in the advance public notices. 5. All written comments received and testimony presented at any public hearings will be reviewed and summarized by the appropriate regional office for use by the contract approving authority. 6. Copies of specific proposed contracts may be obtained from the appropriate regional director or his designated public contact as they become available for review and comment. 7. In the event modifications are made in the form of a proposed contract, the appropriate regional director shall determine whether republication of the notice and/or extension of the comment period is necessary. Factors considered in making such a determination shall include, but are not limited to

(i)the significance of the modification, and

(ii)the degree of public interest which has been expressed over the course of the negotiations. At a minimum, the regional director shall furnish revised contracts to all parties who requested the contract in response to the initial public notice. Definitions of Abbreviations Used in This Document BCP Boulder Canyon Project. Reclamation Bureau of Reclamation. CAP Central Arizona Project. CVP Central Valley Project. CRSP Colorado River Storage Project. FR Federal Register. IDD Irrigation and Drainage District. ID Irrigation District. M&I Municipal and Industrial. NMISC New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission. O&M Operation and Maintenance. P-SMBP Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin Program. PPR Present Perfected Right. RRA Reclamation Reform Act of 1982. SOD Safety of Dams. SRPA Small Reclamation Projects Act of 1956. USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. WD Water District. *Pacific Northwest Region:* Bureau of Reclamation, 1150 North Curtis Road, Suite 100, Boise, Idaho 83706-1234, telephone 208-378-5344. *Completed contract actions:* 11. Three irrigation water user entities, Boise Project, Idaho: Amendatory repayment contract with New Union Ditch Company to reduce contract by 500 acre-feet of Lucky Peak Reservoir storage space and new contracts with Wilderness Ranch Owners' Association for 200 acre-feet and with Osprey Subdivision Project Owners' Association for 300 acre-feet of Lucky Peak Reservoir storage space. The contracts have been executed. 12. Six irrigation water user entities, Rogue River Basin Project, Oregon: Long-term contracts for exchange of water service with six entities for the provision of up to 2,634 acre-feet of stored water from Applegate Reservoir (USACE project) for irrigation use in exchange for the transfer of out-of-stream water rights from the Little Applegate River to instream flow rights with the State of Oregon for instream flow use. The contracts have been executed. *Mid-Pacific Region:* Bureau of Reclamation, 2800 Cottage Way, Sacramento, California 95825-1898, telephone 916-978-5250. *Modified contract actions:* 4. El Dorado County Water Agency, CVP, California: M&I water service contract to supplement existing water supply: Up to 15,000 acre-feet for El Dorado County Water Agency authorized by Pub. L. 101-514. The supply would be subcontracted to El Dorado ID and Georgetown Divide Public Utility District. 7. El Dorado ID, CVP, California: Execution of long-term Warren Act contracts for conveyance of nonproject water (one contract for Weber Reservoir and pre-1914 ditch rights in the amount of 4,560 acre-feet and one contract for Project 184 water in the amount of 17,000 acre-feet). The contracts will allow CVP facilities to be used to convey nonproject water to El Dorado ID for use within its service area. 16. Sacramento Suburban WD, CVP, California: Execution of a long-term Warren Act contract for conveyance of up to 29,000 acre-feet of nonproject water. The contract will allow CVP facilities to be used to convey nonproject water provided from the Placer County Water Agency to Sacramento Suburban WD for use within its service area. *Lower Colorado Region:* Bureau of Reclamation, PO Box 61470 (Nevada Highway and Park Street), Boulder City, Nevada 89006-1470, telephone 702-293-8192. *Completed contract actions:* 7. All-American Canal, BCP, California: Agreement among Reclamation, Imperial ID, Metropolitan WD, and Coachella Valley WD for the federally funded construction of a reservoir(s) and associated facilities that will improve the regulation and management of Colorado River water. Agreement was executed on December 13, 2007. 13. City of Yuma, BCP, Arizona: Amendment to extend contract to allow for the diversion of water through Yuma Project facilities for an additional term of 10 years. Contract was executed on January 8, 2008. *Upper Colorado Region:* Bureau of Reclamation, 125 South State Street, Room 6107, Salt Lake City, Utah 84138-1102, telephone 801-524-3864. *New contract actions:* 30. Florida Water Conservancy District, Florida Project, Colorado: The District has requested a long-term water service contract for M&I water from the Florida Project. 31. Strawberry High Line Canal Company, Strawberry Valley Project, Utah: The Company has requested a contract for carriage of nonproject water in Strawberry Valley Project canals. 32. Jordan Valley Water Conservancy District, Metropolitan WD of Salt Lake and Sandy, and others; Provo River Project, Utah: The entities have requested contracts for storage of nonproject water in Deer Creek Reservoir. *Completed contract action:* 29. Carlsbad ID and New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission, Carlsbad Project, New Mexico: Contract, for a 5-year term, for the District to perform phreatophyte (Salt Cedar) control and for the Commission to provide annual funding of $150,000. Contract was executed on January 14, 2008. *Great Plains Region:* Bureau of Reclamation, PO Box 36900, Federal Building, 316 North 26th Street, Billings, Montana 59101, telephone 406-247-7752. *New contract action:* 39. Hanover ID, Boysen Unit, P-SMBP, Wyoming: Request for renewal of their long-term water service contract. *Modified contract actions:* 11. Fryingpan-Arkansas Project, Colorado: Consideration of requests for long-term contracts for the use of excess capacity in the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project from the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District and the Colorado Springs Utilities. 36. Turtle Lake ID, Garrison Diversion Unit, North Dakota: Turtle Lake ID, water users, and individual irrigators have requested water service contracts, which may be short- or long-term under the Dakota Water Resources Act of 2000. *Discontinued contract action:* 32. Hamlin Construction, Inc., Helena Valley Unit, P-SMBP, Montana: Request for a long-term water service contract for M&I purposes for up to 500 acre-feet per year. *Completed contract actions:* 11. Fryingpan-Arkansas Project, Colorado: Consideration of requests for long-term contracts for the use of excess capacity in the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project from the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District, the City of Aurora, and the Colorado Springs Utilities. The contract with the City of Aurora was executed on September 12, 2007. 24. Colorado River Water Conservation District, Ruedi Reservoir, Fryingpan-Arkansas Project, Colorado: Consideration of a request for a second round of water sales or repayment contract from the regulatory capacity of Ruedi Reservoir for up to 5,000 acre-feet annually for M&I uses and also providing water to the endangered fish and supplementing in-stream flows. Contract was executed on December 28, 2007. 33. Richard Davis, Helena Valley Unit, P-SMBP, Montana: Request for a long-term water service contract for M&I purposes for up to 24 acre-feet per year. Contract was executed on January 1, 2008. Dated: April 8, 2008. Roseann Gonzales, Director, Office of Program and Policy Services, Denver Office. [FR Doc. E8-10347 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-MN-P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Inv. No. 337-TA-640] In the Matter of Certain Short-Wavelength Light Emitting Diodes, Laser Diodes and Products Containing Same; Notice of Commission Determination Not To Review an Initial Determination Granting Complainant's Motion To Amend the Complaint and the Notice of Investigation AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined not to review an initial determination (“ID”) (Order No. 5) of the presiding administrative law judge (“ALJ”) granting complainant's motion to amend the complaint and the notice of investigation. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: Michael Liberman, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone 202-205-3152. Copies of the ID and all other nonconfidential documents filed in connection with this investigation are or will be available for inspection during official business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone 202-205-2000. Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server ( *http://www.usitc.gov* ). The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket

(EDIS)at *http://edis.usitc.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 25, 2008, the Commission instituted an investigation under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. 1337, based on a complaint filed by Gertrude Neumark Rothschild of Hartsdale, New York, alleging a violation of section 337 in the importation, sale for importation, and sale within the United States after importation of certain short-wavelength light emitting diodes, laser diodes and products containing same that infringe certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 5,252,499. 73 FR 1575 (March 25, 2008). The complainant named numerous entities as respondents. On April 1, 2008, complainant moved to amend the complaint and notice of investigation to

(1)correct the name of the Samsung respondent entity from Samsung Group to Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., and

(2)add Ben Q Corporation as a respondent. On April 15, 2008, the ALJ issued Order No. 5 granting complainant's motion. No party petitioned for review of Order No. 5. The Commission has determined not to review the ID. The authority for the Commission's determination is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in section 210.42(h) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.42(h)). By order of the Commission. Issued: May 6, 2008. Marilyn R. Abbott, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. E8-10349 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 731-TA-1111 (Final)] Glycine From India; Determination On the basis of the record 1 developed in the subject investigation, the United States International Trade Commission (Commission) determines, 2 pursuant to section 735(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1673d(b)) (the Act), that an industry in the United States is not materially injured or threatened with material injury, and the establishment of an industry in the United States is not materially retarded, by reason of imports from India of glycine, provided for in subheading 2922.49 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, that have been found by the Department of Commerce (Commerce) to be sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV). 1 The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 207.2(f)). 2 Commissioners Irving A. Williamson and Dean A. Pinkert dissenting. Background The Commission instituted this investigation effective March 30, 2007, following receipt of a petition filed with the Commission and Commerce by GEO Specialty Chemicals, Inc., Lafayette, IN. The final phase of the investigation was scheduled by the Commission following notification of a preliminary determination by Commerce that imports of glycine from India were being sold at LTFV within the meaning of section 733(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673b(b)). Notice of the scheduling of the final phase of the Commission's investigation and of a public hearing to be held in connection therewith was given by posting copies of the notice in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, Washington, DC, and by publishing the notice in the **Federal Register** of September 28, 2007 (72 FR 55247). The hearing was held in Washington, DC, on November 28, 2007, and all persons who requested the opportunity were permitted to appear in person or by counsel. The Commission transmitted its determination in this investigation to the Secretary of Commerce on May 5, 2008. The views of the Commission are contained in USITC Publication 3997 (May 2008), entitled *Glycine from India: Investigation No. 731-TA-1111 (Final)* . By order of the Commission. Issued: May 5, 2008. Marilyn R. Abbott, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. E8-10352 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [USITC SE-08-010] Government in the Sunshine Act Meeting Notice Agency Holding the Meeting: United States International Trade Commission. Time and Date: May 16, 2008 at 11 a.m. Place: Room 101, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, *Telephone:*

(202)205-2000. Status: Open to the public. Matters to be Considered: 1. Agenda for future meetings: none. 2. Minutes. 3. Ratification List. 4. Inv. Nos. 701-TA-455 and 731-TA-1149 and 1150 (Certain Circular Welded Carbon Quality Steel Line Pipe from China and Korea)—briefing and vote. (The Commission is currently scheduled to transmit its determinations to the Secretary of Commerce on or before May 19, 2008; Commissioners' opinions are currently scheduled to be transmitted to the Secretary of Commerce on or before May 27, 2008.) 5. Outstanding action jackets: none. In accordance with Commission policy, subject matter listed above, not disposed of at the scheduled meeting, may be carried over to the agenda of the following meeting. By order of the Commission. Issued: May 6, 2008. William R. Bishop, Hearings and Meetings Coordinator. [FR Doc. E8-10357 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Antitrust Division Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993—PXI Systems Alliance, Inc. Notice is hereby given that, on March 25, 2008, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 *et seq.* (“the Act”), PXI Systems Alliance, Inc. has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, Ranatec Instrument AB, Flöjelbergsgatan, Mölndal, SWEDEN; One Stop Systems, Inc., Escondido, CA; and BAE Systems, San Diego, CA have been added as parties to this venture. Also, MEN Micro, Inc., Ambler, PA has withdrawn as a party to this venture. No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and PXI Systems Alliance, Inc. intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership. On November 22, 2000, PXI Systems Alliance, Inc. filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the **Federal Register** pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on March 8, 2001 (66 FR 13971). The last notification was filed with the Department on January 8, 2008. A notice was published in the **Federal Register** pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on February 25, 2008 (73 FR 10066). Patricia A. Brink, Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division. [FR Doc. E8-10133 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-11-M DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Antitrust Division Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993—Green Building Certification Institute Notice is hereby given that, on March 27, 2008, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 *et seq.* (“the Act”), Green Building Certification Institute (“GBCI”) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing

(1)the name and principal place of business of the standards development organization and

(2)the nature and scope of its standards development activities. The notifications were filed for the purpose of invoking the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act, the name and principal place of business of the standards development organization: Green Building Certification Institute, Washington, DC. The nature and scope of GBCI's standards development activities are: The development of consensus standards for competency in measuring and increasing the environmental efficiency of buildings and communities. Patricia A. Brink, Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division. [FR Doc. E8-10147 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-11-M DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Antitrust Division Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993—IMS Global Learning Consortium, Inc. Notice is hereby given that, on March 31, 2008, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 *et seq.* (“the Act”), IMS Global Learning Consortium, Inc. has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, Follett Corporation, Oak Brook, IL; Georgetown University, Washington, DC; IVIMEDS Consortium, Dundee, Scotland, UNITED KINGDOM; and Tekville.com, Inc., Kangman-ku, Seoul, REPUBLIC OF KOREA have been added as parties to this venture. Also, HarvestRoad Ltd., Perth, WA, AUSTRALIA; University of Wisconsin Madison, Madison, WI; Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, MA; Sun Microsystems, Inc., Broomfield, CO; and ADL (Advanced Distributed Learning), Alexandria, VA have withdrawn as parties to this venture. No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and IMS Global Learning Consortium, Inc. intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership. On April 7, 2000, IMS Global Learning Consortium, Inc. filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the **Federal Register** pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on September 13, 2000 (65 FR 55283). The last notification was filed with the Department on January 10, 2008. A notice was published in the **Federal Register** pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on February 8, 2008 (73 FR 7592). Patricia A. Brink, Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division. [FR Doc. E8-10143 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-11-M DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Antitrust Division Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993—LiMo Foundation Notice is hereby given that, on March 27, 2008, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 *et seq.* (“the Act”), LiMo Foundation (“LiMo”) filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, TrollTech ASA, Oslo, NORWAY; Purple Labs SA, Le Bourget du Lac, FRANCE; Access Co., Ltd., Tokyo, JAPAN; Shenzhen Huawei Communication Technologies Co., Ltd., Shenzhen, PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA; Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., Markham, Ontario, CANADA; FueTrek Co., Ltd., Osaka, JAPAN; Samsung SDS, Seoul, REPUBLIC OF KOREA; Renases Technology Corporation, Tokyo, JAPAN; STMicroelectronics, Milan, ITALY; Open-Plug, Sophia Antipolis, FRANCE; and France Telecom S.A. (Orange Personal Communications Services Limited), Moulineaux, FRANCE, have been added as parties to this venture. In addition, Celunite, Inc., changed its name to Azingo, Sunnyvale, CA. No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of this group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and LiMo intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership. On March 1, 2007, LiMo filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the **Federal Register** pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on April 9, 2007 (72 FR 17583). The last notification was filed with the Department on January 15, 2008. A notice was published in the **Federal Register** pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on February 25, 2008 (73 FR 10065). Patricia A. Brink, Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division. [FR Doc. E8-10135 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-11-M DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Antitrust Division Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993—Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium, Inc. Notice is hereby given that, on March 25, 2008, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 *et seq.* (“the Act”) , Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium, Inc. has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, Iridium Satellite LLC, Bethesda, MD; AEG SPIN S.A., Warsaw, POLAND; AMPER Programas de Electronica y Comunicaciones, S.A., Getafe, Madrid, SPAIN; Bellcomm Information Systems, Madrid, SPAIN; Technopôle Defence & Security, Quebec City, Quebec, CANADA; HAVELSAN Hava Elektronik Sanayi ye Ticaret A.S., Ankara, TURKEY; and BEA Government Systems, McLean, VA have been added as parties to this venture. Also, ANTs Software Inc., Burlingame, CA; Whitney, Bradley & Brown, Inc., Vienna, VA; Cubic Defense Applications, Inc., San Diego, CA; and Argon ST, Inc., Fairfax, VA have withdrawn as parties to this venture. No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium, Inc. intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership. On November 19, 2004, Network Centric Operations Industry Consortium, Inc. filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the ** Federal Register ** pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on February 2, 2005 (70 FR 5486). The last notification was filed with the Department on January 8, 2008. A notice was published in the **Federal Register** pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on February 8, 2008 (73 FR 7592). Patricia A. Brink, Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division. [FR Doc. E8-10136 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-11-M DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Antitrust Division Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993—Open SystemC Initiative Notice is hereby given that, on March 25, 2008, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 *et seq.* (“the Act”), Open SystemC Initiative (“OSCI”) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, Maple Design Automation Co., Ltd., Gwacheon, REPUBLIC OF KOREA; Texas Instruments Incorporated, Stafford, TX; and Virtutech, Inc., San Jose, CA have been added as parties to this venture. No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and OSCI intends to file additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership. On October 9, 2001, OSCI filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the **Federal Register** pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on January 3, 2002 (67 FR 350). The last notification was filed with the Department on December 11, 2007. A notice was published in the **Federal Register** pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on January 28, 2008 (73 FR 4918). Patricia A. Brink, Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division. [FR Doc. E8-10146 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-11-M DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Antitrust Division Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993—Ultrafine Grained Titanium for Near-Net Shape Forging—a Pathway to Titanium Market Expansion Notice is hereby given that, on December 17, 2007, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 *et seq.* (“the Act”), Ultrafine Grained Titanium for Near-net Shape Forging—A Pathway to Titanium Market Expansion has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing

(1)the identities of the parties to the venture and

(2)the nature and objectives of the venture. The notifications were filed for the purpose of invoking the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act, the identities of the parties to the venture are: ATI AIlvac, Monroe, NC; and GE Global Research, Niskayuna, NY. The general area of this group research project's planned activity is to develop a novel ultrafine grained titanium billet process that will enable both near-net shape forging of standard alloys into complex components for aviation, energy, transportation and military markets. Patricia A. Brink, Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division. [FR Doc. E8-10139 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-11-M DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Foreign Claims Settlement Commission [F.C.S.C. Meeting Notice No. 4-08] Sunshine Act Meeting The Foreign Claims Settlement Commission, pursuant to its regulations (45 CFR Part 504) and the Government in the Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b), hereby gives notice in regard to the scheduling of meetings for the transaction of Commission business and other matters specified, as follows: Date and Time: Thursday, May 29, 2008, at 1 p.m. Subject Matter: Issuance of Proposed Decisions, Amended Proposed Decisions, and Orders in claims against Albania. Status: Open. All meetings are held at the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission, 600 E Street, NW., Washington, DC. Requests for information, or advance notices of intention to observe an open meeting, may be directed to: Administrative Officer, Foreign Claims Settlement Commission, 600 E Street, NW., Room 6002, Washington, DC 20579. Telephone:

(202)616-6988. Dated at Washington, DC. Mauricio J. Tamargo, Chairman. [FR Doc. 08-1247 Filed 5-7-08; 2:43 pm]

Connectionstraces to 75

Traces to 75 documents

U.S. Code